[flagged]
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!
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.
> 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.
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.
> 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! ;)
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.
So I don’t actually know what you’re talking about. Please try to be counter my claims rather than making things up.
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.
Frankly when the topic is suicide people who lack empathy like you really should just exit the room entirely. You exacerbate the problem. I can guarantee you people who kill themselves have been verbally assaulted by people like you.
Also how do you know what I said is founded on a bed of lies and deception? You’re thinking I’m akin to a flat earther but have you ever looked at yourself? Mainstream religion is largely bullshit fantasy with people walking on water and rising from the dead. Have you considered that our own beliefs are although mainstream largely also bullshit?
I doubt you have given the raw malice and anger that exudes from your response. Calm the fuck down and consider the arguments.
Why don't you say something of substance instead of mouthing off with drivel like this.
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
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.