SkookumTree
2yr ago
Yeah - short guys looking like Greek Gods can get with women two or three times their weight. Enjoy being 48 and having a 450lb wife that is a sprained ankle away from a nursing home. That might be the least-bad option, and 'we will choose some men by lot to be a kind of insurance plus nurses and caretakers' doesn't seem terrible. I don't know why you would want to raise kids in that kind of dysfunction, but maybe it is not really that bad. I've known decent people raised by shitbag parents, and watching Dad go buy a mobility scooter and extra-large van might not be too bad.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
I mean...I have seen a few? But quite a lot of them have lots of problems caused by what's causing the unattractiveness. I know a woman who had a stroke at 27; she's about 300 pounds. She's doing OK, but her boyfriend had to help her recover early on. If you're very unattractive, you're going to be dealing with hospitals and health problems if lucky, jail and rehab if not.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
I mean...I might have been a bit too focused on the male side of things. But from what I have seen from my unattractive female friends...it is NOT any better for them. Did I tell you about my autistic friends that were raped by assholes and wound up in abusive relationships? About the friend I had who was burned in a house fire when she was three and only got guys that wanted one thing, and then with a bag over her head? Yes, she found a boyfriend, eventually. Then they broke up. I don't know whether dude was a sack of shit or not, but she hasn't dated since that guy, and that was about five years ago.
As for the short man who wound up with the abusive shitbag wife: he was no chump. The wife was decent-looking. OK exterior, garbage interior. I shit you not: he was a colonel in the army, spoke four languages fluently. Special Forces, too. You don't get to become a special forces officer while being a lazy chump or being socially incompetent, do you?
I might be rambling here. But I sincerely believe that there is a small but decent number of men and women that aren't good candidates for relationships. Some people have schizophrenia, some are disabled, some are alcoholics, some are abusive shitbags. Some of this is under people's control, but some is not.
I have known many short dudes who do just fine in the dating department, and have happy relationships. Yes, their dating pool is more limited because a lot of women will automatically swipe left on a 5'4" guy, but the number of women who won't (and who are not landwhales or child abusers) is not that tiny.
What is remarkable about these guys? I do know one short guy who's doing OK for himself: he's going to be a neurosurgeon and has enough charisma for a career in politics. The short guys I know that are medical students or residents and aren't going into neurosurgery are "focused on their careers"; internal medicine, family med, and emergency room ain't up to snuff if you're 5'4". Now. I do not see anything whatsoever wrong with this. A class of people chosen essentially by lot for celibate roles...maybe ones that do not mesh well with family...does not seem like a bad thing at all. That short 14yo boy might hit the books harder or learn to have a politician's charisma if people stopped telling him there was someone for everyone, not "My dude, your small ass has an Everest-size mountain to climb. And that's on a good day. If you want a decent partner, you're going to have to work your ass off and even then it's not nearly as likely as your taller friends. I understand if you choose not to date; there's ways you can be useful without having a partner, marriage, or kids."
We should stop lying to bullshitting kids, and just tell that short/ugly 14yo boy that he should probably be celibate for life for the greater good, as the partners he can get will probably be worse than being alone - unless he likes lights, sirens, and either hospitals or cops in his life. Life ain't fair, and we probably could use some more celibate life paths. Like...it's not about just cosmetic ugliness. It's about things like nursing and caretaking. It's about lights and sirens and traumatized kids. About nursing homes for 45-year-olds and strokes and what most would consider tragedy.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
Other "products" are worse than useless and only bought by fools and the desperate. They're chinesium at best and death traps at worst.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
I've never heard a well-adjusted male be told to give up or to perform some ubermensch-like act of will and dispel their desire for companionship.
Perhaps I was a maladjusted college student. But I was told - in college, by a man who I considered a friend - that it was best if I never had a partner; he believed that all I could get was basically prostitution on a long-term contract. I've had other friends tell me similar things. I understand desexualization. I understand the idea that some people are just shit partners and garbage in, garbage out.
Also: there's no reason why you should exist on the same package as an "exceptional" person? Nobody would buy or be happy in a house if that was the metric.
No. But if your choice is between living in a tent in the woods, and living in a house that's fucking rotting and condemned, full of rats and black mold...the tent seems like the better option.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
I mean it is more than just looks. Are you better off being a nurse and caretaker for your partner? What if they're unattractive because they're homeless and addicted to meth or some shit like that? If they're living on the street because they've got florid, untreated schizophrenia? It's not just unfortunate people that are still capable of working jobs and living independently. It's the 500 pound person in the mobility scooter. The paralyzed man with cerebral palsy that says he's going to kill himself because of despair at his homelessness, and winds up in the local psych ward five times a year. The really unattractive people? They're either at home or in institutions of one type or another. They're Fussell's bottom-out-of-sight people.
It's not just looks - many people would be very happy with someone who had a facial deformity but could work a job, any job, and live independently. It's about the goddamn ambulances and other institutions. It's about watching someone die, possibly to avoidable things like addiction, and being powerless to prevent that.
Getting beat up by the ugly stick is a very different kettle of fish to needing a nurse and caretaker. For the gentlemen: they are indeed looking down the barrel of a life of nursing and caretaking if they want partners. And that is the best many will do. For the ladies, it's even worse.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
The child survived, for what it was worth, with no lasting physical injury. They're gainfully employed and have a clean record. Yes, there are ugly people with good hearts. Yes, some people are in and out of institutions through absolutely no fault whatsoever of their own. Do you want a partner who has some kind of terrible autoimmune disease that means that they will never live independently or hold a job? That, too, is tragic; that is no one's fault. Upthread, someone compared it to driving. You might be a terrible driver because you like to get hammered and do 100mph down residential streets. You might also never be a good driver because you had the bad luck to be born blind or epileptic.
Simply being ugly is one thing. Being in and out of some kind of institution or other is quite another. Where do you want the ambulances?
SkookumTree
2yr ago
I mean. The case of someone that is very unattractive attempting a relationship is like someone who is in the bottom few percent of driving performance considering driving. It may not make sense for them to do so - the risk of accidents is simply too great. With driving...we don't let blind people drive, we don't let people with more than a certain level of visual impairment drive, we don't let people with seizure disorders drive, we make people pass basic tests of roadworthiness before getting their license. "Don't suck donkey balls, or have a condition that means you're going to suck donkey balls, and you can and probably should drive a car."
SkookumTree
2yr ago
It might be a basic human need...but is it better to be alone, or to marry and have children...only to find that your wife tried to kill one of them? Or to be with an abusive alcoholic? All of these things suck: are relationships truly the least bad option here?
Who does not work, does not eat. I suppose you could argue that some people are destined to work extremely dangerous jobs out of pure desperation and run very high risks of being killed and maimed, and that's better than nothing.
"Realistic expectations" means "Become exceptional, or decide where you want the ambulances". It means figuring out how to be OK with either experiencing terrible shit, or watching terrible shit happen - maybe preventable - and being unable to do anything about it. It is a hell of a thing to expect a woman to be OK with winding up with abusive rapists a few times as she learns how to date. It isn't quite as bad (but still bad) to expect guys to be OK watching their partners slowly kill themselves - and that's one of the better outcomes. Imagine coming home to find out that your wife's tried to strangle your nine-year-old son. Do you think that this causes any less despair?
SkookumTree
2yr ago
Why do we expect and encourage the unattractive to have relationships? Yes. Disabled and ugly people deserve a shot at happiness. But there's a hell of a lot of suffering and tragedy that goes on there, and it may well be imprudent to bring children into that. If you're a dude who is 5'4" the least-bad outcome you can reasonably expect is marrying a woman twice your weight and watching her wind up in a nursing home age 44 because she sprained her ankle and couldn't take care of herself after that. And it only gets worse from there: I've known short guys who were with women that were child abusers. Serious shit - as in 'attempted murder' serious. It's no better for unattractive women: there's rapists and abusers and shitbags aplenty. Single motherhood isn't nice either.
I honestly don't get it: if you're unattractive as hell, whether that's partially in your control or not, dating and relationships will suck for you unless you are genuinely exceptional. The only short guy I knew that did OK with dating was a neurosurgery resident with enough charisma for a career in politics. The autistic woman I'm friends with - an emergency-medicine resident in California - wound up enduring a couple relationships with predatory, abusive shitbags before finding a decent guy. Shit fucking sucks, and there's a good chance that the best you're going to get is going to be straight up tragic.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
I don't know that I've met a man in his 30s that is loyal, smart, and likeable that isn't married.
That can easily happen if you're like 5'4" and unwilling to be with someone twice your weight. And that is one of the better things that can happen to short guys looking for partners: I've heard stories about short highly driven competent professional dudes winding up with assholes that...let's leave it at felony child abuse. Plenty of little doctors "married to medicine"; it's a euphemism and we all know it. Don't think that they're worse (or much worse) doctors for it.
Ugliness is one thing. Watching your partner eat herself up to 500 pounds and then wind up in a nursing home age 43 after spraining her ankle is another. Or maybe it is a rehab, and drug abuse. 5'4" guys, unless they are genuinely remarkable, are deciding where they want the ambulances if they want partners. Is it better to be alone your whole life, or to be a nurse and caretaker? Is it better for this guy's female counterpart to date a cheating alcoholic, or to be alone? For quite a lot of people, there are no good options - only less bad ones. I suppose it might not be that bad to have to hire home health aides and stuff if your partner's disabled through no fault of her own. I will grant that. Like. There aren't enough physically deformed people out there for the short guys to marry...
I wonder why we do not simply cut the shit and expect unattractive people to be celibate for life. We need like truck drivers and oilfield workers in the middle of nowhere and shit.
I'm not saying "He can't find a partner" but rather "He can't find a partner that is better than being alone": would you rather be alone for life, or a nurse and caretaker? At some point it isn't about just ugliness but straight-up tragedy. Often made all the more terrible by the knowledge that it could absolutely have been prevented.
Perhaps the poker metaphor is dead, but some guys' best option is walking or running. In the bottom few percent...walking away from the poker table unhurt but with empty pockets ain't that bad. Good arguments to be made for these people not being at the table in the first place. Know when to run.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
Yeah. Although I'm a bit surprised that said senior devs can't find gold diggers willing to hold their noses for the money.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
I don't think being a lesbian is innate and I think it best to be discouraged. I think sexuality is more malleable than people think.
Perhaps this is true. That being said: for young Westerners I don't think that there is enough societal pressure and support to keep a gay person married to an opposite-sex partner for more than a decade, maybe two. If you're very religious/conservative suggesting that gays should be celibate is probably the better way to go...it leads to less personal and family wreckage.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
Many schools and doctors are now teaching a false and poisonous doctrine, that a person can be born in the 'wrong' body and that medical intervention can fix this.
I think that 1) can be true to a greater or lesser degree and 2) is...we are not good at all at changing this. Our medical technology is deeply inadequate; if it was better (say, lab-grown bodies) it wouldn't mean much.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
I would rather make $20 million from secretly winning the lottery
You mean...a long-shot stock option play that pays out hugely, GME style?
SkookumTree
2yr ago
Naw...in ages past it wasn't like well-to-do peasants or carpenters made good went on these. This was very much a 1%er thing if not top 0.1 or 0.01%. The modern equivalent is probably something like a year spent on a personally-owned yacht or something like that...it's for the blue bloods and the people with silver spoons in their mouths.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
Said peasants also buried half their children because they didn't have germ theory, vaccines, or antibiotics.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
Yeah. I've heard lots of tales of fit multimillionaire virgins in Silicon Valley.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
If the purpose of college is mostly signaling, yeah, you can just require high standardized-test scores, cut a few courses, load students up on lots of credits (21 credits per semester was standard at West Point 50 years ago), and basically speedrun college. Two years of hard-ass work, three 20-credit semesters a year.
There is also a socialization/talent-search part of college, too...centuries ago it was a place for the brilliant to mingle with the rich. Isaac Newton had to work his way through college, waiting tables for his richer classmates.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
I think "people are by and large no longer raised in a memeplex that views having children as the terminal goal in life" is underrated as an explanation for why people no longer want to have children.
Strongly agree. That memeplex - and people raised in it - are going to construct a lot of societal expectations and systems.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
The delusion that if you wait around long enough the perfect spouse will drop into your lap. In reality, finding a good husband or wife is like finding a good job or getting into a good college. You should work at it and put yourself out there and make it a priority from a young age.
Yeah. A lot of that is about things like being attractive (Princeton sociologist Catherine Hakim's erotic capital theory) and actually having social capital - not being isolated as all hell.
SkookumTree
2yr ago
Have we made any progress toward safeguarding against superstimuli?
I don't think so. I think that'd take at least thirty years.
No - women have more central tendency. Guys have more champs and way more chumps. Unattractiveness ain't just looks. It can be 'being a criminal shitbag', 'being a drug addict', 'being autistic', or any number of things that are more common for dudes.
More options
Context Copy link