How many people have you "been with" ?

[Venardhi]

How does it work out that straight men have fewer partners than straight women? Considering they're somewhat required to include one from the other group in the activity.

it seems the numbers should be about the same overall, though I would guess in higher concentrations amongst fewer men and more spread out amongst women.

 

[Char Aznable]

It makes me fucking furious that it's not considered a legitimate social problem, and I have a girlfriend.

It's not though. As much as they want people to think it is, there are reasons as to why concepts such as "incel" and "loveshy" aren't recognized by the physological community at large. Mostly though in order to make this brief, their inability to obtain a romantic relationship usually is a symtom of other psychological issues. Throwing sex at them won't cure them, no matter what they want to think.

Besides, it isn't THAT hard to get laid, especially in this day and age. You need to satisfy your sexual urges? Either Jerk off or fuck a hooker.

 

[The Inquisitor]

For those on 0, there's nothing to be ashamed about. I remember the feeling when I was yet to get off the mark. There's nothing in the universe quite as frustrating. The older you get the bigger the psychological barrier builds up, iv seen it happen to friends of mine. There's no shame in paying for it, as long as you are safe and (prefrably) in Amsterdam where it's legal and the ladies are well looked after (and stunning).

 

[SiorX]

It makes me fucking furious that it's not considered a legitimate social problem, and I have a girlfriend.

It's not though. As much as they want people to think it is, there are reasons as to why concepts such as "incel" and "loveshy" aren't recognized by the physological community at large. Mostly though in order to make this brief, their inability to obtain a romantic relationship usually is a symtom of other psychological issues. Throwing sex at them won't cure them, no matter what they want to think.

I went and looked up 'incel' because it wasn't a term I knew, and now I feel more educateder.

A qualm I would have with it (based on the massively authoritative understanding offered by ten minutes Googling) is in how one defines what one is missing out on if one's not having sex.

If it's just the chemical high of orgasm, or the physical act of release, there's a one-player option for that. Once you get other people involved, it's a much more complex system which doesn't follow any single clear-cut model for biological or emotional fulfillment. The sexdrive might be basic, but it isn't like the need for food or water or shelter or clothing. One gets different kinds of things from sexual relationships with different people.

Or to go with the bumper-sticker version of my personal philosophy on this:

Sex isn't a commodity, it's a social event.

 

[Char Aznable]

A qualm I would have with it (based on the massively authoritative understanding offered by ten minutes Googling) is in how one defines what one is missing out on if one's not having sex.

If it's just the chemical high of orgasm, or the physical act of release, there's a one-player option for that. Once you get other people involved, it's a much more complex system which doesn't follow any single clear-cut model for biological or emotional fulfillment. The sexdrive might be basic, but it isn't like the need for food or water or shelter or clothing. One gets all different kinds of things from sexual relationships with different people.

That is kind of my point. The people who suffer from and by into that incel/loveshyness stuff tend to not want to learn now to obtain a girlfriend/sexual conquest/whatever (spoilers: it is not something you can just teach someone. The best teacher is to go out and meet people). What they want is for society to conform to them and their needs. They want everything to be easy for them when dating, falling in love, and having sex aren't meant to be easy. Frankly, as I said before its not THAT hard to get laid if you simply go out and meet people and not be a creepy social-phobe and, failing that, hookers are there too.

Basically, what it comes down to for me is that sex and romantic relationships aren't something people are entitled to. You have the right to pursue anyone to your hearts content of course, but not everyone is meant to succeed. That's simply the sad reality about the way the world works. Sex/romance isn't a right. Its a privilage.

 

[T'Girl]

How does it work out that straight men have fewer partners than straight women? Considering they're somewhat required to include one from the other group in the activity.

It's anecdotal information, combined with reading studies and some personal observation but, it does seem that straight women are having more than twice the number of lovers/sex partners over a given time period, than a straight man. And it's just as you said a large number of women having sex with a fewer number of men. A big part of it is that (straight) women have more opportunities to meet and select sex partners in the course of their daily lives. Plus once the selection is made the "chosen one" is less likely to turn them down.

 

[trekkiedane]

/.../ Plus once the selection is made the "chosen one" is less likely to turn them down.

It's just like the old joke: Man comes up to a woman and offers sex with her, her response is likely to be "Piss off pervert" and a good doze of mace. Woman comes up to a man and offers sex with the likely result that he almost faints "wh...wh...what? -you want to sleep with me?"

 

[RandyS]

/.../ Plus once the selection is made the "chosen one" is less likely to turn them down.

It's just like the old joke: Man comes up to a woman and offers sex with her, her response is likely to be "Piss off pervert" and a good doze of mace. Woman comes up to a man and offers sex with the likely result that he almost faints "wh...wh...what? -you want to sleep with me?"

That's not a joke. It's more or less how I got my girlfriend.

Except that I didn't faint. I DID however, lose the power of speech for a while.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

A qualm I would have with it (based on the massively authoritative understanding offered by ten minutes Googling) is in how one defines what one is missing out on if one's not having sex.

If it's just the chemical high of orgasm, or the physical act of release, there's a one-player option for that. Once you get other people involved, it's a much more complex system which doesn't follow any single clear-cut model for biological or emotional fulfillment. The sexdrive might be basic, but it isn't like the need for food or water or shelter or clothing. One gets all different kinds of things from sexual relationships with different people.

That is kind of my point. The people who suffer from and by into that incel/loveshyness stuff tend to not want to learn now to obtain a girlfriend/sexual conquest/whatever (spoilers: it is not something you can just teach someone. The best teacher is to go out and meet people). What they want is for society to conform to them and their needs. They want everything to be easy for them when dating, falling in love, and having sex aren't meant to be easy. Frankly, as I said before its not THAT hard to get laid if you simply go out and meet people and not be a creepy social-phobe and, failing that, hookers are there too.

Basically, what it comes down to for me is that sex and romantic relationships aren't something people are entitled to. You have the right to pursue anyone to your hearts content of course, but not everyone is meant to succeed. That's simply the sad reality about the way the world works. Sex/romance isn't a right. Its a privilage.

I have had quite a few friends who qualify as "incel" as well as knowing plenty on mailing lists over the years. The latter tend to talk very regularly about how they can't get girlfriend, woe is me. My IRL friends are nice people (often geeky, which is how I end up being friends with them) but they all share one thing in common, a trait I have now observed on varying mailing lists and forums : an inability to change themselves in order to attract a partner. Change themselves could mean style of dress but it also often means getting out of their comfort zone in terms of where they interact, willingness to approach someone and what kind of people they might consider approaching. For people who are in pain over never having a partner they are insanely picky and will in one conversation tick a mental box that says "not my kind of person" over the stupidest things.

I have given up making suggestions and trying to help these people in this area. They have 1000 reasons why they could not or shouldn't have to do any reasonable suggestion made. Everything is too hard or too much of a personal compromise. Really I have to ask what kind of partner would people like this make?

 

[Char Aznable]

I have given up making suggestions and trying to help these people in this area. They have 1000 reasons why they could not or shouldn't have to do any reasonable suggestion made. Everything is too hard or too much of a personal compromise. Really I have to ask what kind of partner would people like this make?

EXACTLY! This is at the heart of the matter and what pisses me off about the whole incel/loveshy thing. They want to be treated special by putting a label on their inability to get a girlfriend so that they can be looked on with pity and hopefully get help that they don't deserve. The problem is they don't have problems because they are lonely, pathetic permavirgins. They're lonely, pathetic permavirgins because they have problems. Rather than hope that a woman will come and fix all their issues, they should work on themselves before worrying about finding a partner.

Again, this may sound harsh, but it needs to be said. Sex is not a need. You won't die without it. It is a want and desire that no one is ENTITLED to.

 

[trekkiedane]

It [sex] is a want and desire that no one is ENTITLED to.

Unless they're married of course, then it's grounds for divorce if your spouse doesn't (whatsthephrase?) 'put up'

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

It [sex] is a want and desire that no one is ENTITLED to.

Unless they're married of course, then it's grounds for divorce if your spouse doesn't (whatsthephrase?) 'put up'

Maybe in countries where you still need to provide a reason you want a divorce. And I think that is "put out".

 

[Listener4]

I'm very familiar with involuntary celibacy and loveshyness, both from my own life and in reading about others experiences. And what I've read here about it is essentially correct. For one reason or another loveshys simply will not or are at least extremely resistant to change. Change in the form of appearance or behaviors but more importantly change of mindset. Many loveshys are unable to attract partners. But some are, yet are still unable to have a relationship, as they will not allow it to happen, as much as they want it.

However, the context, the society, does play a role. Loveshyness would be much less of an issue if that person grew up in a country with arranged marriage or one in which fornication and adultery were actual crimes rather than just taboos. Another important factor is state support of single mothers. If that was taken away, the society would change. Society's role in actually creating loveshyness is more complicated.

I can see both sides of the issue. I know ultimately that it is an internal issue, a matter of the mind. But at the same time, I recognize there have been many changes in Western society, both in law and culture, that have not been kind to certain types of people. I think loveshys want to change, but they also want recognition that society did have a role to play.

 

[Myasishchev]

It makes me fucking furious that it's not considered a legitimate social problem, and I have a girlfriend.

It's not though.

People are in genuine pain. Why should I give more of a crap about, for example, colon cancer? Or, moving more into the realm of the intangible, clinical depression? Or is depression nothing to be spoken of in polite company, as well?

As much as they want people to think it is, there are reasons as to why concepts such as "incel" and "loveshy" aren't recognized by the physological community at large.

They should be, if not as a psychological problem, then a social one, as I'm not convinced it's involuntarily celibate people, or solely involuntarily celibate people, who are the fucked up ones. I think the problem is systemic, and cannot be solved unless a new system is adopted. If the old system is too entrenched, either by nature or through socialization, and if thereby there is no rapid or universal solution to be had, then it is still no mean thing to attempt to at least soothe the problem where we find it.

Mostly though in order to make this brief, their inability to obtain a romantic relationship usually is a symtom of other psychological issues. Throwing sex at them won't cure them, no matter what they want to think.

So what? Throwing money at poor people doesn't solve poverty, so they say, but does that mean poverty isn't a problem?

Besides, it isn't THAT hard to get laid, especially in this day and age. You need to satisfy your sexual urges? Either Jerk off or fuck a hooker.

Jerking off is inferior and hookers are illegal in 49 of these United States, which sort of goes to my point. The law pursues an active discrimination against the sex-poor.

Furthermore, for some people it is harder to get laid than others. Perhaps not impossible, but it doesn't take an impossibility of opportunity to pose a genuine social failure.

It's just like the old joke: Man comes up to a woman and offers sex with her, her response is likely to be "Piss off pervert" and a good doze of mace. Woman comes up to a man and offers sex with the likely result that he almost faints "wh...wh...what? -you want to sleep with me?"

This is the sort of nonsense double standard that I think reinforces my point. How can you expect a market to function with such unequal bargaining positions? As T'Girl pointed out, it doesn't. Or, it does, with bad outcomes for a sizeable number of participants.

Again, this may sound harsh, but it needs to be said. Sex is not a need. You won't die without it. It is a want and desire that no one is ENTITLED to.

No one is entitled to anything. Natural rights rest on a pretty weak theory, in my opinion. That doesn't mean we should all live in the jungle and brain each other with rocks for our coconuts.

I would readily classify sex as a need, as well, though obviously not as immediate as oxygen or food. And in a way, you very much do die without it. The very limited immortality we have is only accessible through sex, which is why it we desire it, and why most folk consider it a long-term need. Also, I'd suspect long sexual droughts make you a bit crazy, and less likely to be capable of attracting a sexual partner in the future--a vicious cycle sort of thing.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I'm very familiar with involuntary celibacy and loveshyness, both from my own life and in reading about others experiences. And what I've read here about it is essentially correct. For one reason or another loveshys simply will not or are at least extremely resistant to change. Change in the form of appearance or behaviors but more importantly change of mindset. Many loveshys are unable to attract partners. But some are, yet are still unable to have a relationship, as they will not allow it to happen, as much as they want it.

See that's interesting to me. I've always had friends that are like you describe and I've often thought that I could easily have tipped into that way of being given one or two other factors in my upbringing. I'm often more comfortable around people on the fringe of what is considered "the way you should be". Hence, fandom.

I have two friends who were both as you describe and ended up in a relationship. They got engaged. They were engaged for 14 years with no sexual contact. All the inability to change was applied to why they could not get married, there were literally 1000 reasons why it was just too, too hard to get married. They had potentially more financial stability than most people start out with but there were reasons why they couldn't access this and on and on. In the end they broke up, one was happy about it (sorta) and the other seems to think that the terrible barriers to them getting married (which were non existent) was what caused the break up.

However, the context, the society, does play a role. Loveshyness would be much less of an issue if that person grew up in a country with arranged marriage or one in which fornication and adultery were actual crimes rather than just taboos. Another important factor is state support of single mothers. If that was taken away, the society would change. Society's role in actually creating loveshyness is more complicated.

Okay you got me there. State support of single mothers? Why because they no longer need to retain a man in order to provide for their child?

I can see both sides of the issue. I know ultimately that it is an internal issue, a matter of the mind. But at the same time, I recognize there have been many changes in Western society, both in law and culture, that have not been kind to certain types of people. I think loveshys want to change, but they also want recognition that society did have a role to play.

People no longer have a cultural free pass is I think what you are saying. You don't get married off by your parents, you don't have "income" as the only requirement for finding a mate.

 

[Amaris]

I think part of it is expectation. Incels want to have sex, they just don't recognize the opportunity, because they have an entirely different expectation about sex. I mean, most people want to have sex. Walk outside and look at the hundreds of people that pass by, and realize that 99% of them want to have sex, and enjoy sex. The problem is getting over that mental barrier that says sex has to be brought about a certain way. I look at incel the same way I look at acquired agoraphobia. For the same reason long term prison inmates who are freed commit an act to get sent back, incels have become so adjusted to their circumstances that they fear actually being "free". It's a self sustaining downward spiral.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Jerking off is inferior and hookers are illegal in 49 of these United States, which sort of goes to my point. The law pursues an active discrimination against the sex-poor.

Why is jerking off inferior? You are talking about people missing out on sex, not relationships. Sure it is nice to have sex with a person but jerking off solves the immediate physical horniness problem. Paying for sex is not a relationship either.

I think part of it is expectation. Incels want to have sex, they just don't recognize the opportunity, because they have an entirely different expectation about sex. I mean, most people want to have sex. Walk outside and look at the hundreds of people that pass by, and realize that 99% of them want to have sex, and enjoy sex. The problem is getting over that mental barrier that says sex has to be brought about a certain way. I look at incel the same way I look at acquired agoraphobia. For the same reason long term prison inmates who are freed commit an act to get sent back, incels have become so adjusted to their circumstances that they fear actually being "free". It's a self sustaining downward spiral.

I think it becomes an identity after a while and that's a problem in itself. If you solve your incel problems you don't have that identiy any more.

 

[Amaris]

Jerking off is inferior and hookers are illegal in 49 of these United States, which sort of goes to my point. The law pursues an active discrimination against the sex-poor.

Why is jerking off inferior? You are talking about people missing out on sex, not relationships. Sure it is nice to have sex with a person but jerking off solves the immediate physical horniness problem. Paying for sex is not a relationship either.

It's all about human contact. Most incels want human contact. They want to feel the responsiveness of another human being.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Jerking off is inferior and hookers are illegal in 49 of these United States, which sort of goes to my point. The law pursues an active discrimination against the sex-poor.

Why is jerking off inferior? You are talking about people missing out on sex, not relationships. Sure it is nice to have sex with a person but jerking off solves the immediate physical horniness problem. Paying for sex is not a relationship either.

It's all about human contact. Most incels want human contact. They want to feel the responsiveness of another human being.

Even if that responsiveness is faked by some poor women taking pills to cope with yet another hairy dude sweating away on top of her?

 

[Myasishchev]

Jerking off is inferior and hookers are illegal in 49 of these United States, which sort of goes to my point. The law pursues an active discrimination against the sex-poor.

Why is jerking off inferior? You are talking about people missing out on sex, not relationships.

I thought that was what we were all talking about.

Sure it is nice to have sex with a person but jerking off solves the immediate physical horniness problem. Paying for sex is not a relationship either.

No, it's certainly not a panacea. But I don't understand this binary view: they can't get a relationship, so sex cannot help them in any way. It's like saying you can't get a job, so an unemployment check provides no assistance.

Which is not to say that I would expect prostitutes to really be any sort of long-term solution. The long-term solution is a simultaneously more charitable, libertine and rational attitude, from ordinary men and women, regarding sex and romance and, particularly, human frailty.

I do not expect to see it in my lifetime, granted.

Even if that responsiveness is faked by some poor women taking pills to cope with yet another hairy dude sweating away on top of her?

What, so the condition of prostitutes can be a legitimate problem, but the factors that make it profitable can't be?