7 ms·

Why do so many women have ptsd from dating?

by arresin 11mo ago

H8crilA 11mo ago
"PTSD" is going through the same semantic inflation as the word "trauma". Or perhaps you could say the common meaning is an increasingly more inflated version of the professional meaning. Not surprising since these two are sort of the same thing. BTW, a more relevant word here is schizoid / schizoidism, not to be confused with schizophrenia. Or at least very strongly avoidant attachment style.
whatsupdog 11mo ago
[flagged]
- jrflowers 11mo ago
  > nobody is yet ready to have a serious discussion about this. There are a ton of people that are happy to have serious discussions about how their superior knowledge of biology gives them oracular insight into the minds of women. These discussions happen every day in Discord chats full of pubescent boys, Discord chats full of young men, and YouTube comments sections full of older men.
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]
- frm88 11mo ago
  Source?
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- H8crilA 11mo ago
  From what I'm seeing the boys are getting much more damage. Even your comment smells a bit of projection.
- Refreeze5224 11mo ago
  This is sexist pseudo-scientific hogwash, and should have no place here.
  - survirtual 11mo ago
    Agreed, but this is also a male-dominated space with a lot of men with relationship issues, so objectivity goes out the window when it comes to women here. I enjoy all the technical discourse here but the views on women are alarming to say the least.
    - mrguyorama 11mo ago
      >I enjoy all the technical discourse here but the views on women are alarming to say the least. You are gell-mann amnesia'ing. The takes on technology or anything else are just as buttfuck stupid and off. The other day HN was full of people insisting that there would be some "unforseen downside" of dropping the penny and making stores round purchase amounts to the nickle. Meanwhile, the first cash registers were only able to operate on 5 cent increments because in the early 1900s pennies were "inconvenient"! Similarly, it's extremely common for people here to insist that "sales tax in the US is complicated" but it just isn't. The entry level cash register from the 90s supports "US, Canada, and VAT" tax schemes and supports 4 custom tax regimes and that is treated as fully expected functionality and was the norm in earlier systems as well.
- survirtual 11mo ago
  Nonsense. Chimpanzees and Bonobos are our distant ancestors. Have a look at how they operate. From what I can tell, men have cause significant damage to women's psyche. Men that turn women into a commodity plaything instead of a fellow human being. Women are human beings just like men, they aren't some alien species. Trauma hurts their psyche, not pleasure. If women were in a safe, supportive, mature society, some would be monogamous, some would be poly, some would be non-committal (but honest), and some would be totally loose. Just like men. In every case they would be safe to be who they are without abuse. Instead, and this is where men and women deviate, it is not safe. Men will often kill or crush women, physically, professionally, and often at random. Women are not allowed to walk around at night because some men having a bad day or a wild night may not be able to control themselves, and most of society is just okay with this. Police in large swaths of the world do not help make anything safer, in fact they make it more dangerous. The only reason women who are more monogamous can seem better off is because society does not make room for those who aren't that way. And there are many who aren't that way. There are many who are forced to mask as that way because it is often dangerous otherwise. At large, a prison for women has been created. I think that people may even enjoy how dangerous it is, in order to force women to seek the safety of a man. Most of society doesn't make room for liberated women and it is heartbreaking. I will dream of a future where I can meet women as total equals, in all walks of life, without disproportionate power, where all of us as humans are free to be who we are in totality.
  - HeinzStuckeIt 11mo ago
    If you read journalism about why women are frustrated with dating today, one of the number-one complaints is that the men they are meeting are “flaky”, women can’t trust that the man will be there for her. Your depiction that “women don’t really need men” completely misses the current trend that this thread is about.
    - survirtual 11mo ago
      I never said women don't need men, did I? Let me read what I said again. No, I never said that. I said women need safety, and society is largely not safe for them. Human beings are social creatures. Women need men. Women need women. Men need women. Men need men. We all need each other. The system patterns of online dating cultivate undesirable traits in both men and women which result in side effects that no one would want. "Flakiness" is one such side effect. Online dating dynamics create high abundance, low commitment environments that systematically produce “flakiness,” so the issue isn’t about women needing men or not, but that both sexes operate in a degraded safety/trust landscape shaped by platform incentives rather than by real world social cues. Restore actual interpersonal safety and the entire pattern shifts positive, with less defensive behavior, less attrition, less pain, and more ethical orgasms. All people, regardless of gender, should cultivate a safety in both society and in themselves. This safety is liberating. Instead of controlling people, you free them. Instead of binding, you uplift. Instead of harming, you heal. This is the basis of safety.
- HeinzStuckeIt 11mo ago
  The parent post is getting flack, but it’s hard to see why it is controversial. I have heard “women want a man who will provide and protect” from every single woman I have ever dated or been married to, from every female friend with whom I could have such deep conversations, and from the literature I read in my anthropology-adjacent academic field. At some point one feels one has enough data to reasonably assume it’s a heterosexual human universal (in the typological sense, i.e. not denying the existence of many exceptions). I can believe that many women are having a hard time under modernity, because so many men no longer feel bound by the former expectations of old-school protector and provider behavior. Some men, like me, now view relationships as two autonomous individuals coming together to share sublime things like hobbies, art or travel, but don’t want to be viewed as a source of security. Other men might be just extracting casual sex from women and then will quickly move on. There’s much less social pressure on men to act a certain way, which in turn impacts on what women experience.
  - goatlover 11mo ago
    Because the post is making an unfounded claim about human female evolution along with another unfounded claim about modernity being different from the rest of history, which involves a ton of cultures and societies.
    - HeinzStuckeIt 11mo ago
      I think the claim that modernity is different is easily defendable. No society during the rest of history had such effective birth control, nor welfare states that removed pressure to produce offspring or even interact so much with family or other members of society. Again, as a man I feel like I am able to live a life very different than I would have been pressured into before, and this surely has ramifications for modern dating and relationships.
      - staticman2 11mo ago
        This is from the evolutionary psychiatry book The Moral Animal: >"What the theory of natural selection says, rather, is that people's minds were designed to maximize fitness in the environment in which those minds evolved. This environment is known as the EEA—the environment of evolutionary adaptation. Or, more memorably: the 'ancestral environment.'... >"What was the ancestral environment like? The closest thing to a twentieth-century example is a hunter-gatherer society, such as the !Kung San of the Kalahari Desert in Africa, the Inuit (Eskimos) of the Arctic region, or the Ache of Paraguay. >"Inconveniently, hunter-gatherer societies are quite different from one another, rendering simple generalization about the crucible of human evolution difficult. This diversity is a reminder that the idea of a single EEA is actually a fiction, a composite drawing; our ancestral social environment no doubt changed much in the course of human evolution. Still, there are recurring themes among contemporary hunter-gatherer societies, and they suggest that some features probably stayed fairly constant during much of the evolution of the human mind. For example: people grew up near close kin in small villages where everyone knew everyone else and strangers didn't show up very often. People got married—monogamously or polygamously—and a female typically was married by the time she was old enough to be fertile." -- The idea that modern life is different is obvious. I get the impression that there's some other conversation going on here that has nothing to do with evolution and you are not saying "lets all live in Igloos...".
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
tonyedgecombe 11mo ago
Probably all the choking.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]

Why do so many women have ptsd from dating?

by arresin 11mo ago

Why do so many women have ptsd from dating?

"PTSD" is going through the same semantic inflation as the word "trauma". Or perhaps you could say the common meaning is an increasingly more inflated version of the professional meaning. Not surprising since these two are sort of the same thing. BTW, a more relevant word here is schizoid / schizoidism, not to be confused with schizophrenia. Or at least very strongly avoidant attachment style.

whatsupdog 11mo ago

[flagged]

jrflowers 11mo ago
> nobody is yet ready to have a serious discussion about this. There are a ton of people that are happy to have serious discussions about how their superior knowledge of biology gives them oracular insight into the minds of women. These discussions happen every day in Discord chats full of pubescent boys, Discord chats full of young men, and YouTube comments sections full of older men.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
frm88 11mo ago
Source?
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
H8crilA 11mo ago
From what I'm seeing the boys are getting much more damage. Even your comment smells a bit of projection.
Refreeze5224 11mo ago
This is sexist pseudo-scientific hogwash, and should have no place here.
- survirtual 11mo ago
  Agreed, but this is also a male-dominated space with a lot of men with relationship issues, so objectivity goes out the window when it comes to women here. I enjoy all the technical discourse here but the views on women are alarming to say the least.
  - mrguyorama 11mo ago
    >I enjoy all the technical discourse here but the views on women are alarming to say the least. You are gell-mann amnesia'ing. The takes on technology or anything else are just as buttfuck stupid and off. The other day HN was full of people insisting that there would be some "unforseen downside" of dropping the penny and making stores round purchase amounts to the nickle. Meanwhile, the first cash registers were only able to operate on 5 cent increments because in the early 1900s pennies were "inconvenient"! Similarly, it's extremely common for people here to insist that "sales tax in the US is complicated" but it just isn't. The entry level cash register from the 90s supports "US, Canada, and VAT" tax schemes and supports 4 custom tax regimes and that is treated as fully expected functionality and was the norm in earlier systems as well.
survirtual 11mo ago
Nonsense. Chimpanzees and Bonobos are our distant ancestors. Have a look at how they operate. From what I can tell, men have cause significant damage to women's psyche. Men that turn women into a commodity plaything instead of a fellow human being. Women are human beings just like men, they aren't some alien species. Trauma hurts their psyche, not pleasure. If women were in a safe, supportive, mature society, some would be monogamous, some would be poly, some would be non-committal (but honest), and some would be totally loose. Just like men. In every case they would be safe to be who they are without abuse. Instead, and this is where men and women deviate, it is not safe. Men will often kill or crush women, physically, professionally, and often at random. Women are not allowed to walk around at night because some men having a bad day or a wild night may not be able to control themselves, and most of society is just okay with this. Police in large swaths of the world do not help make anything safer, in fact they make it more dangerous. The only reason women who are more monogamous can seem better off is because society does not make room for those who aren't that way. And there are many who aren't that way. There are many who are forced to mask as that way because it is often dangerous otherwise. At large, a prison for women has been created. I think that people may even enjoy how dangerous it is, in order to force women to seek the safety of a man. Most of society doesn't make room for liberated women and it is heartbreaking. I will dream of a future where I can meet women as total equals, in all walks of life, without disproportionate power, where all of us as humans are free to be who we are in totality.
- HeinzStuckeIt 11mo ago
  If you read journalism about why women are frustrated with dating today, one of the number-one complaints is that the men they are meeting are “flaky”, women can’t trust that the man will be there for her. Your depiction that “women don’t really need men” completely misses the current trend that this thread is about.
  - survirtual 11mo ago
    I never said women don't need men, did I? Let me read what I said again. No, I never said that. I said women need safety, and society is largely not safe for them. Human beings are social creatures. Women need men. Women need women. Men need women. Men need men. We all need each other. The system patterns of online dating cultivate undesirable traits in both men and women which result in side effects that no one would want. "Flakiness" is one such side effect. Online dating dynamics create high abundance, low commitment environments that systematically produce “flakiness,” so the issue isn’t about women needing men or not, but that both sexes operate in a degraded safety/trust landscape shaped by platform incentives rather than by real world social cues. Restore actual interpersonal safety and the entire pattern shifts positive, with less defensive behavior, less attrition, less pain, and more ethical orgasms. All people, regardless of gender, should cultivate a safety in both society and in themselves. This safety is liberating. Instead of controlling people, you free them. Instead of binding, you uplift. Instead of harming, you heal. This is the basis of safety.
HeinzStuckeIt 11mo ago
The parent post is getting flack, but it’s hard to see why it is controversial. I have heard “women want a man who will provide and protect” from every single woman I have ever dated or been married to, from every female friend with whom I could have such deep conversations, and from the literature I read in my anthropology-adjacent academic field. At some point one feels one has enough data to reasonably assume it’s a heterosexual human universal (in the typological sense, i.e. not denying the existence of many exceptions). I can believe that many women are having a hard time under modernity, because so many men no longer feel bound by the former expectations of old-school protector and provider behavior. Some men, like me, now view relationships as two autonomous individuals coming together to share sublime things like hobbies, art or travel, but don’t want to be viewed as a source of security. Other men might be just extracting casual sex from women and then will quickly move on. There’s much less social pressure on men to act a certain way, which in turn impacts on what women experience.
- goatlover 11mo ago
  Because the post is making an unfounded claim about human female evolution along with another unfounded claim about modernity being different from the rest of history, which involves a ton of cultures and societies.
  - HeinzStuckeIt 11mo ago
    I think the claim that modernity is different is easily defendable. No society during the rest of history had such effective birth control, nor welfare states that removed pressure to produce offspring or even interact so much with family or other members of society. Again, as a man I feel like I am able to live a life very different than I would have been pressured into before, and this surely has ramifications for modern dating and relationships.
    - staticman2 11mo ago
      This is from the evolutionary psychiatry book The Moral Animal: >"What the theory of natural selection says, rather, is that people's minds were designed to maximize fitness in the environment in which those minds evolved. This environment is known as the EEA—the environment of evolutionary adaptation. Or, more memorably: the 'ancestral environment.'... >"What was the ancestral environment like? The closest thing to a twentieth-century example is a hunter-gatherer society, such as the !Kung San of the Kalahari Desert in Africa, the Inuit (Eskimos) of the Arctic region, or the Ache of Paraguay. >"Inconveniently, hunter-gatherer societies are quite different from one another, rendering simple generalization about the crucible of human evolution difficult. This diversity is a reminder that the idea of a single EEA is actually a fiction, a composite drawing; our ancestral social environment no doubt changed much in the course of human evolution. Still, there are recurring themes among contemporary hunter-gatherer societies, and they suggest that some features probably stayed fairly constant during much of the evolution of the human mind. For example: people grew up near close kin in small villages where everyone knew everyone else and strangers didn't show up very often. People got married—monogamously or polygamously—and a female typically was married by the time she was old enough to be fertile." -- The idea that modern life is different is obvious. I get the impression that there's some other conversation going on here that has nothing to do with evolution and you are not saying "lets all live in Igloos...".
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]

tonyedgecombe 11mo ago

Probably all the choking.

deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]