8 ms·

This idea appears every once in awhile, as it’s obviously a major issue in modern life. The interesting thing though is how the solution is always location-agn

This idea appears every once in awhile, as it’s obviously a major issue in modern life. The interesting thing though is how the solution is always location-agnostic. By that I mean it’s never really about a specific cafe or restaurant or soccer field, it’s always an app or service that organizes people to show up in various places. I bring this up because if you look at places that had lively social activities a few decades or a century ago, they were almost always a specific place. The neighborhood cafe where locals can stop by at any time and see other locals. The bar that everyone stops by after work twice a week. These are stationary physical locations that don’t require pre-planning, schedules, apps, or anything else.

JimDabell 1y ago
It’s not always location-agnostic, but you’re more likely to hear about location-agnostic efforts because they have further reach. For instance Men’s Sheds are a local effort with a thousand locations in the UK: > Men’s Sheds encourage people to come together to make, repair and repurpose, supporting projects in their local communities. Improving wellbeing, reducing loneliness and combatting social isolation. > Research gathered by the UKMSA Health and Wellbeing Survey, 2023, suggests 96% of Men’s Shed attendees feel less lonely since joining a Shed. — https://menssheds.org.uk https://menssheds.org.uk Unfortunately, sometimes you get things like this happening: > 'We put the pressure on to join Men in Sheds' > The 74-year-old added: "Eventually they let us in, just one morning, eventually it became all the time, and now it's 50% women, and we absolutely love it." > When the women were allowed into the workshop, members decided to keep a quiet room with a model railway display in it, just for men. > "We [the men] escape now and again [to the quiet room] and have a chat and weigh things up." — https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg5qd9l3094o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg5qd9l3094o
- jamesdeluk 1y ago
  Why didn't they start Women's Sheds?
  - subscribed 1y ago
    Oh, but why if they're having a functional clubs already? I feel like men only spaces in the UK are frowned upon (see Garrick club narration). No matter the reason, the only way single sex spaces work here is women only.
    - jl6 1y ago
      In UK law, it is generally considered sex discrimination to exclude someone on the basis of their sex, unless that exclusion is a “proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim”. It’s fairly well understood that women have sex-based needs that justify this aim, but very rarely recognized that men might have such needs too. Maybe this is one of them. The fear will always be that male-only spaces will become centers of power and decision-making that women are excluded from. That’s where the private London clubs sit. Doesn’t seem as likely to happen in a shed, but who knows?
      - King-Aaron 1y ago
        Generally speaking women are more than welcome at Mens Sheds (In Australia, at least). The ratio of men to women that enjoy sanding wood and tinkering with lawnmowers usually leans more heavily to men, but I've seen the girls around the traps too.
      - parliament32 1y ago
        >it is generally considered sex discrimination to exclude someone on the basis of their sex So are women-only gyms not a thing in the UK then? Here in NA they're everywhere, we even have a women-only version of the YMCA (YWCA).
        dragonwriter 1y ago
        > Here in NA they're everywhere, we even have a women-only version of the YMCA (YWCA). Despite the names, neither the YWCA or YMCA as broad organizations strictly restrict membership by gender (or religion, for that matter.) My understanding with YWCA specifically is that inclusiveness on gender varies considerably by individual local association.
- bcraven 1y ago
  You have selectively quoted that article. Note the last four paragraphs are: >Andrew McNerney, 70, admitted there was initially some resistance to becoming a mixed group. >He said: "There was apprehension, but in all honesty, it's turned out well. >"We [the men] escape now and again [to the quiet room] and have a chat and weigh things up." >But he added: "It's a lovely atmosphere, and it's been good."
  - JimDabell 1y ago
    Yes. I selectively pulled out the bits that I thought were relevant instead of quoting the whole thing. I know he said that it’s been good, but taken in relation to the rest of the article, I don’t place much weight on it. The women persistently pressured the men to join, the men were apprehensive, they allowed them in for one morning, one morning turned into all the time, women now comprise 50% of the group, and the men’s area is now relegated to a back room they escape to. They got one of the men to say it was good, but that’s not the story that the article was telling.
    - williamdclt 1y ago
      > that’s not the story that the article was telling. It is though? Reading the article, I'm fully getting a sense that its point is that it was an improvement for everyone (despite the article describing it as being triggered from nagging from the women). Now you can choose not to believe that, but that _is_ the story the article was telling, or at least it's how I understand it.
      - boppo1 1y ago
        [flagged]
    - afavour 1y ago
      > the men were apprehensive, they allowed them in for one morning, one morning turned into all the time Your assumption is that it “turned into all the time” against the wishes of the men but that’s not clear at all. Being apprehensive about change and then quickly discovering it was for the better is something we all experience in life.
- notarobot123 1y ago
  The men are there to meet each other, not to avoid women. Gender segregation isn't the point - it's about building relationships.
  - JimDabell 1y ago
    They had to be persistently pressured into letting women in, and when that happened they set aside a men-only room to escape to. Gender segregation may not be the point but it seems like it’s important to them.
  - philipallstar 1y ago
    > The men are there to meet each other, not to avoid women. Gender segregation isn't the point - it's about building relationships. I'm not sure that's quite true. Men tend to talk and joke in a different way to women, which they then modify around women or be punished. The main difference between an old-school Personnel department and a modern HR department is HR is (self-)tasked with making sure the environment is always suitable for women. Men have very few places, if any, where they can just be themselves, unmodified. And when those places exist, large shaming campaigns and marketing appear to tell them off and to entice women into them.
    - emptyfile 1y ago
      [dead]
    - kgwxd 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - potato3732842 1y ago
        Surely you see the irony in advocating for "just man up and comply"? Imagine how this comment would come across if applied along any other demographic axis.
        meheleventyone 1y ago
- immibis 1y ago
  Why does the presence of women cause men to not have male friends?
  - ReptileMan 1y ago
    The group dynamic changes the moment it is not single sex anymore.
    - the_gipsy 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - vladvasiliu 1y ago
        I don't think you need to exclude homosexuals. As a straight male, I interact with my homosexual buddies the same way I interact with my straight buddies. Women, gay or straight, interact differently, including those in whom I have no sexual interest. If there was inappropriate behavior which wouldn't stop once called out, they would be excluded.
        the_gipsy 1y ago
        You specifically maybe don't, but homosexual (or bisexual) males do have sexual interest in other homo- or bisexual men. So it wouldn't be a "problem" as long as there exactly only one homosexual, or as long as they're a very small minority.
      - nkrisc 1y ago
        No, you don’t.
      - ReptileMan 1y ago
        No - enlighten me.
    - bregma 1y ago
      [flagged]
- lupusreal 1y ago
  What I find a bit remarkable is how they lost control of their club dynamics so severely. I've been a regular attendee of a few hacker spaces that were open to the public but never had the problem they describe. I think maybe a key aspect is ensuring that all men, particular the ones that are classically unattractive (even repulsive) feel welcome as valued equals. Many women cannot countenance this and will try to shape group membership to be more agreeable; those women are free to leave. The rest are welcome to stay and at that point there shouldn't be any issues. (Of course it goes without saying that actual harassment isn't tolerated, but being a smelly fat slob with a heart of gold doesn't count.)
  - SiempreViernes 1y ago
    Uh, they don't describe any problem though? The piece is about how everyone agrees the change is for the better, its only people in this thread that describe women and men woodworking together as a problem.
    - nothercastle 1y ago
      Obviously the remaining members think it’s better but as an adverse selection problem you can’t ask the ones that left
      - SiempreViernes 1y ago
        The notion that any members left is your own invention.
        JimDabell 1y ago
        From a Reddit discussion about the same article: > I spoke with some men at the Man Shed in Edinburgh at Christmas and they mentioned that in the cases they had heard about where women had been let in the number of male members dropped. — https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1k6w3pr/we_put_the_pressure_on_to_join_men_in_sheds/motuc2g/ https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1k6w3pr/we_p... Aside from that, just take a look at what happened. When women joined, the men responded by finding a men-only room to “escape” to. It’s hardly a great leap to think that some of those men will escape someplace else instead.
- ctippett 1y ago
  I had never heard of Men's Sheds before. Thank you for mentioning it.
- idiotsecant 1y ago
  Yes, unfortunately sometimes social events are wildly successful and even more people want to join, and the existing members let them, and everyone has a great time together. It's unfortunate, but it happens.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
carabiner 1y ago
Last one I tried was Grouper: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grouper_social_club https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grouper_social_club You'd meet up for dinner at a local place that was usually pretty good, with 2-3 other people, mostly tech-adjacent. Dinners were pretty polite, a little awkward, mildly stimulating, but I never made real relationships from it. Seems like the same idea has emerged with https://timeleft.com https://timeleft.com. I don't know. It seems like the best way to make friends is to force people to do some other task next to each other a few days per week and let things form organically after they are around each other for a few years.
- kelnos 1y ago
  > ... with 2-3 other people, mostly tech-adjacent. This IMO is a part of the problem. I don't want more tech friends. Not that there's anything wrong with us, but I want more diversity in my friend groups. And I'm tired of many hangouts eventually devolving into chats about tech-related topics.
  - gonzobonzo 1y ago
    This is a problem with these solutions in general. Most of them are offering generic friends, as if everyone is interchangeable and you just need to sit two people together to make things work. And some people need that, or at least claim to need that. Reddit R4R personals that go - "I'm at home, I'm bored, and looking for someone to talk to. About me, I like music, movies, and food." But I think most of the people who are lonely aren't lonely because they've never had a chance to meet a friend before, but rather because they haven't found someone that clicks with them. And most of these solutions don't put much effort into finding people who match.
- lotsofpulp 1y ago
  > I don't know. It seems like the best way to make friends is to force people to do some other task next to each other a few days per week and let things form organically after they are around each other for a few years. You need a “shared struggle” to build tribal bonds. Some kind of us vs it or us vs them narrative. A simple get together where everyone spends money and has a good time is never going to accomplish that. That is why immigrant groups, religious groups, professional groups, etc are more resilient, and successive generations that experience more independence end up splintering and otherwise loosening the bonds. See also hazing in militaries/sports teams/“Greek” organizations/etc (not that I condone hazing).
seydor 1y ago
It's a matter of process: first exposure to many people, then filtering. That's how it works in school, work etc. Ideally one would plan to gather a ton of people in a crowded place, like a large concert or church.
KolibriFly 1y ago
There's something irreplaceable about place-based community
- km144 1y ago
  Probably that's just how we were wired. I'm probably often guilty of invoking an appeal to nature [1] when it comes to these things, but it's striking to me how few people who exist in modern society have the capacity to acknowledge that to live in this society is to entirely live within an experiment whose parameters have evolved from generation to generation over the past few centuries. We do not think critically enough about which of the technologies that "enhance" our lives actually enhance them. If personal automobiles are good for us, then to what end are they good? If social media is good for us, then to what end is it good? When you go beyond the first or second question, you start to realize the societal good is dubious at best. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature
Euphorbium 1y ago
You are not supposed to stop by. You are supposed to spend money and keep going.
- lovestory 1y ago
  Here in the Balkans and most of European countries always have public squares or similar gathering place for each neighborhood. I was shocked when I visited some USA states that absolutely have nothing of that sort. Not even a park that is tailored for a few hours hangout sessions. Even some public spaces like parks and library gardens are filled with corporate interests like Starbucks. You absolutely are expected to spend money whenever you go out which is depressing af.
- teddyh 1y ago
  If the business doesn’t make enough money it will not be able to pay rent, and will be replaced with a more profitable business which will make enough money, probably by pressuring people to instead be customers, pay and move on. It’s what the system will produce.
cess11 1y ago
It's about brand. This is tailored to a kind of person that feels confused and lost in a setting without a brand, so classics like joining an association around a hobby or a union or the freemasons or whatever makes them feel uncomfortable. It's not only about one's own identity, but also the other participants.
flowingfocus 1y ago
> The neighborhood cafe where locals can stop by at any time and see other locals This is still the norm in some places. When I was cycling through the Balkans, I was surprised how many people sit in public spaces, usually close to a kiosk, and play cards, throw dice, or just chatter
- jajko 1y ago
  Whole southern Europe is like that (sitting now in a small trattorria in Liguria province in Italy, I see this everywhere, and ie Spain, Portugal or Greece is same). The problem mostly arises in big cities where a lot of young move for work, I'd call those socially sterile places.
  - nothercastle 1y ago
    Real estate is too expensive in the USA. To stay profitable you need to turn customers around quickly
    - seb1204 1y ago
      But not on a park bench or park area with tables?
      - nothercastle 1y ago
        In the USA people would graffiti the benches pee on the seats and a homeless person would move in. Almost no protection exists to prevent destruction of public property. I think that’s intentional to discourage people from embracing socialism.
        sfmz 1y ago
        Modern benches and even parks have anti-homeless features. iirc some park in Minneapolis removed their basketball courts because black people would congregate there (also there was drug-dealing). In USA its spend money or get out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture
msgodel 1y ago
Many of us are alone and not lonely and I think most men who feel "lonely" are lying to themselves about what socialization really is.
- unhappy_meaning 1y ago
  Yup, a lot of the men who are lonely are also a bit of an outcast whether it's self-imposed because of their warped sense of socialization or they're ostracized because they have weird takes on life issues or just life itself.
BlueTemplar 1y ago
Not always, but this is the Internet, and Hacker News : if you freaking love hammers, everything starts to look like a nail.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
lurk2 1y ago
> The neighborhood cafe where locals can stop by at any time and see other locals. The bar that everyone stops by after work twice a week. These are stationary physical locations that don’t require pre-planning, schedules, apps, or anything else. I’ve seen a number a theories on why these spaces declined: 1. Social media became more engaging than actual hangouts. 2. Rising levels of cultural and ethnic diversity lead to lower levels of social trust and a subsequent exit from public spaces (see e.g. Robert Putnam). 3. Independent bars and cafes got bought out by chains that favored higher rates of table turnover. 4. Civil Liberties movement made America into an open air insane asylum that normal people avoid venturing into. 5. Wages not keeping pace with inflation leaves less discretionary income available to pay for these spaces. 6. Decline of fraternal orders, friendly societies, and veteran clubhouses which were often the owners of the bars and / or cafes.
- maerF0x0 1y ago
  (Similar to 2) 7. A loss of a common religious practice creating a space for community, and in the case of evangelical Christianity a shift to a female driven congregation and preaching. (Which, ultimately, is very sad for the women in the church, too, because a lot of them want to be married to a Christian man, but struggle to find one if only for a purely supply issue)
- _DeadFred_ 1y ago
  1. True. When I was younger we all went to XYZ coffee shop in large part to see who we ran into there, catch up on gossip, let people know where to come hang that night. With social media you don't have/need that. 3. When I was younger we did item 1 above, but at Denny's late at night after everything shut down. The fact it was a chain didn't seem to impact the hang potential. 4. I grew up in Santa Cruz and it was always an insane asylum and had a homeless problem before having a homeless problem was cool, but it was also always a city full of people hanging out (don't know anymore was forced to move away).
maxehmookau 1y ago
Yeah, to me this is another arm of that old idea that every few years, someone in Silicon Valley reinvents the bus. Place-based community is key, and can't be fixed with an app, or a service. Not long-term anyway.
more_corn 1y ago
Yeah my first thought reading the headline was “isn’t this just called the pub”?
antisthenes 1y ago
I mean, you do realize you FIRST need to be location-agnostic to find some people, right? Only then can your group start to develop favorite local places to hang around at. > I bring this up because if you look at places that had lively social activities a few decades or a century ago, they were almost always a specific place. Which is basically irrelevant, as you can come up with a similar example of pre-covid, during-covid and post-covid changes for how people hang out. People adapt pretty quickly. > The neighborhood cafe where locals can stop by at any time and see other locals. The bar that everyone stops by after work twice a week. I'm not sure these places really ever existed with such a stability as you describe outside of _really_ small towns. Like under 5000 pop towns.
- keiferski 1y ago
  I'm not sure these places really ever existed with such a stability as you describe outside of _really_ small towns. Like under 5000 pop towns. These places exist today, in numerous major cities around the world. I live near one.
lavelganzu 1y ago
Isn't this merely a technological change? "A few decades or a century ago", being location-specific was the only possible option for a social club. Now there are more options; location-specific options still exist, and location-agnostic options exist also. You can totally pick a convenient cafe or pub and start hanging out there & inviting your existing friends. In time you'll start to recognize the other regulars, and you can make a point of chatting with them regularly (but not overstaying your welcome especially early on!), find out what they're interested in, offer & request small favors, crack jokes, eventually a bit of friendly competition, casual debate about mutual interests while intentionally trusting them enough to let them change your mind a little, etc -- all the things you'd normally do to build a social connection with another man. The upside and downside of a location-based approach is that it's a very weak filter. The other regulars may be people whom it's a real stretch to learn to connect with. Location-agnostic social activities are typically focused on an activity or interest, e.g. people who want to hike, watch a movie, play a game or sport, do political activism, do community service, etc. So the social group comes with a filter attached that ensures you will have an easier time connecting with them. This is great! There are some downsides, too, but nothing serious.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
scelerat 1y ago
It seems to me that an underlying assumption of every so-called "social" app is that its users wish to avoid contact with people in real life. That the users wish for some sanitized, safe and dimensionally meager simulacrum of human interaction. Obviously, that's not an absolute; clearly people yearn for human contact. But as you point out, there was a time when people participated in social activities and public life with a much higher degree of physical presence than they do now, and the popularity of apps which sidestep this indicate to me that people also desire not to engage with others so proximately. If you want to have relationships with people, go to where people actually are, buckle your belt, set aside your dread of rejection or indifference, and introduce yourself.
0xfaded 1y ago
Last time I was in Prague my friend brought me straight to the local pub, and without even ordering beer came out. Everyone knew each other and each other's dogs (Prague is very dog friendly, in fact one of the dogs was in the kitchen begging scraps). I have vague memories of similar scenes growing up in Australia, and have seen similar in Ireland. I don't know if anywhere like it in US cities, but maybe it's still like that out in the country.
Eddy_Viscosity2 1y ago
Location specific is better, because if you just know that a particular spot has the kind of people and atmosphere that is inviting and pleasant to be in, you just go there. No need to check-in or schedule a meeting or anything else. Frequent regular interval fixed-time events are good too. I used to part of a racquet club that just had an open session all evening twice a week. You just show up and play and so did everyone else. You put your name up and are just play whoever is next for a game, then wait, then play someone else. You get to play a variety of people and when waiting your turn you can chat and get to know the other players. 5 stars system.
fellowniusmonk 1y ago
I co-ran a very transformative social club as a co-working space for several years. People still talk about it years later. It's not hard to do if you have the space. But you have to have the space.
timnetworks 1y ago
sounds like someone was never a foursquare mayor :) pokemon go was a notable example that got people out of the house (and sometimes into adventure..)
yowzadave 1y ago
I agree with this; I think part of the societal problem is one of poor urban planning. I’m lucky to live in a neighborhood in New York (Sunnyside) that has a park that is the hub of everyone’s social life—most nights of the week, people show up, bring some food, and chat/share dinner and drinks while the kids run around playing unsupervised. This is extremely rare in the US, which is dominated by suburban typologies that feature individual homes and relatively few communal spaces. The shared spaces, like restaurants/bars/etc. tend to be places you have to drive to, and therefore have less of a connection to their community and less of a regular clientele. Everyone wants to have their own backyard…which is fine, but leads to people hanging out alone in their own backyard rather than with their friends and neighbors.
Alex_Notchenko 1y ago
I run local communities (specifically a London based Russian Language Machine Learning and AI community, hit me up if you are interested) it's 100% cannot survive long term without a locus in physical space. Online only exists to facilitate offline, if people are just avatars and not real people, there is a hard limit to what can be achieved in a community, its a question of trust.

JimDabell 1y ago

It’s not always location-agnostic, but you’re more likely to hear about location-agnostic efforts because they have further reach. For instance Men’s Sheds are a local effort with a thousand locations in the UK: > Men’s Sheds encourage people to come together to make, repair and repurpose, supporting projects in their local communities. Improving wellbeing, reducing loneliness and combatting social isolation. > Research gathered by the UKMSA Health and Wellbeing Survey, 2023, suggests 96% of Men’s Shed attendees feel less lonely since joining a Shed. — https://menssheds.org.uk https://menssheds.org.uk Unfortunately, sometimes you get things like this happening: > 'We put the pressure on to join Men in Sheds' > The 74-year-old added: "Eventually they let us in, just one morning, eventually it became all the time, and now it's 50% women, and we absolutely love it." > When the women were allowed into the workshop, members decided to keep a quiet room with a model railway display in it, just for men. > "We [the men] escape now and again [to the quiet room] and have a chat and weigh things up." — https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg5qd9l3094o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg5qd9l3094o

jamesdeluk 1y ago
Why didn't they start Women's Sheds?
- subscribed 1y ago
  Oh, but why if they're having a functional clubs already? I feel like men only spaces in the UK are frowned upon (see Garrick club narration). No matter the reason, the only way single sex spaces work here is women only.
  - jl6 1y ago
    In UK law, it is generally considered sex discrimination to exclude someone on the basis of their sex, unless that exclusion is a “proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim”. It’s fairly well understood that women have sex-based needs that justify this aim, but very rarely recognized that men might have such needs too. Maybe this is one of them. The fear will always be that male-only spaces will become centers of power and decision-making that women are excluded from. That’s where the private London clubs sit. Doesn’t seem as likely to happen in a shed, but who knows?
    - King-Aaron 1y ago
      Generally speaking women are more than welcome at Mens Sheds (In Australia, at least). The ratio of men to women that enjoy sanding wood and tinkering with lawnmowers usually leans more heavily to men, but I've seen the girls around the traps too.
    - parliament32 1y ago
      >it is generally considered sex discrimination to exclude someone on the basis of their sex So are women-only gyms not a thing in the UK then? Here in NA they're everywhere, we even have a women-only version of the YMCA (YWCA).
      - dragonwriter 1y ago
        > Here in NA they're everywhere, we even have a women-only version of the YMCA (YWCA). Despite the names, neither the YWCA or YMCA as broad organizations strictly restrict membership by gender (or religion, for that matter.) My understanding with YWCA specifically is that inclusiveness on gender varies considerably by individual local association.
bcraven 1y ago
You have selectively quoted that article. Note the last four paragraphs are: >Andrew McNerney, 70, admitted there was initially some resistance to becoming a mixed group. >He said: "There was apprehension, but in all honesty, it's turned out well. >"We [the men] escape now and again [to the quiet room] and have a chat and weigh things up." >But he added: "It's a lovely atmosphere, and it's been good."
- JimDabell 1y ago
  Yes. I selectively pulled out the bits that I thought were relevant instead of quoting the whole thing. I know he said that it’s been good, but taken in relation to the rest of the article, I don’t place much weight on it. The women persistently pressured the men to join, the men were apprehensive, they allowed them in for one morning, one morning turned into all the time, women now comprise 50% of the group, and the men’s area is now relegated to a back room they escape to. They got one of the men to say it was good, but that’s not the story that the article was telling.
  - williamdclt 1y ago
    > that’s not the story that the article was telling. It is though? Reading the article, I'm fully getting a sense that its point is that it was an improvement for everyone (despite the article describing it as being triggered from nagging from the women). Now you can choose not to believe that, but that _is_ the story the article was telling, or at least it's how I understand it.
    - boppo1 1y ago
      [flagged]
  - afavour 1y ago
    > the men were apprehensive, they allowed them in for one morning, one morning turned into all the time Your assumption is that it “turned into all the time” against the wishes of the men but that’s not clear at all. Being apprehensive about change and then quickly discovering it was for the better is something we all experience in life.
notarobot123 1y ago
The men are there to meet each other, not to avoid women. Gender segregation isn't the point - it's about building relationships.
- JimDabell 1y ago
  They had to be persistently pressured into letting women in, and when that happened they set aside a men-only room to escape to. Gender segregation may not be the point but it seems like it’s important to them.
- philipallstar 1y ago
  > The men are there to meet each other, not to avoid women. Gender segregation isn't the point - it's about building relationships. I'm not sure that's quite true. Men tend to talk and joke in a different way to women, which they then modify around women or be punished. The main difference between an old-school Personnel department and a modern HR department is HR is (self-)tasked with making sure the environment is always suitable for women. Men have very few places, if any, where they can just be themselves, unmodified. And when those places exist, large shaming campaigns and marketing appear to tell them off and to entice women into them.
  - emptyfile 1y ago
    [dead]
  - kgwxd 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - potato3732842 1y ago
      Surely you see the irony in advocating for "just man up and comply"? Imagine how this comment would come across if applied along any other demographic axis.
      - meheleventyone 1y ago
immibis 1y ago
Why does the presence of women cause men to not have male friends?
- ReptileMan 1y ago
  The group dynamic changes the moment it is not single sex anymore.
  - the_gipsy 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - vladvasiliu 1y ago
      I don't think you need to exclude homosexuals. As a straight male, I interact with my homosexual buddies the same way I interact with my straight buddies. Women, gay or straight, interact differently, including those in whom I have no sexual interest. If there was inappropriate behavior which wouldn't stop once called out, they would be excluded.
      - the_gipsy 1y ago
        You specifically maybe don't, but homosexual (or bisexual) males do have sexual interest in other homo- or bisexual men. So it wouldn't be a "problem" as long as there exactly only one homosexual, or as long as they're a very small minority.
    - nkrisc 1y ago
      No, you don’t.
    - ReptileMan 1y ago
      No - enlighten me.
  - bregma 1y ago
    [flagged]
lupusreal 1y ago
What I find a bit remarkable is how they lost control of their club dynamics so severely. I've been a regular attendee of a few hacker spaces that were open to the public but never had the problem they describe. I think maybe a key aspect is ensuring that all men, particular the ones that are classically unattractive (even repulsive) feel welcome as valued equals. Many women cannot countenance this and will try to shape group membership to be more agreeable; those women are free to leave. The rest are welcome to stay and at that point there shouldn't be any issues. (Of course it goes without saying that actual harassment isn't tolerated, but being a smelly fat slob with a heart of gold doesn't count.)
- SiempreViernes 1y ago
  Uh, they don't describe any problem though? The piece is about how everyone agrees the change is for the better, its only people in this thread that describe women and men woodworking together as a problem.
  - nothercastle 1y ago
    Obviously the remaining members think it’s better but as an adverse selection problem you can’t ask the ones that left
    - SiempreViernes 1y ago
      The notion that any members left is your own invention.
      - JimDabell 1y ago
        From a Reddit discussion about the same article: > I spoke with some men at the Man Shed in Edinburgh at Christmas and they mentioned that in the cases they had heard about where women had been let in the number of male members dropped. — https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1k6w3pr/we_put_the_pressure_on_to_join_men_in_sheds/motuc2g/ https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1k6w3pr/we_p... Aside from that, just take a look at what happened. When women joined, the men responded by finding a men-only room to “escape” to. It’s hardly a great leap to think that some of those men will escape someplace else instead.
ctippett 1y ago
I had never heard of Men's Sheds before. Thank you for mentioning it.
idiotsecant 1y ago
Yes, unfortunately sometimes social events are wildly successful and even more people want to join, and the existing members let them, and everyone has a great time together. It's unfortunate, but it happens.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

carabiner 1y ago

Last one I tried was Grouper: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grouper_social_club https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grouper_social_club You'd meet up for dinner at a local place that was usually pretty good, with 2-3 other people, mostly tech-adjacent. Dinners were pretty polite, a little awkward, mildly stimulating, but I never made real relationships from it. Seems like the same idea has emerged with https://timeleft.com https://timeleft.com. I don't know. It seems like the best way to make friends is to force people to do some other task next to each other a few days per week and let things form organically after they are around each other for a few years.

kelnos 1y ago
> ... with 2-3 other people, mostly tech-adjacent. This IMO is a part of the problem. I don't want more tech friends. Not that there's anything wrong with us, but I want more diversity in my friend groups. And I'm tired of many hangouts eventually devolving into chats about tech-related topics.
- gonzobonzo 1y ago
  This is a problem with these solutions in general. Most of them are offering generic friends, as if everyone is interchangeable and you just need to sit two people together to make things work. And some people need that, or at least claim to need that. Reddit R4R personals that go - "I'm at home, I'm bored, and looking for someone to talk to. About me, I like music, movies, and food." But I think most of the people who are lonely aren't lonely because they've never had a chance to meet a friend before, but rather because they haven't found someone that clicks with them. And most of these solutions don't put much effort into finding people who match.
lotsofpulp 1y ago
> I don't know. It seems like the best way to make friends is to force people to do some other task next to each other a few days per week and let things form organically after they are around each other for a few years. You need a “shared struggle” to build tribal bonds. Some kind of us vs it or us vs them narrative. A simple get together where everyone spends money and has a good time is never going to accomplish that. That is why immigrant groups, religious groups, professional groups, etc are more resilient, and successive generations that experience more independence end up splintering and otherwise loosening the bonds. See also hazing in militaries/sports teams/“Greek” organizations/etc (not that I condone hazing).

seydor 1y ago

It's a matter of process: first exposure to many people, then filtering. That's how it works in school, work etc. Ideally one would plan to gather a ton of people in a crowded place, like a large concert or church.

KolibriFly 1y ago

There's something irreplaceable about place-based community

km144 1y ago
Probably that's just how we were wired. I'm probably often guilty of invoking an appeal to nature [1] when it comes to these things, but it's striking to me how few people who exist in modern society have the capacity to acknowledge that to live in this society is to entirely live within an experiment whose parameters have evolved from generation to generation over the past few centuries. We do not think critically enough about which of the technologies that "enhance" our lives actually enhance them. If personal automobiles are good for us, then to what end are they good? If social media is good for us, then to what end is it good? When you go beyond the first or second question, you start to realize the societal good is dubious at best. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature

Euphorbium 1y ago

You are not supposed to stop by. You are supposed to spend money and keep going.

lovestory 1y ago
Here in the Balkans and most of European countries always have public squares or similar gathering place for each neighborhood. I was shocked when I visited some USA states that absolutely have nothing of that sort. Not even a park that is tailored for a few hours hangout sessions. Even some public spaces like parks and library gardens are filled with corporate interests like Starbucks. You absolutely are expected to spend money whenever you go out which is depressing af.
teddyh 1y ago
If the business doesn’t make enough money it will not be able to pay rent, and will be replaced with a more profitable business which will make enough money, probably by pressuring people to instead be customers, pay and move on. It’s what the system will produce.

cess11 1y ago

It's about brand. This is tailored to a kind of person that feels confused and lost in a setting without a brand, so classics like joining an association around a hobby or a union or the freemasons or whatever makes them feel uncomfortable. It's not only about one's own identity, but also the other participants.

flowingfocus 1y ago

> The neighborhood cafe where locals can stop by at any time and see other locals This is still the norm in some places. When I was cycling through the Balkans, I was surprised how many people sit in public spaces, usually close to a kiosk, and play cards, throw dice, or just chatter

jajko 1y ago
Whole southern Europe is like that (sitting now in a small trattorria in Liguria province in Italy, I see this everywhere, and ie Spain, Portugal or Greece is same). The problem mostly arises in big cities where a lot of young move for work, I'd call those socially sterile places.
- nothercastle 1y ago
  Real estate is too expensive in the USA. To stay profitable you need to turn customers around quickly
  - seb1204 1y ago
    But not on a park bench or park area with tables?
    - nothercastle 1y ago
      In the USA people would graffiti the benches pee on the seats and a homeless person would move in. Almost no protection exists to prevent destruction of public property. I think that’s intentional to discourage people from embracing socialism.
      - sfmz 1y ago
        Modern benches and even parks have anti-homeless features. iirc some park in Minneapolis removed their basketball courts because black people would congregate there (also there was drug-dealing). In USA its spend money or get out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture

msgodel 1y ago

Many of us are alone and not lonely and I think most men who feel "lonely" are lying to themselves about what socialization really is.

unhappy_meaning 1y ago
Yup, a lot of the men who are lonely are also a bit of an outcast whether it's self-imposed because of their warped sense of socialization or they're ostracized because they have weird takes on life issues or just life itself.

BlueTemplar 1y ago

Not always, but this is the Internet, and Hacker News : if you freaking love hammers, everything starts to look like a nail.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

lurk2 1y ago

> The neighborhood cafe where locals can stop by at any time and see other locals. The bar that everyone stops by after work twice a week. These are stationary physical locations that don’t require pre-planning, schedules, apps, or anything else. I’ve seen a number a theories on why these spaces declined: 1. Social media became more engaging than actual hangouts. 2. Rising levels of cultural and ethnic diversity lead to lower levels of social trust and a subsequent exit from public spaces (see e.g. Robert Putnam). 3. Independent bars and cafes got bought out by chains that favored higher rates of table turnover. 4. Civil Liberties movement made America into an open air insane asylum that normal people avoid venturing into. 5. Wages not keeping pace with inflation leaves less discretionary income available to pay for these spaces. 6. Decline of fraternal orders, friendly societies, and veteran clubhouses which were often the owners of the bars and / or cafes.

maerF0x0 1y ago
(Similar to 2) 7. A loss of a common religious practice creating a space for community, and in the case of evangelical Christianity a shift to a female driven congregation and preaching. (Which, ultimately, is very sad for the women in the church, too, because a lot of them want to be married to a Christian man, but struggle to find one if only for a purely supply issue)
_DeadFred_ 1y ago
1. True. When I was younger we all went to XYZ coffee shop in large part to see who we ran into there, catch up on gossip, let people know where to come hang that night. With social media you don't have/need that. 3. When I was younger we did item 1 above, but at Denny's late at night after everything shut down. The fact it was a chain didn't seem to impact the hang potential. 4. I grew up in Santa Cruz and it was always an insane asylum and had a homeless problem before having a homeless problem was cool, but it was also always a city full of people hanging out (don't know anymore was forced to move away).

maxehmookau 1y ago

Yeah, to me this is another arm of that old idea that every few years, someone in Silicon Valley reinvents the bus. Place-based community is key, and can't be fixed with an app, or a service. Not long-term anyway.

more_corn 1y ago

Yeah my first thought reading the headline was “isn’t this just called the pub”?

antisthenes 1y ago

I mean, you do realize you FIRST need to be location-agnostic to find some people, right? Only then can your group start to develop favorite local places to hang around at. > I bring this up because if you look at places that had lively social activities a few decades or a century ago, they were almost always a specific place. Which is basically irrelevant, as you can come up with a similar example of pre-covid, during-covid and post-covid changes for how people hang out. People adapt pretty quickly. > The neighborhood cafe where locals can stop by at any time and see other locals. The bar that everyone stops by after work twice a week. I'm not sure these places really ever existed with such a stability as you describe outside of _really_ small towns. Like under 5000 pop towns.

keiferski 1y ago
I'm not sure these places really ever existed with such a stability as you describe outside of _really_ small towns. Like under 5000 pop towns. These places exist today, in numerous major cities around the world. I live near one.

lavelganzu 1y ago

Isn't this merely a technological change? "A few decades or a century ago", being location-specific was the only possible option for a social club. Now there are more options; location-specific options still exist, and location-agnostic options exist also. You can totally pick a convenient cafe or pub and start hanging out there & inviting your existing friends. In time you'll start to recognize the other regulars, and you can make a point of chatting with them regularly (but not overstaying your welcome especially early on!), find out what they're interested in, offer & request small favors, crack jokes, eventually a bit of friendly competition, casual debate about mutual interests while intentionally trusting them enough to let them change your mind a little, etc -- all the things you'd normally do to build a social connection with another man. The upside and downside of a location-based approach is that it's a very weak filter. The other regulars may be people whom it's a real stretch to learn to connect with. Location-agnostic social activities are typically focused on an activity or interest, e.g. people who want to hike, watch a movie, play a game or sport, do political activism, do community service, etc. So the social group comes with a filter attached that ensures you will have an easier time connecting with them. This is great! There are some downsides, too, but nothing serious.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

scelerat 1y ago

It seems to me that an underlying assumption of every so-called "social" app is that its users wish to avoid contact with people in real life. That the users wish for some sanitized, safe and dimensionally meager simulacrum of human interaction. Obviously, that's not an absolute; clearly people yearn for human contact. But as you point out, there was a time when people participated in social activities and public life with a much higher degree of physical presence than they do now, and the popularity of apps which sidestep this indicate to me that people also desire not to engage with others so proximately. If you want to have relationships with people, go to where people actually are, buckle your belt, set aside your dread of rejection or indifference, and introduce yourself.

0xfaded 1y ago

Last time I was in Prague my friend brought me straight to the local pub, and without even ordering beer came out. Everyone knew each other and each other's dogs (Prague is very dog friendly, in fact one of the dogs was in the kitchen begging scraps). I have vague memories of similar scenes growing up in Australia, and have seen similar in Ireland. I don't know if anywhere like it in US cities, but maybe it's still like that out in the country.

Eddy_Viscosity2 1y ago

Location specific is better, because if you just know that a particular spot has the kind of people and atmosphere that is inviting and pleasant to be in, you just go there. No need to check-in or schedule a meeting or anything else. Frequent regular interval fixed-time events are good too. I used to part of a racquet club that just had an open session all evening twice a week. You just show up and play and so did everyone else. You put your name up and are just play whoever is next for a game, then wait, then play someone else. You get to play a variety of people and when waiting your turn you can chat and get to know the other players. 5 stars system.

fellowniusmonk 1y ago

I co-ran a very transformative social club as a co-working space for several years. People still talk about it years later. It's not hard to do if you have the space. But you have to have the space.

timnetworks 1y ago

sounds like someone was never a foursquare mayor :) pokemon go was a notable example that got people out of the house (and sometimes into adventure..)

yowzadave 1y ago

I agree with this; I think part of the societal problem is one of poor urban planning. I’m lucky to live in a neighborhood in New York (Sunnyside) that has a park that is the hub of everyone’s social life—most nights of the week, people show up, bring some food, and chat/share dinner and drinks while the kids run around playing unsupervised. This is extremely rare in the US, which is dominated by suburban typologies that feature individual homes and relatively few communal spaces. The shared spaces, like restaurants/bars/etc. tend to be places you have to drive to, and therefore have less of a connection to their community and less of a regular clientele. Everyone wants to have their own backyard…which is fine, but leads to people hanging out alone in their own backyard rather than with their friends and neighbors.

Alex_Notchenko 1y ago

I run local communities (specifically a London based Russian Language Machine Learning and AI community, hit me up if you are interested) it's 100% cannot survive long term without a locus in physical space. Online only exists to facilitate offline, if people are just avatars and not real people, there is a hard limit to what can be achieved in a community, its a question of trust.