Categories
Uncategorized

Evo psych prof takes the delusions of Reddit’s dateless dudes as facts — and produces a study only an incel could love

This survey of people I agree with proves I’m right!

By David Futrelle

If you were to ask one Reddit’s self-described “involuntary celibates” just why they were celibate, they would probably give you an answer something like this: Because I’m ugly and short and a socially awkward loser, and in today’s terrible world “Chads” get all the chicks — though back in the good old days I would have been assigned a wife through some sort of arranged marriage or something and thus I wouldn’t be alone and mad and, oh, by the way, women are a bunch of worthless whores.

Apparently these views are held pretty widely on Reddit. In a new paper, Menelaos Apostolou, an Associate Professor of Evolutionary Psychology at Cyprus’ University of Nicosia, looked at a Reddit mega-thread devoted to the question: “Guys, why are you single?”

With help from several other researchers, Apostolou sorted and categorized the 13,429 comments that attempted to directly answer the question, discovering that dateless Reddit dudes were most likely to conclude that they were dateless because they were ugly and/or short and/or socially awkward losers. Typical comments included:

Cause I am ugly as fuck and have been cursed with awful genetics.

Being under 6′0″ means I am invincible to women.

Because I have massive self-esteem issues, I think I’m worthless, and I don’t do social things because I don’t want to inflict my stupid, worthless presence on other people.

If I remotely have a crush on you I’m probably gonna be really fucking awkward. 

Sounds a bit like the Braincels subreddit, minus the extreme misogyny.

It’s not clear how many respondents, if any, commented on “Chad’s” relative dating success, but Apostolou felt the need to inject it into the discussion, not as an incel obsession but as a simple statement of fact, declaring that “men who are … good looking may choose not to commit to a long-term relationship, but choose instead to have many different casual relationships.” (Guess what, dude? Men who are not conventionally attractive can do that too.)

Apostolou also brings up the arranged marriage issue, noting that men who are bad at flirting suffer in the contemporary world, in which people seek out partners themselves. “We can ask whether in a pre-industrial context, where marriages were arranged and/or male-male competition was strong, these same men would be single,” Apostolou writes,

The answer is most probably no. Flirting skills were irrelevant because men did not have to flirt with women: Wives were either provided by parents or obtained through force.

No wonder so many guys today are bad at flirting, Apostolou suggests: Evolution hasn’t prepared them for it!

[I]n an ancestral pre-industrial context, the selection pressures on flirting skills would be weak, resulting in many of our ancestors having poor capacity for flirting. This capacity has passed to contemporary generations who live in post-industrial societies. 

And they. Apostolou  suggests, are kind of screwed.

Apostolou isn’t just reporting what Reddit dudes think are the reasons they can’t get dates. He’s basically accepting their explanations as fact, and adding some convenient “evo psych” rationales to buttress their arguments.  He’s taking the skewed perceptions of Reddit’s single men and treating them like scientific insights.

He is certainly aware that a Reddit thread is not a scientific or demographically representative survey,  and that there is no proof that any of the answers given are actually true. He mentions both of these issues in his paper. But in the end he concludes that most of the respondents were probably telling the truth and that’s good enough for him. “We think … that most people have an accurate understanding of what drives them to be single,” he writes, “so this is not a major bias.”

Really? Because after spending nearly ten years reading (if not always posting on) Reddit, with much of my attention in recent years devoted to incels and MGTOWs and other dudes who can’t find dates (or who claim that they don’t want to), I would have to say that I am a little bit less convinced that Reddit dudes “have an accurate understanding of what drives them to be single.”

Well, that was a bit of deliberate understatement. I’m convinced that a pretty hefty chunk of Reddit’s single men have no fucking clue why they’re single. Incels are convinced that they are too ugly to date women, who only want to date the absolute handsomest of men. Neither of these things are true. When incels post pictures of themselves online to “prove” to the world what horrible ugly freaks they are, most of them look just fine. And women date less-than-perfect-looking guys all the time.

Hell, some of the most romantically successful guys I’ve known have included a pudgy goofball with a weird baby face, a guy with a cleft palate, and a short grouchy schlub who rarely shaved. A former roommate basically lived the life of an incel until his mid-twenties when he suddenly found himself dating a series of women most people would have assumed were out of his league. (And no, he didn’t learn “game”; this was more than a decade before any of that crap.) A friend of one of my close relatives is happily married to a lovely woman even though his face was burnt off by acid when he was four.

Some of these guys succeeded because they’re smart and funny and confident and genuinely decent people; the others, well, I’ve never been able to figure out what women see in them. But they share one thing in common: Seeing only their pictures, Incels would classify them all as ugly “subhumans” destined to spend their lives alone. And they would be wronger than wrong.

Apostolou’s study was posted online only a few days ago by the journal Evolutionary Psychological Science (note to self: do not subscribe to Evolutionary Psychological Science), and it’s already being discussed in the subreddits populated by Reddit’s angriest single men — where it’s seen as belated scientific proof for the incel worldview.

Not that they’ve given Apostolou much credit for coming to the same conclusions they came to long ago. While some took issue with the way the study was being framed — in a way that focused on the social awkwardness issue and downplayed the issue of looks (the incel obsession) — others complained that it was little more than a restatement of what to them seemed obvious.

Pointing to Apostolou’s discussion of arranged marriages, one Braincels commenter sneered: “I have been saying this for YEARS you hack.”

“Another groundbreaking study from the academic journal of No Shit, Sherlock” wrote a commenter in r/ForeverAlone.

If your “scientific” study simply reiterates the accepted, er, “wisdom” of some of the internet’s most hateful and deluded men, you might want to think twice about publishing it. Hell, you should probably reconsider your entire career.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

104 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Scildfreja Unnyðnes
Scildfreja Unnyðnes
2 years ago

So I went to take a look at this Evolutionary Psychological Science Journal, to see what else they get up to. It’s Springer, which is where I’ve been published – they aren’t great but they’re big and they’re generally decent. Basic science editing and publication with a commercial attitude. You can’t pay your way into getting published, but editing is pretty straightforward. (I know this ’cause I’ve edited for them in the past.)

But this journal, you guys, holy noodle. There are some free-to-read publications from the recent issue and oh wow. Here are some of the titles you can go read, right now:

Younger Escorts Advertise Higher Charges Online than Older Escorts for Sexual Services Cross-Culturally

Is Kevin MacDonald’s Theory of Judaism “Plausible”? A Response to Dutton (2018)

How Stifling Debate Around Race, Genes and IQ Can Do Harm

I didn’t cherry pick these, these are just the three at the top of the list. Holy noodle, you guyse, the fuckin’ nazis are invading science, and they invented this shitty non-discipline to do it.

jsrtheta
jsrtheta
2 years ago

Evolutionary psychology? This guy should go back and study history. “Pre-industrial” men and women flirted, dated and married like crazy. In fact, they did it kind of like they do today, minus the internet.

Arranged marriages and “force” were hardly the only solutions to the single life. But then, he’s an evolutionary psychologist, so he doesn’t know much already. He sure doesn’t understand valid scientific testing practices.

Paradoxical Intention - Resident Cheeseburger Slut

@jsrtheta: Yuuuup.

Even if your bride-to-be was granted to you by your parents and hers, YOU still had to win them over and prove that you were good enough.

And even then that was only for upper class families who were looking to climb the social ladder, and not for lower class people who had to spend most of their time working for said upper class families. They just were flirting and carousing and doing everything just the same as we might do now, sans tech.

It’s not that “Times have changed and that’s bad”, it’s that “I can’t figure out what I’m doing wrong and it’s so much easier to stew in that bitterness than it is to actually get up and continue to attempt it.”

thinwhiteduchess
thinwhiteduchess
2 years ago

I think its easier for non conventionally attractive men than non-conventionally attractive women. They are more likely to be seen as having other qualities that make up for it.

Victorious Parasol
Victorious Parasol
2 years ago

Once again, I am convinced that evo psych types have built themselves the ultimate echo chamber, and they will NEVER LEAVE.

thinwhiteduchess
thinwhiteduchess
2 years ago

I think non conventionally attractive men have it easier because they are more likely to be seen as having other qualities that make up for it.

Ariblester
Ariblester
2 years ago

@Scildfreja Unnyðnes

But those are just the open-access articles; surely the paywalled ones would be-

What Caused over a Century of Decline in General Intelligence? Testing Predictions from the Genetic Selection and Neurotoxin Hypotheses

(Presumably these toxins also turn the friggin’ frogs gay.)

The Mutant Says in His Heart, “There Is No God”: the Rejection of Collective Religiosity Centred Around the Worship of Moral Gods Is Associated with High Mutational Load

(Y’see atheists, y’all straight-up twisted)

Victorious Parasol
Victorious Parasol
2 years ago

Y’know, anybody who thinks there was no flirting in the pre-industrial age needs to read more Elizabethan poetry. John Donne probably could’ve talked me out of my panties:

Come, Madam, come, all rest my powers defy,
Until I labour, I in labour lie.
The foe oft-times having the foe in sight,
Is tir’d with standing though he never fight.
Off with that girdle, like heaven’s Zone glistering,
But a far fairer world encompassing.
Unpin that spangled breastplate which you wear,
That th’eyes of busy fools may be stopped there.
Unlace yourself, for that harmonious chime,
Tells me from you, that now it is bed time.
Off with that happy busk, which I envy,
That still can be, and still can stand so nigh.
Your gown going off, such beauteous state reveals,
As when from flowery meads th’hill’s shadow steals.
Off with that wiry Coronet and shew
The hairy Diadem which on you doth grow:
Now off with those shoes, and then safely tread
In this love’s hallow’d temple, this soft bed.
In such white robes, heaven’s Angels used to be
Received by men; Thou Angel bringst with thee
A heaven like Mahomet’s Paradise; and though
Ill spirits walk in white, we easily know,
By this these Angels from an evil sprite,
Those set our hairs, but these our flesh upright.
Licence my roving hands, and let them go,
Before, behind, between, above, below.
O my America! my new-found-land,
My kingdom, safeliest when with one man mann’d,
My Mine of precious stones, My Empirie,
How blest am I in this discovering thee!
To enter in these bonds, is to be free;
Then where my hand is set, my seal shall be.
Full nakedness! All joys are due to thee,
As souls unbodied, bodies uncloth’d must be,
To taste whole joys. Gems which you women use
Are like Atlanta’s balls, cast in men’s views,
That when a fool’s eye lighteth on a Gem,
His earthly soul may covet theirs, not them.
Like pictures, or like books’ gay coverings made
For lay-men, are all women thus array’d;
Themselves are mystic books, which only we
(Whom their imputed grace will dignify)
Must see reveal’d. Then since that I may know;
As liberally, as to a Midwife, shew
Thy self: cast all, yea, this white linen hence,
There is no penance due to innocence.
To teach thee, I am naked first; why then
What needst thou have more covering than a man.

Mish of the Catlady Ascendancy

Scildfreja has already addressed the dodgy nature of the journal – and a big boo hiss to Springer for associating itself with such trash…

So I’ll just roll about laughing at the notion that people didn’t flirt Back In The Day. Please, dude, have you not looked at art from different periods and cultures? How about poetry? Novels and stories?
BIG TIME FLIRTY STUFF
And a lot of it was not even connected to marriage, or prospective marriage. People did it for fun, and still do.
What’s the “selection pressure” for fun, I wonder?
(I don’t, really).

Bakunin
Bakunin
2 years ago

@Ariblester
What the fuck is the second one saying? Atheists typically have more mutations?

I mean, the title is rather self-explanatory, I just didn’t think anyone would be awarded grant money to produce that nonsense.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
2 years ago

“I can’t figure out what I’m doing wrong and it’s so much easier to stew in that bitterness than it is to actually get up and continue to attempt it.”

Maybe someone should write an instruction manual? One that doesn’t assume access to middle class resources.

Runia
Runia
2 years ago

Yeah arranged marriage was basically only done for political gain/inbreeding BY ROYALTY. I know that if your only source of knowledge about history is period dramas it might seem like everyone “back then” spent their days lounging in pretty dresses or looking dashing on horseback but like. Nobility, let alone royalty, has always been a minority and an outlier. Peasants, merchants, soldiers and other working class people had plenty of freedom to marry and frankly if the village smith was a fucking creep he would remain single while all the busty milkmaid Stacys flocked to men who weren’t repulsive.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Does he even bother to show evidence that in the good old days, women didn’t want men who were attractive and charming and were all just perfectly happily to accept any man who came a courtin’?

If he hasn’t studied the history of love and marriage, hasn’t he at least read books and plays from pre-industrial cultures? I mean, he must at least have passing familiarity with the most famous of Shakespeare’s plays, right? Because old fictional love stories are not fundamentally different from contemporary fictional love stories. People have always flirted. People have always had unrequited crushes. People don’t change all that much.

He’s also apparently taking it for granted that flirting and other social skills are innate and fixed and not you know, skills? Skills that one can learn? Sure, flirting comes easier to some than others. I’m not great at flirting myself. But you can learn the basics if you want.

Men need to stop looking for excuses for why it’s unfair that they should have to attract dates and/or sex and just make an effort to be more attractive (looks-wise, personality-wise, or both). Because whining about how women should be falling all over you but aren’t is about the least attractive thing ever.

Valentin - Emigrantski Ragamuffin
Valentin - Emigrantski Ragamuffin
2 years ago

@Victorious Parasol

they need to read pushkin too 😁

and Jane Austin

Iseult The Idle
Iseult The Idle
2 years ago

Being under 6′0″ means I am invincible to women.

I can’t stop laughing.

My nerf claws don’t work on him! He… he must be under 6’0″!

(Frantic hiss of frustration)

(sound of retreating footsteps)

Vucodlak
Vucodlak
2 years ago

I have questions born of those sample comments:
I too have awful genetics. Among other things I inherited a host of allergies, perhaps the worst of which is to grass. How can I possibly date a hu-man feeeeeeemale if we can’t do that thing that happens in every romantic movie where the lovers roll around in the grass and make googly eyes at one another? I mean, I could do that, but I’d be red and swollen from head to toe by the end of the date, and probably covered in ticks too. Do women find oozing rashes, hives, and Rocky Mountain spotted fever sexy?

I am over 6 feet tall. Do I need to worry about squadrons of woman-piloted starfighters attacking my exhaust ports?

I too have self-esteem issues, and I think it’s quite likely I’m a terrible girl inside… and you hate my intuition, as I hate my wretched pride. So go on and throw me to the wolves, my murderous angels. Just lead me to the naked and vicious woods, and run. Can anyone name the song* I, erm, borrowed most of this paragraph from?

I had a crush on a good friend from fourth grade through twelfth, and it was never awkward until I finally told her and asked her out our senior year. She turned me down. I had a short sad. I got over it. Life went on. We’re still friends in that vague sort of way that people who’ve lived their own, totally separate lives for a decade and half. Does that make me a cuck, an alpha, or a wicked child of the deshret?

Also, on the concept of arranged marriages (as envisioned by incel redditors):
Do they really want their mommies and daddies to choose their partners? Have they thought this through? I know I certainly wouldn’t want anything to do with someone my shallow, image-obsessed super-conservative parents chose for me.

*The answer, in rot13: Jbyirf ol Rtb Yvxrarff

Kat, ambassador of the feminist government in exile
Kat, ambassador of the feminist government in exile
2 years ago

@Vucodlak

Have they thought this through?

Of course. Incels are nothing if not rational and think only the best thoughts, the most well-thought-out thoughts. These thoughts do not hold up in the real world, but that is the fault of the real world.

Bina
2 years ago

Being under 6′0″ means I am invincible to women.

That word…it does not mean what you think it means.

And that being said, maybe being vulnerable, and losing your toxic masculinity syndrome, would make you a bigger success with women.

Bina
2 years ago

Also, I note that the author of this piece of…dubious scientific value…is a Greek Cypriot. No wonder he hit on the whole arranged-marriage and allegedly-traditional-values “solution”. They still do that over there, although probably not as much as they used to.

And with no happier results, I’d imagine.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
2 years ago

Once upon a time, way back in human prehistory, environments changed slowly over time. Species adapted to the changes. Evolution, we called it, and it was a good thing.

Fast forward to modern times. Social and cultural changes began to happen at a quicker pace. Gender roles transformed. Everything went all feminazi. Certain men were having trouble adapting.

Obviously, the only solution was to roll back the world to accommodate them.

Now that evolution was mainly cultural, it was bad and had to be stopped. Still, scholars insisted that evolution (the good kind) demanded that we revert to the mating behavior of Neanderthals and medieval feudal lords. As proof, they pointed to caveman cartoons in back issues of “Playboy”.

Everyone gasped at this unassailable logic and women resumed their “natural” behaviors of making sandwiches in 1953. It was agreed that evolutionary progress was only good when men did it. It was further agreed that bending society into pretzels so that a small number of heinously creepy incels could have sex was a brilliant adaptive strategy and in no way the exact opposite of natural selection. From his tomb, Darwin applauded.

The end.

Hexum7
Hexum7
2 years ago

If evolution worked the way prof here, thinks it works, wouldn’t all people be attractive?

Or, if that’s too much to ask of Mother Nature, then would we not have evolved, psychologically speaking to not discriminate between faces.

After all, those poor wives assigned to repulsive men against their will, could not exactly have been the best companions, or receptive to sex, married or not. This can’t have been good breeding strategy.

Oh, fuck, why did this guy make me think about shit like this? Effing sadist!

Fetch
Fetch
2 years ago

“Pre-industrial” seems like a bad way to say “the past”. The start of the industrial revolution is usually pinned at 1750, and that’s just the spinning jenny; for steam engines you have to wait until 1800. 1800 is just not that long ago. The average Londoner in 1800 was not in an arranged marriage.
I mean… the Wife of Bath is a definitively pre-industrial story, and I don’t think her husbands married her by force.

Lumipuna (nee Arctic Ape)
Lumipuna (nee Arctic Ape)
2 years ago

From his tomb, Darwin applauded.

Nobody noticed it, because being six feet under made him invisible to women and men.

Moggie
Moggie
2 years ago

Being under 6′0″ means I am invincible to women.

How does this work? I’m just slightly under 6′, so do I get the full invincibility, or am I still mostly vincible?

I assume he means “invisible”. As someone who has spent my whole adult life trying not to be noticed, and has largely succeeded in being invisible, I’m pretty sure this guy could become visible without using platform shoes. I’ve known a number of short guys who were very popular.

Moggie
Moggie
2 years ago

Lumipuna:

Nobody noticed it, because being six feet under made him invisible to women and men.

comment image

Mish of the Catlady Ascendancy

@Buttercup, @Lumipuna,

*applauds wildly*

Where would you two like your Internets and kitten baskets delivered?

Lukas Xavier
Lukas Xavier
2 years ago

From The Mutant Says in His Heart, “There Is No God”, posted by Ariblester:

We examine associations between these deviations and four indicators of mutational load: (1) poor general health, (2) autism, (3) fluctuating asymmetry, and (4) left-handedness.

In other words, they didn’t actually bother checking the mutational load, but instead used statistics about rather unreliable markers. They could have sequenced DNA from some people and checked, but they didn’t bother.
This is indicative of a problem in evolutionary psychology. They tend to jump from hypothesis to conclusion and forget that part in the middle; you know, the part where you do the actual fucking science.

Violet the Vile, Moonbat Screech Junky
Violet the Vile, Moonbat Screech Junky
2 years ago

It might be because I am a bit tired this morning, but I cannot stop watching that dog gif.

It’s hypnotic.

the real cie
2 years ago

“Being under 6′0″ means I am invincible to women.”

Don’t forget, supervillain wannabes, if you are under 6’0″, you have a damn good shot at beating Wonder Woman, Batgirl, Supergirl, etc. in a fight. If you are over 6’0″, they are far more likely to kick your ass. Always send in your less than 6’0″ supervillains to fight the ladies.

Kat, ambassador of the feminist government in exile
Kat, ambassador of the feminist government in exile
2 years ago

Being under 6′0″ means I am invincible to women.

Not to this woman.

Sheila Crosby
2 years ago

I think the fundamental problem with Evo Psych is that behaviour doesn’t fossilize, so that you’re left with far too few dots to join up. When humans do that, their biases and preconceptions fill the gap seamlessly, and whichever group gets to the gatekeeping positions first gets to lock in their own world view, daft bits and all.

Somewhere there’s an alternate universe where evo pshych is dominated by women, and the papers are a whole different flavour of very silly.

Kat, ambassador of the feminist government in exile
Kat, ambassador of the feminist government in exile
2 years ago

WTF? Man who is shorter than 6 feet actually has a girlfriend who recognizes that he’s shorter than 6 feet, still loves him, but needs for him to stop lying about his height? What kind of bizarre alternative universe have I landed in!

Help! My Boyfriend Insists He’s 6 Feet Tall. He’s Not.

Daniel Mallory Ortberg: Welcome back to me, hello again to all of you, and let’s chat!

Q. Boyfriend believes he’s 6 feet tall: I met my boyfriend David on Tinder five months ago, and it was a match made in heaven. He’s compassionate, attractive, and a bombshell in bed. Recently, at our physical, I learned something. David is 5 feet, 8 inches tall. On his Tinder profile, he lists himself as 6 feet. On our first date, I asked him [if he is] really 6 feet. He got agitated and said yes.

I feel lied to and betrayed—why is he so insecure about his height? He takes so much pride in being tall. Always bragging to our friends and acquaintances, commenting how he won’t fit in that car, asking if I need help getting something off the top shelf. When the doctor read off his height I thought I saw his eyes start to swell up. Now he’s attempting to stick his height into every conversation. I have been afraid to bring it up, but this is really bugging me. I see marriage in our future, as we’re both almost 40—but this needs to be settled first.

A: This is not a situation where you need much of a strategy beyond “acknowledging reality.” Talk to your boyfriend. “Hey, it’s clear that this hits a really deep nerve for you, but I’m not sure why you keep bringing up your height and insisting that you’re 6 feet tall. It was obvious at the doctor’s office that you felt very strongly about hearing your height spoken aloud. What’s going on?” If he wants to talk about his feelings about his height with you, that’s going to be a lot more useful to him than pretending he’s 4 inches taller for the rest of his life.

https://slate.com/human-interest/2018/08/when-men-lie-about-their-height-and-more-advice-from-dear-prudence.html

Citerior Motive
Citerior Motive
2 years ago

Buttercup Q.: And Darwin’s name? Albert Einstein.

Heirloom Roses
Heirloom Roses
2 years ago

When I first heard of evo psy I assumed they study animals like great apes and compare their psychological traits to modern humans and use data from bio-anthropology to construct a model of how humans’ brains evolved.
Apparently it is just a bunch of untested or poorly tested hypotheses about why middle class white westerners in the 21st century have certain behaviors given some assumed past that has little to do with reality.
Sigh.

rugbyyogi
rugbyyogi
2 years ago

Heck the problem with evolutionary anything is that even fossils don’t fossilise. Or rather to say, very, very little of the biota is preserved and even if some things are preserved in the record, the rock has to be subsequently exposed and then accessible to humans who know what to do with them.

But back to the topic at hand, the incels this time are right, that is some seriously kack science, but they are right for (mostly) the wrong reasons.

It makes me sad that evo psych, which sounded like it could be so much fun (much as described by Heirloom Roses above), is taken over by people with such dubious values and such poor methodology.

Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
2 years ago

Evo psych prof

… yeah, right… that’s kinda like being a Professor of Astrology….

And for the closeted incel mammotheer… good news!!

https://slate.com/technology/2018/08/sex-robots-could-totally-redefine-the-institution-of-marriage.html

Schnookums Von Ghostface Fancypants Killer
Schnookums Von Ghostface Fancypants Killer
2 years ago

Well shoot. I’m 6’3″ and was kind of banking on my invincibility as a pick-up line “Hey, I’ll let you shoot me in the head, and if I live you have to go out with me.”

Guess I’ll have to fall back to the classics *swaggers* “Do any of you ladies (and short dudes) need something off a high shelf?”

Gaebolga
Gaebolga
2 years ago

From the OP:

Because I have massive self-esteem issues, I think I’m worthless, and I don’t do social things because I don’t want to inflict my stupid, worthless presence on other people.

Okay, so this guy seems to have a pretty solid analysis of why he’s single. There may be other factors, but that one is major.

Yutolia the Green Hash Thing
Yutolia the Green Hash Thing
2 years ago

@Ariblester: re: neurotoxins

Reading the abstract, they seem to be arguing that *BAD GENETICS!!! are responsible for a supposed drop in average IQ in the past few decades. They seem to be arguing against the hypothesis that neurotoxins (i.e. lead and mercury) and other environmental hazards might have a deleterious effect on a developing brain.

*dog whistle for interracial marriage I’m pretty sure.

Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
2 years ago

@ Heirloom Roses;

just a bunch of untested or poorly tested hypotheses about why middle class white westerners in the 21st century have certain behaviors

… and why those behaviors are CLEARLY SUPERIOR….

All based on the dubious presumption that socialization in the 21st Century is driven by behavior learned 15,000 – 100,000 years ago. Like there’s been no change in society in the interim.

Who?
Who?
2 years ago

I think the most interesting was the guy who discriped himself with massive self-esteem issues, because that one is nearer to the truth, than the rest.
If I interprete it nice, I am dateless because I feel bad about myself and don’t give people a chance to know me, is honest.
It is far more right than ugly or too small.
(With the incels there is the personality and the hatred, that makes thinks worse)
I wanted to highlight it, because it is far from the others at last a good evaluation were his problem is.

About aranged mariages: (Only common among high nobility see above) I gave them a husband/wife and a way to get legitimate children, but stabil is different. The men often had mistresses (in France there were some who were oficial part of the political class and political powerhouses) and a bastard was not uncommon. There was a problem if there was no heir and sometime kings took extreme messures (Henry Tudor is infamous for that).
So I wanted to say that even than love was often found outside of merriages and most of the arrianged merriages were not what we today think as a loving meriage.

Mikey
Mikey
2 years ago

Well the Norwegians say it’s a peer reviewed periodical (2015 start at four issues a year) but I wonder how it scores on the official peer review measure that’s used to rate journals by the number of citations? Anyone know how that works? Even so as noted you can’t draw qualitative data from a forum for the like-minded; there needs to be some Kinsey level of study into social media and sexuality to understand it but also factor in platform and systems for dating in the modern world.

It’s messed up. There was a recent article about plastic surgery increases for nose jobs from people who post selfies; the selfie can make a nose appear 30 per cent bigger depending on the shot position. So they would come in to say their nose was too big and show the evidence and surgeons, the good ones, would say you’re fine and explain the camera issue.

So people’s identity of self is being warped by the tech they use; and reddit peeps get to scream their sads to the like minded who egg each other on. Then there’s the chans.

I grew up with hard copy porn being the only thing you could get and it was hard to get. Now the worst of sex is but clicks away. So sad people see hot people doing it and their perception of normal is gone.

I’m a black pill in their parlance; but someone liked me enough to get past that. Go her.

But I know their sads, that was my life as a teen, but I didn’t have this insane place where I could cook off and be encouraged to do so.

I don’t know how I’d have gone being a teen now young man today in such an environment; I could have been sucked into that world view with the tools and platforms that enable such views to take root.

In the end it boils down to empathy; put yourself in the place of a woman and imagine having to negotiate this world. I shudder at the horrid things I said as a sad teen to girls whose only crime was to be a peer and female.

I could never go to a school reunion; I’d be too ashamed to face them for the way I acted to them because I knew I was not attractive and I presumed they hated me.

And they didn’t; I just didn’t appeal to them that way.

And that’s no one’s fault.

You like who you like and if you’re lucky they will like you back. But you can’t be angry at someone who does not feel the same way as you because you have no choice and you cannot force your attention on them—esp. If you tried and they said no.

Being a sad man who feels unloved sucks; forcing a woman to be with a man because their culture makes it so sucks way more.

What if I was a woman? That’s all they have to do to get it.

Binjabreel
Binjabreel
2 years ago

@heirloom roses:
Honestly good evo psych doesn’t even do that. Even with the other great apes, there’s too much divergence to discuss actual behavior and very few good evo psychologists will really do that.

Most good evo psych is about things like how humans can’t judge the angle of the ground further than about ten to fifteen feet away, because based on our running speed and how fast our visual cortex processes, that’s all we’d ever need.

But that doesn’t make for sexy, overblown headlines.

Liquidmidnight
Liquidmidnight
2 years ago

The investigator is extrapolating male dating patterns from a sample of Reddit users – many whose primary population-defining characteristic is failing at having a romantic partner. The lumps my girlfriend’s cats leave in the litter box have better external validity than this study. No psychological study* has perfect external validity, but that is a HUGE (YUGE?) external validity problem for this study, which the investigator just briefly handwaves at the end by saying, “Like oh yeah, people in the IT world may be over represented.”

The problem is his data do not fit his theory. There’s a difference between making causal conclusions about male dating patterns and making a conclusion about male meta-cognition about perceptions of being single. The data provide some basic support for the latter conclusion, but not the former because he’s simply relying upon subjective perceptions and then shoehorning them to fit a theory.

*This would technically be better classified as a sociology rather than a psychology study due to the (albeit, basic) content analysis methodology and the nature of the theory building.

hapnadsmannen
hapnadsmannen
2 years ago

Runia, it was hardly only royalty, but the larger point is true, arranged marriages (at least in the West, don´t know too much about other cultures) is strongly connected to property being involved in the deal.

When you descend the social ladder down to self-owning farmers, for example (in Sweden), the families were very much involved setting up a match, but the future bride and groom still had to get to know each other first and accept the whole thing. The maiden might be reproached by her family for rejecting what was considered a good match, but it wouldn´t make her a social outcast doing so, just maybe seen as a bit bitchy. The man would have even more freedom.

Catalpa
Catalpa
2 years ago

There has NEVER been a time where people went “hey, you’re a man! Here is your complimentary wife!”, except, perhaps, if you were born into royalty.

The majority of lower class families (and thus the majority of people) partnered by choice, because not having much/any in the way of property, wealth, political power etc. means there’s no point to arranging marriages to consolidate those things. Even in cultures where arranged marriage was fairly common, the suitors would still have to win over the family of the bride, by being charming or wealthy or successful or part of a powerful family. So basically all of the things that “Chads” would be good at, and incels not so much. There’s no benefit to arranging a marriage to a schlub.

But of course if we go back to the good old days, the incels will definitely take their rightful place as god-kings that are handed everything they want and have the power to harm anyone and anything who do not please them. It’s definitely only feminism and women actually having choice in their partners that stands in the way of that future./sarcasm

Bina
2 years ago

If six feet or more is the magic height for male desirability, I’d really like these Neinsteins to explain to me why Dudley Moore, who was all of five-foot-TWO on a good day, was so popular back in the ’70s and ’80s. His height was not a dirty little secret, it was a straight-up ASSET when it came to publicity. His nickname was Cuddly Dudley, and he was routinely paired in the tabloid headlines with tall, statuesque beauties.

But then again, that ain’t none of my business…even though, from personal experience, I can confirm the old adage that ’tis better to have loved a short man than never to have loved a tall. As long as he’s not bitter about his height, it’s all good.

Yutolia the Green Hash Thing
Yutolia the Green Hash Thing
2 years ago

I know others have pointed out a lot of things about arranged marriages, and I just wanted to add –

Do they not realize that while parents could arrange marriages, the woman’s family also had to agree? A lot of times there was some level of exchange. It wasn’t just this “my parents will find a woman for me and then somehow force her to marry me”. Also, while marriages can be arranged, they can also be unarranged. European history is full of nobles marrying off their daughters, then annulling those marriages and marrying the daughter off to another person as the father saw fit.

There are so many reasons why we need to do a much better job teaching history at the pre-college level.

Moggie
Moggie
2 years ago

Bina, I remember Dudley Moore being frequently referred to as a “sex thimble” by the tabloids.

If you don’t want to be angered by another form of “traditional” marriage, don’t look up “bride kidnapping”. This is still prevalent in at least some of the Stans; in Kyrgyzstan, I think something like half of all marriages involve kidnap (though some of that number will really be elopement).

Freemage
Freemage
2 years ago

I looked up their RG Impact score.

https://www.researchgate.net/journal/1474-7049_Evolutionary_Psychology

A 1.28 is… not good:

http://mdanderson.libanswers.com/faq/26159

That sticks them pretty much in the basement in terms of how often they’re cited.

And yeah, EvoPsych is to actual Evolutionary Science what Alchemy is to Chemistry, or Astrology is to Astronomy. There’s a lot of interesting measurements and data buried in there, and you could use that to build a real scientific discipline from it, but first you’d have to clear out all the woo and bias that is built into the primary assumptions.

1 2 3