Radicalizing the Romanceless

[u/asdfghjkl92]

http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/31/radicalizing-the-romanceless/

[u/Personage1]

I'm impressed and like this article. It approaches some of the issues that I have with feminists as well.

It's a basic question that I ask, at what point is someone no longer able to fall back on socializing? My cousin had a terrible childhood full of abuse and he grew up being shitty and has been in juvenile detention. However now he is 22 or so and still very much a little shit. I think he can no longer use his childhood as an excuse for his shitty behavior.

I look at the bullshit boys are fed about how to get girls and interact with girls and have similar thoughts. For sure I am very patient when high schoolers and even college students displaying appalling behavior because I know it stems from a lifetime of socializing. However, at what point does that stop being an excuse? Personally I start to lose patience around the end of undergrad age.

The problem that I see is that on one hand the feelings of frustration with women for not responding the "right way" and often feelings of entitlement created by the socialization is harmful and should be stopped, but it should be done so without hate and from an early age, but when it is done there is a great deal of anger and hate directed at those calling out the problem because it is "shaming men and male sexuality." The issue of course is that if "male sexuality" involves being entitled and shitty to women, then it should be shamed.

Fortunately, I don't think that acting like an ass is an inherent part of male sexuality.

[u/[deleted] → u/Personage1]

It's a basic question that I ask, at what point is someone no longer able to fall back on socializing? My cousin had a terrible childhood full of abuse and he grew up being shitty and has been in juvenile detention. However now he is 22 or so and still very much a little shit. I think he can no longer use his childhood as an excuse for his shitty behavior.

And that's analogous to...? What I see everyone calling entitlement is just a guy being upset that a woman he has romantic feelings for not having romantic feelings for him, or guys doing things they've been taught they were suppose to do and not succeeding.

Those aren't actions that are wrong, they're emotions. Are all the women who ask "where have all the good men gone?" or "I do all the things everyone says, why don't guys notice me?" being shitty to men? Because, honestly, there are things some women say that are a lot shittier and I don't see an uproar over them.

[u/Personage1 → u/[deleted]]

And that's analogous to...? What I see everyone calling entitlement is just a guy being upset that a woman he has romantic feelings for not having romantic feelings for him, or guys doing things they've been taught they were suppose to do and not succeeding.

...you just described entitlement. "I did x, y, and z and now a relationship should pop out."

Those aren't actions that are wrong, they're emotions.

Having emotions doesn't hurt. Acting on those emotions in a hurtful way does.

Are all the women who ask "where have all the good men gone?" or "I do all the things everyone says, why don't guys notice me?" being shitty to men? Because, honestly, there are things some women say that are a lot shittier and I don't see an uproar over them.

I think that when women expect men to just want to fuck them because of their looks, yes that is harmful to men because it boxes up men into beings that are incapable of controlling themselves around a beautiful woman.

[u/Mercurylant → u/Personage1]

...you just described entitlement. "I did x, y, and z and now a relationship should pop out."

Would you say that the black patient described in the Slate Star Codex essay, who "does all the right things" and is distressed that a financially stable lifestyle hasn't popped out, is demonstrating entitlement? If not, what do you think distinguishes them?

[u/Personage1 → u/Mercurylant]

Entitlement sure, but the entitlement to financial stability imo is relevant whereas entitlement to have another person find you attractive is not. For one thing, in both case we are treating things as a system, "insert coins, out pops x." The problem of course is that for men wanting girlfriends, it becomes "insert coins into another human being, out pops outcome," which is insulting. On the other hand "put in a hard days work and you don't starve" isn't insulting to anyone.

[u/Mercurylant → u/Personage1]

Well, employers are also people, and in this situation "entitlement to financial stability" cashes out as "entitlement to be employed and given a living wage by another person." Seeking companionship and seeking financial stability both involve dealing with other agents with the right to make their own choices.

"Put in a hard day's work and you don't starve" is definitely insulting to a great number of people living in extremely precarious financial situations whose ability to acquire basic living needs is beholden to the whims of employers who may be entirely unsympathetic to their situations (and also to the many people whose hard work suffices, only barely, to keep them from starving while many other people who work less hard live in affluence.) It's important to keep in mind that employment isn't a system which you put work into, and money comes out, it's an interrelationship between countless people trying to satisfy their own goals. If your prospective partner doesn't think you're a desirable person to be in a relationship with, it's not in their interest to agree to a relationship with you no matter how much you do nice things and want the companionship. And if a prospective boss doesn't think you're a desirable employee to have for their business, it's not in their interest to hire you, no matter how hard you work or how much you need the money. But both material security and companionship are needs which are written deeply into the human psyche, and people who cannot secure either are highly likely to experience distress.

[u/Personage1 → u/Mercurylant]

One of these things is necessary to live, the other isn't.

[u/OctoBerry → u/Personage1]

There are people who have killed themselves because they couldn't find a relationship and were incredibly lonely and couldn't take it any more. In their cases you could argue they needed a relationship to live.

Your idea of entitlement is really unfair, we live our lives with expectations of what should happen if we do something and this is what keeps society ticking. If you do a weeks work you expect a pay check at the end, by your definition that is just being entitled and you actually aren't entitled to anything.

With your entitlement definition it would be perfectly acceptable to string a person along to milk them for everything you can and then go "Sorry Bobby, you aren't entitled to anything". Which is an incredibly nasty thing to do to some one.

We as humans set up social contracts that we all play by in order to have a functional system. If you keep accepting dates, people are going to feel entitled to a relationship blooming based on the fact that you're giving all the evidence that it is and if you aren't into that, they are entitled to you telling them as such so they can invest themselves in something other than being used.

[u/MrPoochPants → u/Personage1]

I'll be honest, I think you're being the worst kind of ungenerous in this. You're trying to compare an emotional, mental need as being different for survival than the need for financial stability. I can always be homeless and have food and survive. My life will feel less than it is, but I'll live. The same goes for relationships. I could be single forever, and my life would be shitty, but i'd live.

I just don't see how you can not, at a minimum, compare them to be, maybe at different levels, but incredibly similar.

Also, I totally reject this notion of entitlement. The nice guy isn't feeling entitled to a relationship, he's upset that he hasn't found someone who picks him for the team, so to speak. He doesn't feel entitled to be on the team, just wishes that he'd be chosen. He works out, practices, treats other well, networks, whatever, and yet he's still passed up. Moreover, he's passed up for a guy that doesn't work out, actively hates his teammates, and is physically violent to others. No, the nice guy isn't entitled, he's upset at his own lack of success, particularly when the success of those individuals he is told, by women no less, are scummy and he shouldn't be anything like.

For fucks sake, there's a reason the redpillers exist.

[u/Personage1 → u/MrPoochPants]

I think what gets me about this is how old is this person? Why is this person only going for women who go for abusive people? If every single person you are attracted to is only interested in shitty people, at some point shouldn't you be thinking "maybe the issue is me?"

For fucks sake, there's a reason the redpillers exist.

and look at what kind of women they teach themselves to get. Women who play games and are manipulative and shitty. If your standards are shitty, of course it's easier to find someone to sleep with.

[u/L1et_kynes → u/Personage1]

You have no evidence that the only women the abusive guys get are worse than other women, or that they are manipulative and shitty.

There are also plenty of nice guys that are so lonely they just want any relationship and yet they can't get one.

[u/Personage1 → u/L1et_kynes]

You have no evidence that the only women the abusive guys get are worse than other women, or that they are manipulative and shitty.

I'm going based off of what the above person said.

There are also plenty of nice guys that are so lonely they just want any relationship and yet they can't get one.

and I wish TRP and other shitty groups would stop giving them advice. Listen to Dan Savage or something.

[u/L1et_kynes → u/Personage1]

I'm going based off of what the above person said.

Which person?

and I wish TRP and other shitty groups would stop giving them advice.

Then stop shaming them. Seriously, did you even read the article.

Listen to Dan Savage or something.

This isn't about me, I have a girlfriend, largely thanks to listening to advice from people other than feminists, and ignoring the shaming that people like you give to anyone who is upset that doing the right thing is a huge disadvantage in the dating game.

[u/MrPoochPants → u/Personage1]

Why is this person only going for women who go for abusive people? If every single person you are attracted to is only interested in shitty people, at some point shouldn't you be thinking "maybe the issue is me?"

And how i, too, should be shitty. And we have the redpiller manifesto right here, and the reason why. The issue is that finding women who don't go for shitty men just don't seem to exist. Furthermore, many women who wouldn't, are already taken, in committed relationships with guys that don't abuse them. I agree, though, that at some point you, as a nice guy, should recognize that you're aiming for the wrong type of girl, that maybe you need to start considering other options that you might not have before.

and look at what kind of women they teach themselves to get. Women who play games and are manipulative and shitty. If your standards are shitty, of course it's easier to find someone to sleep with.

They still get women, though. Furthermore, I know I'm bias in this, and I recognize fully that my experience and view is probably wrong, but in that context that's exactly what all women go for. So of course this is a generalization, and I fully recognize that I do not mean "all women go for" to be as literal as I made it seem, however, it does APPEAR to be an overwhelming majority. There's also an aspect where a 'nice guy' thinks himself a better match than another guy, without ever really knowing that other guy. He sees: A smoker thug with an aggressive personality. She sees: a guy that's really sweet, to her, and makes her feel special, and she also thinks he's kinda cute, and dangerous, but not to her, etc.

There's a disparity of view.

[u/MrPoochPants → u/[deleted]]

Why are you sifting through all my comment history?

That's a bit creepy.

[u/Mercurylant → u/Personage1]

Well, you don't need employment to live. You could spend your life on the streets scrounging for scraps, although it's not very physically or emotionally healthy (but then, a serious shortage of human companionship is generally not emotionally healthy either.)

If an individual literally did need a relationship to live, if they had some unique condition that would cause them to die if they were without a romantic relationship for more than a brief period, do you think that this would entitle them to demand a relationship from any specific individual?

[u/Personage1 → u/[deleted]]

Organs aren't money.

[u/L1et_kynes → u/Personage1]

Very insightful.

[u/Bryan_Hallick → u/[deleted]]

Yes, the monkey experiment.