Posted by luu 1 day ago
It’s a major issue I have with nonfiction in general though. Most of the words are superfluous. Unlike fiction it’s not prose-poetry or storytelling art either, just dry filler.
That and powerpoint, obviously.
Usually when I want pure facts I now want concise and to the point. If I want art I read fiction. Fiction can convey other things, even facts and new ideas, but the main reason it exists (at least for me) is that it's art.
The male loneliness epidemic is also known as the growth of incel circles and the influence of supposedly masculine influencers who will do literally anything but treat women both as equals and with respect. And the way these groups work is that they need to keep their membership up, so it's in their interest to keep you away from women by turning you against them.
Whatever narrative there is about young men being left behind by progressiveness, it is a big lie over a smaller truth (the system fails everyone and now it is sometimes failing young white men, in terms of education). Not so different to the great replacement theory I would imagine, but based on gender not race/religion.
For us, it is a matter of not being able to build and maintain meatspace social connections - reasons vary, including severe social anxiety, poor socialization (in part due to issues with physical development), and physical isolation; if there is a common thread, it is a history of a dysfunctional family life that disrupted development.
It's very frustrating when women center themselves in these kinds of conversations, and use that spotlight to assume and project the worst. There is a consistent unwillingness to even try to understand the perspective of socially-disadvantaged men, or to engage genuinely with the notion that their needs are unique, and uniquely unmet, when compared to that of women and better-adjusted men.
It makes it difficult to get genuine grievances taken seriously; people are always looking for ways to wash their hands of persistent and onerous social issues, and being told, by someone perceived as socially-successful and authoritative, that they can is all the reason they need.
I was taken seriously for about a week and then it dropped, because it was my sister's boyfriend who did it and he was already going to prison for something else. So why make it worse for him? I got sidelined in favour of that.
My own social connections dropped off at about that time because I became scared. The guy who attacked me was already due to be imprisoned.
So, I was well embedded in that dysfunctional family life, and at every step of the way I was 0 priority compared to the boyfriends of my sisters.
The reason I can't find a woman is not so much that I'm insecure or lonely, but that I need a bit of time to get trust. And besides, lonely people have been paying hookers and escorts forever.
The loneliness epidemic centers on men and men only while data shows no or only small differences between the genders. Somehow, pointing that out is "centering women"?
> There is a consistent unwillingness to even try to understand the perspective of socially-disadvantaged men,
They are constant and persistent center of political conversation. Whether you listen to right wing or centrists, last 3 years were all about socially-disadvantaged men, manufacturing, male loneliness, manliness.
It's reframed that way so it can be dismissed out of hand.
It's already difficult to get anyone to care when men experience troubles (because they should "man up" and solve things themselves), and when you make it sound like it's because men expect something from women, not only does it cease to be a problem worth caring about, but it becomes a threat we need to shout down.
The issue of male loneliness isn't just that men are having a hard time forming relationships with women: it's much broader, and more importantly, it's inclusive of hardships starting and maintaining friendships with other men.
Part of this is due to the fact that most spaces men used to have for socialization have long since been shut down.
However, the small grain of truth buried in the reframing is that women are better at cultivating and maintaining friend groups, and a lot of men currently maintain their social circles through their wives. Of course, the solution is not that we should assign women companions to men like the military would assign a firearm to a soldier, but rather our society needs to start teaching men how to better maintain friendships on their own.
There is already an ecosystem of for-profit social events in European cities (and probably elsewhere) profiting off people's desire to meet up with other human beings when social opportunies have shrunk. Once has seen this on e.g. Meetup.com or Facebook for years now, where bot profiles are used to swell event-signup numbers so people think they will meet more people. Indeed, with the enshittification of Meetup, the only forces that prosper on that site are for-profit ones.
Social media, dating apps, even andrew tate was doing well till some point.
For Social Media and dating apps - both ran into similar problems: they are a small part of the means. Facebook only have 5-10 minutes of real friend content per day. Dating apps can perhaps fill more time per day - but success means you "find someone" and close your account never to return. If you want to get rich you need to find some way to extend the time people spend on your platform - and that means something other than your premise. Facebook is filled with garbage. Any mildly successful dating app will be bought out by a big player because that app is taking away from the big player.
I really wouldn't. If you don't know anything about him, count yourself lucky.
They're called nightclubs and bars lol trust HN to be so insulated from the wider world
Don't you tell me straight faced that mental health isn't an epidemic.
Cures both your scurvy and your social scurvy.
I think we are getting pretty close to that.
No but those who claim to have observed a worrying phenomenon will be interviewed by the press, invited to conferences, listened to by politicians, and will be first in line to receive further grants to study the worrying phenomenon. It's not corruption, it's just normal gratification for your hard work and a feeling of being relevant. Better than studying things and having to report on the absence of any finding.
Given that there's no strong regulation that forces fruit juice to be made from fruit, I'd wager that this is already a product line.
you can't call it juice if there's no juice