March 29, 2019

"Since 2008, the share of men younger than 30 reporting no sex has nearly tripled, to 28 percent."

WaPo reports, in "The share of Americans not having sex has reached a record high/You can blame young people for this dry spell, data show."

Interesting... and you can speculate about the reasons — the article mentions unemployment, living with parents, and video games.

But I just want to say I was offended by "You can blame...".

What is blameworthy about not having sex? You might just as well say it's praiseworthy. I wouldn't say either. Sometimes sex is good and sometimes it isn't. But better than nothing is a high standard!

92 comments:

Mr Wibble said...

Honestly, the unemployed gamers living off mom and dad are the ones who always seem to be able to get laid. They're losers and women seem to flock to them.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

I blame Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion, and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

Michael K said...

Right hands were probably not polled.

Craig said...

I am a trendsetter. I was celibate in my 20's during the nineties and aughts, before it was cool!

rhhardin said...

Just say no thanks.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

But better than nothing is a high standard!

Said no guy*, ever


*any guy who would say such a thing is not a true Scotsmen.

Not Sure said...

Free porn has raised guys' threshold for dealing with actual women.

YoungHegelian said...

As myself & my coterie of friends has grown older, I have noticed that a number of my friends, especially my single friends, really would have had more pleasant lives in a religious order. Some of them probably would have had more sex, too, furtive sex still being sex.

There was a reason why back in Ye Olden Days a sizable fraction of the population ended up in a religious order of some sort (estimates are that 1/10 of the male population of England was in some form of ecclesiastical orders at the accession of Henry VIII to the throne). It's tough & wearying to be out there "on the market" for years & years.

Seeing Red said...

What about females?

I don’t blame the men.

What if we’re going into a reverse 50s where the female is the aggressor?

rehajm said...

Speaking of high standards the substantial gender gap of the sexed implies younger women are either choosing older partners or sharing partners of like age with their female peers. IOW, there’s only a few young studs out there, ladies! Act now!!

traditionalguy said...

You could also explain this by the weaponizing of the feminist war on men. Many of the women who would be seeking a relationship are being taken by the financially and politically favored Lesbians who don't want male competitors fooling around with their women.

Henry said...

The ice caps have melted.

Wince said...

Isn’t “better than nothing” a low standard?

Ray - SoCal said...

Hopefully the articles looked at if some groups of men got more sex (alphas), and others less.

Interesting how making sex into a less costly action (one night stands, no requirement of marriage, abortion option, birth control), has helped create this.

Or perhaps it’s the rise of other options / alternatives for sex, without the potential cost of a fake rape charge. I wonder will more realistic, lower cost sex dolls make this trend worse.

Or perhaps it’s just a rise in the demand for instant gratification.

What a strange world we live in.

The Drill SGT said...

It's a paleo distribution. Hypergamy in action. As women throw themselves at a smaller number of high quality studs, that means that other men suffer a sexual drought.

Nonapod said...

Easy access to infinite free porn may have something to do with it.

Ann Althouse said...

"Isn’t “better than nothing” a low standard?"

Better than nothing is a high standard = my aphorism, used on this blog many times.

joshbraid said...

Yes, "blame" says there is something wrong AND that someone is at fault. It is a very linear and unhelpful frame. This implicit value of sexual orgasm as the greatest good does disservice to people in general, especially "young" people.

Your tag of "celibacy" is in error and I suggest you correct it. The concept of celibacy has a typical connotation of choosing a way of life that does not include sexual (or anal or oral) intercourse, such as Catholic or Buddhist priests. While the term has been corrupted by misuse, I think you would use "chastity", which is the avoidance of sexual relations. Actually, I suggest you use neither because it is not clear that either applies. For example, it may be a result of depressive symptoms rather than an active decision.

Henry said...

Call it a 3% decline in sex and a 25% increase in honesty.

In seriousness our current gaming and media entertainment, especially targeted to young men, are geometrically more absorbing than those of a generation ago.

Boredom is a great improviser.

Lucid-Ideas said...

According to genetic historians, the status-quo for most of human history has been that - conservatively - 9 out of every 10 men that reached reproductive age did not breed.

People talk about the 'Pareto Principle' a lot these days while forgetting that while they impugn it in modern times the 'old world' lived under a version on steroids.

Female hypergamy is always in effect, regardless of whether or not times are good or bad.

For a lot of young men I think putting it in this perspective might soften the angst. I'm more worried about society though. China is experiencing the 1st wave of this right now with almost 30-40 million single men under 30.

Large numbers of unloved, single, unmarried, sexless and jobless men aren't a loss. They're an army.

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

The Drill SGT said...
It's a paleo distribution. Hypergamy in action. As women throw themselves at a smaller number of high quality studs, that means that other men suffer a sexual drought.

And the NYT reaps the benefits! Decades and decades worth of educated women to keep it's pages full of "Why Can't I Meet A Decent Man In This Town" articles!

Gretchen said...

Reasons include:

* Being afraid to talk to women because they might say something rampantly sexist like "you guys" or reveal he likes John Wayne, Kevin Hart, or thought Blazing Saddles was hilarious.

* Being afraid he might flaunt male privilege by paying for OR not paying for a date.

* Being afraid that when he finds out his date Mindy is really Manny and she has a penis, he will be forced to continue dating or be labeled a transphobic bigot.

Can you blame them for staying in the basement and playing video games????

tim in vermont said...

It's a high standard for women, for men almost any sex is "better than nothing."

Ralph L said...

Probably fewer married men under 30, but have the proportions of married/shacking up/single changed much?

So many gays getting married and the moving of cruising to the internet mean a lot fewer "trade"-rs readily available.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Better than Fleshlight™ is a high standard.

Ann Althouse said...

"Speaking of high standards the substantial gender gap of the sexed implies younger women are either choosing older partners or sharing partners of like age with their female peers."

Or having sex with other women!

Don't forget the gays!

Dad Bones said...

They're saving up for a sexbot.

Ann Althouse said...

"Your tag of "celibacy" is in error and I suggest you correct it. The concept of celibacy has a typical connotation of choosing a way of life that does not include sexual (or anal or oral) intercourse, such as Catholic or Buddhist priests. While the term has been corrupted by misuse, I think you would use "chastity", which is the avoidance of sexual relations. Actually, I suggest you use neither because it is not clear that either applies. For example, it may be a result of depressive symptoms rather than an active decision."

"Celibacy" is a long-time tag on this blog with 84 posts. Tags collect related posts, and having too much restriction of meaning defeats the purpose of collecting things. To apply the tag is not to make assertions about the meaning of the word, but to say this belongs with that.

Also, it's my tag, so MY connotations are what matters, not what is "typical."

There is involuntary celibacy. It's talked about a lot. "Involuntary" may be added to overcome the "typical connotation," but the word is still used.

dbp said...

I wouldn't say the best word to use is "blame", I would use "shame"--as in, it is a shame.

In your 20's, you are at peak health, vitality and free time. It is not just the sex-act itself, that is just the cherry on top: It is the intensity and intimacy that come from two young people who get to know each other and eventually fall into each others' arms after days or weeks of flirtation.

It is a great time in one's life and most of the married couples I know, found their spouses that way.

Bob Boyd said...

Since we started wearing our tinfoil hats all the time, my woman and I have been much more sexually active again.
Draw your own conclusions.

Ann Althouse said...

Maybe the #MeToo movement has influenced men to think of the woman's point of view and forgo sex that is intended as low quality. There may be a fear of getting into trouble, but it's possible that people are gaining in insight and empathy.

The idea that a man will take whatever he can get is something you often hear, but I don't think it's grounded in reality (as this survey shows).

Birkel said...

Japan lost a decade (1989 to present and counting) and their people quit having sex.

Obama helped America lose a decade, and our people quit having sex.

I wonder if Trump will get people fucking like they should.

tim in vermont said...

Where did Napoleon get all of those young men? At least he offered the prospect of getting some via rape.

Ralph L said...

It's possible more men got hooked on hooking up in college and decided dating first wasn't worth the trouble.

wwww said...

Later marriage = less sex. Add to later marriage, in more video games, more texting, less socializing in person in the 18-29 cohort. On the other hand, Brad Wilcox, sociologist, finds that the rate of divorce among millennials has fallen to rates in the 60s. Less divorce and less unmarried sex.

tim in vermont said...

Who is going to honestly answer questions when the correct answers change every year and the punishment for a slip up is lifelong and completely indelible?

When it comes to sex, men are simple. The knights in shining armor of women's imaginations are subtle and complex. Guys with a lot of choices can afford higher standards, and women are utterly blind to most of the rest of men. They may as well not exist.

Ray - SoCal said...

I wonder if there is a relationship between sex and mean weight.

Be interesting to graph this...

SDaly said...

Personal observation. Walking around the city, more and more young men (20's and 30's) simply do not look like men anymore. I'm not talking about fashion, I'm talking about facial shape -softer and rounder than men my age (50's) and older. Wispy beards may be a compensation mechanism. Sperm counts for men are increasing lower too.

There's something in the environment that is causing this, which is why the "soyboy" meme rings somewhat true.

My name goes here. said...

When did this start? Was it 2008? What if we find (say around 2027) that men started having relations with increased frequency starting around 2016. Would that finding change what people think might be part of the cause for the decline, and part of the cause for the resurgence?

Just a thought.

Bob Boyd said...

Carrying on a relationship that's not better than nothing is better than nothing until someone you know sees you.

buwaya said...

Another explanation is loss of status.

Low status males become ineffective at obtaining mates, even among similarly liw status females, because of course it is the male who must find a mate, it is his burden. Biology does not gift females with the ability to pursue men in the much more rational way men can pursue women, "settling" for the achievable.

High and low status is relative of course, depending on the persons personality and cultural context.

A climate of cultural suppression can drive a lot of men to avoid the social risk and personal trauma of attempting to mate, against the odds. A proportion will just give up. I also think this explains much homosexuality.

The old social system came much closer to guaranteeing everyone a mate.

Mr Wibble said...

Some thoughts from a mid-30s single guy...

Porn may be giving some men unrealistic expectations, but our culture does the same for women. IIRC, there have been studies showing that women on dating sites rate 80% of men as "below average" attractiveness. I think that a lot of women have unrealistic standards as well compounded by the illusion of choice that dating sites provide.

The attractiveness distribution of women is getting wider. I see a lot of women who are massively overweight, heavily tattooed/pierced/etc., and dress horribly. Most of them would be moderately attractive if they put some effort into it, but instead they seem to deliberately make themselves uglier.

It appears to me like there are an increasing number of women in their early thirties who basically spent their twenties waiting for their boyfriends to grow up, get a decent job, stop playing video games all day, and commit. They hit 29-30 and finally dump him after five or six years together, and now they're behind the curve.

Online dating sucks, but it's hard to escape it. Social activities seem to be in decline. I've had difficulty finding a social group to spend time with where I might actually meet appropriate women. Dancing tends to be either old folks or college students, and a lot of the women are in relationships with men who aren't interested in joining them. Church singles groups have either been a bust, or non-existent.

Temujin said...

Well...let's start with the fact that for the first time in our history, the US is reproducing below replacement rate of 2.1 children per woman. We are, like most Western countries, dying out unless we either change, or just move Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, and 2 states from India into the US.

There are a number of factors, including the fact that we're so sophisticated now, we don't need children. We're so sophisticated we can just extinct ourselves. We do this via a number of means including, but not limited to just aborting them, even up to and after birth. But I joke.

Women have been steered, either by self or societal movement, to stay in school longer, pursue multiple degrees, and after that, a dynamic career. Men, on the other hand, have been steadily ostracized for decades, from grade school through to us playing the stupid goofy guy on TV shows, movies, and commercials. Ritalin induced male children are being funneled out of school when they question what is being taught to them. The end result is: When career women start to think about maybe...possibly...sorta wanting to start a family, they're 35, have no solid relationship going with a man whom they'd want to father their children because the man has been lightly employed for 10 years, and spends most of his time honing his video skills in his apartment or his folks basement. But I joke.

We're too sophisticated to replace ourselves in the population. And there's guilt. White liberals carry around with them a TON of guilt for just being. I think they view themselves as part of an evil cult which the world would be better off without. I find myself agreeing with them on some level. In other words, the younger generation does not see replacement population as a thing that's important. They don't like Western Civilization (except for the nice things it offers them), so they don't see it as a loss when it goes away (they will when it happens). And, as guilty white liberals, they think that EVERYONE should be a person of color. Any color. Just not white color. But I joke.

The only 2 states that are reproducing above replacement level are....South Dakota and Utah. So...at least we know what they do in their spare time.

robother said...

Young men: damned if you do, damned if you don't.

eric said...

This is happening because of porn.

Boys get exposed to porn around 10 years of age in America.

They start watching and get the wrong message about how men interact with women.

In pornography, the woman does whatever you want. Do you want a compliant, submissive, woman? Easy! Do you want a dominatrix? Of course we have that too! How about two women at the same time?

Whatever you want, you get.

In reality though, women have their own agency. Are complex. Have emotions and needs of their own. It's just so messy. Why bother with that when I've got my favorite porn star queued up for whenever I want her?

Like drugs, pornography is destructive to society.

Big Mike said...

There may be a fear of getting into trouble, but it's possible that people are gaining in insight and empathy.

Women don’t have a whole lot of empathy at that age; why should men? (Hell, the evidence is that they don’t seem to have much empathy at your age.)

Fernandinande said...

According to genetic historians, the status-quo for most of human history has been that - conservatively - 9 out of every 10 men that reached reproductive age did not breed.

That was for about 8,0000 to 4,000 years ago (agriculture was "new"), but not before and not after. In recent history about 80% of men and 90% of women reproduce.

stlcdr said...

If you had casual sex with a woman (acquainted or otherwise), you run the risk of being accused of sexual assault or rape, with no defense.

eLocke said...

"Better than nothing is a high standard = my aphorism, used on this blog many times."

I'm a big fan of that aphorism, and have used it many times (crediting you).

I have always taken it to mean that as time goes on, better systems and policies are developed to the point that improvement becomes difficult. Thus, any new proposition needs to meet the "better than nothing" standard at the very least.

I don't see how that applies in this case. At least to the young men involved. Assuming I know anything of what it's like to be a young man these days, but I don't think the world has changed that much.

Leland said...

Since Althouse didn't do it for us; I clicked over to see the top rated comment:
"How can anyone get in a good mood and want to have sex when Republicans are destroying everything?"

Trump now has his opponents depressed and sexless with WaPo blaming them. I think the post is going to need another tag...

Bay Area Guy said...

Feminists and Leftists and Incels and Snowflakes and Beta Males and Vegans and Pacifists are all conspiring to subvert good sex in America.

What we need are more hot women and less Beta Males.

MadisonMan said...

#MAFA

I hope you can intuit what the F the F means.

Michael said...

Women have just become too much trouble - toxic, if you will. Perfectly well-intentioned (if awkward) young men can say or do something that blows up in their faces, leading to administrative or social (media) persecution from which there is no recourse or recovery. In a world where the woman is always right, why chance it?

Lucid-Ideas said...

@Ralph L

Re 'Hook up culture' I completely acknowledge my complicity in this and would make the following statement as too why 'too much' actually ends up being a bad thing.

Familiarity. As it says in Ecclesiastes, "...increaseth knowledge and yay shall you increase sorrow."

I have been with women the world over, and while my current gf is among the best women I've ever been with, I can honestly say that my ideal partner has never materialized, nor does she likely exist. Women, by and large, are shockingly similar in their behavior, interests, personalities, and traits. Men can be too but our society works hard to hide the fact that women (and their personalities) are just as 'disposable' as men in this regard.

The horrible truth is that the 'high variability' in the males of the human species is in direct contrast to the 'low variability' in females. Nature 'tinkers' a lot more with men with the ultimate result of a lot of men don't or can't meet the standard while nature creates women essentially for one purpose, and the underlying psychology doesn't change much either despite all the bloviating 'depth' you'll see on an online dating profile.

I was demoralized for quite some time in my early 30s (which wasn't that long ago) realizing that yes, it may 'not be worth the trouble'. I got lucky in the last few years but a larger and larger number of guys don't and even if sexually active and experienced won't either. Not in this environment.

Virgil Hilts said...

I'm not saying its women now outperforming men in almost all aspects of life, the wide available of high quality free HD porn, the development of amazing sex toys for both sexes or the explosion in obesity (people keep ignoring that one!), but. . . well, OK it's a combination of all 4 of those things.

MD Greene said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said...

Decreasing sperm counts, lower libido, increasing number of young men treated for erectile dysfunction, transgenderism.

Possibly related to all the hormones we've injected into livestock and the food system?

dreams said...

I blame clogged arteries due to the fast food diet, too much sugar and lack of exercise. Lack of blood flow doesn't just affect the penis it also deprives the testicles of oxygen too which decreases desire. More young people are having heart attacks which I predict will become more common , maybe even epidemic like. Believe it or not.

Ambrose said...

"reporting" is the key word.

Renee said...

Maybe young women (or is it men?) have become choosier?

Ok, maybe not.


But, it has been noted, that for couples that do marry, couples will have a less likelihood of divorce. For the women who do marry, are happy with the spouses they chose.

Why?

Couples are deciding, and not just sliding into a situation, where they are living together or having a baby with one another.

But you can have sex outside of marriage? Yes, but it's harder to hook up. Harder than ever apparently. Even with Tinder and the sorts, no one ever meets up, it's literally just swiping faces and a little messaging, no one meets up.


https://ifstudies.org/blog/in-the-uk-today-men-who-marry-are-deciders-not-sliders

"As social pressure to marry has gradually disappeared, those who do choose to marry are making it more of a deliberate choice. We've already seen evidence from the United States that “deciding,” rather than “sliding,” is particularly important to men's commitment. Well, it looks like we are seeing this in the UK with this gender effect. Divorce rates were higher previously simply because some men were sliding into marriage under pressure from family and friends.

No longer. Men who marry today in the UK are “deciders” who really want to get married rather than “sliders” who are doing it under pressure. Since falling divorce rates are the driving force behind the overall reduction in family breakdown that we've seen in the last five to 10 years, this improvement in men's commitment is having a hugely positive effect. What's more, we expect the fall in breakdown to continue as these stable newly married couples have children who become teenagers."

tim in vermont said...

I am pretty sure that empathy requires the ability of the mind to encompass the mind of another.

Xmas said...

Eric said,
"This is happening because of porn.
Boys get exposed to porn around 10 years of age in America.
They start watching and get the wrong message about how men interact with women."

From about 5 years of age, that cohort of young males has been told:
Don't touch
Don't flirt
Don't talk to girls you don't know
Don't say anything that could make someone uncomfortable
Calm down, don't run, don't shout
Take these pills so you're ADHD is under control
Take these pills so you're not sad

And somehow we end up confused why these kids grew up and are unable to interact with other people when their childhood was spent taking daily doses of amphetamine salts while being told their feelings were bad.

Yancey Ward said...

I blame Trump- he is fucking all the fuckable women.

buwaya said...

In my industries, I have known a rather large number of otherwise successful men, able, hard working, honest, and very well paid - they must all make well over $100K, sometimes much more (or the equivalent at the time I knew them) - who are single, often to retirement. And with not a hint that they are homosexual, and indeed they often have been active but unsuccessful at finding a mate.

An interesting parallel with "Fiddler on the Roof". Consider the character of Lazar Wolf the butcher. He is, relatively speaking, a successful man, a "catch" in the traditional sense of the village. Note I am speaking of the musical, I read the "Tevye" stories many years ago, and these are much more complex; still, the musical is what most know.

Lazar Wolf loses out, however, to the modern spirit of the age, wherein all the girls are looking for love and personal fulfillment, and not the old traditional devotion to duty ("Tradition!" is a great song). Tzeitel rejects him for the poor, but more romantic Motel.

The other daughters go for ever more outre but romantic suitors. Even in the 1880's the romantic-drama fantasy had permeated society to the extent that tradition was upset, that tradition that promised a wife for every man prepared to be a husband, and a husband to every woman prepared to be a wife.

This has only escalated, with the conventional modern wisdom that women are obliged to pursue a romantic ideal, however unattainable, as the supply of even plausibly ideal men is quite limited. And, unfortunately, there is no practical option of maintaining a stable harem.

Part of the problem, in real life, are all those Lazar Wolf's. And, probably worse, are all those Tzeitels and Chavas and Hodels, that in the real world often cannot find their ideal or acceptable beaus, because of course "Fiddler on the Roof" is a romantic fantasy, a step on the development of that now universal modern meme-complex, to which women are extremely vulnerable. This meme-complex is much like one of those insidious insect-control systems that fool the creatures into failing to mate.

"Fiddler" though, to its credit, is a remarkably deep and concept-dense piece, even as a musical, and all over the thing are masses of counter-points and complexities.

Mr Wibble said...

Re 'Hook up culture' I completely acknowledge my complicity in this and would make the following statement as too why 'too much' actually ends up being a bad thing.

Familiarity. As it says in Ecclesiastes, "...increaseth knowledge and yay shall you increase sorrow."

I have been with women the world over, and while my current gf is among the best women I've ever been with, I can honestly say that my ideal partner has never materialized, nor does she likely exist. Women, by and large, are shockingly similar in their behavior, interests, personalities, and traits. Men can be too but our society works hard to hide the fact that women (and their personalities) are just as 'disposable' as men in this regard.


Occasionally I'll hear someone say that you should "figure out what you like" before you settle down to marriage. It always struck me as backwards. What you like should depend at least in part on your partner. Where else is better to experiment or broaden your horizons than with someone you love and respect and trust?

buwaya said...

Status, or perceived status may be an important factor. I have seen this a few times.

Ex. An acquaintance was, while working his way up a corporate ladder from a humble start, a nerd indeed, was entirely gay, in a long term relationship with a more-successful man. They even got married. Eventually though the fellow "broke through", accumulated considerable assets, made a pile in real-estate investments, and, interestingly, became entirely heterosexual. The pair broke up, and the newly successful man acquired a string of women.

If I were a rich man,
Yubby dibby dibby dibby dibby dibby dibby dum.
All day long I'd biddy biddy bum.
If I were a wealthy man.

dreams said...

As George Patten said or maybe it was just George C Scott in the movie who said that if you won't screw, than you won't fight for your country.

"72 percent of young adults in Kentucky don't qualify for the military"

And it's not just Ky.

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/opinion/2019/03/29/military-service-most-young-kentuckians-dont-qualify/3021106002/?fbclid=IwAR1wFvjut92cuwcLRrrCJpGnA2-JPDZfYxMPzZkTV-PJu8wtiiGXk9egcoI

Bricap said...

Probably a variety of reasons out there. Increased economic anxiety is probably one of the biggies. If the stat I saw the other day is true, that said that people aged 24-39 earn $10K per year less in real dollars than that age group earned in 1989, plus the explosion of college debt since then, that is likely going to have a real impact.

rehajm said...

Totally correct a percentage of women could be having sex with each other but since the story didn’t celebrate any of the women as homosexual it’s safe to assume we’re talking about hetero sex.

joshbraid said...

"Also, it's my tag, so MY connotations are what matters, not what is "typical." "
Yes, it is your blog so you can decide that words mean whatever you like. I only commented because you seem interested in using words precisely. I am also aware that there is confusion about the meaning(s) attributed to this word and wanted to offer a more standard definition and semantics.

"There is involuntary celibacy. It's talked about a lot. "Involuntary" may be added to overcome the "typical connotation," but the word is still used."
Sorry, celibacy means choosing a state of life where one abstains from sexual (or oral or anal) intercourse. It is a voluntary thing. Involuntary celibacy is an oxymoron.

wwww said...

Marrying later is a big part of it. I hear people saying it's hard to meet people, and I believe it. We met as undergrads, and I think that's the easiest time to meet a future spouse.

I have seen friends marry later. It seems harder then meeting at school. Many met through school and put off marriage for a couple of years. Others met through outdoor clubs like hiking or skiing or boating. I'd strongly suggest looking into these outdoor clubs, if you like skiing, boating, or hiking.

Another idea: If your church doesn't have a good singles group, you might look around at other churches in communion. Our church offers a monthly pub meet-up for singles.

Another possibility: professional meet-up groups. In my location, there's a monthly analytics evening meeting. And a monthly lunch on analytics and tech issues and hey the food is free. Both meetings open to all. Good place to meet professional contacts. If you are looking for a spouse, there are singles in their 20s and early 30s that attend.

Howard said...

I gotta start hitting on 20-something girls.

TobyTucker said...

Can we add smartphone use to the mix as well? Could it be that with everybody glued to their phones and texting up a storm, the ability to converse in person has atrophied? If you can't make interesting conversation, be it witty, flirty or funny, you aren't going to get far. It sure seemed to me that if you could get a gal to laugh, (with you, not at you, obviously) your chances improved considerably.

Yancey Ward said...

It is video games and porn, and those are being combined now in increasingly difficult to distinguish from real porn games.

I am quite thankful, at least today, that the only porn available to me when I was a teenager and in my 20s was mine and my friend's dad's Playboys and Penthouses, along with the occasional Oui. If Pornhub had been available to me as a teenager, I might have died of over-masturbation.

Bob Boyd said...

I don't know if our tinfoil hats are actually blocking the rays and stuff. Maybe they are. Or it could just be because they're really pretty sexy...the way we make them.

Greg Q said...

"Blame" is applied for multiple reasons:

1: The Left embraces Abortion and cheap sex. Having people reject cheap sex is, therefore, apostasy.

2: Males who find an enjoyable life without females are a huge threat to the Left
A: Those girls are a core constituency of the Left. They want "relationships", which is to say they want guys to pay to take them out. The higher the ratio of girls looking for relationships to boys willing to pay, the less the boys have to pay, and the more the girls have to pay.
B: Guys who are trying to get laid will "act Left" to get into left-wing girls pants. Guys who would rather play video games, OTOH, become GamerGate supporters and opponents of the Left

Althouse writes:
Maybe the #MeToo movement has influenced men to think of the woman's point of view and forgo sex that is intended as low quality.

HAHAHAHA
That was funny
#MeToo teaches guys that women can't be trusted, and their lies will beat our truths. See Kavanaugh hearings

If women were adults, we could tell them what we want, they could tell us what they want, and we could come to a mutually amicable agreement.

Instead, we get women going on dates, going home with the guy, doing things without complaint, then attacking the guy for it later.

F that. Playing a video game with guy friends is a lot safer, cheaper, and probably more fun.

We offered equality, but women demand superiority. They demand that the rules be different for men and women, with the men in the inferior position.

Fine, you ladies have fun with that. Alone.

Dave Schuler said...

Less sex and plummeting male fertility are probably completely unrelated.

Basil Duke said...

Here in St. Louis, it appears that most of the hot chicks keep their thighs vapor locked unless a Cardinals or Blues player (and, up until a couple of years ago, a Rams player) 'seduces' them. And once they've scored with a pro jock, well, their sexual intercourse bar is permanently set there - until they reach menopause, at which time they shift to middle-aged investment banker types. I know a fast fading beauty/bartender whose closet is filled with NFL jerseys given to her post coitus by her many conquests. Now in her early 40s, she remains "unattached." At one time, the bar I frequent employed six women as bartenders and waitresses - and five of them had made the beast with two backs with the same Blues player. None of them had actual boyfriends, however. Those Mound City ladies who deign to dabble with 'civilian' men appear to be either alcoholic or insane, or both.

walter said...

Birkel said..I wonder if Trump will get people fucking like they should.
--
Stormy has her MAHA tour.
Is she laying down on the job?

Unknown said...

Crazy Jane said -- I'm past optimal dating age and married. Last week some guy in a sport coat came up to me in the grocery store and asked if I were single. It's that bad.

What s=was so bad about that, exactly?

Bob Loblaw said...

This isn't super complicated. As we delay marriage until the very end of a woman's fertility window, we delay assortive mating until that time. The attractive men are sleeping with multiple women, and the less attractive men aren't sleeping with women at all. By their 30s the more attractive guys are dating younger.

The men who didn't get any interest in their 20s have found hobbies to occupy themselves and haven't put any effort into developing themselves as a potential husband. This is broad strokes, of course, but individual exceptions don't matter in these social shifts.

This is a terrible system for all concerned except those lucky attractive men. The end of this road is a society where only the most religious people get married, women look to the state for provision when they're having children, and most men do the minimum it takes to get by (which in turn reduces the state's ability to care for all those women).

FullMoon said...

Oh, sure. Typical Althouse commeteriat. Ignore the elephant in the room.

Go ahead, you are not fooling anybody.

Climate change.

Prove me wrong. Maybe I cannot prove Climate Change is guilty, but you cannot prove Climate Change is not guilty.

Or, the report is BS, like so many other studies.

Unknown said...

I can’t even imagine a life like this, or even what has caused it. I spent my perhaps misguided but completely enjoyable reproductive years doing just that, or more precisely, acting it out. There were video games, the internet, and parent’s basements then too. I think the difference for me is that I ended up being successful enough to date because that was my Prime Directive. I worked hard, bought a hot car and moved out at 21. That is the power of testosterone, I don’t think young men have it or apply it any more.

bagoh20 said...

You can argue that sex being a primary drive and the only way to survival of the species, that yes, lack of it, technically is a bad thing.

I think the reasons are:

1) A general diminishing of masculinity in men. They are less manly, less driven, less goal oriented, they just have a lot less spunk these days.

2) Women are more difficult to get along with in a sexual male/female dynamic. They may be easier to be friends with, but romance is now too political, to competitive, just not much fun for either of them.

bagoh20 said...

"Climate change."

Possibly on to something there. Will science be able to maintain the effectiveness of deodorant at higher temperatures.

Unknown said...

Lol, humans reproduced quite prolifically before the invention of deodorant and daily showers.

I have a theory about pubic hair, or rather the lack of it.

cronus titan said...

Dr. Helen Reynolds wrote a book a few years, "Men on Strike," arguing that American men are on strike against marriage, fatherhood and pursuing the American Dream. Her argument is that there nothing in it for men any more, and men have concluded that the risks of having a relationship with a woman vastly outweighs the benefits. Her argument was overwrought at times but the basics are sound -- fleeting moments of pleasure in return for throwing the dice with your future. I know quite a few young men in their 20s who have simply checked out of dealing with women outside the workplace, and within the workplace their shields go up when they are around young women. They all know that one slip up or one misunderstanding, whether rel or not, and your career is done and reputation in ruins. Better to not deal with it.

Greg Q said...

Bob Loblaw said...
and most men do the minimum it takes to get by (which in turn reduces the state's ability to care for all those women).

bagoh20 said...
A general diminishing of masculinity in men. They are less manly, less driven, less goal oriented, they just have a lot less spunk these days.


cronus titan said...
Dr. Helen Reynolds wrote a book a few years, "Men on Strike,"

Ding ding ding!

It's not "a general diminishing of masculinity in men", it's a female dominated society that's hostile to masculinity.

No respect for masculinity and men? Great! Then we'll play video games, do the minimum, and let you women do ALL the work to provide for YOUR babies.

"Invest in the future"? Why? Left wing societies have no future. I'm going to take care of me, and let society go to hell.

Am I married? yes. Do I have a good job? yes. Do I have any kids? No. Why? Because i decided that a society willing to elect BO as President is a society not worth saving, and not worth investing in.

I've got mine, the rest of you can all go to hell. And I'm very glad to see younger males having the wisdom to do the same

MD Greene said...

I said this: Crazy Jane said -- I'm past optimal dating age and married. Last week some guy in a sport coat came up to me in the grocery store and asked if I were single. It's that bad.

Unknown's response was this: What s=was so bad about that, exactly?

Nothing, exactly, but this: I'm a middle-aged woman, long married and with a child who is taller than me. I wear a wedding ring. I haven't applied makeup in almost a year, and I live a jeans-and-sneakers life that is punctuated by work projects done at home. Nothing about me or my behavior suggests that I am interesting in meeting single men.

I don't doubt the man meant his question kindly, but it struck me odd that he thought such an approach was even worth pursuing. It was the dating equivalent of buying a lottery ticket.

More to the point, I have marriageable-age friends in Manhattan who, apart from pub crawls and Tinder, have no idea to proceed in these matters.

There's a lot of evidence that young single people are flummoxed in an atomized society where most social contacts are online and not person-to-person. I can think of several who I believe would like their parents to search out dating prospects for them, something I would NEVER have done back in my day.

It's different with this generation.

Joe said...

According to my 27-year-old son, women his age and younger are very entitled; it's there way or the highway. The attitude that you deserve anything you want that affects so many people his age seems to have infected women far worse than men.

Since he was a teen, he's complained that too many girls are whores; they are ride the cock carousel and then wonder why "good" guys aren't interested.

This is exacerbated by seeing couples go through brutal divorces where the man is screwed over.

Note also that men aren't going to college.

And multiple studies have found that online dating has extremely warped matchmaking. Looks--especially facial looks--have always been important, but due to the swipe-left nature of dating sites, it's taken on even more importance.

BTW, my 30-year-old daughter tends to agree with my son. She was my wild child, but even she's surprised how annoying girls in their early twenties have become.

glacial erratic said...

I am a white male, employed, income in the 95th percentile, normal height and weight, average in looks, not socially awkward, active (hiking & biking). I have been completely unsuccessful with women my entire life.

At some point, you just say to hell with it. And go look at p***.



buwaya said...

s j, go abroad.
Take 6 months off, to the provincial Philippines perhaps.
Avoid Manila. Do the wanderjahr. Spend money, but not too much.
Be seen. Learn a bit of the language of wherever you are.
Women will find you.
Your problem at that point will be setting up filters.