doubtingthomas’s topics MEGATHREAD

[doubtingthomas]

DT, you should probably get on board with advocating for the abortion rights of women.

I am not against abortion. I do think some pro-abortion arguments are stupid, but it's alright to have an abortion, especially early during pregnancy.

If you want to enjoy sexual relations with women, then women need some options other than becoming a parent for the next two decades after your condom breaks, and you leave town.

Abortion is legal in most states. The decline of sexual activity started in 2017 according to one study.

[Res Ipsa]

So now we should ignore the “expert” that you were chastising people’s for ignoring.

He's wrong on that point, nobody is perfect. Two studies show that young men were having more sex during the great recession.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8649100/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293001/

and this study proves that economic circumstances don't explain the decline in casual sex.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/1 ... 3121996854

I would really appreciate it if you can explain why there was a decline in sexual activity after 2017, or is this study flawed? I'll stop talking about this subject if you give me a good explanation. The author thinks there are signs of a decline in sexual activity.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8649100/

When women want your “help,” they’ll ask. They are fully competent human beings. Sexiest BS like you are peddling is the opposite of helping.

It's a good thing to be very picky, it's not a good thing to be very picky before hitting the wall.

A lot of women are talking about the same issues that I am pointing out. It's all about ending violence. Don't you want to help end violence?

You’re making the same mistakes with research over and over again. I’m not going to waste my time, as you are either unwilling to or incapable of properly using research. (Hint: a single study of a decline in casual sex in no way disproves the professor’s hypothesis that the hollowing out of the middle class is making young men less viable as partners.)

If you don’t want folks to think of you as a misogynist, stop talking like a misogynist.

Step one: stop telling women what is “good” or “bad” about the way they select romantic partners. People get to choose their romantic and/or sexual partners and it’s none of your goddamn business. Your repeated emphasis on women’s physical appearance and use of the phrase “hitting the wall” is classic sexism. It’s, as Marcus has repeatedly pointed out, treating women as objects and not people who are fully capable of decision making.

[canpakes]

DT, what I haven’t seen from you is what you expect to happen to change this situation, and who you expect to do it … aside from stating that women should simply put aside their preferences in partners in order to substitute in the preferences of random men.

[canpakes]

The decline of sexual activity started in 2017 according to one study.

Hmm. Right when Trump took office. : D

[Res Ipsa]

Show me the research studies or quote the experts.

Have you never heard of something called abusive relationships ..?

I’m kidding. Of course you have.. right?

Why would a man abuse his wife or girlfriend when he’s in a relationship with that wife or girlfriend, and presumably not ‘lonely’ because of it?

You need to consider that you are drawing an exceedingly simplistic ‘cause & effect’ conclusion about human behaviors that is not rooted in reality and facts.

DT would be well served by putting his research skills into learning who is most likely to be the perpetrator of violence against women. (Hint: it’s not lonely guys who can’t get a date.)

[doubtingthomas]

(Hint: a single study of a decline in casual sex in no way disproves the professor’s hypothesis that the hollowing out of the middle class is making young men less viable as partners.)

I agree, I am not claiming that a better economy wouldn't help. However, the economy was pretty bad during the great recession, but men were having a lot more sex.

This paper controls for several variables (such as unemployment, living with parents, and so on) and still concludes that young men who were born after the year 2000 are having less sex.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8649100/

as you are either unwilling to or incapable of properly using research.

You have accused me of that before, you accused me of misrepresenting the research when I was simply sharing the papers that Kipping talked about in the video.

Step one: stop telling women what is “good” or “bad” about the way they select romantic partners. People get to choose their romantic and/or sexual partners and it’s none of your goddamn business.

It's affecting society in many ways. The increasing percentage of single men is a dangerous threat to society. We need to talk about the issue, name calling is just a method to shut down the discussion. Do you deny that reducing loneliness will help to reduce misogyny?

Your repeated emphasis on women’s physical appearance and use of the phrase “hitting the wall” is classic sexism.

Hitting the wall means that you lowered your standards. Both men and women can hit the wall, but evidence shows that women are more likely to stop caring about looks after age 40.

Again, your accusation of sexism is just a nasty way of shutting down the discussion.

Of course, women should have high standards, but there's no evidence that women are avoiding the rich handsome assholes. Laundrie had a wealthy family. There is some evidence that a significant number of women are dating players.

Also, why can't society in the US allow young men in their early 20s to talk to younger women?

[doubtingthomas]

Hmm. Right when Trump took office. : D

I'll stop posting about this issue if someone can give me a good explanation about this.

This paper controls for several variables (such as unemployment, living with parents, and so on) and still concludes that young men who were born after the year 2000 are having less sex.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8649100/

[Marcus]

(Hint: a single study of a decline in casual sex in no way disproves the professor’s hypothesis that the hollowing out of the middle class is making young men less viable as partners.)

I agree, I am not claiming that a better economy wouldn't help. However, the economy was pretty bad during the great recession, but men were having a lot more sex.

This paper controls for several variables (such as unemployment, living with parents, and so on) and still concludes that young men who were born after the year 2000 are having less sex.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8649100/

as you are either unwilling to or incapable of properly using research.

You have accused me of that before, you accused me of misrepresenting the research when I was simply sharing the papers that Kipping talked about in the video.

Step one: stop telling women what is “good” or “bad” about the way they select romantic partners. People get to choose their romantic and/or sexual partners and it’s none of your goddamn business.

It's affecting society in many ways. The increasing percentage of single men is a dangerous threat to society. We need to talk about the issue, name calling is just a method to shut down the discussion. Do you deny that reducing loneliness will help to reduce misogyny?

Your repeated emphasis on women’s physical appearance and use of the phrase “hitting the wall” is classic sexism.

Hitting the wall means that you lowered your standards. Both men and women can hit the wall, but evidence shows that women are more likely to stop caring about looks after age 40.

Again, your accusation of sexism is just a nasty way of shutting down the discussion.

Of course, women should have high standards, but there's no evidence that women are avoiding the rich handsome assholes. Laundrie had a wealthy family. There is some evidence that a significant number of women are dating players.

Also, why can't society in the US allow young men in their early 20s to talk to younger women?

This is more misogynistic BS from doubtingthomas.

[doubtingthomas]

Be the change.

Of course, women should have high standards, but there's no evidence that women are avoiding the rich handsome assholes. Laundrie had a wealthy family. There is some evidence that a significant number of women are dating players.

Wouldn't reducing loneliness help?

[doubtingthomas]

DT would be well served by putting his research skills into learning who is most likely to be the perpetrator of violence against women. (Hint: it’s not lonely guys who can’t get a date.)

You are right, a lot of women would rather be with a Laundrie than with a boring nice guy who isn't very attractive and has a boring job. There's no evidence that the rich jerks (or the jerks who have wealthy families) are having less sex. How pathetic!


Anyways, I'll shut up if you give me an explanation for this.

This paper controls for several variables (such as unemployment, living with parents, and so on) and still concludes that young men who were born after the year 2000 are having less sex.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8649100/