any women here who have never dated, never had a boyfriend?

Post Reply New Topic

is it really that hard to understand that dating or having a girlfriend/boyfriend isn't automatically better than being alone? i think autistic people should know it better than most everyone. loneliness is a b***h, but human contact as a rule is unpleasant. especially when people assume you're automatically better off for it. that alone already makes it exponentially more unpleasant, to the point that it gets disturbing

I don't search the true love, I just someone who is the best at my opinion.

I agree with anagram and hurtloam.

Um, i think you misunderstood me Spiderpig. I meant that women don't participate in this sub forum because some men on the forum basically say, "you're not allowed to be single or incel because you can easily get a man.

It's not as easy as men imagine. Some women just get no interest, but dont want to use online dating. Or the interest they get is with ideologically incompatible men. Should they just throw their life away for an interested man who is not compatible with their lifestyle?

Say she doesn't want kids, but the interested man does. Is she now not allowed to talk about being single because an incompatible man once showed interest in her?

It's like the conversation always turns into, if you won't use online dating you are not allowed to feel lonely or comment on your experiences.

Also. I don't know why you instantly jumped to the conclusion that my use of the word circumstances meant that single women choose not to socialise in real life. That's quite a leap.

I know sociable single women who get no male interest. People say to them," you just need to get out more" and they're like I am out there, no one likes me.

And they're not ugly before anyone decides to throw that old trope into the mix.

That's the case of Temple Grandin for the most of what you say.

anagram, you really manage to puzzle me. I have no idea whether I should really spend the time to answer, because my experience in similar cases suggests I’m only going to make things worse, but ignoring your post feels rude and cowardly, too. I just don’t know if I’m more cowardly replying, because the confrontation seems quite likely to escalate till you or someone else points out I wouldn’t have the balls to defend my position to your face, which is probably true if you make it obvious enough that you’re going to beat me up—if not, I’d just talk and get beaten up without seeing it coming.

You’ve said quite plainly somewhere else that you basically reject logic. Maybe the words you used were objective arguments, but I’m not sure. I’ve since avoided arguing with you, because I know I’m really bad at not getting in trouble with people who show that attitude. Without logic, there’s really no language to understand each other, as you’ve just shown in your very reply: you refuse to follow my reasoning, even to point out the flaws you imply it has, and this frees you to accuse me of anything you want. To achieve any kind of mutual understanding with someone who doesn’t already share all your beliefs, you can’t rely on subjectivity, precisely because it’s subjective—it depends on the person. The only way someone’s subjectivity can be made to work as if it were objective is by force, suppressing all dissent so whatever you want to establish as the truth at any particular time goes unchallenged.

Given this state of affairs, I don’t know what you mean by reasonableness. If you refuse to answer about facts or the deductive process leading to my conclusions, I think the only option left is that you look at the conclusions themselves and decide whether they’re “reasonable” based on whether you like them. We’re bound to disagree unless you show me clearly the supposed flaws in my reasoning, because I like seeking the truth, even if I can’t know it fully. If something is true, I wish to believe it’s true; if it’s false, I wish to believe it’s false. I don’t care if either option would make me feel better or would accommodate existing prejudices of mine better, because that has no bearing on what is actually true.



Now you’ve finally crossed the line into an outright personal attack. You claim, with no explanation whatsoever, that what I said is “besides the point”, simply refusing to follow a line of reasoning I don’t think can be made any clearer, and seize the chance to make me look as bad as possible, or close enough. Ironically, this approach looks a lot like what you yourself accuse me of doing.



Whose point? hurtloam replied about a topic already being discussed. If she just wanted to show her anger, without trying to justify it, she surely said an awful lot more, including a few claims presented as if they explained why most women behave a certain way. I’m interested in those facts and in understanding them, so I pointed out why I disagree with that explanation, hoping to start a debate which might shed some light on the matter. That was my point, and I think I’m no less entitled to have one than anyone else, unless, of course, moderators decide I am. At any rate, I think hurtloam can make her point herself.



Arguments and proofs are the way to discover the root of disagreements and to get someone—not necessarily the other person; it may be yourself if you find out you were mistaken—rationally to change their mind. Forcefully stating your beliefs or your feelings isn’t going to convince anyone to change their own—it may, however, make others afraid to voice them. I’m not interested in that kind of exchange, and, if someone doesn’t want to read any disagreement, what they need is an echo chamber, not a forum where people can freely discuss ideas.

I feel like you're being a bit over-dramatic here.

fixed that for ya

i'm not talking about "negativity", btw. i'm talking about negativism. i'm allergic to it

look it up

Alright, let's do logic.

It remains a tautologous fact that, if a heterosexual woman is in a relationship, or finds success through various dating/people-meeting measures, then so is/does a heterosexual man. He has to, in order for the woman to do so.

As it stands, there is not and never will be a precise parity of numbers (as in, 1:1), but there is a rough enough one for it to hold, particularly when we are nowhere near all heterosexual women having a partner. Within the (still dominant) heterosexual monogamous paradigm, for every single man there is also a single woman. For every man going without a beloved of their own, so is a woman.

'But it's easier for women!'. Is it, though? Easier how? 'Men have to ask, women just have to wait'. Well, no, but for argument's sake: Men ask and ask and ask and ask and ask. They fail, but at least they get it over with. Women wait. And wait. And wait. And. Wait. And. Wait. And for all their efforts (the appearance, the shameless flirting) to get the attention of the object of their desire, they may as well be the predator, invisible or otherwise - it's all the same. She doesn't even get rejected, because she'd have to be noticed to be rejected.

Let's allow the common fantasy and suppose that, if she wanted, any given woman could find a male to have sex with. When you say this, you probably have in mind a woman you fancy. But what if she's not? What if she's someone you find repulsive? She might not be able to get one she finds attractive. 'But she can definitely get someone!' - if you insist. Maybe at best she can get someone desperate to lose their virginity but too scared to go to a sex worker.

But hey, she got laid, no? Is that really anyone's idea of a superpower? If it's yours then 1) don't troll me, but just incase 2) grow up and 3) rethink your life.

It seems to me underlying this victim narrative of 'hard done by men' - which does no help at all - is a fear that (the horror!) women have wants and desires and preferences, too. There is simply no other reason to cling to this 'poor me' story - it's not like it's doing anyone any good, is it?

There's problems here, plenty for all of us. this absurd (and frankly one-sided) pissing contest isn't going to solve any of them.

Last edited by Hopper on 26 Aug 2016, 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Yes, how dare these lonely women just not jump on any "D" that presents itself. The have no right to go around being lonely when they're so darned "privileged."

I really think some guys here would find it enlightening if they stopped thinking of women as smaller, less hairy, defective versions of men, and started thinking of them as WOMEN who have different evolutionary roles in the reproductive process, and, therefore, different wants and needs. Oh, and females have very good reasons for being "picky" that men, in their reproductive role, never have to consider.

Seriously, if men can cure their loneliness by obtaining a woman, ANY women, great. I don't know too many females who can be happy and content hooking up with any 'ole man that comes by. FYI: women who experience nothing but bad relationships can be just as legitimately "lonely" as men who never experience any. And before someone inevitably screams, "AT LEAST THEY HAD RELATIONSHIPS!! !," I reiterate that just "having a relationship, ANY relationship" may be enough to make men happy, but it's not for most women.

Why? Because women are women.....not smaller, less hairy, defective versions of men.

i wouldn't put it that way. i'm not saying that there isn't a link between gender and perspective, but, to be clear: when i emphasize that being with someone else isn't automatically better than being alone, i'm not defending anyone else, i'm talking about myself

i was raised to believe that everything i did or thought or believed on my own was wrong, except for my grades at school. those were my only redeeming quality, and "should" make my life automatically better (they never did, and they were often a disadvantage at the things that mattered to me). and i grew up being accused of being "spoiled", hearing my siblings complain that "it's not fair", simply because i was more stubborn and because i stood my ground despite all the pressure

so i refuse to be reduced to whatever someone else / other people want from me. if that means being alone forever, then so be it. my basic mental health is more important than that

That was pretty much my point.

oh. well, i'm just kinda confused what you mean, because i'm male (not sure if you think i'm female, or if i'm just not getting what you mean)

I didn't even want to debate this but if yall are going to push the whole 'everyone has the same difficulties in dating' then I'm game.


It's not my problem if you get pissed. FA autistic women that can't find a boyfriend are an exception. And an exception does not make the rule. Women like that are in the far...far minority.

If you create standards and find yourself alone as a result of those standards that's YOUR problem that you have created for yourself. And I'm not talking about being open to a junkie wife beater. There are plenty of guys that don't meat the basic requirement. Fact bomb: women have higher standards than they did in the past. And especially in online dating. The person I was replying to said she only wanted an intelligent guy. Well if you're on the bottom end of the totem pole you can't afford to be picky.


Question for the FA females here: how much effort have you actually put into landing a bf? I mean like dressing decent, not being overly negative, putting yourself out there, being open to communication, whether it be irl or putting a dating profile.

Last edited by lobstercowboy on 26 Aug 2016, 4:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Mate, that's literally what I did. And I'm not even average. I'd have to really raise my game to be average. I created a profile, and I watched the messages roll in. God knows where y'all are going wrong.

But then, it was a really, really, really good profile. If I never write anything of note again, it will be my magnum opus, and frankly, it'll be a worthy one.

You're a pretty smart guy, Hopper. Why do you think you're not even "average?"

Yeah except I never said that. I never implied anything that you have said here and you making it seem like I'm some moron that completely clueless with experiences in dating or difficulties that women have in dating. Go back and read my earlier post where I recognized that women do have trouble in dating.

Get over yourself.