5 ms·

I'm a woman and have had long serious relationships and long-ish stretches of being single. Took me a while to filter through all the social pressure BS and rea

I'm a woman and have had long serious relationships and long-ish stretches of being single. Took me a while to filter through all the social pressure BS and realize that, on balance, I have been way (WAY) happier single. Maybe this could change one day? But right now I have no interest in changing it. It'd take someone extraordinary. I'm not 'poly' or 'asexual' or any of that crap, I've just had to give up so much of my time and energy for relationships that ultimately left me worse off in every way. By contrast, on my own I can do what I want with my time and energy, and I'm surrounded by wonderful friends and family. If we put less social pressure on people to pair bond, some non-zero percentage of the population would be genuinely happier.

aidenn0 4y ago
I'm a man and I definitely see more pressure on women to pair off, at least at younger ages. With men (particularly driven or ambitious men), there's a societal "he'll settle down eventually" but with women "eventually" is like "late 20s"
- JasserInicide 4y ago
  It's not just social pressure, it's simply a biological fact. For each year after ~30, the chance of having something wrong with a child during pregnancy goes up. On average in relationships, women's greatest value is their youth and beauty (early/mid 20s), men's greatest value is when they've progressed in their career and are amassing wealth (mid/late 30s). There's nothing wrong about pointing this out, they're just the realities about modern relationships. Yet we can never honestly discuss them because people have a hard time controlling their emotions about it.
  - maxbond 4y ago
    Women are not baby machines or objects of beauty, they're people. Their "greatest value" is whatever they decide it to be. They should form relationships in the way that brings them the most happiness. Reducing women to objects of beauty, saying their value comes from their fertility, and implying that if they disagree with that assessment it's because they're too emotional is almost the dictionary definition of misogyny. I hope you'll reconsider this attitude.
    - dekhn 4y ago
      I think I understand the point you're trying to make, but this is the sort of discussion board where many people are literalists. Women literally are baby machines: from the perspective of biology, and as a critical asset in the development of the human race (especially during times of high child mortality). People get upset when you point this out, but they don't get upset because it's the truth, they get upset because of what they think the consequences of people knowing that truth will be. There are many things which can't be debated in public because it causes people (not just women) to get extremely emotional and retreat to lizard-brain defenses. My hope is that on HN, we can learn to control those responses.
      - aidenn0 4y ago
        > People get upset when you point this out, but they don't get upset because it's the truth, they get upset because of what they think the consequences of people knowing that truth will be. Or they get upset because they aren't Nihilists and believe in some form of personal meaning besides perpetuating the species?
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        adamredwoods 4y ago
        Or because people conflate statements from biological and societal domains, when they should be separating them.
        aidenn0 4y ago
        I mean when the person who made the "literally baby machines" comment, they did qualify it was from a biological (explicitly) and social ("a critical asset in the development of the human race") perspective, they later said that reproduction was probably the most important goal of human life[1], so I think people are properly conflating these statements... 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35548367 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35548367
  - throwway120385 4y ago
    You can't make blanket statements about the "value" of a person's life in one breath and then ask people to eschew emotional reactions in the next breath. Value and emotion go hand in hand and you have to let how you feel lead what you value at times.
    - xupybd 4y ago
      I think they meant perceived value as a potential mate. Not net value to society.
  - thealchemistdev 4y ago
    Unless these people are in your Dunbar Circle, those honest discussions you're looking for won't matter and won't provide value to your life. Craft your life how you see fit and let the results speak for themselves. Besides, this problem we're in is just about ready to wrap itself up.
rektide 4y ago
Masculinity can be quite isolating/toxic but it's emphasis on your intra-tionship, your living with yourself, on relying on yourself, has arisen in my mind in the past couple years as a kind of interesting aspect that feels undersocialized, out shadowed by other discussions of the male gender norms. I hope it wouldn't be too unfair to say that women are regarded as more social, as relying more on their friends & community. It's a complex issue with all kinds of problems wrapped in it, but there's a thread here that doesn't have the discourse or discussion that I think could help people somewhat identify with self focusing. That said, it absolutely does not have to be a gendered discussion either! But it does seem like there's so many examples walking around of a kind of neat way of living & modest not a-sociality, but kind of less compromising prioritizing of what is good for oneself in how we make & navivate our social arrangements. And I'm shifting focus here some, trying to get a more macro view than just the question of partnership. But hopefully this idea of social temperament/directivity makes sense as being a broader difference in how we are nurtured or natured.
- all2 4y ago
  > Masculinity can be quite isolating/toxic but it's emphasis on your intra-tionship, your living with yourself, on relying on yourself, has arisen in my mind in the past couple years as a kind of interesting aspect that feels undersocialized, out shadowed by other discussions of the male gender norms. I think somewhere along the line "self-reliance" became conflated with "anti-social". I've had to put in concerted effort to build my social network of men I can lean on for social activities and accountability. Being by oneself can make almost any task seem insurmountable. Couple that with being self-reliant and you have a recipe for disaster. It is no wonder so many men are committing suicide.
  - prawn 4y ago
    I think it might be because that self-reliance often comes with defensive language/attitude? It's one thing to be self-reliant and another to ooze a miserable attitude about it (e.g., "World's never done shit for me, guess I'll have to just look out for myself."). Without that outward expression, you don't notice that some people appreciate the importance of self-reliance without it feeling anti-social.
lamontcg 4y ago
> If we put less social pressure on people to pair bond, some non-zero percentage of the population would be genuinely happier. 100% agreed.
shrimp_emoji 4y ago
As a man, this take is based and hyper-relatable.
SoftTalker 4y ago
Fully agree. I'm male, and all of my relationships that progressed to the "serious" stage ended in heartbreak (for me). After those experiences, it's just not worth it. And casual hookups have never been a thing for me. So I'm done with romantic relationships, and fine with that.
bingobongodude 4y ago
Thank you so much for your reply. This.
1auralynn 4y ago
Yeah I had something similar and took a looong break from like 30-37 because I just couldn't deal with all the stress of someone else's expectations and issues while I was working on some personal and professional stuff. Eventually I was like, I don't want to be alone, I'm going to actually try dating again, got married and had a baby at 41 :) But it could have easily gone another way and I was mostly fine with it.
vlz 4y ago
> I'm not 'poly' or 'asexual' or any of that crap Not to detract from the rest of your post, which I agree with, but why call these orientations "crap"? That is somewhat hurtful.
- qikInNdOutReply 4y ago
  Why does someone have to appreciate other sexual orientations? I dont run around demanding somebody be forced to appreciate mine. Grumpily ignoring other peoples choices to life and let life is good enough for society to work. The world is not there to be a comfy blanket..
  - vlz 4y ago
    Comparing somebody (or an important part of their personality) with excrements in a public forum is not "grumpily ignoring". I am all for civility, but this is not it.

aidenn0 4y ago

I'm a man and I definitely see more pressure on women to pair off, at least at younger ages. With men (particularly driven or ambitious men), there's a societal "he'll settle down eventually" but with women "eventually" is like "late 20s"

JasserInicide 4y ago
It's not just social pressure, it's simply a biological fact. For each year after ~30, the chance of having something wrong with a child during pregnancy goes up. On average in relationships, women's greatest value is their youth and beauty (early/mid 20s), men's greatest value is when they've progressed in their career and are amassing wealth (mid/late 30s). There's nothing wrong about pointing this out, they're just the realities about modern relationships. Yet we can never honestly discuss them because people have a hard time controlling their emotions about it.
- maxbond 4y ago
  Women are not baby machines or objects of beauty, they're people. Their "greatest value" is whatever they decide it to be. They should form relationships in the way that brings them the most happiness. Reducing women to objects of beauty, saying their value comes from their fertility, and implying that if they disagree with that assessment it's because they're too emotional is almost the dictionary definition of misogyny. I hope you'll reconsider this attitude.
  - dekhn 4y ago
    I think I understand the point you're trying to make, but this is the sort of discussion board where many people are literalists. Women literally are baby machines: from the perspective of biology, and as a critical asset in the development of the human race (especially during times of high child mortality). People get upset when you point this out, but they don't get upset because it's the truth, they get upset because of what they think the consequences of people knowing that truth will be. There are many things which can't be debated in public because it causes people (not just women) to get extremely emotional and retreat to lizard-brain defenses. My hope is that on HN, we can learn to control those responses.
    - aidenn0 4y ago
      > People get upset when you point this out, but they don't get upset because it's the truth, they get upset because of what they think the consequences of people knowing that truth will be. Or they get upset because they aren't Nihilists and believe in some form of personal meaning besides perpetuating the species?
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - adamredwoods 4y ago
        Or because people conflate statements from biological and societal domains, when they should be separating them.
        aidenn0 4y ago
        I mean when the person who made the "literally baby machines" comment, they did qualify it was from a biological (explicitly) and social ("a critical asset in the development of the human race") perspective, they later said that reproduction was probably the most important goal of human life[1], so I think people are properly conflating these statements... 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35548367 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35548367
- throwway120385 4y ago
  You can't make blanket statements about the "value" of a person's life in one breath and then ask people to eschew emotional reactions in the next breath. Value and emotion go hand in hand and you have to let how you feel lead what you value at times.
  - xupybd 4y ago
    I think they meant perceived value as a potential mate. Not net value to society.
- thealchemistdev 4y ago
  Unless these people are in your Dunbar Circle, those honest discussions you're looking for won't matter and won't provide value to your life. Craft your life how you see fit and let the results speak for themselves. Besides, this problem we're in is just about ready to wrap itself up.

rektide 4y ago

Masculinity can be quite isolating/toxic but it's emphasis on your intra-tionship, your living with yourself, on relying on yourself, has arisen in my mind in the past couple years as a kind of interesting aspect that feels undersocialized, out shadowed by other discussions of the male gender norms. I hope it wouldn't be too unfair to say that women are regarded as more social, as relying more on their friends & community. It's a complex issue with all kinds of problems wrapped in it, but there's a thread here that doesn't have the discourse or discussion that I think could help people somewhat identify with self focusing. That said, it absolutely does not have to be a gendered discussion either! But it does seem like there's so many examples walking around of a kind of neat way of living & modest not a-sociality, but kind of less compromising prioritizing of what is good for oneself in how we make & navivate our social arrangements. And I'm shifting focus here some, trying to get a more macro view than just the question of partnership. But hopefully this idea of social temperament/directivity makes sense as being a broader difference in how we are nurtured or natured.

all2 4y ago
> Masculinity can be quite isolating/toxic but it's emphasis on your intra-tionship, your living with yourself, on relying on yourself, has arisen in my mind in the past couple years as a kind of interesting aspect that feels undersocialized, out shadowed by other discussions of the male gender norms. I think somewhere along the line "self-reliance" became conflated with "anti-social". I've had to put in concerted effort to build my social network of men I can lean on for social activities and accountability. Being by oneself can make almost any task seem insurmountable. Couple that with being self-reliant and you have a recipe for disaster. It is no wonder so many men are committing suicide.
- prawn 4y ago
  I think it might be because that self-reliance often comes with defensive language/attitude? It's one thing to be self-reliant and another to ooze a miserable attitude about it (e.g., "World's never done shit for me, guess I'll have to just look out for myself."). Without that outward expression, you don't notice that some people appreciate the importance of self-reliance without it feeling anti-social.

lamontcg 4y ago

> If we put less social pressure on people to pair bond, some non-zero percentage of the population would be genuinely happier. 100% agreed.

shrimp_emoji 4y ago

As a man, this take is based and hyper-relatable.

SoftTalker 4y ago

Fully agree. I'm male, and all of my relationships that progressed to the "serious" stage ended in heartbreak (for me). After those experiences, it's just not worth it. And casual hookups have never been a thing for me. So I'm done with romantic relationships, and fine with that.

bingobongodude 4y ago

Thank you so much for your reply. This.

1auralynn 4y ago

Yeah I had something similar and took a looong break from like 30-37 because I just couldn't deal with all the stress of someone else's expectations and issues while I was working on some personal and professional stuff. Eventually I was like, I don't want to be alone, I'm going to actually try dating again, got married and had a baby at 41 :) But it could have easily gone another way and I was mostly fine with it.

vlz 4y ago

> I'm not 'poly' or 'asexual' or any of that crap Not to detract from the rest of your post, which I agree with, but why call these orientations "crap"? That is somewhat hurtful.

qikInNdOutReply 4y ago
Why does someone have to appreciate other sexual orientations? I dont run around demanding somebody be forced to appreciate mine. Grumpily ignoring other peoples choices to life and let life is good enough for society to work. The world is not there to be a comfy blanket..
- vlz 4y ago
  Comparing somebody (or an important part of their personality) with excrements in a public forum is not "grumpily ignoring". I am all for civility, but this is not it.