3 ms·

> I agree that that would be faulty reasoning. I was combatting the opposite reasoning, which is that some traits or combinations of traits (like being short) a

> I agree that that would be faulty reasoning. I was combatting the opposite reasoning, which is that some traits or combinations of traits (like being short) are disqualifying. E.g. your parent comment in which you wrote: "If you are very short, your attire can not make up for it." Being short is in fact a huge disadvantage for dating, this is well established, for example in the study I gave you. Most females will indeed disqualify a short male from consideration. Of course every dating pool is different and it might contain the odd exception where a female prefers to date a short guy, but then she will still prefer the affluent or handsome short guy over the other short guys, which are now out of mates. > People aren't ranked in some kind of linear way from "more attractive" to "less attractive", lined up, and then can only find partners who agree with their level. There are many reasons... I'll call this the "cosmic justice fantasy". In reality, attractiveness is fairly objective and measurable, with fairly low variance across individuals. There are of course always exceptions at the tail ends, but it doesn't make much of a difference. > All of these combine to make it so that effectively, almost everyone can find a sexual partner. At this point, I think we should differentiate between finding a a partner and having a sexual encounter at least once in your life. > And this is not just a theroetical idea either - as I posted in another comment, according to some random studies I just Googled, <0.5% of people have never had a sexual experience by age 40 What this actually says is that less than 0.5% of people admit to never having had a sexual experience, which also would include an encounter with a prostitute. Even at that low-ball rate, we'd be talking about millions of people in the US. > Let me just close by saying that if you truly believe you (or some/most people posting on incel forums) are incapable of ever having a sexual relationship, I empathize with you - it must be very unhappy to believe you will never have something that you want and see so many other people enjoying. To be clear: I'm neither short, nor bad-looking, nor do I lack sexual experience. I'm neither an incel, nor incel-affiliated, nor do I personally know any actual (self-identified) incels. I don't read discussions on incel forums. You may well be right in that a large amount of incel forum dwellers really only look blame personal failures on some immutable characteristic, because that's just what people like to do. I happen to be interested in the some of the science that an incel might be interested in, because I prefer to know what's real, as opposed to what people would like to be real.

edanm 6y ago
> I happen to be interested in the some of the science that an incel might be interested in, because I prefer to know what's real, as opposed to what people would like to be real. To be clear myself, I agree with this attitude and goal completely. > Being short is in fact a huge disadvantage for dating, this is well established, for example in the study I gave you. Most females will indeed disqualify a short male from consideration. The study you linked is about online dating. While that is clearly important, it's also an arena in which you are basically forced to quantify and pick thresholds for various attributes (and in which it is much easier to just "disqualify" people based on attributes). This is important, and arguably will get more important as reliance on online dating becomes ever more prevalent. But it is still not everything, there are still some places in which potential partners will have a chance to get to know each other without the initial choice to disqualify someone based on height, and through which other attributes might win out. > I'll call this the "cosmic justice fantasy". In reality, attractiveness is fairly objective and measurable, with fairly low variance across individuals. There are of course always exceptions at the tail ends, but it doesn't make much of a difference. I don't know, on reading this I was inclined to agree. But on further reflection, speaking as a man, I know there are plenty of other men who have differences of opinion with me about what they care about in a woman - height, body type, etc. There are the endless discussions of "are you a chest man or a butt man". And the answers really do vary! A woman who is objectively very pretty (and who I can objectively say is very pretty), might still not be the best match for me, because she is e.g. too thin or too tall. Whereas other men might want a thin, tall woman. That said, you're also making another mistake in your reasoning IMO - you're assuming attractiveness is the only thing that matters in finding a mate. That is simply not true - both in what people say they care about, and by simple observation of actual people. Put another way, let's do this experiment: someone takes a hundred couples (let's assume straight couples), takes a picture of the man and the woman separately, then mixes up the pictures. Do you think you'll be able to match the couples based on attractiveness alone? I'm sure there's some correlations here, and you'll be able to do it to some extent, but certainly nowhere near 100%. > What this actually says is that less than 0.5% of people admit to never having had a sexual experience, which also would include an encounter with a prostitute. Even at that low-ball rate, we'd be talking about millions of people in the US. By age 40, and that also includes people who are not actively looking for sex. But yes, that is a lot of people, probably around a million (assuming an over-40 population of around 110 million in the US, which I'm kind of guessing at). -- I'm not sure what our point of disagreement is at this point. I'm not saying that there are literally no people who are able to find a sexual partner despite wanting one. I'm saying: 1. It's very rare to be unable to find a sexual partner. 2. Physical attractiveness and other physical (immutable) attributes, while certainly mattering a lot, will almost certainly not preclude anyone from being able to find a sexual partner. 3. If you're an around-20-year-old incel, the chance that you will never be able to find a sexual partner, assuming you make some steps to change things you can change for the better, is incredibly tiny. Most people posting in incel forums are not in that situation, and if they think they are, they are mistaken.

edanm 6y ago

> I happen to be interested in the some of the science that an incel might be interested in, because I prefer to know what's real, as opposed to what people would like to be real. To be clear myself, I agree with this attitude and goal completely. > Being short is in fact a huge disadvantage for dating, this is well established, for example in the study I gave you. Most females will indeed disqualify a short male from consideration. The study you linked is about online dating. While that is clearly important, it's also an arena in which you are basically forced to quantify and pick thresholds for various attributes (and in which it is much easier to just "disqualify" people based on attributes). This is important, and arguably will get more important as reliance on online dating becomes ever more prevalent. But it is still not everything, there are still some places in which potential partners will have a chance to get to know each other without the initial choice to disqualify someone based on height, and through which other attributes might win out. > I'll call this the "cosmic justice fantasy". In reality, attractiveness is fairly objective and measurable, with fairly low variance across individuals. There are of course always exceptions at the tail ends, but it doesn't make much of a difference. I don't know, on reading this I was inclined to agree. But on further reflection, speaking as a man, I know there are plenty of other men who have differences of opinion with me about what they care about in a woman - height, body type, etc. There are the endless discussions of "are you a chest man or a butt man". And the answers really do vary! A woman who is objectively very pretty (and who I can objectively say is very pretty), might still not be the best match for me, because she is e.g. too thin or too tall. Whereas other men might want a thin, tall woman. That said, you're also making another mistake in your reasoning IMO - you're assuming attractiveness is the only thing that matters in finding a mate. That is simply not true - both in what people say they care about, and by simple observation of actual people. Put another way, let's do this experiment: someone takes a hundred couples (let's assume straight couples), takes a picture of the man and the woman separately, then mixes up the pictures. Do you think you'll be able to match the couples based on attractiveness alone? I'm sure there's some correlations here, and you'll be able to do it to some extent, but certainly nowhere near 100%. > What this actually says is that less than 0.5% of people admit to never having had a sexual experience, which also would include an encounter with a prostitute. Even at that low-ball rate, we'd be talking about millions of people in the US. By age 40, and that also includes people who are not actively looking for sex. But yes, that is a lot of people, probably around a million (assuming an over-40 population of around 110 million in the US, which I'm kind of guessing at). -- I'm not sure what our point of disagreement is at this point. I'm not saying that there are literally no people who are able to find a sexual partner despite wanting one. I'm saying: 1. It's very rare to be unable to find a sexual partner. 2. Physical attractiveness and other physical (immutable) attributes, while certainly mattering a lot, will almost certainly not preclude anyone from being able to find a sexual partner. 3. If you're an around-20-year-old incel, the chance that you will never be able to find a sexual partner, assuming you make some steps to change things you can change for the better, is incredibly tiny. Most people posting in incel forums are not in that situation, and if they think they are, they are mistaken.