3 ms·

> men who are dangerous/abusive/predators stay in the dating pool longer Not only this but they can use these apps to find their victims faster and easier than

> men who are dangerous/abusive/predators stay in the dating pool longer Not only this but they can use these apps to find their victims faster and easier than ever before. > This is explicitly unfair to normal men I think it's also unfair to women that they have to pick up the extra work that was done by the "community" before. And a loss for social cohesion too. I am wondering though how someone who just ended a relationship could deal with this scenario? As a male you arguably look like one of the abusers because you're older and looking for a partner and as a female you're seen as less attractive. At the same time you're probably also more picky because of the break-up. Seems like they're the most shit-out-of-luck here regardless of what's between their legs. I also wonder if this will push us towards being with our "high-school sweethearts" for longer than we would otherwise? > Maybe financial ruin in child support, but explicitly not death. Yeah absolutely, I'm personally not aware of the exact numbers for this but I wouldn't be shocked if you're right. Also I'd include things like false accusations, or getting her brothers/father to "take care of" the ex. Also we need to account for things like baby entrapment. Also men tend to express their aggression physically whereas women tend to express it through reputation destruction. This also partially explains where we are today: women are afraid of male physical repercussions, men are afraid of female societal repercussions. Interestingly, it also mimics a lot of the rhetoric you see about "all males being bad" since it's a form of reputation destruction - whereas the male "comebacks" tend to focus on physical acts of violence that they "could do but won't".

KittenInABox 2y ago
> I think it's also unfair to women that they have to pick up the extra work that was done by the "community" before. And a loss for social cohesion too. I would argue the community explicitly did not do the work of ousting predators. We are only in this generation or so no longer allowed to rape women if we're married to them. It is still legal for adults to marry children, not in an 18-to-17 way but a 38-to-15 way. Child marriages are overwhelmingly older-male-younger-female. As for being with high-school sweethearts, that imo is also less and less likely, because more adults are forced to travel for employment (e.g. landing a job in a big city and moving).
- miningape 2y ago
  I'd like to clarify when I said "community" I wasn't talking exclusively about friend groups (or your mother's friend groups) helping with recommendations and whatnot. I mean the community as a whole - men and women, the bailiffs and the blacksmiths: When you know everyone in your town and most of the people in your neighbouring towns it becomes much easier to know who is a bad person that'll abuse you (or to find out that information).
  - KittenInABox 2y ago
    Yes, I'm pushing back on that because in the past it explicitly legal and normal to abuse women. Women were not allowed to be selective in the first place. So the community explicitly did not perform the protection you are saying. It was only recently illegal to rape your wife.
    - miningape 2y ago
      What I'm trying to say is that the people around us have always shaped who we pair up with - for better or worse - I think losing that is going to have consequences for social cohesion. It's impossible to say who historically had it worse in general and I don't really believe such discussion is important except for historians. The only thing that dwelling on it will cause is resentment towards people who never perpetrated those crimes.
      - KittenInABox 2y ago
        You pointed out a historical inaccuracy I wished to correct. You were the one that brought up the past and then incorrectly depicted it. You're reading a little too much on this.

KittenInABox 2y ago

> I think it's also unfair to women that they have to pick up the extra work that was done by the "community" before. And a loss for social cohesion too. I would argue the community explicitly did not do the work of ousting predators. We are only in this generation or so no longer allowed to rape women if we're married to them. It is still legal for adults to marry children, not in an 18-to-17 way but a 38-to-15 way. Child marriages are overwhelmingly older-male-younger-female. As for being with high-school sweethearts, that imo is also less and less likely, because more adults are forced to travel for employment (e.g. landing a job in a big city and moving).

miningape 2y ago
I'd like to clarify when I said "community" I wasn't talking exclusively about friend groups (or your mother's friend groups) helping with recommendations and whatnot. I mean the community as a whole - men and women, the bailiffs and the blacksmiths: When you know everyone in your town and most of the people in your neighbouring towns it becomes much easier to know who is a bad person that'll abuse you (or to find out that information).
- KittenInABox 2y ago
  Yes, I'm pushing back on that because in the past it explicitly legal and normal to abuse women. Women were not allowed to be selective in the first place. So the community explicitly did not perform the protection you are saying. It was only recently illegal to rape your wife.
  - miningape 2y ago
    What I'm trying to say is that the people around us have always shaped who we pair up with - for better or worse - I think losing that is going to have consequences for social cohesion. It's impossible to say who historically had it worse in general and I don't really believe such discussion is important except for historians. The only thing that dwelling on it will cause is resentment towards people who never perpetrated those crimes.
    - KittenInABox 2y ago
      You pointed out a historical inaccuracy I wished to correct. You were the one that brought up the past and then incorrectly depicted it. You're reading a little too much on this.