Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

One Woman’s Perspective – politicalbetting.com

123457

Comments

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 43,971
    Pagan2 said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    It does risk the Lady Cyclefree thinking slightly less of me but I was a young hedonistic slightly reckless twenty-something once, and I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that I'm not judged too harshly for it.

    I remember her once saying she was a bit naughty in her youth too, which gives me some grounds for hope, but she has the good sense not to share the details about it!
    Hmmm why do I expect the surprise sequel where we eventually find out you were one of cyclefrees youthful conquests much to both of your surprises?
    Jesus.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,402
    Pagan2 said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    It does risk the Lady Cyclefree thinking slightly less of me but I was a young hedonistic slightly reckless twenty-something once, and I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that I'm not judged too harshly for it.

    I remember her once saying she was a bit naughty in her youth too, which gives me some grounds for hope, but she has the good sense not to share the details about it!
    Hmmm why do I expect the surprise sequel where we eventually find out you were one of cyclefrees youthful conquests much to both of your surprises?
    Having met both CR and Cyclefree I can assure you that's unlikely.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 34,833
    MaxPB said:

    In terms of the response to this, I do worry that the most likely action on this is that the policing of language (censoring any word ending with the syllable 'man') will be turned up to eleven, and that men will be lectured by E&DI advisors on the problems they cause for women in the workplace. They might even be encouraged to do an exercise to think of examples of where their behaviour (or another's behaviour) might have caused problems for women.

    One unintended consequence of this will be that some men will try to minimise their interactions with their female colleagues above what's essential as they will think they're treading on eggshells, be coy about telling women what they really think, and will minimise socialising with women after work for fear of misinterpretation or misunderstanding. I've seen some of this happen already, surprisingly amongst younger male staff too, in particular, who were terrified of saying or doing the wrong thing and tried to pretend they weren't attracted to any too.

    I used to regularly have lunches and coffees 1:1 with other women at work (which I enjoyed) and occasionally got comments, yes, that "(I) fancied so and so" but social interaction is where you really find out about a person and what makes them tick and, crucially, it's where a lot of professional networking conversations take place, which are absolutely crucial for career advancement and women getting ahead.

    So, I ignored the comments, and the Woke vibe, and ploughed on, because I enjoyed their company and their conversations. I even found one or two of them attractive but there's a difference between recognising that and acting on it sexually and inappropriately. And they told me they appreciated how rare it was that I took an interest in them, and listened to them, as people.

    As a result my friendship network and professional network is broader and more 'balanced' than it otherwise would be. So I think there's a lot to be said for it.

    Completely agree with your approach CR and take a similar one myself. The co-founder of my new venture inside the bank is a woman and we've spoken at length on how best we can attract women into the available jobs that we've got, the adverts have been written differently and the benefits reflect the modern era of being a working mother or woman of child bearing age.

    One of the other measures we're taking is to try and get our intake of juniors to a more even level, the wider organisation is probably 70/30 and we're aiming for 50/50. I know the cynics will say why not at all levels and only junior - we realised that the issue starts right at the bottom and the only way to fix it is to recruit more women at the junior ranks and give them experience and training so that they can advance their careers in the same way as so many men do in the industry. It's difficult to hire senior women because so few of them exist as not enough were given the chance 10-15 years ago.

    We've realised that creating a workplace fit for men and women is a truly great place for everyone to work, socialise and grow both professional and personally.

    Ultimately, our standards aren't going to change for who we hire, they're still really high. The way we've written the adverts has helped bring more women into the funnel and I think that's something all industries need to do and all interviewers should be trained on asking the right questions rather than unnecessarily aggressive tactics that I got used to using becuase it's what I was subjected to earlier on in my own career.
    Well done. I’ve managed to get my team to 50/50 up to director level but my only MD is a man (plus me) so not quite balanced
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 20,848
    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    It's almost as if some (many?) men think of women as booty to be shared out among them.

    Some incels seriously make that argument, and it’s not *quite* as outrageous as it sounds

    Wait! I know, I know, but bear with me

    The argument goes like this: in modern, liberal western societies, we make sure no one goes completely without food. Or shelter. Or healthcare. Even if it’s their own damn fault, we don’t let anyone starve to death

    And yet we happily let men (and it is nearly all men) go completely without sex, which - the incels argue - is just as cruel, and just as emotionally damaging as starvation or homelessness.

    I can see their logic, however bitterly and insanely they express it. Sex is fundamental to human happiness, just like decent food and a bed.

    Tho how you develop universal credit for sex I dunno. Some say the government should pay sex workers to gratify incels.

    In the end, as I say, sex bots will be the answer. Eventually
    So what about women who have to go without sex because there are no decent men around? Or do you think that women - of all ages - don't have strong sexual desires?

    What happens to their unrequited lust? Do they go round threatening to do terrible things if they don't get gorgeous hunk of their choice to service their needs?

    Because this incel view of the world does seem to assume that women are there to be done to but are presumed to have no active desires or wishes of their own. Which does rather sound like the sort of view pushed by porn - on which see my header.

    I am not remotely defending these people. I’m just saying their argument is not completely illogical, and it’s not. We see food and shelter as human rights, but not sex, even tho a life of unwanted celibacy must be utterly immiserating. It didn’t matter before because it was so rare. You married who you could, you didn’t have much choice. Nearly everyone found ‘someone’. Now there is infinite choice, which paradoxically means much more involuntary celibacy

    As for female desires, of course they exist. But, frankly, the disparity in basic libido between men (always horny) and women (much more choosy) means virtually no woman has to go completely without. If she wants sex, almost any young woman can get it pretty instantly - there are too many desperate unchoosy men who will eagerly agree
    Interesting that you respond and focus on young women whereas I talked of women of all ages.

    You talk of incels. What of women in their 40's, 50's and 60's and older who, believe me, still want and enjoy sex? Most men wouldn't even consider them (more fools them).

    You have a rather old-fashioned view of female libido, if I may say so. Sex is not just about sex. It's also about closeness and intimacy and the loss or absence of that can be shattering for women - as well as men.

    Incels really need to grow up.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 43,971
    Leon said:

    So, this is weird - Shamima Begum is now posing in designer western clothes in a western way for ...The Telegraph:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/03/14/exclusive-shamima-begum-seen-make-up-western-clothes-seeks-break/

    That’s... borderline creepy
    I know! She looks nothing like the infamous SB, does she?

    She's had legal advice not to talk to The Telegraph. The cynic in me suggests she's had advice about this too, particularly since life will be harder for her in camp if she's openly non-conformist.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,634
    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    It's almost as if some (many?) men think of women as booty to be shared out among them.

    Some incels seriously make that argument, and it’s not *quite* as outrageous as it sounds

    Wait! I know, I know, but bear with me

    The argument goes like this: in modern, liberal western societies, we make sure no one goes completely without food. Or shelter. Or healthcare. Even if it’s their own damn fault, we don’t let anyone starve to death

    And yet we happily let men (and it is nearly all men) go completely without sex, which - the incels argue - is just as cruel, and just as emotionally damaging as starvation or homelessness.

    I can see their logic, however bitterly and insanely they express it. Sex is fundamental to human happiness, just like decent food and a bed.

    Tho how you develop universal credit for sex I dunno. Some say the government should pay sex workers to gratify incels.

    In the end, as I say, sex bots will be the answer. Eventually
    So what about women who have to go without sex because there are no decent men around? Or do you think that women - of all ages - don't have strong sexual desires?

    What happens to their unrequited lust? Do they go round threatening to do terrible things if they don't get gorgeous hunk of their choice to service their needs?

    Because this incel view of the world does seem to assume that women are there to be done to but are presumed to have no active desires or wishes of their own. Which does rather sound like the sort of view pushed by porn - on which see my header.
    The discourse tonight from an excellent and topical header is stranger than normal.

    I wonder whether some of these PB posters who seem to be living the dubious dream of a Timothy Lea Confessions book from the 1970s are steeped in reality, or whether they are just actually sad fantasists.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 20,848
    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    AnneJGP said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    It's almost as if some (many?) men think of women as booty to be shared out among them.

    Some incels seriously make that argument, and it’s not *quite* as outrageous as it sounds

    Wait! I know, I know, but bear with me

    The argument goes like this: in modern, liberal western societies, we make sure no one goes completely without food. Or shelter. Or healthcare. Even if it’s their own damn fault, we don’t let anyone starve to death

    And yet we happily let men (and it is nearly all men) go completely without sex, which - the incels argue - is just as cruel, and just as emotionally damaging as starvation or homelessness.

    I can see their logic, however bitterly and insanely they express it. Sex is fundamental to human happiness, just like decent food and a bed.

    Tho how you develop universal credit for sex I dunno. Some say the government should pay sex workers to gratify incels.

    In the end, as I say, sex bots will be the answer. Eventually
    So what about women who have to go without sex because there are no decent men around? Or do you think that women - of all ages - don't have strong sexual desires?

    What happens to their unrequited lust? Do they go round threatening to do terrible things if they don't get gorgeous hunk of their choice to service their needs?

    Because this incel view of the world does seem to assume that women are there to be done to but are presumed to have no active desires or wishes of their own. Which does rather sound like the sort of view pushed by porn - on which see my header.
    Many years ago I read a book which postulated that men see themselves/other men as 'people' and see women as 'women' - ie not 'people': also that women see themselves as 'women' rather than as 'people'.

    It does partly account for the attitude of being there to be done to.
    Camillle Paglia summed it up even more pithily. “Women have it, men want it”

    She also has a great anecdote about having a huge testosterone injection for a health problem. On the way out of the hospital, Paglia (who is bisexual) saw a very attractive young woman, and for the first time in her life she felt a wild, slavering lust. She realised that this is what horny young men feel like ALL THE TIME. She also claims she has felt way more sympathy for young men, ever since
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 2,944
    edited March 14
    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    It's almost as if some (many?) men think of women as booty to be shared out among them.

    Some incels seriously make that argument, and it’s not *quite* as outrageous as it sounds

    Wait! I know, I know, but bear with me

    The argument goes like this: in modern, liberal western societies, we make sure no one goes completely without food. Or shelter. Or healthcare. Even if it’s their own damn fault, we don’t let anyone starve to death

    And yet we happily let men (and it is nearly all men) go completely without sex, which - the incels argue - is just as cruel, and just as emotionally damaging as starvation or homelessness.

    I can see their logic, however bitterly and insanely they express it. Sex is fundamental to human happiness, just like decent food and a bed.

    Tho how you develop universal credit for sex I dunno. Some say the government should pay sex workers to gratify incels.

    In the end, as I say, sex bots will be the answer. Eventually
    So what about women who have to go without sex because there are no decent men around? Or do you think that women - of all ages - don't have strong sexual desires?

    What happens to their unrequited lust? Do they go round threatening to do terrible things if they don't get gorgeous hunk of their choice to service their needs?

    Because this incel view of the world does seem to assume that women are there to be done to but are presumed to have no active desires or wishes of their own. Which does rather sound like the sort of view pushed by porn - on which see my header.

    I am not remotely defending these people. I’m just saying their argument is not completely illogical, and it’s not. We see food and shelter as human rights, but not sex, even tho a life of unwanted celibacy must be utterly immiserating. It didn’t matter before because it was so rare. You married who you could, you didn’t have much choice. Nearly everyone found ‘someone’. Now there is infinite choice, which paradoxically means much more involuntary celibacy

    As for female desires, of course they exist. But, frankly, the disparity in basic libido between men (always horny) and women (much more choosy) means virtually no woman has to go completely without. If she wants sex, almost any young woman can get it pretty instantly - there are too many desperate unchoosy men who will eagerly agree
    For women, I suspect it's much more about the quality than the quantity, rather than their libido being particularly lower. I'm reliably informed that most men make poor lovers, and women can't be doing with the 'wham bam thank you mam' experience that many men (especially the desperate, unchoosy ones) offer - just not worth it.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 38,582
    Leon said:

    Some good articles on the rise of the incel, and how a lot of it is driven by tech like Tinder. A few alpha men get all the sex, huge numbers get none. At all


    ‘In the past decade there has been a three-fold increase in the number of men who have not had sex in the past year.‘

    https://unherd.com/2020/02/why-incels-are-the-losers-in-the-age-of-tinder/

    https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/social-media/2020/01/how-she-ghosted-me-men-being-radicalised-tinder-data

    I see your "in the past one year" and raise you "45 years and counting" :blush:
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,738
    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    One of the best tactics in The Game era was to tell women outright its dirty terrible secrets, they’d scarcely believe you. So you’d offer to stand back and wait all of about 5 minutes for the next chancer to come along and try its pop manipulation techniques on them.

    At which point the girls (based upon my advice) would say “I read a really interesting book recently called The Game, do you know it?”. It was hilarious to watch the faux arrogance drain from these blokes’ faces. Meanwhile you’d done a good deed and had a chance of said girls thinking you weren’t such a bad person, why not have a drink with you. Sorry CR if I ever unwittingly led you into this honey trap.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,837
    As someone who left a 6 year relationship in early 2020 and re-entered the dating scene (Tinder, Bumble, etc) and found a new girlfriend pretty quickly despite the pandemic, the modern dating world isn’t quite like @Leon makes out. I’m not particularly physically attractive or high status, in fact I’m currently unemployed, but I had no problem finding attractive women who were interested.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,194
    justin124 said:

    Leon said:

    alex_ said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    I do feel sorry for kids today. Getting to know women in the real world, spending time getting drunk with them (initially in larger groups), and then eventually falling into a consensual relationship was my main dating technique. Closely followed by “sod it the worst she can say is no” leading to a lot of first dates. None of that quote works if you live through the filter of the internet.
    Not even that given how far the acceptable boundaries seem to have shifted. We've moved a long way in a very short space of time when the only absolutely hard and fast rule was to not engage in sex without clear consent.
    Sex on the first date is now the norm. A pretty huge change from my youth, when it was third date. And a vast gulf from 150 years ago, when you had to wait until you were nearly dead
    Heh. I used to assume 2nd - 3rd date. I’m guessing there’s 10-15 years between us so it must have been declining in a straight line.
    When I was at university in the mid-70s many students were attached - ie 'going steady' - but not having sex.I know of couples who had been together for several years , yet not become physically intimate. It was by no means uncommon to adhere to 'chastity until marriage.' We often would speculate as to whether X and Y were sleeping together - but never assumed that they were. Quite a few clearly did 'go all the way' - though that usually took months rather than weeks - whilst many did not.
    In the 80's I remember a female work colleague of mine telling me about her church going mate - she wanted to be a virgin on her wedding day but was ok with anal and oral sex with her intended in the meantime- apparently they didn't count.....

    Bill Clinton might have agreed .................
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 20,848

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    It does risk the Lady Cyclefree thinking slightly less of me but I was a young hedonistic slightly reckless twenty-something once, and I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that I'm not judged too harshly for it.

    I remember her once saying she was a bit naughty in her youth too, which gives me some grounds for hope, but she has the good sense not to share the details about it!
    Not just in my youth. I am Italian. Neapolitan. We flirt until we're in the grave

    But this thread is now taking a very weird turn.....

    Still at least it's not about Brexit and whoever posted that M***** tweet should be exiled to a non-functioning lift for an afternoon with P**** M****.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    A modern term for the "Treat 'em mean, keep 'em keen" approach of yesteryear.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 43,971

    As someone who left a 6 year relationship in early 2020 and re-entered the dating scene (Tinder, Bumble, etc) and found a new girlfriend pretty quickly despite the pandemic, the modern dating world isn’t quite like @Leon makes out. I’m not particularly physically attractive or high status, in fact I’m currently unemployed, but I had no problem finding attractive women who were interested.

    Your profile pic isn't really you, is it?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,634
    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    A modern term for the "Treat 'em mean, keep 'em keen" approach of yesteryear.
    How quaint.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 43,971
    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    A modern term for the "Treat 'em mean, keep 'em keen" approach of yesteryear.
    No it isn't.

    I don't know why you feel qualified to comment with authority on this subject since the last time you had perfunctory and rather awkward sex was over 25 years ago.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    It's almost as if some (many?) men think of women as booty to be shared out among them.

    Some incels seriously make that argument, and it’s not *quite* as outrageous as it sounds

    Wait! I know, I know, but bear with me

    The argument goes like this: in modern, liberal western societies, we make sure no one goes completely without food. Or shelter. Or healthcare. Even if it’s their own damn fault, we don’t let anyone starve to death

    And yet we happily let men (and it is nearly all men) go completely without sex, which - the incels argue - is just as cruel, and just as emotionally damaging as starvation or homelessness.

    I can see their logic, however bitterly and insanely they express it. Sex is fundamental to human happiness, just like decent food and a bed.

    Tho how you develop universal credit for sex I dunno. Some say the government should pay sex workers to gratify incels.

    In the end, as I say, sex bots will be the answer. Eventually
    So what about women who have to go without sex because there are no decent men around? Or do you think that women - of all ages - don't have strong sexual desires?

    What happens to their unrequited lust? Do they go round threatening to do terrible things if they don't get gorgeous hunk of their choice to service their needs?

    Because this incel view of the world does seem to assume that women are there to be done to but are presumed to have no active desires or wishes of their own. Which does rather sound like the sort of view pushed by porn - on which see my header.

    I am not remotely defending these people. I’m just saying their argument is not completely illogical, and it’s not. We see food and shelter as human rights, but not sex, even tho a life of unwanted celibacy must be utterly immiserating. It didn’t matter before because it was so rare. You married who you could, you didn’t have much choice. Nearly everyone found ‘someone’. Now there is infinite choice, which paradoxically means much more involuntary celibacy

    As for female desires, of course they exist. But, frankly, the disparity in basic libido between men (always horny) and women (much more choosy) means virtually no woman has to go completely without. If she wants sex, almost any young woman can get it pretty instantly - there are too many desperate unchoosy men who will eagerly agree
    Interesting that you respond and focus on young women whereas I talked of women of all ages.

    You talk of incels. What of women in their 40's, 50's and 60's and older who, believe me, still want and enjoy sex? Most men wouldn't even consider them (more fools them).

    You have a rather old-fashioned view of female libido, if I may say so. Sex is not just about sex. It's also about closeness and intimacy and the loss or absence of that can be shattering for women - as well as men.

    Incels really need to grow up.
    Yes. The power imbalance is reversed as humans age. Young women have great power over men. After about 35 this switches (I’m happy to say). A sane, solvent man over 40 can pick and choose, but they will tend to go for younger partners, which is tough on older women

    I don’t agree with you on libido. Men are simply much hornier. As Stephen Fry has noted, look how the sexes behave if the other gender isn’t involved. Gay men have much more sex than heterosexual men, because there is no choosy, less horny woman to slow things down. Lesbians have less sex than heterosexual women, because there is no horny desperate man to speed things up.

    This is data, by the way, not anecdata. Studies consistently show it


    ‘Over the past 30 years, much has been said and written about “lesbian bed death,” or the idea that long-term romantic relationships between women tend to be characterized by rather inactive sex lives. This originally stemmed from an observation in national survey data that female same-sex couples have a lower sexual frequency than both mixed-sex (male-female) couples and male same-sex couples [1], a finding that has been replicated many times since. ‘

    https://www.lehmiller.com/blog/2014/9/12/lesbians-may-have-sex-less-often-but-when-they-do-it-they-make-it-count
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 20,848
    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    A modern term for the "Treat 'em mean, keep 'em keen" approach of yesteryear.
    Thanks.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Floater said:

    justin124 said:

    Leon said:

    alex_ said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    I do feel sorry for kids today. Getting to know women in the real world, spending time getting drunk with them (initially in larger groups), and then eventually falling into a consensual relationship was my main dating technique. Closely followed by “sod it the worst she can say is no” leading to a lot of first dates. None of that quote works if you live through the filter of the internet.
    Not even that given how far the acceptable boundaries seem to have shifted. We've moved a long way in a very short space of time when the only absolutely hard and fast rule was to not engage in sex without clear consent.
    Sex on the first date is now the norm. A pretty huge change from my youth, when it was third date. And a vast gulf from 150 years ago, when you had to wait until you were nearly dead
    Heh. I used to assume 2nd - 3rd date. I’m guessing there’s 10-15 years between us so it must have been declining in a straight line.
    When I was at university in the mid-70s many students were attached - ie 'going steady' - but not having sex.I know of couples who had been together for several years , yet not become physically intimate. It was by no means uncommon to adhere to 'chastity until marriage.' We often would speculate as to whether X and Y were sleeping together - but never assumed that they were. Quite a few clearly did 'go all the way' - though that usually took months rather than weeks - whilst many did not.
    In the 80's I remember a female work colleague of mine telling me about her church going mate - she wanted to be a virgin on her wedding day but was ok with anal and oral sex with her intended in the meantime- apparently they didn't count.....

    Bill Clinton might have agreed .................
    I suppose a lot depends on what is meant by ' having sex'. Some would view passionate kissing or 'heavy petting' as being covered by the term. To this day I suspect that really devout religious people abstain from full physical sex until marriage.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 38,582

    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    A modern term for the "Treat 'em mean, keep 'em keen" approach of yesteryear.
    No it isn't.

    I don't know why you feel qualified to comment with authority on this subject since the last time you had perfunctory and rather awkward sex was over 25 years ago.
    "Negging (derived from the verb neg, meaning "negative feedback") is an act of emotional manipulation whereby a person makes a deliberate backhanded compliment or otherwise flirtatious remark to another person to undermine their confidence and increase their need of the manipulator's approval.[1] The term was coined and prescribed by pickup artists.[1]"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negging
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441
    edited March 14
    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 43,971
    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    It does risk the Lady Cyclefree thinking slightly less of me but I was a young hedonistic slightly reckless twenty-something once, and I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that I'm not judged too harshly for it.

    I remember her once saying she was a bit naughty in her youth too, which gives me some grounds for hope, but she has the good sense not to share the details about it!
    Not just in my youth. I am Italian. Neapolitan. We flirt until we're in the grave

    But this thread is now taking a very weird turn.....

    Still at least it's not about Brexit and whoever posted that M***** tweet should be exiled to a non-functioning lift for an afternoon with P**** M****.
    Indeed. Talking about care-free hedonism at least let's my spirits escape the confines of lockdown, to more wild times having fun with real people, so that's something.

    Anyway, a late supper beckons. Night.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441
    Leon said:

    So, this is weird - Shamima Begum is now posing in designer western clothes in a western way for ...The Telegraph:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/03/14/exclusive-shamima-begum-seen-make-up-western-clothes-seeks-break/

    That’s... borderline creepy
    Half tidy... There'll be an incel ready to take her on should she be allowed back. Bit of baggage, but hey-ho its part of the fun!
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,194
    justin124 said:

    Floater said:

    justin124 said:

    Leon said:

    alex_ said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    I do feel sorry for kids today. Getting to know women in the real world, spending time getting drunk with them (initially in larger groups), and then eventually falling into a consensual relationship was my main dating technique. Closely followed by “sod it the worst she can say is no” leading to a lot of first dates. None of that quote works if you live through the filter of the internet.
    Not even that given how far the acceptable boundaries seem to have shifted. We've moved a long way in a very short space of time when the only absolutely hard and fast rule was to not engage in sex without clear consent.
    Sex on the first date is now the norm. A pretty huge change from my youth, when it was third date. And a vast gulf from 150 years ago, when you had to wait until you were nearly dead
    Heh. I used to assume 2nd - 3rd date. I’m guessing there’s 10-15 years between us so it must have been declining in a straight line.
    When I was at university in the mid-70s many students were attached - ie 'going steady' - but not having sex.I know of couples who had been together for several years , yet not become physically intimate. It was by no means uncommon to adhere to 'chastity until marriage.' We often would speculate as to whether X and Y were sleeping together - but never assumed that they were. Quite a few clearly did 'go all the way' - though that usually took months rather than weeks - whilst many did not.
    In the 80's I remember a female work colleague of mine telling me about her church going mate - she wanted to be a virgin on her wedding day but was ok with anal and oral sex with her intended in the meantime- apparently they didn't count.....

    Bill Clinton might have agreed .................
    I suppose a lot depends on what is meant by ' having sex'. Some would view passionate kissing or 'heavy petting' as being covered by the term. To this day I suspect that really devout religious people abstain from full physical sex until marriage.
    I know some that did that.

    Heavy petting or even Oral were seen as justifiable for a number of them - even some I knew who saw themselves as born again Christians

    I'm not judging, each to their own.

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 38,582
    Sorry for lowering the tone, but I'm willing to bet I am the oldest virgin on PB.

    I am 45. :blush:

    There. I. Said. It.

    I guess @Leon will now accuse me of being an incel :lol:
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 34,833

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I don't paint all men as part of the problem. And you clearly have not read the last paragraph.

    "To change a culture for the better, all must play their part. Men have a vital role to play to change the world in which women live – as allies, as champions, as teachers, as exemplars, as defenders – so that, whether they are 18 or 80, women can live their lives to the fullest and without fear of men behaving badly."

    Which bit of this do you have a problem with?
    Hmm. I think yesterday @MarqueeMark posted some reservations about painting all men as part of the problem.

    You weren't on the thread much but suddenly popped up and went for him with both barrels posting a polemic in response starting with "Oh, do stop whining.."

    Not surprisingly, that turned him off. And it got close to turning me off too.

    I think we all want this unfair skewing of risk and responsibility against women to end. But the words and language you use to mobilise your allies is important, and needs to be measured - not uncompromising.
    Let me try and respond without getting everyone would up again. And let me make it clear that none of this is personally addressed to you or the lovely
    @MarqueeMark.

    You see this feels to me like men expecting women to tiptoe around their feelings. But our feelings - well that's us giving both barrels and putting people off and all the rest of it. And that exemplifies in a small way part of the problem. Perhaps for a change men could consider our feelings first and understand why women feel so bloody furious about it all.

    At a time when a woman was abducted off the streets and murdered, one of the first reactions on here by some of our eminent posters was to say that they weren't to blame. Well of course they aren't. But timing is everything in life. Is that really the time to make this point?

    As opposed to perhaps asking oneself some tough questions about why - if the majority of men aren't horrible sex pests - so much sexual harassment is happening. Why - if schools are teaching respect - are so many young men behaving and talking about women in a way that suggests they never attended any of those lessons?

    I mention the middle aged clients making obscene suggestions at breakfast. That happened to me. The men were fathers and grandfathers, successful professionals. Together they behaved like a bunch of dirty-minded 13 year olds. When spoken to individually they spoke with pride and love about their wives and daughters. They were ordinary men, much like many others. And yet they still behaved appallingly to me - a young barrister. Presumably I was not someone's loved daughter or wife. Just a girl who had to sit and endure and could not answer back.

    Or the traders who wrote vile stuff about what childbirth does to a certain part of a woman's autonomy - in workplace chats about a colleague then on maternity leave. When challenged and asked whether they would like this said about their wives one said they'd punch anyone doing that. They looked at me blankly until the penny dropped when I asked why then they thought it ok for them to write that about someone else's wife, about someone they worked with.

    Where does all this vileness come from? And how can we reduce or, ideally, stop it?

    There is I think a bit of cognitive dissonance in some men who do not realise how they are behaving, how they appear to women. It is easy for us all to think our behaviour impeccable when it really may not be as good as we like to think. And I include myself in that.

    Ms Cyclefree, we both know I am lovely - and I take no personal offence. But what I see is you trying to get acceptance that many men are awful - but with no acceptance in return that yes, to many guys they they are seen as arseholes too. The "jock" mentality of the "pussy-grabbing" Trump really is alien to most guys. Those that engage in such sexual braggadocio have a sixth sense about who their fellow pussy-grabbers are. It's not talk I have been party to, because they instinctively know they would be told where to go.


    I worked for a company that was rare in having a female CFO in a FTSE250 company, back in the day. Far less worthy of comment now. Some men might still feel weirdly threatened by a female boss. Women may feel that is still the norm. You have had the misfortune to work in areas of business where the shit floats upwards. But reality is, they are few and getting fewer. There is likely a big overlap between those remaining people who have a problem with a female boss and those who have authority issues with a male boss too.

    Most guys already DO learn respect towards women at school - and exercise that respect, throughout their lives. There is perhaps an issue that is a subset of the problem - those who now see no real distinction in how they behave as between men and women. Treat the ladies as one of the lads. Those boundaries around equality and equals don't always come with nice clear dividing lines, despite many women still wanting the "equal but different" to be respected more.

    My real issue is that your frustration/anger comes without agenda items on how to change anything. "Just think on how bad some men are." We know. But the problem guys aren't us is a fair response, when nothing more concrete is listed, no behavioural changes set out.

    I flagged an idea on the previous thread that would be controversial, but would send a distinct message that male sexual violence towards women needs special measures to help end it. It would cut across centuries of gender equality under the law. But perhaps, to get more prosecutions of men for sexual violence towards women, we need differing standards of proof. I suggested that perhaps for accused men, the standard of proof should be reduced from beyond all reasonable doubt to balance of probabilities. That doesn't come without some risk of injustice to men, but it would provoke a real debate.
    A truly, truly appalling idea. That’s worse than the 6pm curfew. ‘Sorry you’re a man so you have a much bigger chance of being jailed unjustly. That’s because we’re trying to be fair’.
    Someone of your acquaintance might have especially firm views on it. But we have a huge problem in getting convictions for sexual assaults by men on women. Come up with something else then, to level that playing field. Because it isn't working as is.
    Part of the problem is the treatment of “date rape” as being the same as rape. However the evidence is often word against word (especially around consent) and so juries are nervous about conviction. I saw a suggestion of creating a lesser offence of “sexual misconduct” for these cases which struck me as interesting
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Floater said:

    justin124 said:

    Floater said:

    justin124 said:

    Leon said:

    alex_ said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    I do feel sorry for kids today. Getting to know women in the real world, spending time getting drunk with them (initially in larger groups), and then eventually falling into a consensual relationship was my main dating technique. Closely followed by “sod it the worst she can say is no” leading to a lot of first dates. None of that quote works if you live through the filter of the internet.
    Not even that given how far the acceptable boundaries seem to have shifted. We've moved a long way in a very short space of time when the only absolutely hard and fast rule was to not engage in sex without clear consent.
    Sex on the first date is now the norm. A pretty huge change from my youth, when it was third date. And a vast gulf from 150 years ago, when you had to wait until you were nearly dead
    Heh. I used to assume 2nd - 3rd date. I’m guessing there’s 10-15 years between us so it must have been declining in a straight line.
    When I was at university in the mid-70s many students were attached - ie 'going steady' - but not having sex.I know of couples who had been together for several years , yet not become physically intimate. It was by no means uncommon to adhere to 'chastity until marriage.' We often would speculate as to whether X and Y were sleeping together - but never assumed that they were. Quite a few clearly did 'go all the way' - though that usually took months rather than weeks - whilst many did not.
    In the 80's I remember a female work colleague of mine telling me about her church going mate - she wanted to be a virgin on her wedding day but was ok with anal and oral sex with her intended in the meantime- apparently they didn't count.....

    Bill Clinton might have agreed .................
    I suppose a lot depends on what is meant by ' having sex'. Some would view passionate kissing or 'heavy petting' as being covered by the term. To this day I suspect that really devout religious people abstain from full physical sex until marriage.
    I know some that did that.

    Heavy petting or even Oral were seen as justifiable for a number of them - even some I knew who saw themselves as born again Christians

    I'm not judging, each to their own.

    I am too young to remember but would suspect that was typical of most couples back in the 1950s - even the first half of the 1960s - before contraception became so readily available!
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441
    edited March 14
    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
    For me it was a case of "Dear Mr Atlas, I have completed the course, please send the muscles" - I read a chapter or two of The Game, but never remembered to try the tactics. My mates were all quite legendary pullers, a lot of them well into three figures in terms of conquests, whereas I was a bit Nice Guy Eddie in comparison and felt awkward spinning a line. But it worked out alright in the end.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,260
    edited March 14
    Among many other facets of attraction, I've always found smell a powerful factor.
    Anyway here's Ben Franklin on older women:

    https://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bdorsey1/41docs/51-fra.html
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 2,774
    Cyclefree, before I veer quickly into Leon's territory, may I say excellent article that I pretty much entirely agree with.

    I do worry a little about male youth and sex. The whole Incel thing is at the extreme end, but at a lower tier, a lot of the wider internet echo chambering and disinformation is driving a wider feeling that feminism and #MeToo is driving misandry and that relationships are just too much of a minefield to go near . The widening divide between male and female voting intentions, coming up through the age ranges in the UK, is a bad sign, and there is an anti-identitarian strand to young male opinion that rejects campaigns for human decency wholesale because they are routinely fed the more extreme voices in those campaigns.

    Rather than the 10% cornering the "sex market" because of algorithms, my concern is more that there has been too little emphasis on what good behaviour looks like, too much on those who would ban any attempt to initiate a relationship. I think many decent lads struggle to comprehend of any sexual behaviour that might still be appropriate, so leave well alone, and that simply leaves the field open for those lads more willing to be transgressive. This may ultimately be to the detriment of women's safety and decency.

    My son had a conversation in sociology class this week on the women's safety issue. He was surprised to find the mainstream girls' views on this issue something he could fully agree with. I think the light came on that really rather few people are raging identitarians and misandrynists, Cyclefree's article will be essential reading, as it comes from the same place and from a reality that cannot be denied.

    For our youth, we need to break the mindset that any campaign for decency and safety is just the preserve of a few extreme Corbynites and that these campaigns can and should be owned by mainstream society.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 2,438

    As someone who left a 6 year relationship in early 2020 and re-entered the dating scene (Tinder, Bumble, etc) and found a new girlfriend pretty quickly despite the pandemic, the modern dating world isn’t quite like @Leon makes out. I’m not particularly physically attractive or high status, in fact I’m currently unemployed, but I had no problem finding attractive women who were interested.

    I look at many couples I know, and think "He's punching above his weight".
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,194
    Changing subject entirely - rumours that Qatar is helping Turkey move military equipment to Ukraine
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 30,177
    Good oh, things getting back to normal after the unfortunate events of the last few days.

    https://twitter.com/oldnorthroad/status/1371183552008708096?s=21
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,695
    Cyclefree, thank you yet again for sparking (along with the Met) a most interesting, informative and discursive discussion.

    IF you haven't already done so, you've earned your spurs as a 1st-class PBer, that's for sure.

    BTW, it may (or may not) be relevant, that I just flipped on my TV (broadcast signal only) and on one of the old movie channels, they are running . . . wait for it . . . "Fatal Attraction" . . .
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    isam said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
    For me it was a case of "Dear Mr Atlas, I have completed the course, please send the muscles" - I read a chapter or two of The Game, but never remembered to try the tactics. My mates were all quite legendary pullers, a lot of them well into three figures in terms of conquests, whereas I was a bit Nice Guy Eddie in comparison and felt awkward spinning a line. But it worked out alright in the end.
    It does that way. A relationship started by emotional manipulation and deception is not likely to last well. One founded on honesty and respect is a prize worth winning.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    isam said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
    For me it was a case of "Dear Mr Atlas, I have completed the course, please send the muscles" - I read a chapter or two of The Game, but never remembered to try the tactics. My mates were all quite legendary pullers, a lot of them well into three figures in terms of conquests, whereas I was a bit Nice Guy Eddie in comparison and felt awkward spinning a line. But it worked out alright in the end.
    Nearly all my friends were highly sexed, many still are. They have the bed notches (sorry, Foxy) to prove it. Some are over 500, easily

    I was astonished when a very old friend revealed to me his lifetime tally is 8.

    8!

    I apologise if this comes across as misogyny or whatever, but men do discuss these things. And they do compare batting averages. As, indeed, do women.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 20,848
    Toms said:

    Among many other facets of attraction, I've always found smell a powerful factor.
    Anyway here's Ben Franklin on older women:

    https://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bdorsey1/41docs/51-fra.html

    I always find it quite cheering when an older woman finds love again. A reminder that they are not invisible - that love and sex and attraction are not the preserve of the young.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,376

    Good oh, things getting back to normal after the unfortunate events of the last few days.

    https://twitter.com/oldnorthroad/status/1371183552008708096?s=21

    Why not protect both?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 38,582
    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
    For me it was a case of "Dear Mr Atlas, I have completed the course, please send the muscles" - I read a chapter or two of The Game, but never remembered to try the tactics. My mates were all quite legendary pullers, a lot of them well into three figures in terms of conquests, whereas I was a bit Nice Guy Eddie in comparison and felt awkward spinning a line. But it worked out alright in the end.
    Nearly all my friends were highly sexed, many still are. They have the bed notches (sorry, Foxy) to prove it. Some are over 500, easily

    I was astonished when a very old friend revealed to me his lifetime tally is 8.

    8!

    I apologise if this comes across as misogyny or whatever, but men do discuss these things. And they do compare batting averages. As, indeed, do women.
    My lifetime tally is... ZERO :lol:
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,695

    Good oh, things getting back to normal after the unfortunate events of the last few days.

    https://twitter.com/oldnorthroad/status/1371183552008708096?s=21

    Am quite certain that Sir Winston would dearly love all the attention. History, including (or rather especially) confirms that he adored personal controversy, publicity and relevancy. IF not always in that order.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    I know someone - who appears to be somewhat bisexual prima facie - who says he falls in love with the'soul' of a person rather than the 'physical body' per se. He has become pretty besotted on people - both sexes - but is quite adamant that the attraction relates to them as human beings - ie 'lovely people' rather than 'lust for the body'.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    Foxy said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
    For me it was a case of "Dear Mr Atlas, I have completed the course, please send the muscles" - I read a chapter or two of The Game, but never remembered to try the tactics. My mates were all quite legendary pullers, a lot of them well into three figures in terms of conquests, whereas I was a bit Nice Guy Eddie in comparison and felt awkward spinning a line. But it worked out alright in the end.
    It does that way. A relationship started by emotional manipulation and deception is not likely to last well. One founded on honesty and respect is a prize worth winning.
    Filthy sex achieved via low cunning, an oyster supper and vats of champagne is quite fun tho
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,749
    Corbyn equates Assange to a Soviet dissident.
    https://twitter.com/evolvepolitics/status/1371175315020595200?s=21
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 34,833
    DougSeal said:

    This is a point that maybe should have been raised earlier but, now the Duke of Sussex is gone for good, who is going to defend the county from the marauding hordes of Kent, Surrey and Hampshire?

    Given Kent has both a Prince and a Duke, Sussex never stood a chance
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,376
    Where is the funding for it coming from though? If it does not lead to a huge growth spurt it just means even more debt longer term
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 15,258
    In my view, sex with one person 1000 times is more fulfilling than sex with 1000 people once.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884
    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
    For me it was a case of "Dear Mr Atlas, I have completed the course, please send the muscles" - I read a chapter or two of The Game, but never remembered to try the tactics. My mates were all quite legendary pullers, a lot of them well into three figures in terms of conquests, whereas I was a bit Nice Guy Eddie in comparison and felt awkward spinning a line. But it worked out alright in the end.
    Nearly all my friends were highly sexed, many still are. They have the bed notches (sorry, Foxy) to prove it. Some are over 500, easily

    I was astonished when a very old friend revealed to me his lifetime tally is 8.

    8!

    I apologise if this comes across as misogyny or whatever, but men do discuss these things. And they do compare batting averages. As, indeed, do women.
    Many of your friends are liars. 500 so once a week for ten years. Once a fortnight for twenty years.

    Didn't happen.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861

    In my view, sex with one person 1000 times is more fulfilling than sex with 1000 people once.

    That would be a valid and deeply interesting opinion - if you have tried both
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,695
    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
    For me it was a case of "Dear Mr Atlas, I have completed the course, please send the muscles" - I read a chapter or two of The Game, but never remembered to try the tactics. My mates were all quite legendary pullers, a lot of them well into three figures in terms of conquests, whereas I was a bit Nice Guy Eddie in comparison and felt awkward spinning a line. But it worked out alright in the end.
    Nearly all my friends were highly sexed, many still are. They have the bed notches (sorry, Foxy) to prove it. Some are over 500, easily

    I was astonished when a very old friend revealed to me his lifetime tally is 8.

    8!

    I apologise if this comes across as misogyny or whatever, but men do discuss these things. And they do compare batting averages. As, indeed, do women.
    Based on comparison of contemporary WW2 RAF pilot claims re: enemy aircraft bested in battle, with Luftwaffe records & other evidence postwar, COULD it be that at least some of your swordsmen MAY have exaggerated their own conquests somewhat? At least (or rather especially) when comparing notes with fellow horn-dogs?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 38,582
    Charles said:

    DougSeal said:

    This is a point that maybe should have been raised earlier but, now the Duke of Sussex is gone for good, who is going to defend the county from the marauding hordes of Kent, Surrey and Hampshire?

    Given Kent has both a Prince and a Duke, Sussex never stood a chance
    The brave defenders of Sussex were badly defeated by the Administrative Reforms of the 1970s, their shattered remnants having to endure a botched Partition into West Sussex and East Sussex.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
    For me it was a case of "Dear Mr Atlas, I have completed the course, please send the muscles" - I read a chapter or two of The Game, but never remembered to try the tactics. My mates were all quite legendary pullers, a lot of them well into three figures in terms of conquests, whereas I was a bit Nice Guy Eddie in comparison and felt awkward spinning a line. But it worked out alright in the end.
    Nearly all my friends were highly sexed, many still are. They have the bed notches (sorry, Foxy) to prove it. Some are over 500, easily

    I was astonished when a very old friend revealed to me his lifetime tally is 8.

    8!

    I apologise if this comes across as misogyny or whatever, but men do discuss these things. And they do compare batting averages. As, indeed, do women.
    Many of your friends are liars. 500 so once a week for ten years. Once a fortnight for twenty years.

    Didn't happen.
    It did. I saw.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Foxy , as you are with us at this hour! May I ask how alarming it is to receive a call from a medical practice re- a blood test carried out less than 24 hours earlier?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,376
    HYUFD said:

    Good oh, things getting back to normal after the unfortunate events of the last few days.

    https://twitter.com/oldnorthroad/status/1371183552008708096?s=21

    Why not protect both?
    https://twitter.com/thefoxholenews/status/1371185274726854659?s=20
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,402
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
    For me it was a case of "Dear Mr Atlas, I have completed the course, please send the muscles" - I read a chapter or two of The Game, but never remembered to try the tactics. My mates were all quite legendary pullers, a lot of them well into three figures in terms of conquests, whereas I was a bit Nice Guy Eddie in comparison and felt awkward spinning a line. But it worked out alright in the end.
    Nearly all my friends were highly sexed, many still are. They have the bed notches (sorry, Foxy) to prove it. Some are over 500, easily

    I was astonished when a very old friend revealed to me his lifetime tally is 8.

    8!

    I apologise if this comes across as misogyny or whatever, but men do discuss these things. And they do compare batting averages. As, indeed, do women.
    Many of your friends are liars. 500 so once a week for ten years. Once a fortnight for twenty years.

    Didn't happen.
    It did. I saw.
    You watched all 500 of your friends conquests :D ?!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,402
    I'm going to watch the Sturgeon/Salmond panorama show on Thursday - mainly to find out what on earth it is all about
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,695
    Charles said:

    DougSeal said:

    This is a point that maybe should have been raised earlier but, now the Duke of Sussex is gone for good, who is going to defend the county from the marauding hordes of Kent, Surrey and Hampshire?

    Given Kent has both a Prince and a Duke, Sussex never stood a chance
    Are their any English counties without a senior peer of the realm, at least in feudal theory & noninclature?

    Seems to me one of the secrets of the British aristocracy, is to have branches, representation, presence everywhere.

    Sorta like Starbucks, Amazon and Toastmasters International.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    edited March 14
    justin124 said:

    Foxy , as you are with us at this hour! May I ask how alarming it is to receive a call from a medical practice re- a blood test carried out less than 24 hours earlier?

    Fairly alarming, on a Sunday.

    Less so perhaps at other times.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,634
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good oh, things getting back to normal after the unfortunate events of the last few days.

    https://twitter.com/oldnorthroad/status/1371183552008708096?s=21

    Why not protect both?
    https://twitter.com/thefoxholenews/status/1371185274726854659?s=20
    Calling Britain's greatest leader, a racist? Who's calling Boris Johnson a racist?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,936
    edited March 14
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    Topping

    I can see, however, why you are skeptical of my stats. So let me try and give details, without too much info. For a start I said ‘some’ not ‘many’. Let’s say three of my friends are ‘some’

    2 took ages to settle (married VERY late). 1 still hasn’t. All are highly sexed, 2 work in creative industries which are highly sociable, all are rich, confident, successful. More importantly, all are/were prepared to pay if they were going without.

    That last factor is crucial. Add that in and suddenly it’s very easy

    I’ve glimpsed, vicariously, the Weinstein world
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,458
    HYUFD said:

    Where is the funding for it coming from though? If it does not lead to a huge growth spurt it just means even more debt longer term
    Even Larry Summers thinks it's too much.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,654
    Leon said:

    In my view, sex with one person 1000 times is more fulfilling than sex with 1000 people once.

    That would be a valid and deeply interesting opinion - if you have tried both
    Love v mechanics...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
    For me it was a case of "Dear Mr Atlas, I have completed the course, please send the muscles" - I read a chapter or two of The Game, but never remembered to try the tactics. My mates were all quite legendary pullers, a lot of them well into three figures in terms of conquests, whereas I was a bit Nice Guy Eddie in comparison and felt awkward spinning a line. But it worked out alright in the end.
    Nearly all my friends were highly sexed, many still are. They have the bed notches (sorry, Foxy) to prove it. Some are over 500, easily

    I was astonished when a very old friend revealed to me his lifetime tally is 8.

    8!

    I apologise if this comes across as misogyny or whatever, but men do discuss these things. And they do compare batting averages. As, indeed, do women.
    Many of your friends are liars. 500 so once a week for ten years. Once a fortnight for twenty years.

    Didn't happen.
    It did. I saw.
    No you didn't. Great bantz though.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy , as you are with us at this hour! May I ask how alarming it is to receive a call from a medical practice re- a blood test carried out less than 24 hours earlier?

    Fairly alarming!

    Thank you. The test form was issued in mid- January re- suspected gout. I have not been suffering unduly severely relative to others I am aware of who have the condition , and - given current NHS pressures - did not actually present it until last Weds at 12.30. I got a call from my surgery at 9.30 next morning - and have a telephone consultation to review the test on Tuesday afternoon.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,194
    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy , as you are with us at this hour! May I ask how alarming it is to receive a call from a medical practice re- a blood test carried out less than 24 hours earlier?

    Fairly alarming!

    Thank you. The test form was issued in mid- January re- suspected gout. I have not been suffering unduly severely relative to others I am aware of who have the condition , and - given current NHS pressures - did not actually present it until last Weds at 12.30. I got a call from my surgery at 9.30 next morning - and have a telephone consultation to review the test on Tuesday afternoon.
    Fingers crossed for you Justin
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
    For me it was a case of "Dear Mr Atlas, I have completed the course, please send the muscles" - I read a chapter or two of The Game, but never remembered to try the tactics. My mates were all quite legendary pullers, a lot of them well into three figures in terms of conquests, whereas I was a bit Nice Guy Eddie in comparison and felt awkward spinning a line. But it worked out alright in the end.
    Nearly all my friends were highly sexed, many still are. They have the bed notches (sorry, Foxy) to prove it. Some are over 500, easily

    I was astonished when a very old friend revealed to me his lifetime tally is 8.

    8!

    I apologise if this comes across as misogyny or whatever, but men do discuss these things. And they do compare batting averages. As, indeed, do women.
    Many of your friends are liars. 500 so once a week for ten years. Once a fortnight for twenty years.

    Didn't happen.
    It did. I saw.
    No you didn't. Great bantz though.
    See my later post explaining. It really is true - I accept it seems implausible
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884
    Leon said:

    Topping

    I can see, however, why you are skeptical of my stats. So let me try and give details, without too much info. For a start I said ‘some’ not ‘many’. Let’s say three of my friends are ‘some’

    2 took ages to settle (married VERY late). 1 still hasn’t. All are highly sexed, 2 work in creative industries which are highly sociable, all are rich, confident, successful. More importantly, all are/were prepared to pay if they were going without.

    That last factor is crucial. Add that in and suddenly it’s very easy

    I’ve glimpsed, vicariously, the Weinstein world

    Mate. Not 500. Even with working girls. The story is just as good with a lower number but not 500. Think about it.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,194
    Leon said:

    Topping

    I can see, however, why you are skeptical of my stats. So let me try and give details, without too much info. For a start I said ‘some’ not ‘many’. Let’s say three of my friends are ‘some’

    2 took ages to settle (married VERY late). 1 still hasn’t. All are highly sexed, 2 work in creative industries which are highly sociable, all are rich, confident, successful. More importantly, all are/were prepared to pay if they were going without.

    That last factor is crucial. Add that in and suddenly it’s very easy

    I’ve glimpsed, vicariously, the Weinstein world

    You could always try Thailand - I hear that has its attractions
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    edited March 14
    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy , as you are with us at this hour! May I ask how alarming it is to receive a call from a medical practice re- a blood test carried out less than 24 hours earlier?

    Fairly alarming!

    Thank you. The test form was issued in mid- January re- suspected gout. I have not been suffering unduly severely relative to others I am aware of who have the condition , and - given current NHS pressures - did not actually present it until last Weds at 12.30. I got a call from my surgery at 9.30 next morning - and have a telephone consultation to review the test on Tuesday afternoon.
    Less so in that case. If it were something serious then an immediate consultation.

    Good GP's are getting very efficient with lockdown medicine. Others are pretty useless.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 4,476
    If no one else wants the stuff, can we not just have it all? Speed up the boost even more...
    I have no problem with caution, but what evidence are they seeing to suggest issues? How many doses have we injected in the uk and how many problems?
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,695
    HYUFD said:

    Where is the funding for it coming from though? If it does not lead to a huge growth spurt it just means even more debt longer term
    Appears the funding, in terms of federal borrowing capacity, has already been provided for, thanks to previous administration, in particular former Treasury Sec. Mnuchin.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/14/covid-relief-package-federal-debt-475622

    It was Dick Cheney who most memorably said, "Deficits don't matter" after decades of GOPers savaging (sometimes rightly) the "tax and spend" Democrats.

    Note that as a former follower of Paul Simon (who supported a US balanced-budget amendment) and Paul Tsongas (another liberal Democratic deficit hawk) I hear what you are saying.

    Think that the powers-that-be, including Wall Street and other major institutions (center) left, (center) right and (center) center, believe (or rather hope) that post-COVID economic surge will float the boat over the rocks and to safe harbors at home & abroad.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884
    Grace. ITV. Perfectly good cop show. I like both John Simm and Richie Campbell.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 34,833
    Cyclefree said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    I do feel sorry for kids today. Getting to know women in the real world, spending time getting drunk with them (initially in larger groups), and then eventually falling into a consensual relationship was my main dating technique. Closely followed by “sod it the worst she can say is no” leading to a lot of first dates. None of that quote works if you live through the filter of the internet.
    The first girl I lived with I met by landing on top of her after falling of an upright piano, she didn't seem in a hurry to get out from under me so I kissed her....my way was quicker
    Your efficiency is to be admired.
    I want to know what he was doing on top of the upright piano. It sounds very Laurel and Hardy-esque.
    Presumably drunk dancing 😉
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,458

    HYUFD said:

    Where is the funding for it coming from though? If it does not lead to a huge growth spurt it just means even more debt longer term
    Appears the funding, in terms of federal borrowing capacity, has already been provided for, thanks to previous administration, in particular former Treasury Sec. Mnuchin.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/14/covid-relief-package-federal-debt-475622

    It was Dick Cheney who most memorably said, "Deficits don't matter" after decades of GOPers savaging (sometimes rightly) the "tax and spend" Democrats.

    Note that as a former follower of Paul Simon (who supported a US balanced-budget amendment) and Paul Tsongas (another liberal Democratic deficit hawk) I hear what you are saying.

    Think that the powers-that-be, including Wall Street and other major institutions (center) left, (center) right and (center) center, believe (or rather hope) that post-COVID economic surge will float the boat over the rocks and to safe harbors at home & abroad.
    The GOP only care about the deficit when they are out of office. Then it becomes the devil's work until the moment they are back in the Oval Office.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy , as you are with us at this hour! May I ask how alarming it is to receive a call from a medical practice re- a blood test carried out less than 24 hours earlier?

    Fairly alarming!

    Thank you. The test form was issued in mid- January re- suspected gout. I have not been suffering unduly severely relative to others I am aware of who have the condition , and - given current NHS pressures - did not actually present it until last Weds at 12.30. I got a call from my surgery at 9.30 next morning - and have a telephone consultation to review the test on Tuesday afternoon.
    Less so in that case. If it were something serious then an immediate consultation.

    Good GP's are getting very efficient with lockdown medicine. Others are pretty useless.
    Thanks for that. I was surprised that the test result was returned to the surgery so quickly!It usually takes a few days.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,695
    Charles said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    I do feel sorry for kids today. Getting to know women in the real world, spending time getting drunk with them (initially in larger groups), and then eventually falling into a consensual relationship was my main dating technique. Closely followed by “sod it the worst she can say is no” leading to a lot of first dates. None of that quote works if you live through the filter of the internet.
    The first girl I lived with I met by landing on top of her after falling of an upright piano, she didn't seem in a hurry to get out from under me so I kissed her....my way was quicker
    Your efficiency is to be admired.
    I want to know what he was doing on top of the upright piano. It sounds very Laurel and Hardy-esque.
    Presumably drunk dancing 😉
    That's slander IF it turns out that back then Pagan was a piano tuner.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 25,318
    Pagan2 said:

    alex_ said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Pagan2 said:

    To be controversial (for a change :) )

    The header calls for men to change, I do wonder however women shouldn't also look at themselves and think about their behaviour. Now maybe I am unusual in this but I have known many women ditch boyfriends who were steady and respectful and stable for those that were shall we say less respectful. The habitual cheats and regularly unemployed and worse because apparently "well bob was sort of boring".

    I don't think its just me because girls like a bad boy has become somewhat of a cliche and certainly seen it happen. The bad boy however is also quite often the sort railed against in this thread.

    No before you say so not claiming its all womens fault by any means just that there is also as well as men behaving badly women rewarding them almost for being like that

    Yes - the number of women who voted for Trump despite his appalling behaviour and attitudes is evidence that women too can admire and reinforce bad behaviour. If we want better behaviour we all need to play our part.
    Methinks majority of women who voted for Trumpsky, did so DESPITE his sexual bad behavior NOT because of it.

    Certainly true for (most) evangelical Christina church ladies who voted for the swine.
    A huge percentage of Trump supporters simply don't believe anything said about him. So conditioned are they against "the MSM", and so deep into the cult. Even when he damn near confirms it with his own words.
    The worst thing I ever got called by a woman was "cute but scary" I still to this day have no idea how to work out what that meant
    That's exactly how I find you - cute but scary.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Topping

    I can see, however, why you are skeptical of my stats. So let me try and give details, without too much info. For a start I said ‘some’ not ‘many’. Let’s say three of my friends are ‘some’

    2 took ages to settle (married VERY late). 1 still hasn’t. All are highly sexed, 2 work in creative industries which are highly sociable, all are rich, confident, successful. More importantly, all are/were prepared to pay if they were going without.

    That last factor is crucial. Add that in and suddenly it’s very easy

    I’ve glimpsed, vicariously, the Weinstein world

    Mate. Not 500. Even with working girls. The story is just as good with a lower number but not 500. Think about it.
    OK let me paint you a picture. I’ve altered all the crucial details but the portrait is accurate.

    You’re very libidinous. Late 30s. You LOVE sex. You’re a multi millionaire theatre director. You’ve come out of an intense relationship feeling quite sad and nihilistic, but also extremely horny. You’re in a lovely Manhattan apartment on the Upper East Side

    You decide to embark on a prolonged period of hedonism. A woman every other night, sometimes two a night. Mostly expensive call girls but also some genuine hook ups. You are, after all, a very rich successful theatre director. Quite a catch.

    Eventually you tire of the bleakness, maybe you meet another woman for whom you have genuine feelings.

    But you’ve spent two years on a bender. You can EASILY rack up 100 conquests a year if you’re so minded. Let’s say this period of indulgence happens, with varying degrees of excess, two or three times in your life

    Et voila
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,458

    If no one else wants the stuff, can we not just have it all? Speed up the boost even more...
    I have no problem with caution, but what evidence are they seeing to suggest issues? How many doses have we injected in the uk and how many problems?
    A lot of countries need an urgent review of the way the political class handles and understand risk and precaution when this is all over.
  • TazTaz Posts: 2,451
    TOPPING said:

    Grace. ITV. Perfectly good cop show. I like both John Simm and Richie Campbell.

    Preferred McDomald and Dodds. They announced Grace is back next year but no news on the former
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 4,476
    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy , as you are with us at this hour! May I ask how alarming it is to receive a call from a medical practice re- a blood test carried out less than 24 hours earlier?

    Fairly alarming!

    Thank you. The test form was issued in mid- January re- suspected gout. I have not been suffering unduly severely relative to others I am aware of who have the condition , and - given current NHS pressures - did not actually present it until last Weds at 12.30. I got a call from my surgery at 9.30 next morning - and have a telephone consultation to review the test on Tuesday afternoon.
    Less so in that case. If it were something serious then an immediate consultation.

    Good GP's are getting very efficient with lockdown medicine. Others are pretty useless.
    Thanks for that. I was surprised that the test result was returned to the surgery so quickly!It usually takes a few days.
    In my limited experience if it was really serious you’d have been called straight in to hospital (as was my experience with leukaemia - blood test led to call to go straight to hospital, do not pass go etc). Hopefully for you nothing too serious. Good luck!
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,695

    HYUFD said:

    Where is the funding for it coming from though? If it does not lead to a huge growth spurt it just means even more debt longer term
    Appears the funding, in terms of federal borrowing capacity, has already been provided for, thanks to previous administration, in particular former Treasury Sec. Mnuchin.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/14/covid-relief-package-federal-debt-475622

    It was Dick Cheney who most memorably said, "Deficits don't matter" after decades of GOPers savaging (sometimes rightly) the "tax and spend" Democrats.

    Note that as a former follower of Paul Simon (who supported a US balanced-budget amendment) and Paul Tsongas (another liberal Democratic deficit hawk) I hear what you are saying.

    Think that the powers-that-be, including Wall Street and other major institutions (center) left, (center) right and (center) center, believe (or rather hope) that post-COVID economic surge will float the boat over the rocks and to safe harbors at home & abroad.
    The GOP only care about the deficit when they are out of office. Then it becomes the devil's work until the moment they are back in the Oval Office.
    To be (semi) fair, the Republicans DO still have a significant corps of deficit hawks, as per party tradition & inclination.

    AND of course even they are prone to argue, that at least under a GOP administration, the money is being spent for GOOD things, not being wasted on BAD things by demon Democrat politicos.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 43,971
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good oh, things getting back to normal after the unfortunate events of the last few days.

    https://twitter.com/oldnorthroad/status/1371183552008708096?s=21

    Why not protect both?
    https://twitter.com/thefoxholenews/status/1371185274726854659?s=20
    This isn't the same protestors over Sarah Everard at the vigil last night; it's the usual hard Left rent-a-mob on the rampage, so the cordons seem totally appropriate to me.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    edited March 14

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good oh, things getting back to normal after the unfortunate events of the last few days.

    https://twitter.com/oldnorthroad/status/1371183552008708096?s=21

    Why not protect both?
    https://twitter.com/thefoxholenews/status/1371185274726854659?s=20
    Calling Britain's greatest leader, a racist? Who's calling Boris Johnson a racist?
    Utterly pathetic. Random BLM chants. ‘Ray-cist! Ray-cist!’ Lots of abuse of the coppers doing their unthanked job

    What the F has this got to do with the poor woman who was murdered?
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441
    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy , as you are with us at this hour! May I ask how alarming it is to receive a call from a medical practice re- a blood test carried out less than 24 hours earlier?

    Fairly alarming!

    Thank you. The test form was issued in mid- January re- suspected gout. I have not been suffering unduly severely relative to others I am aware of who have the condition , and - given current NHS pressures - did not actually present it until last Weds at 12.30. I got a call from my surgery at 9.30 next morning - and have a telephone consultation to review the test on Tuesday afternoon.
    Less so in that case. If it were something serious then an immediate consultation.

    Good GP's are getting very efficient with lockdown medicine. Others are pretty useless.
    Just over a fortnight ago I went to my doctors, first visit at this surgery, because I was worried about a mole that seemed to have changed. He said it was ok but was worried about a different one and said I should see a dermatologist ... next morning I got a phone call from the hospital arranging an appt, they told me he had put it down as urgent. I nearly passed out! It was the morning of one of my best mates funeral, fair to say I was pretty stressed. They said it was because GPs are worried about the backlog of cases missed due to Covid. I didn’t believe them, was too scared to go to the local hospital so went private and it was ok.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 38,582
    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    alex_ said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Pagan2 said:

    To be controversial (for a change :) )

    The header calls for men to change, I do wonder however women shouldn't also look at themselves and think about their behaviour. Now maybe I am unusual in this but I have known many women ditch boyfriends who were steady and respectful and stable for those that were shall we say less respectful. The habitual cheats and regularly unemployed and worse because apparently "well bob was sort of boring".

    I don't think its just me because girls like a bad boy has become somewhat of a cliche and certainly seen it happen. The bad boy however is also quite often the sort railed against in this thread.

    No before you say so not claiming its all womens fault by any means just that there is also as well as men behaving badly women rewarding them almost for being like that

    Yes - the number of women who voted for Trump despite his appalling behaviour and attitudes is evidence that women too can admire and reinforce bad behaviour. If we want better behaviour we all need to play our part.
    Methinks majority of women who voted for Trumpsky, did so DESPITE his sexual bad behavior NOT because of it.

    Certainly true for (most) evangelical Christina church ladies who voted for the swine.
    A huge percentage of Trump supporters simply don't believe anything said about him. So conditioned are they against "the MSM", and so deep into the cult. Even when he damn near confirms it with his own words.
    The worst thing I ever got called by a woman was "cute but scary" I still to this day have no idea how to work out what that meant
    That's exactly how I find you - cute but scary.
    "Get a room!" :lol:
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Topping

    I can see, however, why you are skeptical of my stats. So let me try and give details, without too much info. For a start I said ‘some’ not ‘many’. Let’s say three of my friends are ‘some’

    2 took ages to settle (married VERY late). 1 still hasn’t. All are highly sexed, 2 work in creative industries which are highly sociable, all are rich, confident, successful. More importantly, all are/were prepared to pay if they were going without.

    That last factor is crucial. Add that in and suddenly it’s very easy

    I’ve glimpsed, vicariously, the Weinstein world

    Mate. Not 500. Even with working girls. The story is just as good with a lower number but not 500. Think about it.
    OK let me paint you a picture. I’ve altered all the crucial details but the portrait is accurate.

    You’re very libidinous. Late 30s. You LOVE sex. You’re a multi millionaire theatre director. You’ve come out of an intense relationship feeling quite sad and nihilistic, but also extremely horny. You’re in a lovely Manhattan apartment on the Upper East Side

    You decide to embark on a prolonged period of hedonism. A woman every other night, sometimes two a night. Mostly expensive call girls but also some genuine hook ups. You are, after all, a very rich successful theatre director. Quite a catch.

    Eventually you tire of the bleakness, maybe you meet another woman for whom you have genuine feelings.

    But you’ve spent two years on a bender. You can EASILY rack up 100 conquests a year if you’re so minded. Let’s say this period of indulgence happens, with varying degrees of excess, two or three times in your life

    Et voila
    So we've gone from some of your friends are over 500 to one bloke (soz, who may or may not exist). And he might have had 100 conquests a year. For two years. Twice, perhaps (although again unlikely).
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 25,318
    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    isam said:

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Been out this afternoon walking in the rain so just catching up on this thread.

    Once again to join with other contributors, an excellent piece and nothing I can disagree with in there.

    I think the key point to be understood is education of boys and young men. Never has Aristotle's aphorism been more true than in the treatment of women.

    Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man.

    There certainly seem to be a lot of emotionally stunted blokes forever frozen at the age of seven on twitter.
    Not just on twitter.

    I have mused on @Cyclefree header whilst pottering in the garden. The problem seems intractable, and while better education and police who are competent are clearly good things, they do have a rather apple pie appeal. Who doesn't favour these things?

    The problem is men, and while only a minority behave physically violently, it is a big problem for women. While fear of random street violence is legitimate in men, the threat is violence or robbery rather than sexual assault, so of a different order.

    There is a lot of male anger out there, and part of that is that for many men anger is the only permissable emotional outlet. It is the goto for any stress or difficulty. The threat to status from female equality and emancipation brings it to the fore.

    I work in a majority female workplace, and cannot recall seeing any misogyny, but at a recent pre-pandemic team day the subject #metoo came up.

    I was the only male at a lunchtable with a half dozen female colleagues aged from mid twenties to mid fifties. I asked them to tell me of their #metoo stories. Everyone of them had several, mostly inappropriate behaviour from male patients. Indeed they had devised a way of marking notes for certain patients to be never be seen without a witness.

    Perhaps the most important thing for men to do is to listen to the women in their lives and workplace, without interrupting or arguing. These experiences are very common, only yesterday Mrs Foxy told me of an incident where a van driver cut her up, blocked the road in front of her, got out and pounded on her car window swearing at her and accusing her of dangerous driving. These incidents are so common that all women seem able to tell similar tales. So my advice to men is to raise the issue, and listen, just listen.

    It would be nice if these angry metropolitan women had marched in the name of the THOUSANDS of girls systematically groomed, raped, abused and sometimes killed - with the connivance of police and politicians - across the north and Midlands in the last 30 years, but maybe I am over-optimistic about human nature.

    On your larger point, I agree, but I fear misogyny and male violence - clearly very real problems - are likely to get WORSE before they get better. Why? Involuntary celibacy. Incels. More and more young men are getting less and less sex, for various reasons - apps like Tinder, inequality, declining employment prospects for young men, and so on.

    Young men deprived of sex quite quickly turn to violence. See the rise of Islamism in sexually suppressive societies.

    Eventually this problem will probably be solved by technology. Sex bots. GPT3 with fake boobs.

    But we could be in for a rocky decade or three before then. It’s a major issue, not really acknowledged
    Except.

    Plenty of those sleazeballs are in high status roles, like policemen, bankers or politicians. They have money and partners.

    They just get greedy; they assume that because they are bursting with spunk (to take a phrase I must have picked up from someone famous) they can take without asking. Biologically, that's what males do, but civilisation is turning away from pure biological urges, because they lead to nasty, brutish and short lives.

    But some men don't bother with that. Because they're alphas, dontchaknow?
    And yet we ARE making progress there. After MeToo. Powerful men are much less likely to abuse that power, sexually, because society is much less tolerant. That’s good.

    It’s the powerLESS men we should be worried about. The incels. They are already one of the biggest terror threats in the USA
    They could try being nice to women. Plenty of women would welcome funny kind men who make them feel good.
    They don’t tho. You’re being naive. Social media (and other changes) really have altered dating fundamentally. Read the links I posted, and others. There’s plenty of material out there. 80% of women compete for 10% of men.

    What has happened in many other human endeavors - from the arts to football teams to banking - is now happening to sex. A lucky few at the top do incredibly well and get all the money and glory. A huge chunk - the bottom half of the pyramid - get little or nothing.

    Trouble is, this is sex, not children’s fiction. So it has a grave potential to destabilize
    It is not just the incels losing out it is fair to note either, a lot of the top 5% now find they can have a different girl most nights and woman are increasingly opting to hold out for them, the bottom 5% which are the incels are getting no more than they ever did and the mid 90% of nice guys is getting a lower share
    Yes, absolutely right. If you’re in that top 10% of men getting all the attention, why settle down with one woman? You can have endless sexual variety into your 40s. A male fantasy come true

    This makes the most-desired men more commitment-phobic, which makes the women even more paranoid and yielding, and so the vicious cycle tightens

    The only choice for the beta minus men is to get rich. Easier said than done, of course
    Confession: I read the very unWoke books "The Game", "The Mystery Method", and "Millions of Women are Waiting to Meet You" in my 20s.

    They WORKED.

    I'd previously only had two relationships. After reading these, I had a far higher number (which I will not disclose) in the space of less than two years. I had a number of successful relationships (admittedly, all short-lived but that was partly through choice as I was a bit of a kamikaze) with extremely intelligent and beautiful young women. Amazing. And they are not supposed to "work", because they are all about demonstrating higher social value and the fact you don't care about the rules; you're fun, exciting and a risk-taker.

    Did I behave slightly selfishly and greedily? Yes. But, then, I met my wife, possibly through lessons and skills learned through this, calmed down and it all changed. But, the memories.

    Oh, the memories.
    I noticed you "negging" Cyclefree earlier... old habits eh?!
    "Negging"?

    What am I missing out on?



    As others said, a retelling of "treat em mean..."

    If you fancy a girl, walk up to her when she is with her mates and talk to the mates, or if she has got her hair down say it looks good... but you prefer it when she wears it up.

    Same kind of thinking as a humble brag I would say
    There are definite tricks that reliably work. I stumbled on a few in my 30s. I would find myself reusing lines, with predictable success (for a while).

    It did feel a bit bleak, however. Mechanical
    For me it was a case of "Dear Mr Atlas, I have completed the course, please send the muscles" - I read a chapter or two of The Game, but never remembered to try the tactics. My mates were all quite legendary pullers, a lot of them well into three figures in terms of conquests, whereas I was a bit Nice Guy Eddie in comparison and felt awkward spinning a line. But it worked out alright in the end.
    Nearly all my friends were highly sexed, many still are. They have the bed notches (sorry, Foxy) to prove it. Some are over 500, easily

    I was astonished when a very old friend revealed to me his lifetime tally is 8.

    8!

    I apologise if this comes across as misogyny or whatever, but men do discuss these things. And they do compare batting averages. As, indeed, do women.
    Or whatever?
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,323
    Pulpstar said:

    I'm going to watch the Sturgeon/Salmond panorama show on Thursday - mainly to find out what on earth it is all about

    If it’s anything like the BBC Kirsty Wark ‘documentary’, be prepared to do a lot of research on the missing bits.

    Gordon Dangerfield’s recent blogs are lengthy but informative.

    https://gordondangerfield.com/
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884
    edited March 14
    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy , as you are with us at this hour! May I ask how alarming it is to receive a call from a medical practice re- a blood test carried out less than 24 hours earlier?

    Fairly alarming!

    Thank you. The test form was issued in mid- January re- suspected gout. I have not been suffering unduly severely relative to others I am aware of who have the condition , and - given current NHS pressures - did not actually present it until last Weds at 12.30. I got a call from my surgery at 9.30 next morning - and have a telephone consultation to review the test on Tuesday afternoon.
    Less so in that case. If it were something serious then an immediate consultation.

    Good GP's are getting very efficient with lockdown medicine. Others are pretty useless.
    Just over a fortnight ago I went to my doctors, first visit at this surgery, because I was worried about a mole that seemed to have changed. He said it was ok but was worried about a different one and said I should see a dermatologist ... next morning I got a phone call from the hospital arranging an appt, they told me he had put it down as urgent. I nearly passed out! It was the morning of one of my best mates funeral, fair to say I was pretty stressed. They said it was because GPs are worried about the backlog of cases missed due to Covid. I didn’t believe them, was too scared to go to the local hospital so went private and it was ok.
    Good to hear. Reading about Sarah Harding over the weekend. She waited until she was nearly passing out with pain before being told to go to A&E because the pain killers she wanted were so extreme. She has been given months to live now.

    Best advice a doctor ever gave me was "don't wait".

    Oh and also: Google diagnoses not symptoms.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Topping

    I can see, however, why you are skeptical of my stats. So let me try and give details, without too much info. For a start I said ‘some’ not ‘many’. Let’s say three of my friends are ‘some’

    2 took ages to settle (married VERY late). 1 still hasn’t. All are highly sexed, 2 work in creative industries which are highly sociable, all are rich, confident, successful. More importantly, all are/were prepared to pay if they were going without.

    That last factor is crucial. Add that in and suddenly it’s very easy

    I’ve glimpsed, vicariously, the Weinstein world

    Mate. Not 500. Even with working girls. The story is just as good with a lower number but not 500. Think about it.
    OK let me paint you a picture. I’ve altered all the crucial details but the portrait is accurate.

    You’re very libidinous. Late 30s. You LOVE sex. You’re a multi millionaire theatre director. You’ve come out of an intense relationship feeling quite sad and nihilistic, but also extremely horny. You’re in a lovely Manhattan apartment on the Upper East Side

    You decide to embark on a prolonged period of hedonism. A woman every other night, sometimes two a night. Mostly expensive call girls but also some genuine hook ups. You are, after all, a very rich successful theatre director. Quite a catch.

    Eventually you tire of the bleakness, maybe you meet another woman for whom you have genuine feelings.

    But you’ve spent two years on a bender. You can EASILY rack up 100 conquests a year if you’re so minded. Let’s say this period of indulgence happens, with varying degrees of excess, two or three times in your life

    Et voila
    So we've gone from some of your friends are over 500 to one bloke (soz, who may or may not exist). And he might have had 100 conquests a year. For two years. Twice, perhaps (although again unlikely).
    No. I said ‘some’ in my original comment. Not ‘many’. And it is some. 3, to be precise. Tho I have my suspicions about a fourth. Lol. Genuinely

    I’ve given one (disguised and redacted) example of how it can happen. Quite easily. I can’t give any more for obv reasons. But think variations of that
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Topping

    I can see, however, why you are skeptical of my stats. So let me try and give details, without too much info. For a start I said ‘some’ not ‘many’. Let’s say three of my friends are ‘some’

    2 took ages to settle (married VERY late). 1 still hasn’t. All are highly sexed, 2 work in creative industries which are highly sociable, all are rich, confident, successful. More importantly, all are/were prepared to pay if they were going without.

    That last factor is crucial. Add that in and suddenly it’s very easy

    I’ve glimpsed, vicariously, the Weinstein world

    Mate. Not 500. Even with working girls. The story is just as good with a lower number but not 500. Think about it.
    OK let me paint you a picture. I’ve altered all the crucial details but the portrait is accurate.

    You’re very libidinous. Late 30s. You LOVE sex. You’re a multi millionaire theatre director. You’ve come out of an intense relationship feeling quite sad and nihilistic, but also extremely horny. You’re in a lovely Manhattan apartment on the Upper East Side

    You decide to embark on a prolonged period of hedonism. A woman every other night, sometimes two a night. Mostly expensive call girls but also some genuine hook ups. You are, after all, a very rich successful theatre director. Quite a catch.

    Eventually you tire of the bleakness, maybe you meet another woman for whom you have genuine feelings.

    But you’ve spent two years on a bender. You can EASILY rack up 100 conquests a year if you’re so minded. Let’s say this period of indulgence happens, with varying degrees of excess, two or three times in your life

    Et voila
    So we've gone from some of your friends are over 500 to one bloke (soz, who may or may not exist). And he might have had 100 conquests a year. For two years. Twice, perhaps (although again unlikely).
    To be fair I don’t think it is as unlikely as you say. Some of my mates are well into three figures, and they are just electricians from Hornchurch who settled down at 30!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,745
    Floater said:
    I'll have it, if it going spare.....
This discussion has been closed.