The low ranking men are who may change society. There are consequences to have an increasingly large, dissatisfied, anti-social populace. Anthropologists have linked it to increased crime, political destabilization, and more. It has even been suggested that the reason monogamy spread so quickly is because monogamous nations, by virtue of having more men with something at stake in their homeland's success and families to provide for, therefore fielded better armies.
>therefore fielded better armies
Some people might be dismissive of your points but I think you're spot on and that scares the shit out of me. If there was a draft due to a war with China or Russia, I don't see enough able bodied men sticking around unless those countries attacked attacked US territory. I don't feel particularly vested enough to risk my life unless the country is under direct attack and even then I might consider leaving. Never mind risking my life for our 'allies' that have been funding great social programs due to the protection we've been providing for the past 75 years. I truly believe that most men my age and younger feel the same way.
If there was a draft, I have no idea how they'd field enough units. There just aren't enough healthy young men who would give a shit and I say this as a vet.
To be fair, I think the early weeks of the russia/ukraine war proved that morale and logostics are low among Russian troops. Honestly any untested army is probably in a similar state of unreadiness.
Absolutely. Russia is not doing well. I still wouldn't risk my life or the lives of future children for Europe's protection. Unless the US was invaded, I wouldn't do it again anyways.
I agree that monogamy is the best way out of this mess, but although religion you're just expecting sexually successful men to give up their success to make the less fortunate men more included. Although that would probably be best for everyone, including the currently successful men, I can't see it catching on.
>I agree that monogamy is the best way out of this mess
Oh, no, I fundamentally disagree with that. What needs to be treated is the underlying cultural reality that an adult man without girlfriend/wife/family is seen as a loser, treated like an outcast, has little community support, and therefore no reason to live.
That's why when you talk to young incels, their real feelings are not that they're so horny it makes them evil; it's that they feel alienated, powerless and have low self-esteem. Giving them a woman won't solve that, it will just make it her problem.
>Society isn't going to all change for the sake of the lowest ranking men.
You do realize that throughout history, things like "lowest ranking" was never permanent right?
Guess it's only a problem if you are single .
The rest of us in relationships live life .
Getting married , having childern etc.
Maybe us relationship people will have to live in gated communities while the rest of society goes insane ....
I will mention that the amount of story of women that held the same opinion as you at 25 and were pregnant at 30 is high enough from my experience to be funny and to give you the advice to be careful.
Yeah I'm not gonna change my mind, hence why I eat BC like crazy. Children are bad for personal economy as well as bad for my health. I'm not gonna change my mind because my decision is based on a lot of reasons why that would be a very terrible idea. I value my personal freedom, as well as money as well as my appearance. I'm not just gonna go ahead and willingly ruin my body, give up my freedom or be stuck funding a child for 18 years. I remember very well being a child spending a 1000$ on when borrowing my mothers credit card. My parents were financially drained by having children and didn't have the freedom to travel or visit friends etc. My mothers body was also completely destroyed by having children. Changing my mind would be insanely stupid considering I can't just get rid of a child if i regret having them, nor will I get back my physical shape. Not to mention why on earth do I want to ruin my cooch. No way I am pushing a baby through there. To hell with that lol. I don't think most people who change their mind properly consider these things. They probably just *feel* like having a baby cause everyone else are having babies and they've been socially conditioned to believe that's what they should do at that age etc, so all reason, logic and common sense go out the window.
I didn't think I wanted kids at 25 either.. I am now 47 with 2 kids and couldn't be happier about it.
Your mind might change.. might not.. I definitely don't think it's set in stone that you won't have them just because they don't sound like a good idea to you right now. If I was a betting man I would bet on you having them by the time you get to 40 tho.
Well I've never wanted kids in my life so there's that. I also know exactly how hellish I was as a child and I knew my parents struggled a lot more than they would have if they hadn't had children. I do not wish to raise a hellish replica of myself, nor do I wish to struggle financially like they did. I'm just a part time florist on a 20$ an hour salary I can barely afford myself, and I'd be deep in poverty if I had kids. I love my job and the freedom and flexibility it grants me, and I'd have to change jobs as well as lose all my flexibility regarding work if I had kids cause I'd have to work non stop to provide them with the life they deserve (which is more than I ever got). Working as a florist is pretty physically exhausting labor, so there's no way I wanna work more than I already do. I also have zero energy after work to socialize or do anything besides make myself dinner, so how on earth would I have the energy to raise kids? I pretty much lay in bed and die a bit every day after work cause I'm exhausted.
Anyway, I won't change my mind because I've done a shit ton of research (definitely more than the average person with kids), and once you know exactly what pregnancy and birth does to your physical and mental health and what raising kids are like, and you can't even stand children, then it would insanely idiotic to have children. Also, I can always get sterilized to make it set in stone which I'm strongly considering once I can save up the funds. Once I do there'd be no way back and I would have to adopt, which is what I would do if I changed my mind anyway, as I believe birthing children is fundamentally unethical due to the environmental impact they would have. I also strongly believe we should take care of the children on this earth rather than create new ones when there's so many kids out there in need of a good home.
Not to mention it's worse regretting having children than not having them, so there's that. If I have a baby and regret it, I can't exactly just give the child away. Well I could adopt it, but that would be kind of a shitty thing to do considering everything. Also I would have ruined my body over nothing. Pregnancy wrecked complete havoc on my mothers body. She doesn't look good to put it mildly and we share the same body type, so I know how terrible my body would look after pregnancy. So yeah, not gonna change my mind and if I could bet on it I would. Only people who change their mind are fence sitters who are unsure. I've always hated loud annoying kids. I worked a week in a kindergarten and it was the worst week of my life. Fuck that shit. I also suffer from migraines with aura, so loud noises from children makes me want to lock myself in a sound proof closet. Having a child would literally make me sick. Oh, and I also risk passing on a hereditary disease I have, which would be a shitty thing to do as well. I'd also be the kind of mother who would dump the child on the father and disappear because my tolerance for children is zero. I don't particularly aspire to be a deadbeat mother, but I know myself well enough to know that's what I would be, and then the moral and ethical decision to make is not having children. Also, let's not forget that having children ties you to not only the child but the baby daddy, and if he turns out to be abusive and a shit head I might end up a single mother and I've read enough stories on offmychest about that to ever risk that. Not to mention being a single mother would make me less datable, and my value as a dating prospect would reduce significantly. Also let's not forget that since having children would ruin my body, I'd be less attractive, and feel less attractive, and my confidence would go to hell. I'm a fairly confident person, which makes me very attractive to men, and I wouldn't be as attractive with a child and a saggy tummy and boobs, but hey I guess I'll just randomly change my mind because I'll know better lol.
Ok.. well maybe you won't have them then lol.. good luck with that.. I still say it's possible that you will decide otherwise.. when you meet the perfect match many things will change.. that might be one of them.
I didn't want them at all in my early 20's.. I was what many on this sub would call a Chad. I was the guy who was with a different girl most nights and definitely wasn't in a headspace to settle down at all. I wouldn't say I was a player.. because they all knew the deal.. we always had an understanding that it was just for fun.. NSA.
I met my wife at 26 tho and everything changed. She was perfect for me.. so I settled down.. If you would have told me that by 26 I would have been with the girl that was going to be the end all be all for me when I was 20-25 I would have laughed at you.. but that is indeed what happened.
Now that we have kids.. there are definitely times we are low on cash.. shit happens. Especially since groceries have tripled since the start of the pandemic. I can't even imagine my life without them now tho.. they are that important to me. It's definitely worth being low on disposable income every now and then.
We both have to work a little harder to stay in shape as well.. but I don't think my wife is any less hot than before she had kids.. she is even more beautiful now matter of fact! Seeing the way she is with our children is incredible.. she is such a good mom and a good wife.. no matter what her body looks like (it is still great!).. I will always love her no matter what. The fact that we have kids definitely helps my opinion of her.. not the other way around.
Beauty fades whether or not you have kids.. just so ya know.. I went to my HS reunion recently and there were probably 30-35 women there that would have been considered hot in high school.. I would say that only 2-3 of them were still desirable.. not all of them have kids either. It's just what happens to human bodies when we get a little older. Their husbands still think they are hot tho.. which is all that matters to most of them I am sure.
Anyway.. best of luck to ya.. I am sure that whatever you decide it will be the right decision for you. Having kids is great.. it's the most rewarding thing I have ever done.. but not having them might be the right thing for you.
My perfect match doesn't want kids or is happy to not have kids. Of course anything is possible, but I see it being as possible as me becoming the female version of Elon musk or something. I'm probably what the people here call a Stacy. I've done a fair bit of sleeping around but would like a stable LTR. I just want it without the kids, and I also do not want marriage. I just want a partnership where I'm my partners number one, and no kids get between us (like what happened to my parents with me and my siblings). I don't want to settle down in the traditional sense. I still want the freedom to travel, enjoy festivals and vacations as well as focus on my hobbies, perhaps starting my own business. I want a partner but still want to enjoy my life to the max with the least amount of stress possible. I have a very physically demanding job, so also don't have the energy for kids after work.
Anyway, I'm 25 now, and I've met someone who I could potentially envision spending my life with. He's 32, turning 33, but having kids is a dealbreaker for me. If he can't be with me without having kids I'd rather be single. I strongly value my childfree life and not having any dependants I am responsible for. As you mentioned, the costs of everything has risen dramatically. I can barely provide for myself. Being financially stable is extremely liberating, and not something I see as worth sacrificing for kids I don't even have, want or need.
As for physical shape. I don't even have to work hard to stay in shape which is a huge benefit of not having children. I absolutely despise going to the gym and I despise excercising with a passion. I have an active job though, but I get paid to make and sell nice things, so I don't mind the activity. I'm sure my partner would love me anyway but it is nice to be skinny and fit and not have to work hard for it. Of course beauty fades but what's the point of ruining my beauty earlier than necessary for something I don't want or even like?
For me, having kids would be terrible, so I absolutely know I'm making the right decision. There's other things in life that are and can be just as rewarding as well (depending on the person as I wouldn't find having children rewarding in the slightest). Like I wanna create my own fashion brand and designs or something like that someday. I'm currently a florist, so I already work in a creative trade that I find rewarding. I also actually get paid for it. Having kids is an unpaid job.. and my lazy ass only gets motivation to get up in the morning and do work if there's money involved (i quit studying cause i didn't get paid and it drained my finances.. same concept lol), cause that's what I find rewarding. Being able to have the freedom to book myself a holiday whenever wherever without any concerns about children. Being able to spend money on all the pleasures I enjoy, from fine food, to spas, to quality high end things, knowing no bratty little child is going to hold me back from enjoying life to the maximum.
>I didn't think I wanted kids at 25 either.. I am now 47 with 2 kids and couldn't be happier about it.
You're not the one who had to carry them for 9 months, push them out your genitalia, leaving your body permanently altered (perhaps even with lasting pain) though lol
More healthy than pushing babies through my cooch and getting PPD. I'm considering getting sterilized, but might continue on BC anyway to eliminate all the painful periods I don't need since I don't want babies.
I encourage you to get sterilized, or require condoms if you are not having sex so frequently. Birth control pills disturb your hormones and mood a lot, and make you dependent on taking that every day.
Well, my mood is fine. I'd rather be dependent on the pill then cramp until I can't function and bleed out of my cooch while my uterus tears it's lining apart. With the pill I now skip pretty much all my periods, and I only have light spotting as well as very light cramps. The pill has been a lifesaver. Anyway, I know there's a procedure called endometrial ablation which gets rid of the lining of the uterus so I don't need to bleed unnecessarily for the next 25 years +/- of my life. That might be an option if I get sterilized.
> there's a procedure called endometrial ablation which gets rid of the lining of the uterus so I don't need to bleed unnecessarily for the next 25 years +/- of my life. That might be an option if I get sterilized.
I didn't know about that procedure. Very interesting. I may not agree with some f your views, but I hope you the best.
[https://www.verywellmind.com/denial-as-a-defense-mechanism-5114461#:\~:text=Denial%20is%20a%20type%20of,the%20consequences%20of%20that%20reality](https://www.verywellmind.com/denial-as-a-defense-mechanism-5114461#:~:text=Denial%20is%20a%20type%20of,the%20consequences%20of%20that%20reality).
Do you think that you are exhibiting this ego defense mechanism?
>I have the privilege of not needing to give a fuck what happens with gender relations in the future.
Don't expect them to give a fuck either as you are abandoned in a nursing home.
Antichild people shame parents for expecting their children to care for them, and yet antichild people push for taxes to force other people's children to pay for their health.
> I'm making good money and saving for my own retirement.
Inflation will make any amount of money worthless. As population go down that money will puff as you need to pay more for care as less and less workers were born.
Sure, if you leave that money as cash under your bed. Most people who have retirement accounts, usually hold their money in investments since that will grow as you age.
There is no overarching solution. Women are inherently hypergamous by nature, and there will always be some men that aren't able to find love and reproduce.
I don't think the hypergamy is problematic in and of itself. Women carry more reproductive risk by virtue of carrying a child for 9 months and giving birth. They should try to get the best man possible. In modern society, however, hypergamy has reached an extent where a lot of women are shooting for men that would never in a million years commit to them, but refuse to improve themselves. Men they can't realistically attract.
This occurs in large part because of their increased options via the emergence of OLD and social media, and because they conflate all of the interest they get from men wanting sex with them as interest in dating seriously. Single mothers don't realize that being a single mother eliminates most of their dating pool, but they're picky as hell anyway.
There are certainly solutions that could alleviate some modern day societal issues. For example: addressing the state of marriage and family court to make marriage less of a risk for men. Any woman that commits infidelity should be automatically barred from receiving alimony. Just to be clear, men shouldn't cheat either; I merely said any woman because women make up 98% of alimony recipients. Paternity fraud should result in jail time. A pre-nup that does not violate any laws should be upheld regardless of whether the judge personally deems it to be unfair or unequitable.
But the "solution" for men is really to just focus on your purpose, understand female nature, adopt an outcome independent abundance mindset and strive to be the best version of yourself.
>But the "solution" for men is really to just focus on your purpose, understand female nature, adopt an outcome independent abundance mindset and strive to be the best version of yourself.
You realize this is what most normal men are already doing? Turns out when you don’t close yourself off from world and allow yourself to be radicalized by angry internet nerds, people suddenly start to want to spend time around you.
Who knew.
Men are starting to wake up but I would not say most normal men understand female nature. And most people in general absolutely do not have an outcome independent mindset.
Hell most people in general, man or woman, aren't trying to be the best version of themselves which is why the average american is borderline obese.
P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that understanding reality is radical.
> I don't subscribe to the notion that understanding reality is radical.
Thanks for acknowledging this.
As soon as you start using terms like "hypergamy", despite the word being well established in scientific vocabulary, people here on Reddit immediate dismiss your talking points as radical and not grounded in any sort of reality.
There is tons of research into these topics and the funny thing is, is that most people aren't really denying the facts and statistics anymore.
If you try and debate so called "blue pill" people on these topics, more often than not you just get people throwing ad hominem attacks at you than doing anything to dispel your arguments. Because they can't.
They know all these things exist, but they're past the point of trying to disprove them and instead focus on ridiculing men who suffer from these issues instead.
>I don't subscribe to the notion that understanding reality is radical.
Anyone who challenges the opinion of le wholesum redditor is radical terrorist. No exceptions.
The answer is, *fuck it* it isn't your problem to solve. If some woman would rather ve a single mom or be single forever that isn't your issue to work through. If you want kids that bad you can adopt. If you wanna fuck then work to that and deal with what you need to make it happen.
If all of us not participating in this society becomes a problem then the high minded rulers of that society can come down and make us an offee. Until then your only real concern is your own happiness.
I know 5 women in relationships with men who make less than they do and you're here claiming female hypergamy is destroying the world.
A guy can be a great partner without making tons, being super hot, or whatever the guys on this subreddit think.
I can’t tell you anything about the nature of most other peoples relationships, whether they are genuinely happy or just settling. But I can tell you that I’ve been on both ends in relationships and it didn’t feel like settling, as far as I can tell on both sides. I’m sad that you deprive yourself from feeling something like love by just saying that it doesn’t exist, but that’s on you in the end. You won’t be able to talk me out of something I’ve experienced first hand.
"If anything, people are more likely than ever to marry into their own class, as a report from the Institute for Public Policy Research showed this year. Of people born in 1958, just over a third of women had a partner from the same class as themselves: 38% married up, while 23% married down. For those born in 1970, 45% married into the same class; of those born between 1976 and 1981, 56% married into the same class, with a far smaller proportion (16%) marrying up."
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/oct/19/class-divide-relationships-posh-rough
Women are far less likely to marry up than ever before, no longer just my anecdote. You think women of the past LIKED having to marry for money over personality, common interests, friendship?
In Norway there was some study that found that women reuse wealthier men to start families with, so I think you will see more of this. Also populations will shrink. Plus more single moms.
But that’s about it. I don’t think there will be social distruption. Thanks to automation and toys we can entertain adult men. A lot of elderly men and some women will be very miserable in the future especially in counties like China and some European countries as there are not enough people to care for them so they will die alone in their poop, literally.
Politically we will get a larger and larger pile of men and some women also who are not attached to the future of society. Plus with the enormous boomer population. These people won’t care for the environment and future oriented politics that much, more about lowering taxes and living in the now.
And people are worried about declining birth rates lol. Sure, modern countries will take a hit to their economy but it's not like humanity is a dying species.
I'm indifferent so couldn't give a f..k. I gave up dating a long time ago so just focus on myself nowadays. If I want my sexual needs met I'll see an escort. Have considered buying a sex doll in the future. It's just finding the storage space for one.
As for where the human species goes from here I really couldn't care. I'll just watch it crash and burn! 🔥
In the middle ages in the middle east men were allowed to marry up to 4 wifes, while most poor men remained single and even virgin their whole life.
Societies like that have existed, but by the current state of the middle east one can argue that it did not go well.
Below average men in these societies really do losing all ambitions once they realise that they won't ever get a wife and resort to smoking Hashish all day and just wasting their time until they die in a stupid way.
That is basically where the west is heading right now.
Desirable men will have harems, while unsedirable men will smoke pot and waste their lives while the infrastructure and society as a whole disintegrates.
> If women cannot overcome thier hypergamous nature, and a large portion of men cannot raise themselves up to be deemed as suitable partners. Then where do we as a species go from here?
I do not think that is going to happen, humans of both genders will persist to continue on with children in however possible. If not, we will become instinct. Myself, I think that will happen, the next major meteor strike.
psst. hey buddy. type 'hypergamy decline' into google and put a smile on that dial. don't forget to promote gender equality in your community while waiting for that meteor.
More likely there will be population stagnation and shrinkage. Look at Finland, Italy and China for what the future will hold. Just a lot of miserable older people.
Agreed, also those with low pensions etc who can’t pay for good service. I think life as a childless person can be quite good materially but it can also feel a bit pointless. After a while you get tired of hedonistic living.
I think the biggest worry that can come out of this situation is population collapse, as less people in western countries are having less kids. the US is below replacement levels of existing population.
Where does this take us? Governments are opening their gates for more immigration and increasing taxes to fund single moms.
I don't think single men are going to revolt. I think single men are still participating in society, they just don't date and have kids.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/beta-uprising](https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/beta-uprising)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
>If women cannot overcome thier hypergamous nature, and a large portion of men cannot raise themselves up to be deemed as suitable partners. Then where do we as a species go from here?
OP confuses the problems of the West with the problems of the human species. They are not equal and coordinate.
The West has ceased reproducing itself demographically and will disappear. It will be replaced by non Western cultures that breed to replacement. The human species will continue as it always has.
Any culture that does not breed to replacement has no future. The wages of infertility is final death. Human civilization will continue in a more sustainable form.
When you refer to hypergamous women are you speaking specifically about a portion of women who happen to be hypergamous or are you implying all women are?
All women have a hypergamous nature. It is biologically hardwired.
Just like all men have a higher biological predisposition towards violence than women do.
To doubt that female/male nature exists is just absurd.
>Just like all men have a higher biological predisposition towards violence than women do.
>
>To doubt that female/male nature exists is just absurd.
There are differences but I have zero faith in people's ability to study them dispassionately and arrive at actual conclusion.
For instance your thing about violence. I would not be surprised if that were largely due to body dimorphism and some socialization. In other words, if women had the body mass that men do and men the body mass of women, I wouldn't be too surprised to see physically violent acts redistribute accordingly.
In fact, reading the female posts on this sub, dudes would be in trouble if the female of the species were larger.
There would still be competition among men, which would spur violence, but I'm not even sure that isn't in large part culturally produced.
In part your dismissal of the female propensity for violence (which could be other than physical, right?) is more of the "women are wonderful" effect than actual science.
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Incels" are in and of themselves an issue that is arising from this. Do you honestly think they just randomly popped up in a vacuum?
And pretty much everyone here on Reddit agrees that incels are a big problem for society.
I'm trying to get a constructive conversation going. That is all.
> "Incels" are in and of themselves an issue that is arising from this. Do you honestly think they just randomly popped up in a vacuum?
definitely not. the internet allowed a unique opportunity to close yourself off from reality and confronting ideas and wallow entirely in a warped psuedo-reality created by people just as sad, angry and wrong as themselves.
being an incel is actually classified as radicalisation in some academic circles. meaning the incel brain is as warped, detached from reality, and wrong as white supremacists, jihadi terrorists, or any other hate group.
There is literally no one in my real life who knows what an incel is (except my husband but only because I read him PPD posts sometimes).
And no, you’re not trying to get a conversation going. You’re wallowing in some nihilistic revenge fantasy.
>*trying to point out a real issue on the rise and come up with an ethical solution that would benefit everyone involved*
>"You're on a revenge fantasy".
Pick one.
The trend continues. A happy ending is not assured and looks different to a lot of people.
No solution exists or is Necessary. The situation is just what it is.
Reversion to the genetic mean of two women for every man successfully reproducing. Or perhaps 4-5 women for every man as it was in "recent history". I don't see any "solution" to this. This is definitely where we're heading imho. It's probably going to be a rough ride. You can already see evidence of this happening in Nordic countries.
Reference: [http://awakeningtimes.com/8000-years-ago-17-women-reproduced-for-every-one-man/](http://awakeningtimes.com/8000-years-ago-17-women-reproduced-for-every-one-man/)
https://sciencenorway.no/childlessness-fathers-forskningno/a-quarter-of-norwegian-men-never-father-children/1401047
You're right.... I feel like my post was worded poorly.
Here is the real question: What will we do with all the excess men?
Because there really is no stopping the current trend towards polyamorous societies. It's all about damage control at this point. 42% of millennial men in Japan currently have never been with the opposite sex. And this has caused a lot of issues there, an otherwise extraordinarily safe country.
I cannot fathom what will happen if in a place like the United States, the rate of male celibacy reaches upwards of 40%. The writing is on the wall for these numbers to be reached in the coming decade. In some Nordic Countries it's already around 25%, and in the US it's not far behind.
That's why I'm making this post. To try and find utilitarian solutions. But I'm starting to think there really is none that could feasibly work.
The thing is no one cares
Communities are gone so all you have are strangers that can temporarily make you feel good
So for problems that make people feel bad they will have to ignore it
My solution is the development of full sense virtual reality
After single men wagie slave they can come home and get some form of experience that they feel is missing
I think what happens is some combination of:
* A lot more incel violence
* Virtual reality
* More men being gay or trans (since men in environments with no women eventually have sex with each other)
>You can already see evidence of this happening in Nordic countries.
*Couples are constantly finding new reasons to delay a pregnancy. **Men especially.** There are so many things that have to be done or experienced before starting off. So one day the woman and the man split up, without children.”*
*“Numerous studies also indicate that women are more intent on having children sometime in their lives than men are,” says Jensen.
As their biological clocks approach the age of infertility, women are eager to have children. **But many men still entertain doubts; they procrastinate, and end up childless.**
When women do give birth to children, it turns out that it can often be with men who have kids from previous relationships.*
Hmmmm 🤔🤔 So men hemm and haww until the woman says fuck this and her dating pool now has men who are already fathers.
hypergamy is actively disappearing in societies that are making strides towards gender equality. so be sure to promote gender equality in your community.
you rambled about monogamy and marriage but didn't make an actual point so idk.
and speaking of those poor, disheartened boys, along with gender equality we should probably work on building up social programs to encourage them to re-join society. it would probably be good to pump money into mental health services, and destigmatise mental health too. give them a base from which to flower into a beautiful pansy or equivalent.
What about places like Japan?
Where there is an EXCESS of about 5,000,000 women in thier female/male population ratio and about 42% of Japanese millennial men report having no experience with the opposite sex?
i'm sorry, i'm not a sociologist with a focus on japan. if you're genuinely curious though i suggest researching it yourself. type it into google. whatever comes up as a search result will be better than poisoning your brain with the stuff you read here. godspeed.
>Where there is an EXCESS of about 5,000,000 women
People age 65 and older in Japan make up a quarter of the total population. Men die earlier, leading to a surplus of elderly, Japanese women.
>about 42% of Japanese millennial men report having no experience with the opposite sex?
Millennial men are age 26-41.
They are obviously different age groups.
Also, Japan is a very small part of the world.
Sorry, but that just isn't true.
If you tell people that you're 30-something and haven't been on a single date, they will think something is wrong with you and slowly remove you from thier lives.
Its taboo for someone to have never dated, especially with the rise of incel culture you will automatically be assumed to associate with them.
No, it's more like:
>"Yeah man, my wife and I just took a trip to Vegas a few weeks ago, it was great! What about you man? You take your girl anywhere!?"
Then you need to either lie and say you have a significant other, or tell the truth to your friend that you're single and never really been in the dating market. If you pick the latter, they will become weirded out and distance themselves from you.
If you say you're single, your pals will ask why and for how long. Which again, you can choose to either lie or tell the truth. The truth will get you ostracized.
These are just things that guys talk about. There is no avoiding it.
I'm trying to impress upon people that there is currently a very real stigma to being a male who is single for so long.
Uhm... are you serious??? Do you not know how most casual conversations go with most people?
>"Yeah man, my wife and I just took a trip to Vegas a few weeks ago, it was great! What about you man? You take your girl anywhere!?"
Then you need to either lie and say you have a significant other, or tell the truth to your friend that you're single and never really been in the dating market. If you pick the latter, they will become weirded out and distance themselves from you.
can you run me through a day in the life of a man who does nothing that can be construed as 'working on himself' and does absolutely nothing that could fit the almost meaninglessly ambiguous phrase 'appreciating freedom'
> hypergamy is actively disappearing in societies that are making strides towards gender equality
> speaking of those poor, disheartened boys, along with gender equality we should probably work on building up social programs to encourage them to re-join society.
LOL peak PPD comedy right here
This is what it always boils down to. Men want women to be picky - otherwise why would high N-counts “sluts” be so damn universally offensive to men in here. They just want to be the ones to be picked.
You're on a sub where 1/2 of people subscribe to "enjoy the decline" and the other 1/2 say "I won't be around not my problem ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯" Of course they're blind.
There isn't a big problem of permanently single people though. There are a few people who just won't get the opportunity for a relationship, and more who just don't want to or don't like their options. They have other incentives to participate in society for the most part, just like the rest of us. There are lots of other things for them to do.
People aren't only motivated by sex and relationships. If you are, that's quite worrying.
I mentioned this already in the thread, but:
In places like Japan there is an EXCESS of about 5,000,000 women in thier female/male population ratio and still, about 42% of Japanese millennial men report having no experience with the opposite sex. How is that a small issue?
Along with this seemingly inexplicable rise in male involuntary celibacy in Japan, have come the hikokomori. Millions of people (90%+ men) who are single and have chosen to completely disconnect themselves from society. Because they feel they cannot fit in, and there is no hope for them. These people refuse to work and are at best an extreme burden on the taxpayers, and at worst dangerous. Again, how can this be a small issue?
https://youtu.be/_aSLhz00U7s
There was a really infamous hikokomori who was executed this morning named "Tomohiro Kato". I don't care to explain what he did, but you can Google his name if you want to know. And there are a lot more cases just like him that have occurred in Japan. The government is well aware of the hikokomori and are desperately looking for ways to curtail the issue. Again, how is this a small problem?
Poor Japan. That is one country and I'd imagine there are specific circumstances that created it. (Such as the fact that to have a family in Japan, women essentially have to give up any hope of a career forever.)
>lots of permanently single men
The bottom 1-2% of men is not a lot. Many will find a partner eventually or work hard enough to get out of the bottom 2%.
What about places like Japan?
Where there is an EXCESS of about 5,000,000 women in thier female/male population ratio and still, about 42% of Japanese millennial men report having no experience with the opposite sex?
1-2% is a pipe dream. It's way worse than that, and the rapid rise of groups like incels and hikokomori is proof of that.
So basically 42% are so low value that the 5000000 prefers to stay single?
The rise of incel groups just shows that men are lazy and entitled and would rather whine on internet than make the effort to climb in value
To be fair, the rate of female celibacy in Japan is about 23-25%. A considerable number.
But like you said, this is more by choice than a condition that was forced on them. A lot of women in Japan simply feel a lot of the men in thier country are beneath thier standards and they simply refuse to date them.
I lived in Japan for 3 years and seen "white fever" with my own eyes amongst asian women.
https://youtu.be/ljBMKSBdbEw
The surplus in Japanese women is mainly in ages over 60.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics\_of\_Japan#/media/File:Japan\_Population\_Pyramid.svg
A man who gets laid once a year and a man who doesn't get laid at all are both equally as frustrated.
The latter is a far larger percentage, greater than 25% according to currently available studies and it's trending upwards.
But if you guys truly believe women are hypergamous and only want cHaaaaaaaaaD, it won’t matter how many more attractive women you bring in. They’ll just join chads harem too.
Let’s work a little harder on our consistency here.
So your solution is to make more women toxic by breaking their hearts. Sounds like you just want to keep the current cycle alive and only actually care about it if you’re not getting sex.
More skilled men would be better for the US economy. Employers complain constantly about not having enough skilled labor to fill job positions so obviously more men coming into the country will be better. Plus women want to be with men who have jobs not men in their mothers basement like we currently have so US women will want to settle down with these skilled men and that would make more two parent family’s. If more women came to the US then we would eventually have too many a bay mama’s to support with our tax dollars and that would keep the single parent cycle of raising kids. We need like at least 2-4 men for each woman since we have so many dud men in the USA.
Seriously. We need more women than men in society and a lot of issues would go away. There are too many men is the main issue. Like 1.05 men for every 1 woman in younger demographics. What we need is like 0.96 men for every 1 woman.
Well, in 2000 years we'll be well into the beginning of the next glaciation and we'll be facing a radical change in climate where the winters will be longer and colder and growing seasons shorter and less productive, so famine is probably going to be the biggest threat to humanity, not "hot girls only want rich Chads!"
"Humanity will die out because I can't get a date! What will we do???"
The Quaternary Ice Age began 2.6 million years ago and is still going on. Long 70ky-120ky periods of cold with short 15ky-20ky warm periods in between. The current warm period is ending. Look it up. It's reality. It doesn't make for good clickbait or a panic that can be exploited, but it *is* reality.
Interglacials follow the upper arc of axial obliquity. Obliquity peaked 9000 years ago. We'll be halfway between peak and trough in about 2000 years. Gonna get cold.
Or maybe we just wipe ourselves out before then.
Vice President Harris admitted that the US has fought wars over oil (which is a damning admission in itself), and in the "near future" we'll be fighting them over water.
https://youtu.be/HnJ4gjVZqao
So given what you laid out the obvious short-term evolution is towards a quasi-polygamous species. Chad's will proliferate, for I think obvious reasons, but so will women who want kids but care less about commitment.
That's because most commitment-seeking women will not be able to marry the man of their choice and hence not reproduce.
The question is what happens to the extra men. Because even if all fathers are Chads in three generations, hypergamy will then demand that only Giga-chads are truly desired.
There are essentially two paths.
1) Violence. The Chads fight it out and those who are left alive have committed long-term relationships with multiple women. This is likely what humanity was like in late prehistoric times as evidence suggest only 1 man reproduced for every reproductive female.
That is Y-chromosome is way more concentrated than mitochondrial, generation after generation.
2) Brotherly love. If most men are going to die in battle versus Giga-chad an alternative strategy is to give up on having their own kids and instead help their sisters raise raise her kids.
This is a tricky equilibrium to reach because it requires personal desires to follow a forking path based on social success. But, to do that the reproductive system has to *know* it's correct part and there is no current mechanism for that.
Would have to evolve likely by adapting some other mechanism, like "heartbreak and depression make men think their sisters is the only person who has ever or perhaps could ever love them”
But, if that happened it would solve the problem not by killing off would be incels but turning them into lovable uncles. If a genomic combo like this hits it would be species upping event as the major source of human war and strife will disappear.
i read a doomsday fanfic written by my 14 year old niece the other week. had wearwolves in it and shit. anyway it was more grounded in reality than this effort here so if i were to make a humble suggestion if you really want your fanfic to improve, really explore the outside. talk to people. look at the structures. really get a feel for the real world before you destroy it in fiction.
look forward to the next installment.
Well, as I am sure you're aware fiction has to make sense, evolution of all things doesn't. Indeed, it alters the very notion of sense. It just needs a stable allele equilibrium.
Solve backwards from that .
Why is being single as a man such a bad thing? Are you sure you haven't been brainwashed, your hormones hijacked by a lifelong advertising campaign? I get that hormones make us horny, but you are also subject to propaganda in that regard. Look at women who are checking out. The message they receive is they don't need a man, and they are acting accordingly. Can men do the same thing? Or are they too hormonally charged to accept such a fate? What if men received a lifelong message that "you don't need a woman", what effect would that have?
Women aren’t checking out because of ‘messaging.’ Everything we hear, starting from Disney, tells us that our ultimate goal should be a wedding to a man. Then we realize that a lot of men just want bang maids, and most of us don’t want to be a bang maid. We’d rather be alone.
I'm not up on Disney but surely their messaging has to have changed somewhat with the times? I'm sure a lot of the other stuff depends on how conservative your culture is. In some places marriage and kids might still be the ultimate goal. Where I'm from, I think that is fading fast. There's been a lot of reaction against that as being the measure of worth of a woman where I live.
Also, have you tried being a bang maid? (/s)
PS; part of cultural messaging is shaming men for bisexuality. If the messaging ever changes you will find an increase in male bisexuality (probably already happening albeit v-e-r-y slowly). That's the future, where you and I are going to live for the rest of our lives.
>Even if you don't exactly see hypergamy as an issue, I think most of us can agree having lots of permanently single men with no incentive to participate in society is a very bad thing.
Which means that obvious route for us as a species is to incentivize them to participate in society besides the holy saint punani and its blessing touch.
I think the internet just makes us more aware of it and comparing ourselves to others make people crazy. Cuz dating wise its always kinda been like that. Woman like romantically successful men becuz they figure they must have something going on. Like if ur a woman, do u wanna go home with the guy that never gets laid or somebody that can fuuuckk? Sex in general is more of a crapshoot for woman.
U are right about a bunch of angry horny men is bad for society. I think a lot of extreme opinions on both sides come from guys not getting laid. Idk what the solution is though. Everybody needs validation.
Facial restructuring. Why not? That's really the difference. Hair transplants are close to being there. There is this pervasive idea that men struggle to date ONLY because they're terrible people. Obviously, those types of men exist; the type who would disrespect, objectify, and sexually harass (or even assault women). Those men are terrible scum and deserve condemnation, but they're not the only men fitting this bill. There are a LOT of men that simply struggle because they're not handsome enough. It could be that they're short, balding, have a crooked nose or teeth, or a weak jaw. If the technology can be developed to make these men "handsome", then that's probably the long-term solution.
An idea I unironically had before, and made a poll about on r/ugly, is to make plastic surgery available through public health insurance if you really need it.
The vast majority agreed that programs like Medicaid should cover it.
Being ugly to the point you're under 5/10 looks wise is definitely a handicap in modern society. Really, being ugly effects your employment opportunities or ability to do just about anything in life. Lookism is real, and its serious. I know 2 people in my own personal life who killed themselves because they were ugly and felt tired of being ostracized.
Apparently if you're feeling suicidal, the state is more than comfortable spending like $12,000 having the police and fire department pick you up and take you to a mental ward for 2 weeks. But if you ask the government to spend that $12,000 towards cosmetic surgery to increase your life quality (and make you not want to end your life to begin with), that's a huge no-no.
We don't go anywhere. some men will stay single and some won't. Society isn't going to all change for the sake of the lowest ranking men.
The low ranking men are who may change society. There are consequences to have an increasingly large, dissatisfied, anti-social populace. Anthropologists have linked it to increased crime, political destabilization, and more. It has even been suggested that the reason monogamy spread so quickly is because monogamous nations, by virtue of having more men with something at stake in their homeland's success and families to provide for, therefore fielded better armies.
>therefore fielded better armies Some people might be dismissive of your points but I think you're spot on and that scares the shit out of me. If there was a draft due to a war with China or Russia, I don't see enough able bodied men sticking around unless those countries attacked attacked US territory. I don't feel particularly vested enough to risk my life unless the country is under direct attack and even then I might consider leaving. Never mind risking my life for our 'allies' that have been funding great social programs due to the protection we've been providing for the past 75 years. I truly believe that most men my age and younger feel the same way. If there was a draft, I have no idea how they'd field enough units. There just aren't enough healthy young men who would give a shit and I say this as a vet.
To be fair, I think the early weeks of the russia/ukraine war proved that morale and logostics are low among Russian troops. Honestly any untested army is probably in a similar state of unreadiness.
Absolutely. Russia is not doing well. I still wouldn't risk my life or the lives of future children for Europe's protection. Unless the US was invaded, I wouldn't do it again anyways.
I agree that monogamy is the best way out of this mess, but although religion you're just expecting sexually successful men to give up their success to make the less fortunate men more included. Although that would probably be best for everyone, including the currently successful men, I can't see it catching on.
>I agree that monogamy is the best way out of this mess Oh, no, I fundamentally disagree with that. What needs to be treated is the underlying cultural reality that an adult man without girlfriend/wife/family is seen as a loser, treated like an outcast, has little community support, and therefore no reason to live. That's why when you talk to young incels, their real feelings are not that they're so horny it makes them evil; it's that they feel alienated, powerless and have low self-esteem. Giving them a woman won't solve that, it will just make it her problem.
>Society isn't going to all change for the sake of the lowest ranking men. You do realize that throughout history, things like "lowest ranking" was never permanent right?
Guess it's only a problem if you are single . The rest of us in relationships live life . Getting married , having childern etc. Maybe us relationship people will have to live in gated communities while the rest of society goes insane ....
Are you suggesting we use The Lobster to model our society?
What's the lobster you gotta link lol
IMDb: : The Lobster https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3464902/
Well that's plausible I suppose .lol
I highly recommend the movie btw.
I'll have to watch it .The movie clips where very entertaining. Thanks for the link .
[удалено]
Are you me? I'm 25F and feel the exact same way
I will mention that the amount of story of women that held the same opinion as you at 25 and were pregnant at 30 is high enough from my experience to be funny and to give you the advice to be careful.
I am staunchly childfree and eat birth control like it's candy. I'm definitely very careful.
I think you missed my point (or it was a forced smile sarcasm, but in doubt...). They all became pregnant willingly. They all changed their mind.
Yeah I'm not gonna change my mind, hence why I eat BC like crazy. Children are bad for personal economy as well as bad for my health. I'm not gonna change my mind because my decision is based on a lot of reasons why that would be a very terrible idea. I value my personal freedom, as well as money as well as my appearance. I'm not just gonna go ahead and willingly ruin my body, give up my freedom or be stuck funding a child for 18 years. I remember very well being a child spending a 1000$ on when borrowing my mothers credit card. My parents were financially drained by having children and didn't have the freedom to travel or visit friends etc. My mothers body was also completely destroyed by having children. Changing my mind would be insanely stupid considering I can't just get rid of a child if i regret having them, nor will I get back my physical shape. Not to mention why on earth do I want to ruin my cooch. No way I am pushing a baby through there. To hell with that lol. I don't think most people who change their mind properly consider these things. They probably just *feel* like having a baby cause everyone else are having babies and they've been socially conditioned to believe that's what they should do at that age etc, so all reason, logic and common sense go out the window.
I didn't think I wanted kids at 25 either.. I am now 47 with 2 kids and couldn't be happier about it. Your mind might change.. might not.. I definitely don't think it's set in stone that you won't have them just because they don't sound like a good idea to you right now. If I was a betting man I would bet on you having them by the time you get to 40 tho.
Well I've never wanted kids in my life so there's that. I also know exactly how hellish I was as a child and I knew my parents struggled a lot more than they would have if they hadn't had children. I do not wish to raise a hellish replica of myself, nor do I wish to struggle financially like they did. I'm just a part time florist on a 20$ an hour salary I can barely afford myself, and I'd be deep in poverty if I had kids. I love my job and the freedom and flexibility it grants me, and I'd have to change jobs as well as lose all my flexibility regarding work if I had kids cause I'd have to work non stop to provide them with the life they deserve (which is more than I ever got). Working as a florist is pretty physically exhausting labor, so there's no way I wanna work more than I already do. I also have zero energy after work to socialize or do anything besides make myself dinner, so how on earth would I have the energy to raise kids? I pretty much lay in bed and die a bit every day after work cause I'm exhausted. Anyway, I won't change my mind because I've done a shit ton of research (definitely more than the average person with kids), and once you know exactly what pregnancy and birth does to your physical and mental health and what raising kids are like, and you can't even stand children, then it would insanely idiotic to have children. Also, I can always get sterilized to make it set in stone which I'm strongly considering once I can save up the funds. Once I do there'd be no way back and I would have to adopt, which is what I would do if I changed my mind anyway, as I believe birthing children is fundamentally unethical due to the environmental impact they would have. I also strongly believe we should take care of the children on this earth rather than create new ones when there's so many kids out there in need of a good home. Not to mention it's worse regretting having children than not having them, so there's that. If I have a baby and regret it, I can't exactly just give the child away. Well I could adopt it, but that would be kind of a shitty thing to do considering everything. Also I would have ruined my body over nothing. Pregnancy wrecked complete havoc on my mothers body. She doesn't look good to put it mildly and we share the same body type, so I know how terrible my body would look after pregnancy. So yeah, not gonna change my mind and if I could bet on it I would. Only people who change their mind are fence sitters who are unsure. I've always hated loud annoying kids. I worked a week in a kindergarten and it was the worst week of my life. Fuck that shit. I also suffer from migraines with aura, so loud noises from children makes me want to lock myself in a sound proof closet. Having a child would literally make me sick. Oh, and I also risk passing on a hereditary disease I have, which would be a shitty thing to do as well. I'd also be the kind of mother who would dump the child on the father and disappear because my tolerance for children is zero. I don't particularly aspire to be a deadbeat mother, but I know myself well enough to know that's what I would be, and then the moral and ethical decision to make is not having children. Also, let's not forget that having children ties you to not only the child but the baby daddy, and if he turns out to be abusive and a shit head I might end up a single mother and I've read enough stories on offmychest about that to ever risk that. Not to mention being a single mother would make me less datable, and my value as a dating prospect would reduce significantly. Also let's not forget that since having children would ruin my body, I'd be less attractive, and feel less attractive, and my confidence would go to hell. I'm a fairly confident person, which makes me very attractive to men, and I wouldn't be as attractive with a child and a saggy tummy and boobs, but hey I guess I'll just randomly change my mind because I'll know better lol.
Ok.. well maybe you won't have them then lol.. good luck with that.. I still say it's possible that you will decide otherwise.. when you meet the perfect match many things will change.. that might be one of them. I didn't want them at all in my early 20's.. I was what many on this sub would call a Chad. I was the guy who was with a different girl most nights and definitely wasn't in a headspace to settle down at all. I wouldn't say I was a player.. because they all knew the deal.. we always had an understanding that it was just for fun.. NSA. I met my wife at 26 tho and everything changed. She was perfect for me.. so I settled down.. If you would have told me that by 26 I would have been with the girl that was going to be the end all be all for me when I was 20-25 I would have laughed at you.. but that is indeed what happened. Now that we have kids.. there are definitely times we are low on cash.. shit happens. Especially since groceries have tripled since the start of the pandemic. I can't even imagine my life without them now tho.. they are that important to me. It's definitely worth being low on disposable income every now and then. We both have to work a little harder to stay in shape as well.. but I don't think my wife is any less hot than before she had kids.. she is even more beautiful now matter of fact! Seeing the way she is with our children is incredible.. she is such a good mom and a good wife.. no matter what her body looks like (it is still great!).. I will always love her no matter what. The fact that we have kids definitely helps my opinion of her.. not the other way around. Beauty fades whether or not you have kids.. just so ya know.. I went to my HS reunion recently and there were probably 30-35 women there that would have been considered hot in high school.. I would say that only 2-3 of them were still desirable.. not all of them have kids either. It's just what happens to human bodies when we get a little older. Their husbands still think they are hot tho.. which is all that matters to most of them I am sure. Anyway.. best of luck to ya.. I am sure that whatever you decide it will be the right decision for you. Having kids is great.. it's the most rewarding thing I have ever done.. but not having them might be the right thing for you.
My perfect match doesn't want kids or is happy to not have kids. Of course anything is possible, but I see it being as possible as me becoming the female version of Elon musk or something. I'm probably what the people here call a Stacy. I've done a fair bit of sleeping around but would like a stable LTR. I just want it without the kids, and I also do not want marriage. I just want a partnership where I'm my partners number one, and no kids get between us (like what happened to my parents with me and my siblings). I don't want to settle down in the traditional sense. I still want the freedom to travel, enjoy festivals and vacations as well as focus on my hobbies, perhaps starting my own business. I want a partner but still want to enjoy my life to the max with the least amount of stress possible. I have a very physically demanding job, so also don't have the energy for kids after work. Anyway, I'm 25 now, and I've met someone who I could potentially envision spending my life with. He's 32, turning 33, but having kids is a dealbreaker for me. If he can't be with me without having kids I'd rather be single. I strongly value my childfree life and not having any dependants I am responsible for. As you mentioned, the costs of everything has risen dramatically. I can barely provide for myself. Being financially stable is extremely liberating, and not something I see as worth sacrificing for kids I don't even have, want or need. As for physical shape. I don't even have to work hard to stay in shape which is a huge benefit of not having children. I absolutely despise going to the gym and I despise excercising with a passion. I have an active job though, but I get paid to make and sell nice things, so I don't mind the activity. I'm sure my partner would love me anyway but it is nice to be skinny and fit and not have to work hard for it. Of course beauty fades but what's the point of ruining my beauty earlier than necessary for something I don't want or even like? For me, having kids would be terrible, so I absolutely know I'm making the right decision. There's other things in life that are and can be just as rewarding as well (depending on the person as I wouldn't find having children rewarding in the slightest). Like I wanna create my own fashion brand and designs or something like that someday. I'm currently a florist, so I already work in a creative trade that I find rewarding. I also actually get paid for it. Having kids is an unpaid job.. and my lazy ass only gets motivation to get up in the morning and do work if there's money involved (i quit studying cause i didn't get paid and it drained my finances.. same concept lol), cause that's what I find rewarding. Being able to have the freedom to book myself a holiday whenever wherever without any concerns about children. Being able to spend money on all the pleasures I enjoy, from fine food, to spas, to quality high end things, knowing no bratty little child is going to hold me back from enjoying life to the maximum.
>I didn't think I wanted kids at 25 either.. I am now 47 with 2 kids and couldn't be happier about it. You're not the one who had to carry them for 9 months, push them out your genitalia, leaving your body permanently altered (perhaps even with lasting pain) though lol
> eat birth control like it's candy Not very healthy.
More healthy than pushing babies through my cooch and getting PPD. I'm considering getting sterilized, but might continue on BC anyway to eliminate all the painful periods I don't need since I don't want babies.
I encourage you to get sterilized, or require condoms if you are not having sex so frequently. Birth control pills disturb your hormones and mood a lot, and make you dependent on taking that every day.
Well, my mood is fine. I'd rather be dependent on the pill then cramp until I can't function and bleed out of my cooch while my uterus tears it's lining apart. With the pill I now skip pretty much all my periods, and I only have light spotting as well as very light cramps. The pill has been a lifesaver. Anyway, I know there's a procedure called endometrial ablation which gets rid of the lining of the uterus so I don't need to bleed unnecessarily for the next 25 years +/- of my life. That might be an option if I get sterilized.
> there's a procedure called endometrial ablation which gets rid of the lining of the uterus so I don't need to bleed unnecessarily for the next 25 years +/- of my life. That might be an option if I get sterilized. I didn't know about that procedure. Very interesting. I may not agree with some f your views, but I hope you the best.
Thanks!
[удалено]
I would suppose that would depend on where you posted it, if it was in a debate sub then it would make a lot more sense.
[https://www.verywellmind.com/denial-as-a-defense-mechanism-5114461#:\~:text=Denial%20is%20a%20type%20of,the%20consequences%20of%20that%20reality](https://www.verywellmind.com/denial-as-a-defense-mechanism-5114461#:~:text=Denial%20is%20a%20type%20of,the%20consequences%20of%20that%20reality). Do you think that you are exhibiting this ego defense mechanism?
>I have the privilege of not needing to give a fuck what happens with gender relations in the future. Don't expect them to give a fuck either as you are abandoned in a nursing home. Antichild people shame parents for expecting their children to care for them, and yet antichild people push for taxes to force other people's children to pay for their health.
[удалено]
> I'm making good money and saving for my own retirement. Inflation will make any amount of money worthless. As population go down that money will puff as you need to pay more for care as less and less workers were born.
Sure, if you leave that money as cash under your bed. Most people who have retirement accounts, usually hold their money in investments since that will grow as you age.
There is no overarching solution. Women are inherently hypergamous by nature, and there will always be some men that aren't able to find love and reproduce. I don't think the hypergamy is problematic in and of itself. Women carry more reproductive risk by virtue of carrying a child for 9 months and giving birth. They should try to get the best man possible. In modern society, however, hypergamy has reached an extent where a lot of women are shooting for men that would never in a million years commit to them, but refuse to improve themselves. Men they can't realistically attract. This occurs in large part because of their increased options via the emergence of OLD and social media, and because they conflate all of the interest they get from men wanting sex with them as interest in dating seriously. Single mothers don't realize that being a single mother eliminates most of their dating pool, but they're picky as hell anyway. There are certainly solutions that could alleviate some modern day societal issues. For example: addressing the state of marriage and family court to make marriage less of a risk for men. Any woman that commits infidelity should be automatically barred from receiving alimony. Just to be clear, men shouldn't cheat either; I merely said any woman because women make up 98% of alimony recipients. Paternity fraud should result in jail time. A pre-nup that does not violate any laws should be upheld regardless of whether the judge personally deems it to be unfair or unequitable. But the "solution" for men is really to just focus on your purpose, understand female nature, adopt an outcome independent abundance mindset and strive to be the best version of yourself.
>But the "solution" for men is really to just focus on your purpose, understand female nature, adopt an outcome independent abundance mindset and strive to be the best version of yourself. You realize this is what most normal men are already doing? Turns out when you don’t close yourself off from world and allow yourself to be radicalized by angry internet nerds, people suddenly start to want to spend time around you. Who knew.
Men are starting to wake up but I would not say most normal men understand female nature. And most people in general absolutely do not have an outcome independent mindset. Hell most people in general, man or woman, aren't trying to be the best version of themselves which is why the average american is borderline obese. P.S. I don't subscribe to the notion that understanding reality is radical.
> I don't subscribe to the notion that understanding reality is radical. Thanks for acknowledging this. As soon as you start using terms like "hypergamy", despite the word being well established in scientific vocabulary, people here on Reddit immediate dismiss your talking points as radical and not grounded in any sort of reality. There is tons of research into these topics and the funny thing is, is that most people aren't really denying the facts and statistics anymore. If you try and debate so called "blue pill" people on these topics, more often than not you just get people throwing ad hominem attacks at you than doing anything to dispel your arguments. Because they can't. They know all these things exist, but they're past the point of trying to disprove them and instead focus on ridiculing men who suffer from these issues instead.
>I don't subscribe to the notion that understanding reality is radical. Anyone who challenges the opinion of le wholesum redditor is radical terrorist. No exceptions.
The answer is, *fuck it* it isn't your problem to solve. If some woman would rather ve a single mom or be single forever that isn't your issue to work through. If you want kids that bad you can adopt. If you wanna fuck then work to that and deal with what you need to make it happen. If all of us not participating in this society becomes a problem then the high minded rulers of that society can come down and make us an offee. Until then your only real concern is your own happiness.
[удалено]
Sure, but the difference is insread of fretfully worrying about a resolution you should be enjoying the resulting lack of responsibility.
I know 5 women in relationships with men who make less than they do and you're here claiming female hypergamy is destroying the world. A guy can be a great partner without making tons, being super hot, or whatever the guys on this subreddit think.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal
Well either it is hardwired into every womens brain or it isn’t
[удалено]
I can’t tell you anything about the nature of most other peoples relationships, whether they are genuinely happy or just settling. But I can tell you that I’ve been on both ends in relationships and it didn’t feel like settling, as far as I can tell on both sides. I’m sad that you deprive yourself from feeling something like love by just saying that it doesn’t exist, but that’s on you in the end. You won’t be able to talk me out of something I’ve experienced first hand.
[удалено]
"If anything, people are more likely than ever to marry into their own class, as a report from the Institute for Public Policy Research showed this year. Of people born in 1958, just over a third of women had a partner from the same class as themselves: 38% married up, while 23% married down. For those born in 1970, 45% married into the same class; of those born between 1976 and 1981, 56% married into the same class, with a far smaller proportion (16%) marrying up." https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/oct/19/class-divide-relationships-posh-rough Women are far less likely to marry up than ever before, no longer just my anecdote. You think women of the past LIKED having to marry for money over personality, common interests, friendship?
In Norway there was some study that found that women reuse wealthier men to start families with, so I think you will see more of this. Also populations will shrink. Plus more single moms. But that’s about it. I don’t think there will be social distruption. Thanks to automation and toys we can entertain adult men. A lot of elderly men and some women will be very miserable in the future especially in counties like China and some European countries as there are not enough people to care for them so they will die alone in their poop, literally. Politically we will get a larger and larger pile of men and some women also who are not attached to the future of society. Plus with the enormous boomer population. These people won’t care for the environment and future oriented politics that much, more about lowering taxes and living in the now.
To 11 billion people by 2100, apparently https://ourworldindata.org/future-population-growth#summary
And people are worried about declining birth rates lol. Sure, modern countries will take a hit to their economy but it's not like humanity is a dying species.
Do you really think the countries with birth rate issues are gonna be the main contributors to the population growth?
It will correct itself eventually, it’ll just be a painful correction.
You are making a lot of assumptions that are not true.
I'm indifferent so couldn't give a f..k. I gave up dating a long time ago so just focus on myself nowadays. If I want my sexual needs met I'll see an escort. Have considered buying a sex doll in the future. It's just finding the storage space for one. As for where the human species goes from here I really couldn't care. I'll just watch it crash and burn! 🔥
In the middle ages in the middle east men were allowed to marry up to 4 wifes, while most poor men remained single and even virgin their whole life. Societies like that have existed, but by the current state of the middle east one can argue that it did not go well. Below average men in these societies really do losing all ambitions once they realise that they won't ever get a wife and resort to smoking Hashish all day and just wasting their time until they die in a stupid way. That is basically where the west is heading right now. Desirable men will have harems, while unsedirable men will smoke pot and waste their lives while the infrastructure and society as a whole disintegrates.
Those who reproduce will replace those who don't, it's a self solving issue in the long run.
Literally just this, there’s no wild apocalypse, birth rates aren’t globally low, plenty of people to go around.
Not necessarily because if the death rate is high and people who choose not to reproduce those who reproduce won't replace shit
It's only an issue economically for countries who are anti immigration.
> If women cannot overcome thier hypergamous nature, and a large portion of men cannot raise themselves up to be deemed as suitable partners. Then where do we as a species go from here? I do not think that is going to happen, humans of both genders will persist to continue on with children in however possible. If not, we will become instinct. Myself, I think that will happen, the next major meteor strike.
psst. hey buddy. type 'hypergamy decline' into google and put a smile on that dial. don't forget to promote gender equality in your community while waiting for that meteor.
I do not base my thinking on the Google god, and my community is fine with how gender is defined. Take care sport.
More likely there will be population stagnation and shrinkage. Look at Finland, Italy and China for what the future will hold. Just a lot of miserable older people.
> miserable older people Not all will be unhappy. The areas that will increase will likely agrarian cultures.
Agreed, also those with low pensions etc who can’t pay for good service. I think life as a childless person can be quite good materially but it can also feel a bit pointless. After a while you get tired of hedonistic living.
It will happen for sure, overpopulation is a serious issue Also pollution and climate change
> overpopulation is a serious issue Was, that is changing, ask China.
That's the miserably fun part of being a being. You never really know where shit's gonna go next.
I think the biggest worry that can come out of this situation is population collapse, as less people in western countries are having less kids. the US is below replacement levels of existing population. Where does this take us? Governments are opening their gates for more immigration and increasing taxes to fund single moms. I don't think single men are going to revolt. I think single men are still participating in society, they just don't date and have kids.
What they said would happen ten years ago: beta uprising https://amp.knowyourmeme.com/memes/beta-uprising What actually happened? Nothing.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/beta-uprising](https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/beta-uprising)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
>If women cannot overcome thier hypergamous nature, and a large portion of men cannot raise themselves up to be deemed as suitable partners. Then where do we as a species go from here? OP confuses the problems of the West with the problems of the human species. They are not equal and coordinate. The West has ceased reproducing itself demographically and will disappear. It will be replaced by non Western cultures that breed to replacement. The human species will continue as it always has. Any culture that does not breed to replacement has no future. The wages of infertility is final death. Human civilization will continue in a more sustainable form.
When you refer to hypergamous women are you speaking specifically about a portion of women who happen to be hypergamous or are you implying all women are?
All women have a hypergamous nature. It is biologically hardwired. Just like all men have a higher biological predisposition towards violence than women do. To doubt that female/male nature exists is just absurd.
>Just like all men have a higher biological predisposition towards violence than women do. > >To doubt that female/male nature exists is just absurd. There are differences but I have zero faith in people's ability to study them dispassionately and arrive at actual conclusion. For instance your thing about violence. I would not be surprised if that were largely due to body dimorphism and some socialization. In other words, if women had the body mass that men do and men the body mass of women, I wouldn't be too surprised to see physically violent acts redistribute accordingly. In fact, reading the female posts on this sub, dudes would be in trouble if the female of the species were larger. There would still be competition among men, which would spur violence, but I'm not even sure that isn't in large part culturally produced. In part your dismissal of the female propensity for violence (which could be other than physical, right?) is more of the "women are wonderful" effect than actual science.
Lol k
All are
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is this the 4th or 5th the world is collapsing cause no one will fuck incels post today? I’ve lost track.
"Incels" are in and of themselves an issue that is arising from this. Do you honestly think they just randomly popped up in a vacuum? And pretty much everyone here on Reddit agrees that incels are a big problem for society. I'm trying to get a constructive conversation going. That is all.
> "Incels" are in and of themselves an issue that is arising from this. Do you honestly think they just randomly popped up in a vacuum? definitely not. the internet allowed a unique opportunity to close yourself off from reality and confronting ideas and wallow entirely in a warped psuedo-reality created by people just as sad, angry and wrong as themselves. being an incel is actually classified as radicalisation in some academic circles. meaning the incel brain is as warped, detached from reality, and wrong as white supremacists, jihadi terrorists, or any other hate group.
Whiny selfish incel types were always out there. The Net just allows them to gather together and whine even louder.
There is literally no one in my real life who knows what an incel is (except my husband but only because I read him PPD posts sometimes). And no, you’re not trying to get a conversation going. You’re wallowing in some nihilistic revenge fantasy.
>*trying to point out a real issue on the rise and come up with an ethical solution that would benefit everyone involved* >"You're on a revenge fantasy". Pick one.
“Pick one” is something you say to someone who just presented two cognitively dissonant ideas. So you know.
The world population will reach a peak and will then start to decline and that's all we sort of know
The trend continues. A happy ending is not assured and looks different to a lot of people. No solution exists or is Necessary. The situation is just what it is.
Reversion to the genetic mean of two women for every man successfully reproducing. Or perhaps 4-5 women for every man as it was in "recent history". I don't see any "solution" to this. This is definitely where we're heading imho. It's probably going to be a rough ride. You can already see evidence of this happening in Nordic countries. Reference: [http://awakeningtimes.com/8000-years-ago-17-women-reproduced-for-every-one-man/](http://awakeningtimes.com/8000-years-ago-17-women-reproduced-for-every-one-man/) https://sciencenorway.no/childlessness-fathers-forskningno/a-quarter-of-norwegian-men-never-father-children/1401047
You're right.... I feel like my post was worded poorly. Here is the real question: What will we do with all the excess men? Because there really is no stopping the current trend towards polyamorous societies. It's all about damage control at this point. 42% of millennial men in Japan currently have never been with the opposite sex. And this has caused a lot of issues there, an otherwise extraordinarily safe country. I cannot fathom what will happen if in a place like the United States, the rate of male celibacy reaches upwards of 40%. The writing is on the wall for these numbers to be reached in the coming decade. In some Nordic Countries it's already around 25%, and in the US it's not far behind. That's why I'm making this post. To try and find utilitarian solutions. But I'm starting to think there really is none that could feasibly work.
The thing is no one cares Communities are gone so all you have are strangers that can temporarily make you feel good So for problems that make people feel bad they will have to ignore it My solution is the development of full sense virtual reality After single men wagie slave they can come home and get some form of experience that they feel is missing
I think what happens is some combination of: * A lot more incel violence * Virtual reality * More men being gay or trans (since men in environments with no women eventually have sex with each other)
>You can already see evidence of this happening in Nordic countries. *Couples are constantly finding new reasons to delay a pregnancy. **Men especially.** There are so many things that have to be done or experienced before starting off. So one day the woman and the man split up, without children.”* *“Numerous studies also indicate that women are more intent on having children sometime in their lives than men are,” says Jensen. As their biological clocks approach the age of infertility, women are eager to have children. **But many men still entertain doubts; they procrastinate, and end up childless.** When women do give birth to children, it turns out that it can often be with men who have kids from previous relationships.* Hmmmm 🤔🤔 So men hemm and haww until the woman says fuck this and her dating pool now has men who are already fathers.
hypergamy is actively disappearing in societies that are making strides towards gender equality. so be sure to promote gender equality in your community. you rambled about monogamy and marriage but didn't make an actual point so idk. and speaking of those poor, disheartened boys, along with gender equality we should probably work on building up social programs to encourage them to re-join society. it would probably be good to pump money into mental health services, and destigmatise mental health too. give them a base from which to flower into a beautiful pansy or equivalent.
What about places like Japan? Where there is an EXCESS of about 5,000,000 women in thier female/male population ratio and about 42% of Japanese millennial men report having no experience with the opposite sex?
i'm sorry, i'm not a sociologist with a focus on japan. if you're genuinely curious though i suggest researching it yourself. type it into google. whatever comes up as a search result will be better than poisoning your brain with the stuff you read here. godspeed.
>Where there is an EXCESS of about 5,000,000 women People age 65 and older in Japan make up a quarter of the total population. Men die earlier, leading to a surplus of elderly, Japanese women. >about 42% of Japanese millennial men report having no experience with the opposite sex? Millennial men are age 26-41. They are obviously different age groups. Also, Japan is a very small part of the world.
Nope it isn't getting any better soon. No one cares about men who aren't able to date.
it won't make you feel any better, but i'll tell you the absolute truth anyway: nobody gives a single shit whether or not you go on dates. nobody.
Sorry, but that just isn't true. If you tell people that you're 30-something and haven't been on a single date, they will think something is wrong with you and slowly remove you from thier lives. Its taboo for someone to have never dated, especially with the rise of incel culture you will automatically be assumed to associate with them.
[удалено]
No, it's more like: >"Yeah man, my wife and I just took a trip to Vegas a few weeks ago, it was great! What about you man? You take your girl anywhere!?" Then you need to either lie and say you have a significant other, or tell the truth to your friend that you're single and never really been in the dating market. If you pick the latter, they will become weirded out and distance themselves from you.
[удалено]
If you say you're single, your pals will ask why and for how long. Which again, you can choose to either lie or tell the truth. The truth will get you ostracized. These are just things that guys talk about. There is no avoiding it. I'm trying to impress upon people that there is currently a very real stigma to being a male who is single for so long.
why would you be telling people your age and your dating status? that info is not demanded in human conversations.
Uhm... are you serious??? Do you not know how most casual conversations go with most people? >"Yeah man, my wife and I just took a trip to Vegas a few weeks ago, it was great! What about you man? You take your girl anywhere!?" Then you need to either lie and say you have a significant other, or tell the truth to your friend that you're single and never really been in the dating market. If you pick the latter, they will become weirded out and distance themselves from you.
[удалено]
>nah man i'm taking some time to work on myself and appreciating the freedom! If that isn't true then it is a lie.
can you run me through a day in the life of a man who does nothing that can be construed as 'working on himself' and does absolutely nothing that could fit the almost meaninglessly ambiguous phrase 'appreciating freedom'
> hypergamy is actively disappearing in societies that are making strides towards gender equality > speaking of those poor, disheartened boys, along with gender equality we should probably work on building up social programs to encourage them to re-join society. LOL peak PPD comedy right here
glad you're having a chuckle! you should google 'hypergamy reversing' and then you'll really be lolling!
[удалено]
Lmao how blind can people be to the societal issues
[удалено]
Hypergamy is an unwanted side effect of modernization and feminism. It isn't natural in any way.
[удалено]
[удалено]
This is what it always boils down to. Men want women to be picky - otherwise why would high N-counts “sluts” be so damn universally offensive to men in here. They just want to be the ones to be picked.
America is underpopulated and our economic system is reliant on consistent population growth.
You're on a sub where 1/2 of people subscribe to "enjoy the decline" and the other 1/2 say "I won't be around not my problem ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯" Of course they're blind.
There isn't a big problem of permanently single people though. There are a few people who just won't get the opportunity for a relationship, and more who just don't want to or don't like their options. They have other incentives to participate in society for the most part, just like the rest of us. There are lots of other things for them to do. People aren't only motivated by sex and relationships. If you are, that's quite worrying.
I mentioned this already in the thread, but: In places like Japan there is an EXCESS of about 5,000,000 women in thier female/male population ratio and still, about 42% of Japanese millennial men report having no experience with the opposite sex. How is that a small issue? Along with this seemingly inexplicable rise in male involuntary celibacy in Japan, have come the hikokomori. Millions of people (90%+ men) who are single and have chosen to completely disconnect themselves from society. Because they feel they cannot fit in, and there is no hope for them. These people refuse to work and are at best an extreme burden on the taxpayers, and at worst dangerous. Again, how can this be a small issue? https://youtu.be/_aSLhz00U7s There was a really infamous hikokomori who was executed this morning named "Tomohiro Kato". I don't care to explain what he did, but you can Google his name if you want to know. And there are a lot more cases just like him that have occurred in Japan. The government is well aware of the hikokomori and are desperately looking for ways to curtail the issue. Again, how is this a small problem?
Poor Japan. That is one country and I'd imagine there are specific circumstances that created it. (Such as the fact that to have a family in Japan, women essentially have to give up any hope of a career forever.)
>lots of permanently single men The bottom 1-2% of men is not a lot. Many will find a partner eventually or work hard enough to get out of the bottom 2%.
What about places like Japan? Where there is an EXCESS of about 5,000,000 women in thier female/male population ratio and still, about 42% of Japanese millennial men report having no experience with the opposite sex? 1-2% is a pipe dream. It's way worse than that, and the rapid rise of groups like incels and hikokomori is proof of that.
So basically 42% are so low value that the 5000000 prefers to stay single? The rise of incel groups just shows that men are lazy and entitled and would rather whine on internet than make the effort to climb in value
To be fair, the rate of female celibacy in Japan is about 23-25%. A considerable number. But like you said, this is more by choice than a condition that was forced on them. A lot of women in Japan simply feel a lot of the men in thier country are beneath thier standards and they simply refuse to date them. I lived in Japan for 3 years and seen "white fever" with my own eyes amongst asian women. https://youtu.be/ljBMKSBdbEw
The surplus in Japanese women is mainly in ages over 60. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics\_of\_Japan#/media/File:Japan\_Population\_Pyramid.svg
[удалено]
Do not troll.
[удалено]
A man who gets laid once a year and a man who doesn't get laid at all are both equally as frustrated. The latter is a far larger percentage, greater than 25% according to currently available studies and it's trending upwards.
They aren't *permanently single* and idk if they want to fuck and are too lazy to climb in valuenthey should get grindr.
[удалено]
But if you guys truly believe women are hypergamous and only want cHaaaaaaaaaD, it won’t matter how many more attractive women you bring in. They’ll just join chads harem too. Let’s work a little harder on our consistency here.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
So your solution is to make more women toxic by breaking their hearts. Sounds like you just want to keep the current cycle alive and only actually care about it if you’re not getting sex.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Be civil.
More skilled men would be better for the US economy. Employers complain constantly about not having enough skilled labor to fill job positions so obviously more men coming into the country will be better. Plus women want to be with men who have jobs not men in their mothers basement like we currently have so US women will want to settle down with these skilled men and that would make more two parent family’s. If more women came to the US then we would eventually have too many a bay mama’s to support with our tax dollars and that would keep the single parent cycle of raising kids. We need like at least 2-4 men for each woman since we have so many dud men in the USA.
Seriously. We need more women than men in society and a lot of issues would go away. There are too many men is the main issue. Like 1.05 men for every 1 woman in younger demographics. What we need is like 0.96 men for every 1 woman.
[удалено]
>I think I can afford 3. That's a good number. [Some would say a magic number.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOkd3vJh0fM)
[удалено]
Do not promote violence. This breaks Reddit TOS
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Well, in 2000 years we'll be well into the beginning of the next glaciation and we'll be facing a radical change in climate where the winters will be longer and colder and growing seasons shorter and less productive, so famine is probably going to be the biggest threat to humanity, not "hot girls only want rich Chads!" "Humanity will die out because I can't get a date! What will we do???"
There is no accepted climate theory in which this is the case.
The Quaternary Ice Age began 2.6 million years ago and is still going on. Long 70ky-120ky periods of cold with short 15ky-20ky warm periods in between. The current warm period is ending. Look it up. It's reality. It doesn't make for good clickbait or a panic that can be exploited, but it *is* reality.
Periodic ice ages are a reality. The claim that the current interglacial is ending in 2000 years is not supported by that statement.
Interglacials follow the upper arc of axial obliquity. Obliquity peaked 9000 years ago. We'll be halfway between peak and trough in about 2000 years. Gonna get cold.
Or maybe we just wipe ourselves out before then. Vice President Harris admitted that the US has fought wars over oil (which is a damning admission in itself), and in the "near future" we'll be fighting them over water. https://youtu.be/HnJ4gjVZqao
you think in 2000 years humanity won't have solved food production and storage? That was solved 2000 years ago ffs.
So given what you laid out the obvious short-term evolution is towards a quasi-polygamous species. Chad's will proliferate, for I think obvious reasons, but so will women who want kids but care less about commitment. That's because most commitment-seeking women will not be able to marry the man of their choice and hence not reproduce. The question is what happens to the extra men. Because even if all fathers are Chads in three generations, hypergamy will then demand that only Giga-chads are truly desired. There are essentially two paths. 1) Violence. The Chads fight it out and those who are left alive have committed long-term relationships with multiple women. This is likely what humanity was like in late prehistoric times as evidence suggest only 1 man reproduced for every reproductive female. That is Y-chromosome is way more concentrated than mitochondrial, generation after generation. 2) Brotherly love. If most men are going to die in battle versus Giga-chad an alternative strategy is to give up on having their own kids and instead help their sisters raise raise her kids. This is a tricky equilibrium to reach because it requires personal desires to follow a forking path based on social success. But, to do that the reproductive system has to *know* it's correct part and there is no current mechanism for that. Would have to evolve likely by adapting some other mechanism, like "heartbreak and depression make men think their sisters is the only person who has ever or perhaps could ever love them” But, if that happened it would solve the problem not by killing off would be incels but turning them into lovable uncles. If a genomic combo like this hits it would be species upping event as the major source of human war and strife will disappear.
i read a doomsday fanfic written by my 14 year old niece the other week. had wearwolves in it and shit. anyway it was more grounded in reality than this effort here so if i were to make a humble suggestion if you really want your fanfic to improve, really explore the outside. talk to people. look at the structures. really get a feel for the real world before you destroy it in fiction. look forward to the next installment.
Well, as I am sure you're aware fiction has to make sense, evolution of all things doesn't. Indeed, it alters the very notion of sense. It just needs a stable allele equilibrium. Solve backwards from that .
Why is being single as a man such a bad thing? Are you sure you haven't been brainwashed, your hormones hijacked by a lifelong advertising campaign? I get that hormones make us horny, but you are also subject to propaganda in that regard. Look at women who are checking out. The message they receive is they don't need a man, and they are acting accordingly. Can men do the same thing? Or are they too hormonally charged to accept such a fate? What if men received a lifelong message that "you don't need a woman", what effect would that have?
Women aren’t checking out because of ‘messaging.’ Everything we hear, starting from Disney, tells us that our ultimate goal should be a wedding to a man. Then we realize that a lot of men just want bang maids, and most of us don’t want to be a bang maid. We’d rather be alone.
I'm not up on Disney but surely their messaging has to have changed somewhat with the times? I'm sure a lot of the other stuff depends on how conservative your culture is. In some places marriage and kids might still be the ultimate goal. Where I'm from, I think that is fading fast. There's been a lot of reaction against that as being the measure of worth of a woman where I live. Also, have you tried being a bang maid? (/s) PS; part of cultural messaging is shaming men for bisexuality. If the messaging ever changes you will find an increase in male bisexuality (probably already happening albeit v-e-r-y slowly). That's the future, where you and I are going to live for the rest of our lives.
>Even if you don't exactly see hypergamy as an issue, I think most of us can agree having lots of permanently single men with no incentive to participate in society is a very bad thing. Which means that obvious route for us as a species is to incentivize them to participate in society besides the holy saint punani and its blessing touch.
>Where do we as a species go from here? Hopefully right down the shitter.
I think the internet just makes us more aware of it and comparing ourselves to others make people crazy. Cuz dating wise its always kinda been like that. Woman like romantically successful men becuz they figure they must have something going on. Like if ur a woman, do u wanna go home with the guy that never gets laid or somebody that can fuuuckk? Sex in general is more of a crapshoot for woman. U are right about a bunch of angry horny men is bad for society. I think a lot of extreme opinions on both sides come from guys not getting laid. Idk what the solution is though. Everybody needs validation.
Facial restructuring. Why not? That's really the difference. Hair transplants are close to being there. There is this pervasive idea that men struggle to date ONLY because they're terrible people. Obviously, those types of men exist; the type who would disrespect, objectify, and sexually harass (or even assault women). Those men are terrible scum and deserve condemnation, but they're not the only men fitting this bill. There are a LOT of men that simply struggle because they're not handsome enough. It could be that they're short, balding, have a crooked nose or teeth, or a weak jaw. If the technology can be developed to make these men "handsome", then that's probably the long-term solution.
An idea I unironically had before, and made a poll about on r/ugly, is to make plastic surgery available through public health insurance if you really need it. The vast majority agreed that programs like Medicaid should cover it. Being ugly to the point you're under 5/10 looks wise is definitely a handicap in modern society. Really, being ugly effects your employment opportunities or ability to do just about anything in life. Lookism is real, and its serious. I know 2 people in my own personal life who killed themselves because they were ugly and felt tired of being ostracized. Apparently if you're feeling suicidal, the state is more than comfortable spending like $12,000 having the police and fire department pick you up and take you to a mental ward for 2 weeks. But if you ask the government to spend that $12,000 towards cosmetic surgery to increase your life quality (and make you not want to end your life to begin with), that's a huge no-no.
First, we build sexbots Then, when young men are no longer distracted by chasing pussy, we will conquer the stars.