Crisis of masculinity

Paschendale said:

Maybe the problem is that we're only looking at some kinds of technological interaction. There are marriages that start with playing together in an online game. There are massive social networks that keep people in touch and help organize meetings and events. There's a lot more to it than a few tweets. I don't doubt the accuracy of your statistics, though I'd be curious about the idea that this is a new phenomenon. I think it's just manifesting differently. But either way, the idea that technological communication starts and ends with twitter is a very narrow view.

People build communities on forums like these, and while this one is a little oddball in its combative nature, there are online communities centered around comic book or anime convention circuits, and people build friendships (and start businesses) around those. Vast numbers of gatherings take place every day in every city organized through online event planners, with people who have never met each other sharing activities. I don't disagree that Twitter is a poor substitute for meaningful interaction, but if a study focuses only on Twitter or Facebook, it's missing a lot of what new technology has to offer in terms of creating, not reducing, social interaction. And even Twitter or Facebook can help a friendship survive a rocky or distant period. They might not keep a bond strong, but they can be very useful in reuniting people after a temporary geographical separation.

I tried not to make this post just out of my own experiences, but I personally know people who have done all the things I mentioned in it. I've done some of them. Probably you have, too.

Click to expand...

But the studies I'm refering to don't refer to any particular method of interacting through technology. They're addressing the overall picture of people's lives: the amount of intimacy they have, and their own feelings of loneliness. It has nothing to do with Twitter or Facebook in particular. It has to do with everything, right down to how some people seem to think texting is a substitute for a meaningful face-to-face conversation.

It is a new phenomenon. The numbers have shifted dramatically just since the turn of the millenium. It's very clear what's causing it.

I don't disagree technology can be used to enhance social connection. I do that extensively since I've moved. In fact, the majority of the activities and people I've gotten involved with since I expatriated have been in some way kick-started by technology. It's today's replacement for the community bulletin board. Meetup is awesome.

But it seems that most people are using it as a way to avoid genuine interaction. Rather than using it as a springboard to meet people, they use it as a way to keep the people they know at arm's length. This is not some kind of hypothesis; this is how most people feel about their own relationships.

I myself found my life improved dramatically when I unplugged a bit: got rid of my smartphone (thus making the bible-length text an impossibility and severing me from all those infernal notifications), dropped most of my social profiles except a very basic and sparse Facebook, and started using the internet to find places and people with which to spend more time in the real world, not less.

Not a lot of American males seem to take marriage seriously. I think a lot of do look at porn and try to use dating sites for hook ups. Males can be disgusting with how much they'll try to manipulate women into having sex with them. I have been on a lot of crappy dates where it was obvious sex is all he was interested in.

I don't relate to it as a female, but I think lying to have sex with somebody seems like a lot more trouble than finding a slut. I shot all those losers down.

Ironfist17 said:

Do you believe that our society is facing masculinity crisis due to overload of porn and video game content? Instead of communicating with people and learning how to live a real life many young people isolate themselves in their rooms. Playing games while chatting with your friends may seem like a nice substitute to the real life communication, but it's a completely different thing. Maybe that's why there are so many feminists out where because they can't find men capable to raise their potential children?
There is a research conducted by a leading Stanford psychologist who shares that point of view.
Porn and video game addiction leading to 'masculinity crisis', says Stanford psychologist - Science - News - The Independent
Is there any possible way to reverse the trend? I don't want to live in an effeminate society where gender roles are completely wrecked.

Click to expand...

Older adolescence is a consequence of social economics. Take, for instance, the Pacific Northwest during the late 19th century. The conception of adulthood was for a young man of 17-19 to strike it on their own and have their own farm. It turned out that the young men could no longer acquire such features, and were thus alienated from the quintessential feature of their masculinity. Without their own farm they were living with their parents. While living with their parents they were purposefully avoiding marriage, but an acceptable man had to have his own plot and live separately from his parents. All the meanwhile the "new woman" of the late 19th century was becoming more publicly known, getting employment, and less interested in settling for the gender dynamics expected of them from their mother's generation. Young men were stripped of manhood while women were expressing continued social influence, albeit in a minority fashion.

Sound slightly familiar?

As far as technology is concerned, I agree that it seems to be an issue. However, i have also noticed at times there's a particular subtext to the discussion. Once in a while it will be observed by some commentators or intellectuals that technology has become at times an expression of the high functioning autistic and it's changing your society for the worse. It's a social stereotype, but you can still play with it. Social awkwardness, brainy, but almost obsessively preoccupied by esoteric concepts and devices. So anyways, occasionally I hear something to this effect and I laugh. The reason I do so is because folks that are under the umbrella or close to it (such as myself) we see technology as this bridge from our heads to the grander society. So in a sense it seems like we are moving in one direction because of technology, and the rest of you are walking the opposite direction. We either use it to increase our participation in society or allow it to merely enhance what we've long since done (be that increase work productivity or enhance our own social niches). Meanwhile you folks are worried about it isolating you.

Then whenever someone makes such an observation about autism and technology's fostering of isolationism, I just think that the rest of you folks are just using technology wrong to begin with. It's not exactly our fault.

SmokeAndMirrors said:

But the studies I'm refering to don't refer to any particular method of interacting through technology. They're addressing the overall picture of people's lives: the amount of intimacy they have, and their own feelings of loneliness. It has nothing to do with Twitter or Facebook in particular. It has to do with everything, right down to how some people seem to think texting is a substitute for a meaningful face-to-face conversation.

It is a new phenomenon. The numbers have shifted dramatically just since the turn of the millenium. It's very clear what's causing it.

Click to expand...

Can you link to some of those studies? I'd like to read them.

I don't disagree technology can be used to enhance social connection. I do that extensively since I've moved. In fact, the majority of the activities and people I've gotten involved with since I expatriated have been in some way kick-started by technology. It's today's replacement for the community bulletin board. Meetup is awesome.

Click to expand...

Right!?

But it seems that most people are using it as a way to avoid genuine interaction. Rather than using it as a springboard to meet people, they use it as a way to keep the people they know at arm's length. This is not some kind of hypothesis; this is how most people feel about their own relationships.

Click to expand...

That sounds sad. I hope we can find a way to better balance technology in our lives and use it for the positives more than the negatives.

I myself found my life improved dramatically when I unplugged a bit: got rid of my smartphone (thus making the bible-length text an impossibility and severing me from all those infernal notifications), dropped most of my social profiles except a very basic and sparse Facebook, and started using the internet to find places and people with which to spend more time in the real world, not less.

Click to expand...

I think I started in that position, except for the smartphone. I have a terrible sense of direction and need my maps.

Paschendale said:

Can you link to some of those studies? I'd like to read them.

Click to expand...

Yup. Here's one for the Americans, though the same is happening in Europe to some degree.

This study, conducted by Duke, is actually even more dire than the numbers I'd been seeing for the UK (because I'm in the UK, I get search results from UK sources first, and thus about the UK first -- had to search specifically for the American numbers). In this one, a full quarter of respondents said they had no one to talk about important things with.

http://www.newsweek.com/lonely-planet-isolation-increases-us-78647

If I had to hypotheisze about why America's numbers are so bad, I think it might be geographical. America is a big country where most people travel by car. We've always had to go a little bit more out of our way to talk to people, because people are spaced further apart. So when you take away the incentive to do that, it leads to pretty severe isolation. Americans aren't forced to interact as often as most Europeans are.

That sounds sad. I hope we can find a way to better balance technology in our lives and use it for the positives more than the negatives.

Click to expand...

I think this is really the crux. There needs to be a dialogue about this, and how to be self-aware of when we're basically manifesting social maladjustment through technology (i.e. avoiding conversation by texting, is it because you shy from difficult situations, just like a person might avoid conversation by hiding in their den or changing the subject?). We recognize the signs of when we're getting unhealthy in various live mediums, and that needs to extend to the technological arm of our lives.

That gives us some way to gauge what's normal for ourselves, and perhaps gives parents some way of gauging where their kids are at socially. The kid who never gets off Facebook chat but rarely actually goes out to see their friends is seen, by their parents, as an alien product of their generation. What if they're just lonely or have some social anxiety, instead? What if that's the "unhealthy" opposite from the "healthy" of deciding to get on Meetup and go to an event to make new friends? Both involve technology. But the purpose of either one is very different.

Humans today have the same need for face time, deep sharing, and touch that they always have.

I think I started in that position, except for the smartphone. I have a terrible sense of direction and need my maps.

Click to expand...

You know what? I was afraid that would be the killer for me too, and it really hasn't been. I have a compass and I look at a map before I go out. That usually gets me where I need to go without any mishaps.

Plus, because I live in a damn big city where people walk, there's little maps everywhere. If you live in NYC, I imagine you have the same benefit.

And besides that, on the rare occasion I do get turned around, that means I have to stop and ask someone for directions. And every now and then... asking someone for directions is the beginning of a conversation. See, this is why I'll never have a smartphone again. It gives you every excuse in the world not to talk to the people around you, and not to pay attention to the ones you are talking to if you actually manage to overcome that.

Try it for a week. I bet it's different than you think it will be. Weirdly enough, the only thing I really miss is having a good music player while I'm walking around. :lol: But in a way, it's probably better that I don't. Having my headphones in is a way of avoiding the world.

"There is no crisis in American masculinity."


- Bruce Jenner

chromium said:

Masculinity is a social construct

Click to expand...

You're right about that.


But what the PC crowd won't tell you is that social constructs matter a great deal in life whether you want them to or not. I'd rather deck out my socially constructed masculinity so that I have the 20 year old blonde blue eyes girl underneath me rather than refuse to play the masculinity game and settle with porn or a fat girl instead. No thanks to that. I'd rather do whatever it takes. (be that pretend to be religious, pretend to like country music, pretend to like rap, whatever, who gives a ****?) You just have to be comfortable with who you are then the means to the end matter a lot less because you understand that yes, masculinity is simply something you have to project if you want a ****able girl.

I don't think it's an overload of porn and video games- but more likely cultural conditioning.

Superfly said:

And crude. I have to wonder about the age of the poster.

Click to expand...

Sounds like something gathomas would say.

I'm an IT guy and I've never has trouble finding woman, for example

SheWolf said:

Not a lot of American males seem to take marriage seriously. I think a lot of do look at porn and try to use dating sites for hook ups. Males can be disgusting with how much they'll try to manipulate women into having sex with them. I have been on a lot of crappy dates where it was obvious sex is all he was interested in.

I don't relate to it as a female, but I think lying to have sex with somebody seems like a lot more trouble than finding a slut. I shot all those losers down.

Click to expand...

Ryan5 said:

You're right about that.


But what the PC crowd won't tell you is that social constructs matter a great deal in life whether you want them to or not. I'd rather deck out my socially constructed masculinity so that I have the 20 year old blonde blue eyes girl underneath me rather than refuse to play the masculinity game and settle with porn or a fat girl instead. No thanks to that. I'd rather do whatever it takes. (be that pretend to be religious, pretend to like country music, pretend to like rap, whatever, who gives a ****?) You just have to be comfortable with who you are then the means to the end matter a lot less because you understand that yes, masculinity is simply something you have to project if you want a ****able girl.

Click to expand...

Did you two date?

tacomancer said:

Sounds like something gathomas would say.

I'm an IT guy and I've never has trouble finding woman, for example

Click to expand...

Ummm... Beg pardon?

I might be a lot of things. Ryan5, however, I can assure you I am not. :lol:

Gathomas88 said:

Ummm... Beg pardon?

I might be a lot of things. Ryan5, however, I can assure you I am not. [emoji38]

Click to expand...

Thank god

But you seem to have theories about men and women that, my experience with them has not corroborated and seem a bit odd to me

About things like women always look for the manliest men and all that

tacomancer said:

Thank god

But you seem to have theories about men and women that, my experience with them has not corroborated and seem a bit odd to me

About things like women always look for the manliest men and all that

Click to expand...

As a matter of scientific fact, it has been fairly well established that women who are looking primarily for sex tend to overwhelmingly prefer men who fit more stereotypically "alpha" (strong, physically attractive, extroverted, aggressive, interpersonally dominant, etca) archetypes, yes. It has also been established that women looking for more serious relationships tend to go after less overtly "macho" specimens, while favoring more stable and secure "nest builder" types instead - i.e. men more likely to provide reliable positive outcomes for a woman and her offspring on a steady basis, and not chase after other women.

Cads and dads | The Economist

Given that fact, there is a certain element of truth to Ryan's statements.

In today's substantially more "casual" sexual culture, it does tend to be the case that a very small minority of "alpha" men manage to achieve the best sexual outcomes, with the most desirable women, on the most frequent basis. It is also the case that "nest builders" are struggling a bit more, due - in combination - to a culture which tends to actively discourage "settling down" in more serious relationships in one's youth on the one hand, and a devastated economy which makes it rather difficult for young men to build any sort of "nest" to actually attract a mate to settle down with on the other.

Ryan goes off the rails, however, with all the latent hostility, misogynistic rhetoric, and over-generalized political dialogue he attaches to this analysis.

He also uses it to justify some rather amoral and manipulative behavior which I find to be abhorrent. Basically, as long as he gets to be in one of the "alpha" slots himself, he thinks everything's fine and dandy. He really doesn't care what he has to do, or who he has to hurt, to get there either.

Gathomas88 said:

As a matter of scientific fact, it has been fairly well established that women who are looking primarily for sex tend to overwhelmingly prefer men who fit more stereotypically "alpha" (strong, physically attractive, extroverted, aggressive, interpersonally dominant, etca) archetypes, yes. It has also been established that women looking for more serious relationships tend to go after less overtly "macho" specimens, while favoring more stable and secure "nest builder" types instead - i.e. men more likely to provide reliable positive outcomes for a woman and her offspring on a steady basis, and not chase after other women.

Cads and dads | The Economist

Given that fact, there is a certain element of truth to Ryan's statements.

In today's substantially more "casual" sexual culture, it does tend to be the case that a very small minority of "alpha" men manage to achieve the best sexual outcomes, with the most desirable women, on the most frequent basis. It is also the case that "nest builders" are struggling a bit more, due - in combination - to a culture which tends to actively discourage "settling down" in more serious relationships in one's youth on the one hand, and a devastated economy which makes it rather difficult for young men to build any sort of "nest" to actually attract a mate to settle down with on the other.

Ryan goes off the rails, however, with all the latent hostility, misogynistic rhetoric, and over-generalized political dialogue he attaches to this analysis.

He also uses it to justify some rather amoral and manipulative behavior which I find to be abhorrent.

Click to expand...

Wow...where are these women at, Mr. Thomas? :lol:

Man, you are wayyyyyyyy to consumed with such heavy moral dilemmas. You're toooo young for this stuff.

I predict that one day you'll wake up and ponder all of this stuff you find so important...and kick yourself in the ass...all the way to Mexico for ever having ponder it all.

Don't prove the old saying that "Youth is wasted on the young."

Removable Mind said:

Wow...where are these women at, Mr. Thomas? :lol:

Man, you are wayyyyyyyy to consumed with such heavy moral dilemmas. You're toooo young for this stuff.

I predict that one day you'll wake up and ponder all of this stuff you find so important...and kick yourself in the ass...all the way to Mexico for ever having ponder it all.

Don't prove the old saying that "Youth is wasted on the young."

Click to expand...

Take it up with behavioral science, not me. I'm simply stating the facts as they presently exist. :shrug:

Frankly, I'm sure how anyone could spend much time at all in a bar or night club and not come to the conclusion that it's generally the good looking masculine guys with strong social skills and flashy moves who go home with the women (let alone the good looking women), while everyone else goes home alone.

Gathomas88 said:

Take it up with behavioral science, not me. I'm simply stating the facts as they presently exist. :shrug:

Click to expand...

Hmmmmm...don't read it then. Real life is way more exciting.

Removable Mind said:

Hmmmmm...don't read it then. Real life is way more exciting.

Click to expand...

And toss aside my well laid plans? NEVAH!!

lol

Suffice to say, there is a time and a place for everything. This simply isn't it.

All good things to those who wait.

Gathomas88 said:

And toss aside my well laid plans? NEVAH!!

lol

Suffice to say, there is a time and a place for everything. This simply isn't it.

All good things to those who wait.

Click to expand...

Good things happen to those who pursue them.

Removable Mind said:

Good things happen to those who pursue them.

Click to expand...

While ultimately true, the simple fact of the matter is that pursuing any endeavor "half-cocked" isn't generally liable to result in much of anything besides bruised egos and setback ambitions. :lol:

This is real life, not a Hollywood ROMCOM, after all. Nine times out of ten, the Captain of football team goes home to **** the prom queen while the nerdy "underdog" stays in playing with himself, and standing under a young woman's window with a stero over one's head is far more likely to get a person arrested than to "get the girl."

I mean... I dunno. I guess some people actually find charging into uncertainty simply to fall flat on their face thrilling. Personally, however, it's always struck me as being little more than an irritating and stressful waste of time and resources which could have been better spent elsewhere.

In any eventuality, I don't see any harm in putting the fairer sex "on the back burner" until I am actually capable of answering the question "My place, or yours?" without having to scramble for artful excuses to cover for the stigma attached with my current circumstances. There are some things a "man" is expected to have, like it or not. At the moment, I simply happen to lack some of them. I both accept that reality, and work to remedy it.

I guess I'm just not much of a "romantic." :lamo

Gathomas88 said:

While ultimately true, the simple fact of the matter is that pursuing any endeavor "half-cocked" isn't generally liable to result in much of anything besides bruised egos and setback ambitions. :lol:

This is real life, not a Hollywood ROMCOM, after all. Nine times out of ten, the Captain of football team goes home to **** the prom queen while the nerdy "underdog" stays in playing with himself, and standing under a young woman's window with a stero over one's head is far more likely to get a person arrested than to "get the girl."

I mean... I dunno. I guess some people actually find charging into uncertainty simply to fall flat on their face thrilling. Personally, however, it's always struck me as simply being an irritating and stressful waste of time and resources which could have been better spent elsewhere.

In any eventuality, I don't see any harm in putting the fairer sex "on the back burner" until I am actually capable of answering the question "my place, or yours" without having to scramble for excuses to cover for the stigma attached with my current circumstances. I guess I'm just not much of a romantic. :lamo

Click to expand...

Ah. Well, live life as you must, Mr. Thomas. But it's not a dress rehearsal, as they say.

Y'all present a false reality though and then you start building morals on that false reality.



Stable IT nerd types with high degrees and upper class credentials, essentially the top 10% of America, aren't landing the women.
(See evidence The Sex Therapists Of Silicon Valley )


Your claim that essentially "The men who manipulate women are bad and don't provide" has some holes. For one, why are the women with them if that's true? Secondly, have you considered that it isn't actually manipulation and is actually what women want? Perhaps these men simply know how to appeal to women and the other men don't and there's simply a jealously issue there. I'd say that's a lot closer to the reality.


What you all are basically arguing is that "Women are stubbornly with the wrong men." Sounds like maybe the real answer is the upper class IT types don't know how to deal with women. (and the data shows this to be true).


“These are the tropes of tech development,” says Elizabeth McGrath, his sex therapist, who shared his story with me. (McGrath did not give me her patient’s name, and asked me to use a pseudonym when writing about him.) “To his mind, and his processing, there was no desire to prioritize anything other than that.” She spends much of their sessions trying to teach him the very basics of talking to women.

If what women truly "want" is to be lied to, manipulated, and used as base sex objects before being unceremoniously dumped like yesterday's garbage, often times with a fresh STD or illegitimate bastard that they're going to now have to support by themselves to remember the experience by, I'm afraid I can't help them. As they say, "stupid is as stupid does." :lol:

Fortunately, however, that does not appear to be the case. Only certain women are interested in that kind of thing, or women of a certain mindset.

Granted, due to the influences of modern culture and modern "sexual morality" (oxymoron that it may be :roll those kinds of mindsets are a lot more common now than they were in the past. Society as a whole continues to suffer the consequences of that reality on a daily basis.

Such views and behaviors are not, however, universal. Frankly, even where they are common, most people eventually grow out of them and start looking for something more.

While some may be correct in noting that money and status are not everything when it comes to sexual success, I don't believe anyone ever argued that they were to begin with. They are simply things which most women, on an objective basis, can be seen to consider as being very important in the selection of a long term mate. Of equal or greater importance, however, is simply being the stable, dependable, and enjoyable sort of guy that women would actually want to settle down with on a long term basis to begin with.

Where that is concerned, make no mistake, the more manipulative and predatory sorts of men some posters in this thread have chosen to extol tend to fare a lot more poorly in the long run than their more relaxed peers.

Gathomas88 said:

If what women truly "want" is to be lied to, manipulated, and used as base sex objects before being unceremoniously dumped like yesterday's garbage, often times with a fresh STD or illegitimate bastard that they're going to now have to support by themselves to remember the experience by, I'm afraid I can't help them. As they say, "stupid is as stupid does." :lol:

Fortunately, however, that does not appear to be the case. Only certain women are interested in that kind of thing, or women of a certain mindset.

Granted, due to the influences of modern culture and modern "sexual morality" (oxymoron that it may be :roll those kinds of mindsets are a lot more common now than they were in the past. Society as a whole continues to suffer the consequences of that reality on a daily basis.

Such views and behaviors are not, however, universal. Frankly, even where they are common, most people eventually grow out of them and start looking for something more.

While some may be correct in noting that money and status are not everything when it comes to sexual success, I don't believe anyone ever argued that they were to begin with. They are simply things which most women, on an objective basis, can be seen to consider as being very important in the selection of a long term mate. Of equal or greater importance, however, is simply being the stable, dependable, and enjoyable sort of guy that women would actually want to settle down with on a long term basis to begin with.

Where that is concerned, make no mistake, the more manipulative and predatory sorts of men some posters in this thread have chosen to extol tend to fare a lot more poorly in the long run than their more relaxed peers.

Click to expand...

It doesn't seem so though. Seems that the evidence suggests that introverted IT nerd Esq men have a hard time well into middle age with women.



To me y'all take things a tad too seriously. You focus on "moral dilemmas" that you conjure in your minds so as to have an excuse for dealings or lack-thereof with women. It sounds very needy and frankly very creepy. As if you'd all sit her down and read off a list of your "morals" (which I'm sure would be hilarious to observe the ensuing disaster). You all sound frankly extremely overly patriarchal and needy which is a surefire recipe for failure with women.


I think you all should be more open minded in respect to your dealings with women.

Ryan5 said:

It doesn't seem so though. Seems that the evidence suggests that introverted IT nerd Esq men have a hard time well into middle age with women.



To me y'all take things a tad too seriously. You focus on "moral dilemmas" that you conjure in your minds so as to have an excuse for dealings or lack-thereof with women. It sounds very needy and frankly very creepy. As if you'd all sit her down and read off a list of your "morals" (which I'm sure would be hilarious to observe the ensuing disaster). You all sound frankly extremely overly patriarchal and needy which is a surefire recipe for failure with women.


I think you all should be more open minded in respect to your dealings with women.

Click to expand...

First off, why in the heck is "nerdy IT guy" what you keep going back to here? :lol:

Men don't only come in two varieties, you know - with him on the one side...



And him on the other.



For that matter, neither do women. There are a wide range of other personal and professional types out there for both genders, many of whom do better with the opposite sex in some environments than in others.

The "strong silent type," for example, is generally going to be rather lackluster with regards to "game" at the average bar or night club. However, that doesn't mean that there aren't a lot of women out there who might actually be into that sort of thing under different circumstances.

It's entirely possible to be a guy who does reasonably well with women without being a manipulative or predatory man whore about it. In point of fact, most men probably fall in that category to some degree or another.

Hell! Believe it or not, there actually are some of us out there who wouldn't even want to rack up the massive body counts you seem to so highly value in the first place. We favor quality over quantity, and that is not a short coming.

Secondly, if having enough of a sense of "morality" to feel like lying to women to get them to sleep with me is unacceptable makes me "creepy" or "patriarchal," I'll gladly bear both titles. The "only sane man" shtick might not be one I necessarily enjoy, but I'll live it all the same.