Yeah, it sucks. Being a man in dating is literally the meme Its essentially akin to the job market: practice interview with a career coach, practice for the technical interview, get to the 100th round, and then receive a rejection email. Not to mention the 1000s of resumes to each job posting. Just to find one job that pays $7 an hour.
It used to be that people met at church or through friends of friends, but because friendship & socializing is on decline, the above is essentially the path to success going forward until we can find a solution to lack of socialization. Its the major thing that exemplifies the issue (that and the economic circumstances mentioned)
If it makes you feel better, 1 in 4 people over 40 never get married so you arent alone, if you dont find someone.
I wouldn’t generalize that to most people around me, but I really think women will never appreciate the kind of perseverance it takes to keep pushing forward.
Here are some thought on the current relationship recession going on.
I've always felt like our society has had a hard time talking to young men about dating, sex, and what it means to be a man. We are basically just throwing them them to the wolves and and having them figure it out for themselves. This results in bad outcomes for both parties: Men being seen as "creepy" for not being able woo a woman smoothly. & women being disappointed in the interactions and not being able to find a prince charming.
On top of culture being abysmal at talking about the problem productively, we now live in a service economy that requires social skills and knowledge to move up the ladder. Gone are the days where one could get a factory job for 40 years and call it a day; those jobs have been automated or offshored to china. But increasingly, young men have fallen behind young women in education: creating a situation where they essentially are locked out of this service economy due to the credential requirements.
Now, being in this young male category myself, ive been pondering solutions for a while now, and i've also notice that this forum doesnt really talk about solutions to the many cultural issues, so im throwing my hat into the ring on what i believe willl be effective, based on the research and data ive collected.
"New Masculinity"
So its apparent in the majority of cases, that societies judge men (primarily) by one large metrics:
The ability to climb up social hierarchy to obtain status.
Most of the other judgements that we place upon men are downstream of this one thing (virgin men being losers/incels, calling men broke, being called a pussy or a weakling ect) Being weak, lacking confidence, hinders once ability to obtain status. Being a incel/virgin indicates that you have skill issues with women. Homeless men are often looked at as "lazy" or "bums". Im not saying i agree with these - but thats how its perceived.
Old Masculinity: being overly independent, not wanting help, being a misogynistic tough guy, or shunning emotion ("boys dont cry") are things that arguably need to be left behind, and didnt serve us in the past and they dont serve us now. But there are obviously elements worth preserving: Being strong, tough, courageous, protective, ect.
If you can make things happen, be socially savvy, be dominant & soft, you will find success. Some of these are within our control, some arent. But i think individuals might be able to tilt the needle enough to find some success individually, minus the obvious changes to society.
1.) Obtaining "Status"
Women desire men with high status. The easiest way to obtain status in society is to get a higher education or to obtain high income (these often correlate). If you can get into Harvard, go for it, but for most cases, a local community college or state university is sufficient. People often meet their spouses there as a matter of fact. Now, if for whatever reason, you find that you can't obtain a degree, there are other options, my father did real-estate (this job can earn a decent living and has the plus of sharpening your social skills!), my uncle had a mechanic shop (Its worth noting here, however that most evidence still points to the degree being the best shot you have). Raising mens income has a positive effect on birth rates - so whatever you job you get, make sure it pays somewhat decent. On top of this, build other skills: learn how to dance (my personal recommendation, ive done this myself and ive gotten some positive attention and even some dates!). This will increase confidence and get you socializing, and if your good, you'll be the coolest guy in the room. Which leads to my next point:
2.) Social Skills.
This new variation of Masculinity needs to focus heavily on social skills. Men as a group are more likely to be poor in this area (higher autism diagonsis, ect). Believe it or not, many men who are single or are having trouble havent even attempted asking out the girl. I know, I know - #MeToo and all, but in my experience if one approaches with kindness (and humors!) it will be received positively. One easy way that worked for me is ride-share driving. Take little step, ask someone about their day, how they feel about certain things, ect. Join a comedy club and try to sharpen your humor! (Incredibly attractive to women in my experience). Charisma and Social skills will positively affect both your dating life, and your career success. Much of the drop in relationships and birth rate are amongst the poor and less educated, partially because of the shifts in the economy towards the service sector jobs that require the ability to talk to others. So sharpening this skill is of utmost importance. You'll probably get the hang of flirting and the like once you conjure up these social skills.
3.) GYM. GYM. GYM. GYM. GYM. GYM. GYM. GYM.
This is so insanely understated by many of people, but as someone who was 240lbs and is now 155 (im 5"6 for reference). Pretty privilege is a real thing. People respect and admire you more when you look good, for men this means wider shoulder relative to hips, and being fairly lean, you dont need to look like Arnold Schwarzenegger. But if you look like this dude in the thumbnail, your pretty golden. Being tall helps too, but thats not something within your control. Easy way to get thinner: Eat less calories than maintaince (around 2000) and burn said calories via exercise (running on a treadmill, ride a bicycle, lift weights, jump rope). For building muscle, you'll need to eat around ~1lb of protein per body weight, in a slight caloric excess. You''ll have to go through cut and bulk phases where you are basically eating less to burn off fat, and then eating around or in slight excess to build muscle. Get 8 hours of sleep for recovery, drink water, remove suger from your diet if possible. You'll need to be patient as the process is slow, but once completed: your options for mates increases, your status increases, and people will treat you with more dignity and respect. Looks matter.
4.) If you are overly "nice" or sweet, masculinize yourself a bit
This will probably be more controversial, but this needs to be said. Society does have a bias towards men who are more conventionally masculine, shorter men have higher suicide rates, gay men are hated more then lesbians. I've also seen this several times anecdotally and learned this from personal experience: My own mother told me not to cry in front of women, because you'll be seen as weak. My ex told me that being more manly would probably get me further with women. I think a better middle ground here, especially if your a man who is on the less manly side of things, is to masculinize yourself a bit. Best way to do this? Learn martial arts (or do some tough sport - rugby or football) - the mindset thats built from martial arts will help masculinize you to some degree, as well as proving to women that your capable of protecting them (Trust me - they care about this). This part might sound like im trying to change you, perhaps to some extent, i am. But this is in most mens best interest, in my experience - not having some manly-ness to you will hurt your perception, at least a little bit. You can still be soft and sensitive, as a matter of fact, it works in your interests much of the time, just have some "umph" and know when to pull out the sensitive, and tough sides.
One of the main reasons that bad faith actors like Andrew Tait are so popular is because many people in our society dont want to confront various hard truths, that many in red-pill spaces actively expose: Looks, Money, & Masculinity matter. The more we lie and refuse to ack-knowledge this the worse the current social ills become. Its also important that a sort of guide map of masculinity be given (the one ive layed probably would produce positive results individually) so that young boys dont go searching for a road map else-where. Telling people to "be themselves" isnt gonna be sufficient advice in the majority of cases.
Finally, there are societal trends that make some of these harder to achieve today. People do not socialize and gather as they did in the past, meaning many women (though not as much as men) likely are going to have not so good social skills themselves or be more difficult to meet. And as stated before, our economy favors those with educated service sectors skills over those who dont. Sadly, i haven't thought of a good way around these barriers.
Take note that this is something ive written up after thinking about this for a bit, so im open to critiques or flaws in my proposals or reasoning. (As a matter of fact, Its welcome!)
Nerd
18d ago
I actually did an internship with a hospital for IT. They sadly did not have a spot for me.
Nerd
18d ago
I could probably beat those 3 questions without issue. My technical knowledge is fairly sharp - I probably need to find a way to just beat out the other candidates out via soft skills. Not that i dont have them. But at the final stages ive heard many people say it can come down to who the HM likes more, who has a better personality if all else is equal. "Culture Fit" so to speak.
Nerd
18d ago
Certainly people are already changing career plans, college plans, savings strategies, family planning, etc. and it will only get much worse. New broadly available opportunities in AI are not going to open up faster than the fear of AI disruption will spread; we are already in a spiral.
Co-workers at my current job ended up pivoting away from Software Engineering, particularly because they saw this coming from miles. They are aiming for Cyber-Security. I studied Software Engineering in undergrad, while i didnt pivot away from it because of AI specifically, i wouldnt be surprised if a lot of tech majors pivoted away from it because of the AI boom. With that being said, im of the opinion that the "AI will take our jobs" schtick is slightly overstated: Technology has always replaced jobs, thats how it always goes. New jobs will arise. People forget that most people were working in agriculture before the industrial revolution, all those farmers didnt just stop working, they found the newly produced jobs else ware in the economy (its actually part of the reason urbanization has increased so much!). I dont think we need to worry all that much until we have actual JARVIS/Cortana level computers running around with Terminator robotics.
Nerd
18d ago
The major thing is you've got less than 2 years of post-college professional experience, which tends to disqualify you for anything but entry level jobs -- and those tend to be filled out of college recruiting office
Yeah, i suspected as much. Not a lot of easy ways around experience. It is king. I was actually thinking about doing either System Administration or Network Engineering. Do you think cloud might be a better future proof direction?
Nerd
18d ago
It's always weird to me when the IT field gets conflated with "Tech" which to me (not that I am an authority) is a shorthand for Software Engineers/Machine Learning Engineers/Computer Scientists. The two fields have radically different variables, IT is almost always a cost center to someone.
Why wouldnt IT be tech? Infrastructure is still technology (Network devices like routers and switches, configuration of servers, cloud computing, ect). Software still runs on hardware at the end of the day. For an analogy here: An OBGYN & a Dermatologists are both under the medical field, even though feminine genitals & skin are both different organs, they play a roll in the body and in human general health, so grouping them together under medicine still makes sense.
You have too much white space, it definitely shouldn't be 2 pages. Everything reads super bland. You don't need to always do the "show me don't tell me" it just needs to read better than something 10k other entry level IT folks also all do.
Thats an interesting critique. I havent heard of the too much white space critique before. How do i compress everything, while still sounding significant? Run it through GPT-5?
Only if you picked the right field, got internships and work experience, and either networked, did projects, research or went to the right school. The extra parts were just implied.
I mean. Per my resume, I did do most of this. As did many of my peers. We aren't jobless at all. Its just difficult to take the next step after help-desk.
Nerd
18d ago
Your projects section is counter-productive. Don't tell me what you've built - show me. Setup a GitHub repo and sling whatever code you have already developed at it. Then writeup a 1000 or so word guide on how you did everything.
I mean, i do know how to develop software, ive develop my own programs here and there, but I've actually decided that id like to stay on the infrastructure side of tech, as i personally find it more enjoyable.
The networking advice is probable my best shot at the next job. Ive also heard that many jobs are part of a "hidden job market" where friends of friends get each other hired via referrals. Ill look into it.
Nerd
18d ago
When I was in highschool it was something encouraged by my teachers. Im also a 1st generation immigrant and my parents stressed education, and i know people in my friend group who were told this as well (Specifically get something in STEM, and i did). Perhaps my immigrant background probably makes an impact here.
Nerd
18d ago
Ok, Interesting. I was actually advise to use the Harvard Style resume. As outlined here, it supposedly helps bypass the ATS system. Im also not running into a lot of FAANG companies here in florida. So perhaps FAANG and non FAANG hire differently.
Im curious what peoples predictions for the coming demographic decline is for the US and other countries? Here is mine: An increase in healthcare related work, and a stagnation of other job sectors. Apparently, excluding healthcare, the amount of jobs in the US is on the decline or stagnating. Not such a fun job market, especially for someone like myself you falls in the "information" category. This will probably continue as the population declines and ages.
Its fascinating, because many people in the gen-z bracket were told to got to college, get a degree, and you'd have a nice cushy office job lined up. While this wasnt all the way bullshit, as i do actually have one of these jobs - as someone who is competing in the current job market, it is BRUTAL. I've had applied to a around ~ 50 jobs (All of these jobs that are at least close to my skill level & credentials, i live in florida for reference and its not the best market for tech to begin with, even though the tech sector is growing here according to the data). In total ive gotten about 3-4 call backs 2 - 3 interview. One were i made it to the final round after 3, and was rejected. Ghosted in another, and have one up and coming.
For more perspective here is my resume (& yes, im aware of the slight formatting error in the projects section). Multiple internships, degrees, & certificates, im trying my best to be competitive. More than one person in my friend group is happy to hear about this population decline; the job search is just so tough for them cant say id blame them, but what many dont understand about declining populations is that population both creates and takes jobs simultaneously. Sure if the population declines, you might have less competition, but you'd also have fewer openings as well. Hard to get hired when a lot of people are not around to create the job you'd be working to start with. The whole demographic decline is good because there will be less people to compete with strikes me as a shortsighted perspective - Humans make the wheels turn all the way down and less people being around isnt gonna create more opportunities for us as a whole.
Still, i can't help but empathize with the sentiment. Constantly apply to every job listing, going through multiple round interview, just to get rejected is so incredibly brutal. Many countries outside the US like china and italy have it even worse with high youth unemployment. It certainly doesnt feel like having more people would be a good from that perspective, even if it likely would. Aging populations mean that a lot of our future jobs and productivity is gonna be directed toward the health sector of our economies, inevitably taking away from or slowing growth from other sectors. I envy people who already have a strong career with high pay and benefits, its insanely difficult for the rest of us.
Nerd
1mo ago
I mean, if the goal was to "win" on these issues it clearly isnt a tactic that works for all issues. Hence many "human rights" not being realized in democratic states. And it also wouldnt answer the question as to why the economic issues brought forward are of less moral importance. (why give "homophobia" a less of a free pass when housing and wages negatively affect more people?). Even if you are trying to shutdown the debate, why shutdown some debates and not others? What makes, "lets not build housing or give a livable wage to a single-mom, because i dont want to give up my high house prices or pay more in taxes or have her live near me, ect" more morally legitimate?
This is a decent response. But i think the problem i still have is the one of functional outcome. The women in the video kinda stated that because voting republican would defacto = voting for someone who would be against those things (abortion/gay marriage other "human rights"). That means youd still be a "bad person", even if you agreed with that stuff. I would imagine it would still follow here: even if people hypothetically would be for more housing as an example - them voting against virtually all or any attempts to make it a reality (particularly if they dont want to sacrifice their own interests to accomplish those things, which is often the case with these kinds of policies) creates the same functional reality of people not having that available to them (& suffering consequentially as a result).
I guess if your judging things by intentions it might slide - but I think it still fails from a functional standpoint.
To add a bit (perhaps this is a reiteration) - being against gay marriage still yields less suffering overall (even if we were to call it intentional) than being against those other things, even if we assumed that people had valid or good reasons being against those specific housing policies (Id argue we already know the solution, people simply dont want it implemented because they are guarding their homes value). I suppose this would come down to how one is judging things.
Nerd
1mo ago
One thing that has always bothered me about progressive politics, is the constant moral framing. As this women does here Along with this comment:
"The left will debate taxes and social programs, not human rights— And why would they engage in conversations intended to reduce personhood. Like Bffr."
But here is what i dont get - why are some issues less "up for debate"? (mainly social issues, such as gay marriage) but others not? & Furthermore, why is it assumed that Democrats & democratic voters are in favor of these Human Rights, even though many of them havent been achieved or been actively worked against?
To elaborate more on what i mean. Im gonna take a handful of things that are often stated to be human rights by liberals & progressives (or at least - could be argued to be) mainly:
A living wage Affordable Housing Healthcare Education
Affordable Housing is a notorious one, and no blue state in the country has been able to tackle the problem effectively. Mainly because locals vote against measures to make it more affordable. Many of these states are also notoriously expensive (part of it is because of housing as well) And the only way to get a living wage would be to go to school (which is arguably still a failure: a living wage as human right would imply all humans are entitled to it - no just those who went to college). No state has universal healthcare. Many states also have poor educational outcomes (Looking at you Maryland).
I bring a lot of this up, because i feel like what a lot of people who think this way dont realize is that many of these economic issues effect people a lot more, and on a lot more of scale than many social issues like gay marriage do. In such way where i think one could effectively "moralize it"
Lets say liberals in a blue state vote against an affordable housing policy, think of the consequential impact of that: The poor single moms and their kids have to stay outside in the heat and the cold & if she cant find a job with a good wage - potentially go without food? Is this supposedly more morally tolerable? Is this hypothetical liberal a "better person" than a hypothetical conservative voter who would vote against gay marriage for instance? Wouldnt they also functionally be against "human rights" as well? Why is "bigotry" more morally unacceptable to these individuals than the economic problems at hand?
For the record im not arguing that being against gay marriage would be "ok". But two guys not being able to get married shouldnt be as big of a deal compared to the hypothetical single mom scenario ive painted above. I think a lot of people (the majority voters) are probably against "human rights" in some way or another - a lot of it is because actually fully realizing the right threatens their self interests (home owner voting against affordable housing, people being against higher taxes, or against poor people moving in next to them to aid with access to education and general social mobility). The apparent lack of those things mentioned arguably creates more suffering for many more people than merely "hating" gay people would (if you wanted to frame it that way).
I'm trying to do a deeper dive into education and its outcomes on children's life success. This is sort of a rehash on a post i made before. However this time the speaker is Matthew Stewart, who documents the same class differences that Charles Murray wrote about. Particular focus on the 9.9%. These people essentially live in gated neighborhoods with zoning that excludes people with less overall wealth. Much of schooling is funded by property taxes, and so as a result of the 9.9%'s houses being expensive, their schools get more and better funding, but when i took a small look, ive come across information stating that poor and rich schools receive the same funding in many instances, bringing the better schools advantage into question. To be fair, these schools may still hold an advantage in other ways, perhaps they have students that are less disruptive for example. Ive noticed here that there are many who debate this issue as one of the chicken and egg. Is it that the people in the lower class simply do bad behaviors, and thus they are in the lower-class with bad schools, and their children have worst outcomes because of it (or the children themselves are bad, which makes the school bad as well since you have many bad children that disrupt well behaved children's ability to learn), (and vice versa - the higher class simply made the right decisions, and thus their children benefit.) or does already being in poverty cause the bad behaviors/poor schooling? It seems very clear that college education effects outcomes such as higher earnings. But Id like more information on K-12. Mainly because id like to give my offspring the best advantage possible, and select the optimal school district and educational system for him/her. Does this simply not matter as much as we thought previously? Or perhaps there is more in the power of parents to help with schooling, with educational activities such as reading and writing at an early age?
Nerd
1yr ago
Hmm. Honestly this is a very good argument i will pick up the book when i get the chance.
Nerd
1yr ago
The normal methods of government can only make this problem worse, not better. The actual solutions are out there, and have been out there. Private charity orgs and mutual aid societies used to handle some of the people falling through the cracks. Apprenticeships where people learn by doing were far more common than schooling. Churches provided help to people
This is a really good point, though i dont agree with it entirely. I cant deny my advantages in my life: my parents are well offish and pay for much of my expenses, they instilled enough work ethic in me and pushed me to go to school. However I also took advantage of the opportunities around me. I choose to go to a cheaper community college to get my degree as opposed to a larger university. I can say scholarships helped me as much as the pell grant did. I got my start in it doing an internship for a small local computer shop, those guys were awesome and were more than willing to help me. I dont think i would have my current job without them. There are certainly things local or market forces can do to help with many of these things. I took advantage of them and i am quite thankful for it, however i think the more nuanced perspective is to insert government where it may be critical (ie the Pell grant) rather than eschew government intervention in our lives entirely.
Nerd
1yr ago
If i had to take an educated guess. They have no positive work ethic that was instilled in them as children. They have also had no motivation from their parents. They dont seem to care about education at all. The fact that they are constantly in an area with drugs and prostitutes doesnt help the matter. But honestly i dont have enough information on them to stipulate anymore beyond that.
Nerd
1yr ago
Theyll get into temporary relationships with men, and try to get them to pay for their nails, make up, or straight up ask for money from them. They hookup with these men much more then they really date them.
Nerd
1yr ago
She doesnt like her family all that much, she constantly complains about them is actively looking to get away. I can certainly see your concern with a potentially darkside of her rearing its ugly head, but i also somewhat feel that this risk exits in dating anyone to begin with. You never truly know who someone is or how they may be until shit hits the fan. This type of faith is typical in relationships, and it in her until she shows me otherwise. My own parents came from a poorer country and pathed there way, if someone has the consistent work ethic regardless of class to do the same, there has to something special about them that would make them differ enough in my book, especially doing so when all the other cards are stacked against you.
Yeah, college is pretty much one of the best times to meet a spouse. You're around many single young people your age. I actually asked a girl out using the flowgorithm program in my intro to programming course. Didnt go anywhere, but if your still in school - its definitely a decent pool.
More options
Context Copy link