= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Qiaochu_Yuan comments on LW Women Submissions: On Misogyny - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (472)
I just want to say that as a man, I'm horrified by what submitters A & B observed/endured, and I hope they learn some day that most of us guys aren't like that. I was forward in an unintentionally creepy way (probably 1.5-2x as bad as the "attractive college dormmate" story) several years ago. I realized how awful my behavior was, apologized for it, still regret it, and haven't done anything like that since then.
I do attribute reading PUA stuff for my creepiness. Since then, my model has been refined, and I've seen plenty of empirical data suggesting that being a jerk like I was is counterproductive if you're trying to get laid. (Not to say being a jerk would be A-OK even if it did work.) If girls like jerks, it seems to be because they're confident/comfortable with themselves/sexually assertive and not because they have unpleasant personalities. My observations suggest that in the average case, it works better to be a friendly assertive guy than an unfriendly assertive guy.
Furthermore, I'm not even convinced that women are attracted to high-status men so much as they get uncomfortable around socially awkward ones. I suspect most of the gain moving from low-status to high-status comes on the early part of the curve, from low-status to OK-status. Does getting deeply comfortable with yourself take work? Yes, but it takes an obese woman work to lose weight, so it's not like women don't face their own challenges. And like losing weight, getting deeply comfortable with yourself is useful for other reasons, so maybe guys should be glad they're given this incentive.
This site ended up being way more useful to me than any PUA thing. After quitting porn and masturbation for 4+ months, my standards for women I considered attractive changed, I became more confident, I actually had a visceral desire to have sex (instead of being resentful that I wasn't getting any in the abstract), and I started to notice women giving me subtle signs of interest that I hadn't seen before.
This page may be a good starting point: Was the Cowardly Lion Just Masturbating Too Much?. This subreddit, which has half as many subscribers as the subreddit devoted to PUA, is full of stories like mine and will hopefully convince you that this is a real phenomenon.
As far as I can tell, "nice guy syndrome" is a phenomenon that originated in this generation due to porn's effects on the brain. Philip Zimbardo also thinks something is up.
What evidence do you have that most men are in fact not like that? (Disclaimer: I am also male. Also, thanks for the porn and masturbation links. Seems worth looking more into.)
He didn't even asert that most aren't, he can hope that it is true and she learns it, can't she? However, it does seem fair that that would be the higher prior.
He didn't assert it, he presupposed it.
"I hope that one day you learn that p" doesn't mean "I hope that p is the case and one day you learn it". It presupposes p and asserts "I hope that one day you learn it".
Well, you're presupposing his presupposition there.
Regardless, I think demanding evidence for the statement that not all men, for example, are prone to beating or abusing their daughters is a much, much stronger presupposition.
I mean, seriously, are we at the point where the prior is greater for 'all x are y' than 'not all x are y' ?
Whether or not hg00 has evidence of it, I can personally point to, well, nearly every man I know personally, including myself and my father.
I'm not quite sure what you're talking about. The statement in question - the one that was presupposed - is neither of the form 'all x are y' nor 'not all x are y', but of the form 'most x are not y'.
You're right, it does read "most of us are not like that," which I read incorrectly as "not all of us are like that." I still think requesting evidence for that sounds a bit off, but it no longer looks that the presumption of Qiaochu_Yuan in asking for evidence is so unreasonable. I (unoffically) retract my comments and tone.
Though I hope everyone, after looking at evidence, does in fact learn what my experience has been, that most men are not like that.
As was pointed elsewhere (I don't remember to whom, so if it was to you, sorry for that), the men you know may be a biased sample.
And as I attempted to clarify above, the preference for my experience not to be a merely sampling effect but indicative of broader population is a part of what the word 'hope' is refering to.