Remix.run Logo
▲ 1-more 2 days ago

> You hit a point in your life, reflect back on where you'd thought you'd be when you were in your early 20s, and think.. shit.. what I do all of this for?

Do people who say this have kids? I ask genuinely. Everything before my little dude was fake. Everything since him is real deal Holyfield. Probably knock off in the next 20 minutes and take him to Home Depot to look at some bullshit because we have a good time with that kind of thing.

▲dofm 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Yes, men who have children do go through nihilistic existential mid life crises too. That age has their biggest risk of cheating on their partners, fathering new children with work colleagues, walking away from marriage, developing drug and alcohol dependency, developing serious gambling problems and other worse things. Parenthood reduces but does not eliminate the risk of suicide in middle aged men, and parenthood plus long term joblessness is a common cause.

Midlife anxieties are real and nothing in particular prevents it.

▲rozap 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I can imagine having kids is super rewarding, but also amplifies the pressure of being a provider probably 100x. In uncertain times, I think a lot of us aren't sure how we'll provide for ourselves in ~5 years, let alone a tiny dude, which plays into the decision to not have kids.

I'm still gainfully employed, and business is ripping, but a huge part of my value as a professional got totally vaporized over the last year. So part of me is extremely glad I don't have kids right now, and part of me is really angry that everything feeling so unstable is leading to our decision to not have them. I know that even in the best time it's a scary decision, but the general vibe is flipping people (like my wife and i) who are at the margin.

▲1-more 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> a huge part of my value as a professional got totally vaporized over the last year

We are all descendants of like 1,000 individuals who kept having lil babies through an ice age. There are mobile home parks full of happy kids dotting my town, populated by people who paint houses and do landscaping and make ends meet. I have no idea what your profession is or what your housing situation is, so maybe that's already where you are. My wife and I talk gratitude a lot, and that includes being grateful that if we had to dig ditches to keep a double wide over our heads, we'd go ahead and do that and have some giggles with our little miracle in there.

▲ElevenLathe a day ago | parent [-]

<comment deleted>

▲willchis a day ago | parent [-]

Nah you're way off the mark here and this sounds scarily like how people feel when at their most bleak. I hope this is just you reflecting and not how you feel "in real life" - family needs family and kids need their parents. Kids need their parents even if they're broke and/or out of work.

▲DanielHB a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I am in this awkward situation where I just had a baby, but at the same time feel I should work less and put less effort into work. But at the same time not being able to slow down.

I daydream about being fired with severance so I can spend more time with my little dude. But also deadly afraid of not being able to get another job when savings run out.

▲anon291 11 hours ago | parent [-]

Welcome to fatherhood.

▲Ntrails a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't dismiss or discount your perspective but based on my social circle: Your experience of fatherhood is not the median. The variance is pretty high too.

▲munksbeer a day ago | parent [-]

I agree. I'm a father of two, and my existence didn't suddenly get meaningful when I had children. I always found it meaningful, only in the sense that I get one life and want to experience as much as I can while I have it. That is a big part of why I chose to have children, it seemed like basically *the* fundamental life experience. But for me, I didn't experience this sudden big gain in meaning that a lot of online fathers seem to have.

I also wasn't prepared for a bit of a curve ball and I have experienced a loss of self that hasn't recovered or been compensated for yet.

I often wish I felt like a lot of other online fathers, but I take comfort in knowing there are a lot of others out there like me who struggle with parenthood. I hope I figure it all out in time!

▲iugtmkbdfil834 a day ago | parent | next [-]

Only one kid and I can't pretend it is all sunshine and rainbows, but there are real moments that make some of the other things irrelevant. It is possible that I went into fatherhood older and with eyes wide open so it was less of an adjustment, but it still surprised me in how things slowly re-aligned. Meaning was basically a side-effect of near exclusive focus on someone else ( for me ).

And that was my long way to say, the struggle is real and we are all figuring it out in real time. gl out there

▲clayr 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I’m grateful for your comment. I’m also a father of two, and the “loss of self” has frankly worsened over time (though my oldest isn’t even 4 yet).

After the second, I thought it would get better, and that a Contented Doting Father would emerge from the ruins of my previous life. That the attention and effort required would simply obliterate any trace of my past self, and with it, any longing for the spontaneity and lightness and frankly selfishness of my child-free life.

But that hasn’t happened. There are moments of grace and joy, and I love my kids so deeply it’s painful (he says, truthfully, but defensively, because an admission like this from a father usually doesn’t go over well).

But counterintuitively, returning to the topic of the thread, if I DO lose my career, I will be doubly grateful for my kids. Because they DO love me unconditionally, and I them; they don’t care about status games or anomie or anything resembling a “career.” Perhaps starting over in a new field and moving to a cheaper COL area would finally clear space for the Contented Doting Father.

▲Ntrails 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> a Contented Doting Father would emerge

Unsolicited pov. Don't do this to yourself. I don't doubt that there exists such a person, but it's not the norm and when it is observed I reckon it is as often someone feigning as it is anything else.

Love your kids and raise them as best you know how. That's the deal. That's enough. You are allowed space to miss aspects of your life before, and that may or may not fade.

▲munksbeer 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I am also so grateful to hear this in response to my comment.

As far as I see it, I use the term "online fathers" in a rather cynical manner. In real life, I interact with parents who are struggling, I know some who are suffering from depression (I'm lucky to belong to a sports club where some dads unload). This is real life.

But go online and you'd think you're some sort of freak for not being completely transformed and having unconditional daily joy from being a dad.

By the way. The last week has been a good week. I've had a lot of work stress, but my children seem to have somehow sensed it and they're being extra kind to me, giving me lots of hugs and just wanting to be with me. It feels WONDERFUL. Like you, I love them more than I would have ever known, would literally die for them. But it is also ok to admit it is very hard, and there is a big loss of self and other aspects.

Keep going!

▲cowlevel 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

that's what I felt about moving to a different country, too, until I didn't.

I think these things are less consistent than is often stated, we just see them occur consistently among people with similar lives. The "mid life crisis" is also debunked and replaced by "existential crisis" since it can actually occur at any age, from teenager to elderly, and zero, one, or multiple times. Only in the classic life progression of a certain era, it typically occurred worst at around 40-45 so it got that label.

▲brailsafe 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I would think those with kids at that age that wanted them worked backwards from that mission, and if they have a midlife crisis it's some version of having spent too much time working and on their kid and start spending their money on low-impact possibly expensive hobbies they'd have liked to do in their younger years, somewhat in denial of the fact that they sold their whole life to the man despite raising a kid.

▲1-more 2 days ago | parent [-]

But that sounds nice! Let me reword: after getting through the messy middle of establishing a career and weathering the insane time and money necessary to rear a young kid, a dude finds himself with a little more time and money, and doesn't know what to do with himself. He gets a fishing rod/road bike/membership at makerspace/skein of nice yarn and some circular needles/signs up for his first powerlifting meet. He makes new friends, shows his kid a new side of himself, and maybe gets a nice steelhead/race trinket/dining table/scarf/medal out of the whole thing.

▲brailsafe 21 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Sure, seems like it would be a standard path in another time. The real personal crisis in that position these days is probably being forced to find a new career instead of or alongside raising a kid. Unless you get quite lucky, things can get dark very quickly. Job loss creates stress, prolonged unemployment might break up your relationship, lose access to the kid maybe, and suddenly you're destitute. It's hard to see prospects for normal people getting better, and it makes more sense to avoid the kid and the house.

▲emodendroket 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah, that's an adaptive use for the impulse. Sometimes people go for destructive ones instead.

▲erfgh a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Kids will not always be kids.

▲scarecrowbob 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I had two kiddos by the time I as 23 and I'm in my late 40s now. I am super glad that they are off on their own, living their own successful lives and I am very proud of them.

You too will (hopefully) watch your children move away.

Personally, when I am down I've been feeling a little like I've finished the main quest in a video game. I can look to my kiddos and be happy that they are doing okay but I still have almost as much adult life in front of me as I have behind me.

While the philosophy degree I got when I was young has helped a lot, I'm middle age, twice-divorced, and haven't had (or needed) a "regular" job, bald (well, I rock a skullet and have 'aura' according to the youngesters), and I can't rock climb as hard as I used to. I don't really enjoy drinking anymore, and I don't enjoy many drugs at all. I've gotten to a position where it's hard to maintain the fantasies that make romantic partners appealing, and while I have deep and diverse friend groups, I still spend most of my time in a shack in the middle of nowhere writing music for no one.

When people shit-talk on humanities educations, it's been hard to keep my mouth shut because the real payoffs have been in being able to meet the long and large world with some equanimity and I feel incredibly privileged to have been so misguided in my early life that I got a deep and canonical education.

There are plenty of things that I can do- keeping with the video game metaphor, I feel like I am working through all possible side quests on hard mode. Being emancipated from my children means that I no longer have to earn very much money or even maintain a stable home if I don't enjoy it.

I bought some off grid land in the middle of nowhere and I am slowly getting utilities working in the shacks. I started doing way more direct political action, including getting an EMT cert so I could volunteer at the local free clinic. I have 4 bands and play 5-6 gigs a month and run an A/V company where I do another 2-3 gigs a month.

So, yeah, I've got a pretty good skill set, I have however easy a life that I choose, lots of engagement in my enclosure. I have kids I am proud of.

And even looking at all that, I look at even a couple of years and sometimes wonder "shit.. what I do all of this for?". And I know that in another 25 years I will still probably asking that question, wondering if there had been a better way to do the things.

Enjoy browsing stuff with your kiddos. That is indeed the important kind of activity. But also, understand that you too will (hopefully) face existential choices in the future.

▲1-more an hour ago | parent [-]

Yeah I think having him later in my life and him still being a toddler just means "having kids" means wildly different things in our cases. In my case, the life altering pivots (getting sober, married, divorced) happened before meeting my wife with whom I had him. I guess I got extremely lucky having the nuclear life changer of a baby show up at the age where such a thing is welcome. We just started touring preschools and the rapid approach of a time where I'm not within 30 feet of him for 90% of the day is already a pretty daunting prospect.

▲watwut a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Kids loose interest in you as they age and do their own stuff. You are necessary for their survival, but they prefer company of peers. And then they leave.

All of that is normal, but you are left alone and if taking the kid somewhere was your only thing, you have nothing.

▲emodendroket 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes. Come on, I love my kid, but you can't seriously be asking this question. Fatherhood is in fact sometimes part of what they're so dissatisfied with.

▲eastbound 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲jandrewrogers 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

FWIW, social status comes from “interestingness” rather than the pure application of time and money. Anything that is mostly grinding (a few million, muscles, etc) doesn’t clear that threshold. At best it checks a box.

If there isn’t a compelling story behind it, it probably doesn’t convey social status. Poor people with interesting lives often have far more success in the dating market than “successful” people that are indistinguishable from every other successful person. It is less about collecting credentials and more about writing a story that people want to read.

Fortunately, the bar for this is low. Most people have done few interesting things in their entire lives despite abundant opportunity. Many people that have lived interesting lives fail to tell the story. Having time and money expands the kind of story you can write but you still need the courage to live it.

I wish I would have figured this out earlier in my life than I did.

▲eastbound a day ago | parent [-]

I've travelled around the world, lived in 4 countries, read hundreds of books, I played guitar. Only thing I don't have is smoking and tattoos.

I'm just slightly autistic, which is barely visible, but makes me socially untalented, I make small mistakes or don't notice clues, and here I am, 43, hating everyone. A small communication handicap at the beginning, that society took as an excuse to fail my life entirely. I'm happy to have lived so far, I couldn't guess at an earlier age how lengths people go hurting their fellow citizen.

▲watwut a day ago | parent [-]

> A small communication handicap at the beginning, that society took as an excuse to fail my life entirely.

That is weird jump from you describing yourself as rich successful muscular and all that. People who fit your description are considered successful.

▲paulryanrogers a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The only thing keeping me alive is the idea of revenge against the people who insult us like this.

Pretty major red flag there. As an awkward, small, unattractive teen I could've related. Yet the best thing was letting it go and finding other people whom I could connect with.

▲nradov 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't doubt that social media and dating apps may have broken the "market", but if you're living for revenge then women can probably pick up on that.

▲eastbound a day ago | parent [-]

Correct, I'm not hoping much anymore, just doing my job of fulfilling each quest to say I didn't leave any stone unturned.

I just know the end in the story: I end up excluded.

▲ 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
▲regexorcist a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

With a few millions in the bank I'd retire to Asia and live off interests. I guarantee you wouldn't be treated like shit.

▲ a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
▲lutanista a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It goes both ways.

Guys that do have families are willing to give up a lot too. Things I was never really willing to give up.

I have dated a lot and there is one woman I would have wanted kids with. She wasn't into that with me though.

That is not a problem with the woman, that is a problem with me.

I know a few guys in this same situation. It is not a problem with the dating market, it is a type of narcissism that clouds judgement and sets standards that can't be met.

It is hard to see it in yourself until you get a vasectomy.

▲kuerbel 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I guess it's hard to understand what women want...

CEO could mean no free time to spend with her. Muscular for what? Are you climbing or doing some other interesting sport or just spend time at the gym?

A lot of money, but are you doing something good with it? Helping people? At least some women think that's admirable.

I don't know you personally, so it's just some general vibe I've gotten from your post. No offense, maybe none of this is you but if it is it might be worth thinking about.

▲splintercell 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Most people who are saying this to you are in a similar situation like yourself, but with that missing element you have.

If you have money, but they don't, then they think there must be your fault, because if they had money, they wouldn't be in this situation.

If you're muscular, but they're not, then they think if they were muscular, they wouldn't be in this situation.

The biggest insult in the incel community is not someone who gets laid, but that someone is a volcel larping as an incel (purely as an attempt to demoralize them)

I do agree that the dating market is broken, but only men can find a way out of this. And those women want to be saved too, just not the way you think.

▲tuesdaynight 18 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm sorry, but it's pretty hard to believe that you have all these qualities and are still alone because of women or whatever. I've met so many horrible men that are married and have a family, and they are not millionaires, muscular or providers.

▲rustystump 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The world is large. I will say what I used to say when people complained about how awful dating was pre social media, if you are shopping at a bar, it is like shopping in the gutter, you may find a gem but more often it is shit.

There are alot of women who want kids but they likely are not in the pool you engage with. Go to a conservative US christian state, join a church, engage with the community, it is easy. I bet the issue is that you do in fact have a standard and that standard is the barrier.

If it helps, almost every wealthy man i have known engaged with escorts or prostitutes at some point so I wouldnt view it as shameful and who knows, you may learn something about yourself in the process.

▲paulryanrogers a day ago | parent [-]

> Go to a conservative US christian state, join a church

While this strategy can work, it also means your kids will likely be taught hell is a real place most of humanity will go to suffer in eternal flames. (Possibly from a very young age.) Does not help with mental health.

Red states also have quite a lot of racism, IME. So be sure to be at least passing as white and with little or no accent.

> I bet the issue is that you do in fact have a standard and that standard is the barrier.

Among the guys I've known this seems to be the biggest factor. Of course ladies have their own expectations. Everyone seems to relax them as they get older.

▲habinero 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't think posting like Elliot Rodgers helps, my dude.

▲s5300 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[dead]

▲threethirtytwo 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲nl a day ago | parent | next [-]

> So actually I think the real solution to these problems is actually banning birth control.

Anytime where someone thinks the solution to a problem is taking away choices from another group it's time to be very very suspicious to say the least.

There's a lot of points in this post that are common talking points in the "manosphere":

> you get a lot of single men who want to kill themselves and a lot of single women who are fine with being single

> What’s happening is a population crisis. Women don’t get with men, men are frustrated but also there’s no children.

These are not widely accepted viewpoints.

It's impossible to prove or disprove something like these are "wrong" or "right", but blaming women for male unhappiness is a prime tactic that is very similar to the common tactic of blaming an outgroup. It's not a good thing!

▲threethirtytwo a day ago | parent [-]

>Anytime where someone thinks the solution to a problem is taking away choices from another group it's time to be very very suspicious to say the least.

Is it? Nature and evolution never gave us the choice for millions of years. We only had the choice for the last century and for the first time in human history, humanity is hitting population decline. Asia, notably Korea, Japan, and china are hitting it first.

>These are not widely accepted viewpoints.

Who cares about widely accepted? How about let's talk truth. Is it real or not real? HN has been widely wrong about AI and self driving cars, The US population voted for trump and has been largely wrong. Widely accepted is not widely true.

>It's impossible to prove or disprove something like these are "wrong" or "right", but blaming women for male unhappiness is a prime tactic that is very similar to the common tactic of blaming an outgroup. It's not a good thing!

WE don't need to prove anything. It's just a discussion. When people on HN ask for scientific proof and statistical validation it halts the conversation and is unfair because MOST things cannot ever be validated like this. There's no point. I won't hold you to that because if I did the discussion will end. Present your argument and I'll give it a fair read, I won't do something stupid and ask for a scientific paper.

Also Why don't you take more time to read what I wrote. I never BLAMED women. My argument is women are changing and that is the cause of a lot of problems. Take a closer look, I said women becoming more empowered and the rise of feminism ARE good things... it's morally right. But their are intrinsic biological consequences because things have not been this way biologically for millions of years.

Think of it like how the female praying mantis eating the male praying mantis after they mate. That is NOT a morally right action. I mean it's technically murder... But it happens because of biology. The intrinsic dilemma here is nature vs. ethics. By creating a more ethical society we have exited gender norms established by nature for millions of years. We give people choice which is ethical, but orgasms and sex were CLEARLY biologically evolved to be addictive and remove choice from the equation.

So what is the correct action here? Be ethical or align our behavior with biological norms which are clearly unethical? I don't actually know. But there are clearly logistical consequences that occur when people don't behave the way they were evolved to behave. How much "ethics" are we willing to give up to prevent those consequences? Again I don't actually know.

Look up the population decline, it's a real thing. You can buy a house (a really good one) for 10k in Japan due to massive population loss. It's a real problem that will affect all of us WITHIN out lifetimes. Birth control is definitely a causal factor within it.

And also get over the idea that our biology is aligned with ethics. It's not this way for praying mantises and don't expect it to magically be that way for humans.

▲nl 18 hours ago | parent [-]

>> Anytime where someone thinks the solution to a problem is taking away choices from another group it's time to be very very suspicious to say the least.

> Is it?

Yes.

To quote you: "get over the idea that our biology is aligned with ethics."

> Nature and evolution never gave us the choice for millions of years. We only had the choice for the last century and for the first time in human history, humanity is hitting population decline. Asia, notably Korea, Japan, and china are hitting it first.

You say this like population decline is a bad thing.

It's true that it upends economic growth that is based on population growth.

Beyond that it's not particularly clear cut.

> Also Why don't you take more time to read what I wrote. I never BLAMED women.

And yet your solution is to make them have more children ("So actually I think the real solution to these problems is actually banning birth control.), and "Women don’t get with men, men are frustrated but also there’s no children"

You causal chain clearly makes women responsible: you argue that population growth is the solution to male suicide(!!), that women "don't get with men", and therefore the solution to the male suicide problem is to ban birth control.

To make it crystal clear:

There is no evidence that shrinking population leads to male suicide.

There are good arguments that a shrinking population is a good thing.

This pulls out the two pillars that support your argument for banning birth control.

▲threethirtytwo 17 hours ago | parent [-]

>Yes.

No.

>get over the idea that our biology is aligned with ethics.

This quote is true. See praying mantis example. Plenty of examples where the male or female dies sacrificing itself for the next generation. These are not ethical features of biology. They are practical and they factually exist.

>You say this like population decline is a bad thing.

It is. The eventual end of population decline is the decline of civilization and eventually the end of humanity. The first part we face in our lifetimes is economic decline, joblessness, and more.

>Beyond that it's not particularly clear cut.

It's clear cut, within your lifetime you will see a 1st world country be brought down by a complete lack of people. Japan or Korea. We already see the effects in the country. Entire towns and villages vanishing. You just need to scale that up to see what happens next. This is not theoretical. It is happening in front of our eyes.

>And yet your solution is to make them have more children

That's not blame. When a woman has children, so does a man. The man bares the same responsibility.

>You causal chain clearly makes women responsible

It does. They aren't responsible willingly. It's not that they made a bad choice and they become responsible. It's a logistical fact. For example if your car breaks down and you can't drive it. The thing responsible for breaking down is the car. But is it the cars fault? No. Women are the causal source, but it's not their fault.

If you want to make things more fair. Porn is a causal factor from the male side. It keeps a lot of males perpetually single.

>There is no evidence that shrinking population leads to male suicide.

I never claimed this. My claim is that men BEING single and not able to find a male or a girlfriend or a wife increases suicide rates. Think about it. It's a very VERY realistic proposition.

>There are good arguments that a shrinking population is a good thing.

There is FACTUAL on the GROUND realities that show currently how bad it is.

>This pulls out the two pillars that support your argument for banning birth control.

It pulls out nothing.

▲nl 15 hours ago | parent [-]

>> You say this like population decline is a bad thing.

> It is. The eventual end of population decline is the decline of civilization and eventually the end of humanity. The first part we face in our lifetimes is economic decline, joblessness, and more.

That's a ridiculous claim unsupported by any evidence.

The counter argument has much stronger backing: If we measure "civilization" by standard of living and technological progress then they are associated with lower birth rates.

>>You causal chain clearly makes women responsible

> It does. They aren't responsible willingly.

Like I said - blaming women.

> My claim is that men BEING single and not able to find a male or a girlfriend or a wife increases suicide rates. Think about it. It's a very VERY realistic proposition.

The evidence doesn't show this. eg:

> Suicide fatality rate was higher in married people compared to the unmarried, however, after adjusting for age as a determinant factor, no significant difference was observed between the 2 groups.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6505054/

There is some evidence that divorce increases suicide amongst men:

> Divorce did matter in a negative way, but only for men. What seems important about divorce is not that the men end up unmarried. Remember that the men who had always been single were no more likely to kill themselves than the men who were currently married. Instead, having once been married and then getting divorced seems to be the risk – again, only for the men.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/living-single/201304...

Indeed the very article we are commenting is about suicide by men aged 45 to 64, who have higher marriage rates that other groups!

Clearly marriage should be banned! ;)

▲threethirtytwo 13 hours ago | parent [-]

> That's a ridiculous claim unsupported by any evidence.

It’s called following the trendline. We have current rates of population decline and past rates of population decline and we do a projection and we get one of the few quantitative predictors in our statistical arsenal. All else is qualitative speculation.

> Like I said - blaming women

Are you reading what I wrote? Take a look at what I wrote again before starting shit.

> The evidence doesn't show this.

Among the suicides by men age 45 to 64 those are the divorced men. That is the age where divorces happen.

Marriage shouldn’t be banned. Condoms should.

And outside of this. Your rude ass comments and witch hunt like accusations were uncalled for.

▲smackeyacky 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This isn’t historically true. Women used to work outside the home, it’s a relatively recent phenomenon that the nuclear family with a stay at home mother was the norm. So the basis of your argument is false

▲threethirtytwo a day ago | parent [-]

I never said they didn’t work outside the home and I never said that the nuclear family was the norm.

So I don’t actually know what you’re talking about. Please try to be counter my claims rather than making things up.

▲smackeyacky a day ago | parent [-]

The argument presented was a giant gish gallop of regurgitated nonsense from the manosphere with no basis in fact. Be better.

▲threethirtytwo a day ago | parent [-]

What is the manosphere and no. It's anthropology.

Stop insulting me. If you have a counter argument to present, present it. Calling something you disagree with nonsense and presenting no argument or making up shit just shows you don't know what you're talking about.

Get educated.

▲pirates 3 hours ago | parent [-]

There simply is no reason to engage with the points you’re trying to make because they are all founded on a bed of lies and deception. If you feel insulted because people call you on your bullshit then tough shit I guess

▲michaelhoney a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

dude, you need to escape the manosphere

▲threethirtytwo a day ago | parent [-]

I don't even know what a manosphere is nor do I care. Most likely it's some incel misogyny insult.

Why don't you say something of substance instead of mouthing off with drivel like this.

▲tuesdaynight 17 hours ago | parent [-]

Maybe it will sound harsh, sorry for that, but I'm going to be real: people like you should be alone, and will be alone, no matter what happens with women rights in the future. If they are not choosing you now, they will not choose you because they got pregnant or something else. You will still be alone.

You talk about status, but you are here, on HN, where a lot of wealthy people are. You probably have more money than 99% of men. And you still can't get pussy. Look at the @eastbound guy, multimillionaire, muscular, and still not getting pussy. You need something external to validate your shortcomings, and that's human.

Go outside and look at every straight couple that you see. Do you really believe that every one of them are higher status than you, and that's why you are alone? Do you really believe that every woman out there expects to be married to a multimillionaire handsome man? It's delusional, sorry

▲threethirtytwo 17 hours ago | parent [-]

>Maybe it will sound harsh, sorry for that, but I'm going to be real: people like you should be alone, and will be alone, no matter what happens with women rights in the future. If they are not choosing you now, they will not choose you because they got pregnant or something else. You will still be alone.

I applaud your realness. And I sincerely hope it is completely real with no emotional bias. Tell me the truth like it is. Normally stuff like this gets flagged by dang in HN, but I disagree. If you feel it's true, it should be said.

That being said, there is an argument for making things impersonal. Talk about the state of the world, why needle in on the person making the argument and talk about his personal circumstance? It makes me think even though you CLAIM to be real, I think you're just emotional and trying to get an emotional response. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though.

>You talk about status, but you are here, on HN, where a lot of wealthy people are. You probably have more money than 99% of men. And you still can't get pussy. Look at the @eastbound guy, multimillionaire, muscular, and still not getting pussy. You need something external to validate your shortcomings, and that's human.

I don't get as much pussy as I like, nor do I get the girls that I really want. This is true. But I do get around. So this is not fully true.

>Go outside and look at every straight couple that you see. Do you really believe that every one of them are higher status than you, and that's why you are alone?

NO. Dude you're projecting. I'm talking about the population crisis. I'm talking about suicide rates. All my arguments refer to that, it doesn't even touch other couples or "status" or multimillionars. You're completely wrong on where this argument is coming from.

▲s5300 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]