7 ms·

> It is these men who are having all the sex. Seems like a powder keg over time as the excluded men become bitter and forced to postpone getting married and sta

> It is these men who are having all the sex. Seems like a powder keg over time as the excluded men become bitter and forced to postpone getting married and starting a family. I believe many of these men will eventually find someone once enough of the women who are now rejecting them face biological realities and are forced to settle if they want to have children. Yep. The problems will be generational. On one hand you have the possibility that the men are very aware of this problem, and any relationship they find will be tainted by knowing they weren't good enough to party with but good enough to marry. But more important than that is the time a couple spends actually getting to know each other is greatly cut down. Which then impacts how the children are raised. I wouldn't be surprised if we see an increase in divorce and/or single family rates over time.

cortesoft 6y ago
> any relationship they find will be tainted by knowing they weren't good enough to party with but good enough to marry. I am confused by this.... I would feel much better about myself knowing I was the one good enough to marry rather than the one who was only good enough to party with.
- bradlys 6y ago
  Ultimately, it usually means you're not that desirable - just reliable. Almost everyone wants to be desirable.
  - Jommi 6y ago
    What? Cant reliability be a desirable attribute?
    - bradlys 6y ago
      It can. But is reliability really the #1 attribute for people out there? Most people want a partner who excites them and who makes them happy. If they're unreliable then that can be a problem but usually a very desirable person has reliability in addition to everything else. When you're settling - you're usually settling for someone who is at least reliable but isn't very exciting.
      - cortesoft 6y ago
        After dating lots of people, one of the major factors in what made me decide to build a life with my wife was that I could count on her to be a reliable partner. That is soooo huge when choosing someone you are going to build a family with. It is way more important than any sort of animal sexual attraction.
        downerending 6y ago
        I guess so, but I definitely wouldn't tell her that you're not really highly sexually attracted to her.
        dingaling 6y ago
        Why not? After 12 years of marriage I told my wife that and it cleared the air. We both knew it but it remained unsaid for so long and had been having an adverse affect on the relationship. Yes, it was a tough and emotional week. But things are better out in the open and we have started to rebuild the relationship on love, not lust. She did ask if I was having affairs. But I honestly said that I'm finished with sex now, I've just no time or interest in playing the chasing games. There are more important things in life.
        downerending 6y ago
        Glad it turned out, but that sounds like a risky and hard road.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- Nav_Panel 6y ago
  Ah, I feel this is because something deeper happened than simply "a small subset of men are monopolizing the sex marketplace", something more on the level of morality and ego than can be represented in concrete facts. Specifically, I believe we've seen a devaluation and financialization of morality (what makes me a valuable person?) in a broader sense. Christopher Lasch caught the beginning of this back in the 70s, arguing that we now judge ourselves in terms of the views of our peer group rather than relative to an authority figure or multigenerational community. The result is that sleeping around becomes a mark of virtue (at least, among men). This sentiment is at odds with more "traditional" forms of morality and virtue, particularly coming from religious traditions, and the resulting internal conflict can cause a lot of psychic distress, a lot of asking "who am I really?" and "am I really good enough, is she merely 'settling' for me?" If you can navigate that conflict and feel satisfied that you were good enough to marry, then I applaud you for having a level head and for having your values in order. But I expect many men do not feel this way :(
  - armitron 6y ago
    Relationships are two-party affairs. What a man thinks of himself obviously affects how he behaves in a relationship but is not as important as the view that the woman has for him. This is what constitutes the basis of the relationship. If there are no kids, then for a woman that has spent the best years of her life dating attractive alpha males, an unattractive male is never going to measure up. Empirical evidence leads me to believe that kids can change that and be a stabilizing influence, bridging the gap between these models since both parties are able to make compromises by coming together and focusing on their kids.
- dogma1138 6y ago
  I don’t think that settling down with someone that isn’t sexually attracted to you enough is a recipe for a healthy relationship. On the plus side if you’re in your early 30’s and economically stable and well enough off for your area your get to experience life on easy mode. I got to experience that after my last brake up before I got fed up and went for something more stable and it was really an eye opening experience. I pretty much spent my whole 20’s in a single LTR that ended so I never had to experience Tinder before but it was a whole other experience.
  - nicoburns 6y ago
    Isn't sexually attracted to you upon first meeting doesn't mean that they're not sexually attracted to you in the relationship.
    - dogma1138 6y ago
      While it might be true, I’ve seen too many cases of infidelity and or dead bedrooms with relationships that didn’t had the former. Also speaking from my own experience while I’ve experienced finding women more attractive as I got to know them better it wasn’t the same type of an attraction, as it wasn’t sexual but rather more complex in terms of seeing long term future possibilities and wanting to share experiences with them in order to enrich my own life, but it never really affected how physically attractive I found them. Maybe I’m different, maybe men are different in general but at least for me I won’t settle for someone that doesn’t want to jump me or that I wouldn’t want to jump them to me it seems unnatural.
    - armitron 6y ago
      Sexual attraction is multifaceted, but by far the strongest and most important/longest-living aspect regarding the strength of a relationship is the biological component which is for all intents and purposes instant and present from the very beginning. If that's absent, you're definitely stacking the deck against you in a major way. I am not saying an LTR can't work, but you'll be putting in substantially more energy, time and effort to make it happen. It's the difference between playing a game in easy vs nightmare mode. This is all based on empirical observations. I am 55 years old, I've had more than 100 sexual partners in my life and a lot of relationships, some of them lacking the initial biological/animalistic sexual attraction factor I described here. I've been married twice, now divorced and in a long-term relationship with my partner. I have two daughters in their 20s.
- newguy1234 6y ago
  The problem is your spouse will not really find you attractive sexually. She will be with you because you have money and are a good provider. She really wants to be with the guy she partied with in her younger years, not you.
  - cortesoft 6y ago
    I think you have a very limited understanding of sexual attraction... it is not static. It can grow for someone as you get to know them and spend time with someone.
    - Kye 6y ago
      It's always interesting to watch my attraction for someone who was really hot up front start to slide down the more they talk, or the other way around. Personality is so much more important than level of initial attraction.
    - armitron 6y ago
      Raw sexual attraction is instant and involuntary, not cerebral, cultivated. It doesn't depend on anything other than a person's biology. Looks, smell, maybe other biological factors that are hard to quantify. If a woman is with you for other reasons, then she's just not into you sexually and you're playing a game in nightmare mode if you're trying to establish an LTR with an attractive female that has other opportunities or keep it going without issues (e.g. cheating). That does not mean that other slow-burn factors such as intellectual chemistry or friendship do not apply, but it does mean that they work synergistically and on top of the raw animalistic part which is the foundation. This is all based on decades of empirical observations. On the plus side for men, it is definitely possible to learn to detect this extremely reliable indicator. On the minus side, one needs a lot of experience with many different women, which isn't the case with average, physically unattractive males.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    That’s always been the case. People’s goals are different at different times during their life. There’s always a transactional aspect to being in a relationship. Are you good looking enough, healthy enough, wealthy enough, well connected enough, emotionally connected, personality etc. It may not be fruitful to frame a relationship exclusively in those pros and cons terms, but that’s the way nature has always worked.
- doc_gunthrop 6y ago
  Your premise is based on a fallacy. The guy who is among the top 10% of men is the one who is good enough to party with AND good enough to marry. However, though this guy has a plethora of women at his disposal, he can only select one for marriage. For the women who weren't chosen, their first choice guy is no longer an option, so they have to settle for a plan B (that is, a less desirable man). So even if you were "good enough" to marry, you weren't first choice in that either.
  - cortesoft 6y ago
    You're premise is based on a fallacy... that there is a strict ordering of men, and women all have the same order. A marriage is about finding a person who fits with you, and you can build a life together. That is not the same person for everyone. My best partner is not the same as your best partner.
    - eloisius 6y ago
      Your premise omits the possibility that there is correlation among the diverse orderings that women apply to men. Or even barring that, that they don't converge to an aggregate ordering which is what GP is explaining that men experience.
      - cortesoft 6y ago
        Some traits will be clearly desirable, but so many aren't. Introvert/extrovert, opinions on how to raise kids, family goals, what sort of place you like to live (rural/urban), political views, conversation style, etc. Those are going to vary greatly amongst people.
        eloisius 6y ago
        Yes, some preferences vary widely, while others are more narrow, such as height, income, seniority/authority, and facial structure. In aggregate there is a clear spectrum from desirable to less desirable along those dimensions. It's definitely true that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or attraction more generally, but it's hard to believe that being 1.60 m tall won't make you (in general) less attractive as a man.
pas 6y ago
On the other hand people might be a bit more experienced when they finally have kids. And they might even have better ways to evaluate their prospective parent-partner.

cortesoft 6y ago

> any relationship they find will be tainted by knowing they weren't good enough to party with but good enough to marry. I am confused by this.... I would feel much better about myself knowing I was the one good enough to marry rather than the one who was only good enough to party with.

bradlys 6y ago
Ultimately, it usually means you're not that desirable - just reliable. Almost everyone wants to be desirable.
- Jommi 6y ago
  What? Cant reliability be a desirable attribute?
  - bradlys 6y ago
    It can. But is reliability really the #1 attribute for people out there? Most people want a partner who excites them and who makes them happy. If they're unreliable then that can be a problem but usually a very desirable person has reliability in addition to everything else. When you're settling - you're usually settling for someone who is at least reliable but isn't very exciting.
    - cortesoft 6y ago
      After dating lots of people, one of the major factors in what made me decide to build a life with my wife was that I could count on her to be a reliable partner. That is soooo huge when choosing someone you are going to build a family with. It is way more important than any sort of animal sexual attraction.
      - downerending 6y ago
        I guess so, but I definitely wouldn't tell her that you're not really highly sexually attracted to her.
        dingaling 6y ago
        Why not? After 12 years of marriage I told my wife that and it cleared the air. We both knew it but it remained unsaid for so long and had been having an adverse affect on the relationship. Yes, it was a tough and emotional week. But things are better out in the open and we have started to rebuild the relationship on love, not lust. She did ask if I was having affairs. But I honestly said that I'm finished with sex now, I've just no time or interest in playing the chasing games. There are more important things in life.
        downerending 6y ago
        Glad it turned out, but that sounds like a risky and hard road.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
Nav_Panel 6y ago
Ah, I feel this is because something deeper happened than simply "a small subset of men are monopolizing the sex marketplace", something more on the level of morality and ego than can be represented in concrete facts. Specifically, I believe we've seen a devaluation and financialization of morality (what makes me a valuable person?) in a broader sense. Christopher Lasch caught the beginning of this back in the 70s, arguing that we now judge ourselves in terms of the views of our peer group rather than relative to an authority figure or multigenerational community. The result is that sleeping around becomes a mark of virtue (at least, among men). This sentiment is at odds with more "traditional" forms of morality and virtue, particularly coming from religious traditions, and the resulting internal conflict can cause a lot of psychic distress, a lot of asking "who am I really?" and "am I really good enough, is she merely 'settling' for me?" If you can navigate that conflict and feel satisfied that you were good enough to marry, then I applaud you for having a level head and for having your values in order. But I expect many men do not feel this way :(
- armitron 6y ago
  Relationships are two-party affairs. What a man thinks of himself obviously affects how he behaves in a relationship but is not as important as the view that the woman has for him. This is what constitutes the basis of the relationship. If there are no kids, then for a woman that has spent the best years of her life dating attractive alpha males, an unattractive male is never going to measure up. Empirical evidence leads me to believe that kids can change that and be a stabilizing influence, bridging the gap between these models since both parties are able to make compromises by coming together and focusing on their kids.
dogma1138 6y ago
I don’t think that settling down with someone that isn’t sexually attracted to you enough is a recipe for a healthy relationship. On the plus side if you’re in your early 30’s and economically stable and well enough off for your area your get to experience life on easy mode. I got to experience that after my last brake up before I got fed up and went for something more stable and it was really an eye opening experience. I pretty much spent my whole 20’s in a single LTR that ended so I never had to experience Tinder before but it was a whole other experience.
- nicoburns 6y ago
  Isn't sexually attracted to you upon first meeting doesn't mean that they're not sexually attracted to you in the relationship.
  - dogma1138 6y ago
    While it might be true, I’ve seen too many cases of infidelity and or dead bedrooms with relationships that didn’t had the former. Also speaking from my own experience while I’ve experienced finding women more attractive as I got to know them better it wasn’t the same type of an attraction, as it wasn’t sexual but rather more complex in terms of seeing long term future possibilities and wanting to share experiences with them in order to enrich my own life, but it never really affected how physically attractive I found them. Maybe I’m different, maybe men are different in general but at least for me I won’t settle for someone that doesn’t want to jump me or that I wouldn’t want to jump them to me it seems unnatural.
  - armitron 6y ago
    Sexual attraction is multifaceted, but by far the strongest and most important/longest-living aspect regarding the strength of a relationship is the biological component which is for all intents and purposes instant and present from the very beginning. If that's absent, you're definitely stacking the deck against you in a major way. I am not saying an LTR can't work, but you'll be putting in substantially more energy, time and effort to make it happen. It's the difference between playing a game in easy vs nightmare mode. This is all based on empirical observations. I am 55 years old, I've had more than 100 sexual partners in my life and a lot of relationships, some of them lacking the initial biological/animalistic sexual attraction factor I described here. I've been married twice, now divorced and in a long-term relationship with my partner. I have two daughters in their 20s.
newguy1234 6y ago
The problem is your spouse will not really find you attractive sexually. She will be with you because you have money and are a good provider. She really wants to be with the guy she partied with in her younger years, not you.
- cortesoft 6y ago
  I think you have a very limited understanding of sexual attraction... it is not static. It can grow for someone as you get to know them and spend time with someone.
  - Kye 6y ago
    It's always interesting to watch my attraction for someone who was really hot up front start to slide down the more they talk, or the other way around. Personality is so much more important than level of initial attraction.
  - armitron 6y ago
    Raw sexual attraction is instant and involuntary, not cerebral, cultivated. It doesn't depend on anything other than a person's biology. Looks, smell, maybe other biological factors that are hard to quantify. If a woman is with you for other reasons, then she's just not into you sexually and you're playing a game in nightmare mode if you're trying to establish an LTR with an attractive female that has other opportunities or keep it going without issues (e.g. cheating). That does not mean that other slow-burn factors such as intellectual chemistry or friendship do not apply, but it does mean that they work synergistically and on top of the raw animalistic part which is the foundation. This is all based on decades of empirical observations. On the plus side for men, it is definitely possible to learn to detect this extremely reliable indicator. On the minus side, one needs a lot of experience with many different women, which isn't the case with average, physically unattractive males.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  That’s always been the case. People’s goals are different at different times during their life. There’s always a transactional aspect to being in a relationship. Are you good looking enough, healthy enough, wealthy enough, well connected enough, emotionally connected, personality etc. It may not be fruitful to frame a relationship exclusively in those pros and cons terms, but that’s the way nature has always worked.
doc_gunthrop 6y ago
Your premise is based on a fallacy. The guy who is among the top 10% of men is the one who is good enough to party with AND good enough to marry. However, though this guy has a plethora of women at his disposal, he can only select one for marriage. For the women who weren't chosen, their first choice guy is no longer an option, so they have to settle for a plan B (that is, a less desirable man). So even if you were "good enough" to marry, you weren't first choice in that either.
- cortesoft 6y ago
  You're premise is based on a fallacy... that there is a strict ordering of men, and women all have the same order. A marriage is about finding a person who fits with you, and you can build a life together. That is not the same person for everyone. My best partner is not the same as your best partner.
  - eloisius 6y ago
    Your premise omits the possibility that there is correlation among the diverse orderings that women apply to men. Or even barring that, that they don't converge to an aggregate ordering which is what GP is explaining that men experience.
    - cortesoft 6y ago
      Some traits will be clearly desirable, but so many aren't. Introvert/extrovert, opinions on how to raise kids, family goals, what sort of place you like to live (rural/urban), political views, conversation style, etc. Those are going to vary greatly amongst people.
      - eloisius 6y ago
        Yes, some preferences vary widely, while others are more narrow, such as height, income, seniority/authority, and facial structure. In aggregate there is a clear spectrum from desirable to less desirable along those dimensions. It's definitely true that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or attraction more generally, but it's hard to believe that being 1.60 m tall won't make you (in general) less attractive as a man.

pas 6y ago

On the other hand people might be a bit more experienced when they finally have kids. And they might even have better ways to evaluate their prospective parent-partner.