Record high amount of young men not having..ehm you-know-what.

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

Yes, a man's opinions are often likely to be one of his biggest obstacles to overcome to changing how he is viewed by women in general. The way men view, judge and value women by their appearance is part of the problem to a man's approach to dating in the first place. If a man looks at a woman and thinks " she's a 4" he pretty much just made himself a "0" for viewing women like that to begin with.

Surely women don't entertain the thought that men won't get attracted to looks first? When you as a teenager start realizing why you have a crush on this girl instead of that other one, there's no going back (probably speaking for myself only). When you say that the "direction" people have is maybe too different between sexes, does it boil down to "men want looks, women want personality"? Cause I agree with you that there are different headings, so to speak, but I like to be more specific. Just in my previous couple of years at the university I've witnessed how fast the topic of a casual conversation can veer into a territory men or women find utterly unrelatable (sports is a good example, even women's sports).

Of course, people, both men and women notice appearance first and find certain people more attractive than others. Not everyone however, bases a persons value on that or harshly judges them that way. Infatuation is fleeting. You can have a crush on someone one day and have zero attraction to them the next. What people find attractive can greatly vary as well, even among men. Both men and women find many different things attractive. While one guy may look at a woman and shallowly judge her to be ugly, another may see her as being the most beautiful woman in the world to him. If a guy thinks a woman is a 4 so she should be "happy" he is giving her attention, he is completely screwed in the head in the first place and should address his own issues before he will be ready for any relationship, as there are plenty of other guys out there that are just happy she is giving them attention instead and think the world of her. Some people just " don't get it".

When I say "direction" I mean in expectations in a relationship, lifestyle, what they want in life. How they interact with the opposite sex, how they interact every day in an actual relationship. Recent studies have shown that people are becoming more self centered, less empathetic to others and more entitled. Relationships are give and take and you have to want to put the other person's needs and wants first because they are important to you, not just force yourself to or go through the motions. There is a difference, and for a relationship to work, both people in that relationship should be the ones doing so because they genuinely want to.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/what-the-wild-things-are/201006/are-today-s-youth-even-more-self-absorbed-and-less-caring
https://www.indy100.com/article/young-people-entitlement-disappointed-narcissism-psychology-research-7867961

There are many guys today that cannot even manage to make it through the first interactions with a woman without making an ass of themselves, let alone manage to make it as far as an actual relationship. When a guy is so self centered that even showing others empathy at all feels like a chore, they are not going to be able to handle doing so on a regular basis. Far too often a man thinks of a woman more of as an accessory to his life, like " he needs a woman" to join him rather than him becoming a part of her life and them building a new life together instead. There is a limited supply of women who want one night stands with no strings attached so if guys are so self centered and want to keep their life the way it is, they will have to also accept that they will have to compete with the very limited supply of women who want that as well, otherwise if they want a relationship, that means to make actual changes and to genuinely want to do so on their own accord because it makes them happy to do so and not do so begrudgingly.

 

[Abomination]

One can point out unsavoury connotations to words and ask people to refrain from using them in polite spaces - as per the above to Hawki. Assuming intent of bigotry need not be done.

You are right on that second part. I despise the idea that a word that literally means something now associated me as a bigot for using it because some person I hold no political similarities to likes to misuse the word.

I rebel against that notion. The word has a clearly defined reason and "giving it up" to bigots just means they'll find another word to taint. The offensive word treadmill is tiring.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

It's because of pornography.

Why have real sex with real people when they can't live up to the fantasies people have been brainwashed with since their teens? It's just going to be an exercise in anxiety and disappointment.

* * *

I don't believe for a minute people can't get laid (with consent) if they want. What they possibly can't do is have sex with the idealised partners they want to, and don't want to 'drop their standards', so to speak. I firmly believe pretty much anyone can have sex as long as they're prepared to be less picky. And in a worst case scenario, they can always help sex workers pay the rent. For some, it's not the sex that's problematic, but where sex is tied up with relationships and it's the whole emotions and bonding and intimate talk stuff they don't really like.

I don't believe Porn has much to do with it. Women watch porn as well, and I do not think it really has an impact on how you view an actual relationship with another person. Both men and women fantasize, but watching porn is nothing like having actual sex with another person and I do not see the two really being related, outside of couples watching porn together while having sex, which is common as well.

I don't really buy into the whole " anti porn" propaganda that has been going around, people have had sex openly in front of others since the dawn of man and watching others have sex in no way affects ones own ability to have sex or a relationship.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I don't believe Porn has much to do with it. Women watch porn as well, and I do not think it really has an impact on how you view an actual relationship with another person. Both men and women fantasize, but watching porn is nothing like having actual sex with another person and I do not see the two really being related, outside of couples watching pron together while having sex, which is common as well.

Disagree there, lots of porn use porn as sex/relationship education. Though, apart from stuff like the 3d Pig meme, I had thought it mostly caused problems within relationships, rather than in starting them.

I don't really buy into the whole " anti porn" propaganda that has been going around, people have had sex openly in front of others since the dawn of man and watching others have sex in no way affects ones own ability to have sex or a relationship.

Which is (generally) not the argument, people are saying that people are watching unrealistic depictions of sex, not sex.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I don't believe Porn has much to do with it. Women watch porn as well, and I do not think it really has an impact on how you view an actual relationship with another person. Both men and women fantasize, but watching porn is nothing like having actual sex with another person and I do not see the two really being related, outside of couples watching pron together while having sex, which is common as well.

Disagree there, lots of porn use porn as sex/relationship education. Though, apart from stuff like the 3d Pig meme, I had thought it mostly caused problems within relationships, rather than in starting them.

I don't really buy into the whole " anti porn" propaganda that has been going around, people have had sex openly in front of others since the dawn of man and watching others have sex in no way affects ones own ability to have sex or a relationship.

Which is (generally) not the argument, people are saying that people are watching unrealistic depictions of sex, not sex.

Most porn out there is just sex, of course there is plenty of fetish porn, but the vast majority of porn that is viewed is actual sex. Women viewing porn with a guy hung with 12 inches does not mean they expect all men to be hung like a horse. I also think men are capable of not expecting women to have massive implants and plastic surgery. I see it as no different than a guy watching LOTR and thinking that elf was hot not expecting to find an actual elf chic for himself.

As for the actual sex itself, usually the most unrealistic part of sex in porn is the idea a guy can last that long to begin with. I am not sure what " unrealistic expectations" people are talking about here that are actually interfering with one's ability to have a relationship.

 

[stroopwafel]

As for the actual sex itself, usually the most unrealistic part of sex in porn is the idea a guy can last that long to begin with. I am not sure what " unrealistic expectations" people are talking about here that are actually interfering with one's ability to have a relationship.

There is definitely something to say that porn can become a replacement not just for 'incels' but couples as well, espescially men who no longer find their wife/girlfriend attractive but are otherwise happy with the relationship or find it too inconvenient to leave. It can become a surrogate and I guess the more conditioned one becomes to the more extreme stuff the more difficult it becomes to get the same dopamine rush from 'regular' sex. It's no surprise many men who watch too much porn complain about not being able to get it up with an actual partner. With porn there is always something new, something novel that gets the dopamine flowing espescially with people too afraid or unwilling to share their kinks. For incels otoh masturbating to an infinite supply of porn every day can definitely take away some of that drive to make an actual effort to find a girlfriend. So yeah, I think for both incels and people(espescially men) in a relationship porn can do harm if not used responsibly. That counts for every kind of indulgence ofcourse.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

In a broader perspective, we must not forget that men have fewer close friends, spend less time hanging out with friends that are not family and tend to put more stock in workplace friends then women do. A lot more men then women find themselves without any close friends and with barely any contact with their co-workers.

Where are you getting this from?

Without having the strength to look up sources, since I've come down with a nasty cold, it is a well established pattern that keeps repeating in just about all research on men's mental health in the Western world. Men are generally the lonelier sex, with all the terrible implications that has for mental well-being and the ability to function in a modern society.

What would've been the crystal ball to reveal us this development ten, fifteen years ago? I think recall when geeky stuff was just about to hit mainstream (dreaded days of The Early Big Bang Theory) people still had a sort of balance in the back of their heads and the online world could be easily separated from the real one. That's not there anymore and the balance has shifted too: kids entertain hopes of being esports stars, twitch partners, and youtubers which all require to spend more and more online and in front of a monitor.

I think there are two things we need to keep in mind here:
1. This is a pattern that goes back to at least the 1950's, the idea that a man is not judged on how sociable he is, but his ability to make money or be successful at his job. Susan Faludi in her book Stiffed! from 1999 points out that men have been told that as long as they put in the work and stay loyal to the company (and the nation in most cases) they'll be rewarded with a nice domestic life with wife and kids. The wife supposedly being drawn to the man's ability to make her life comfortable. This focus on men as workers, with all the associated traits of endurance, strength and self-reliance meant that a lot of young boys were raised to be able to put in 10 hours in the factory or office. Those same boys were not taught how to socialize or be sociable, because those weren't necessary skills and up until the mid-90's or so, it was still expected that women would choose a man based on his earning ability, not whether he was a nice person or not.

2. For all purposes, being sociable online is pretty much indistinguishable from being sociable in real life today. A lot of people today meet their partner via games, social media or other online activities and even more people spend a lot of time online hanging out with their friends. This is partially a response to the simple fact that young adults today spend more time working (and more often work uncomfortable hours, like evenings and nights), which means there's less time to meet physically, but maybe just enough time to sling some shit on Discord.

I am not intending to make this thread into a feminist argument, as I'd prefer it to be an argument about the mental health of young adults in general considering that somewhere in the realm of 25% of young adults haven't had sex in the last year. However, there are gender issues to discuss when men are so disproportionately excluded from what's a pretty basic human activity. A lot of the lopsidedness probably has to do with men's relatively poor social skills, a side-effect of the male gender role not prioritizing those skills.

With that said, we should probably think about the life situation for young adults in general today, considering these numbers and similar, which show that young adults today are more lonely, have less sex and generally have a worse mental health than prior generations of young adults. Something in society is messing with the young adults, that much is clear.

 

[McElroy]

Of course, people, both men and women notice appearance first and find certain people more attractive than others. Not everyone however, bases a persons value on that or harshly judges them that way. Infatuation is fleeting. You can have a crush on someone one day and have zero attraction to them the next.

To me this sounds like a neat excuse to lead guys on and then completely reject them the next day. Then again beer vision is a thing and works both ways.

What people find attractive can greatly vary as well, even among men. Both men and women find many different things attractive. While one guy may look at a woman and shallowly judge her to be ugly, another may see her as being the most beautiful woman in the world to him. If a guy thinks a woman is a 4 so she should be "happy" he is giving her attention, he is completely screwed in the head in the first place and should address his own issues before he will be ready for any relationship, as there are plenty of other guys out there that are just happy she is giving them attention instead and think the world of her. Some people just " don't get it".

That does sound like an obnoxious mindset to have, yet it's one of many, all with their intricacies. What you can pin down is only a bunch of people at once, and then hopefully more people can relate to that. Maybe there is someone who really isn't the most beautiful woman in the world even subjectively, or maybe she doesn't know how to approach men even though she wants to. I personally find it difficult to reconcile with having hopeless crushes on many women but feeling nothing for the few others who actually show interest in me.

Far too often a man thinks of a woman more of as an accessory to his life, like " he needs a woman" to join him rather than him becoming a part of her life and them building a new life together instead.

All in all this sentiment seems to be in short supply, though this is one aspect of relationships (how to make them long-lasting) that sees plenty of different reasons for how it goes. Like, for someone "let's see what happens" is way too slow and sometimes it ties into people really wanting their partners to be the same age as them, which can be a limiting factor.

 

[CaitSeith]

https://www.sciencealert.com/the-percentage-of-americans-not-having-sex-has-reached-a-record-high

One final factor that may be affecting Americans' sexual habits at all ages is technology. "There are a lot more things to do at 10 o'clock at night now than there were 20 years ago," Twenge said. "Streaming video, social media, console games, everything else."

Freaking console games! I knew they would be the downfall of modern civilization!

Spoiler

OK, kidding aside... no. Sorry, I can't take this seriously and nothing that has been posted convinced to be serious about it.

 

[Agema]

I don't really buy into the whole " anti porn" propaganda that has been going around, people have had sex openly in front of others since the dawn of man and watching others have sex in no way affects ones own ability to have sex or a relationship.

Sure. If you mean real sex, with all the goo, sweat, unwanted body hair, flab, grunting, (a lot) less-than-perfect sculpted bods, premature ejaculation and failure to achieve orgasm, occasional discomfort or even pain, etc. But that's not what you tend to get in porn.

A bit of porn is harmless or fun. But I think potentially it can give people very unrealistic ideas about what sex is, what to expect from partners or the act itself. Particularly in the case of men and more so inexperienced ones, it may increase performance anxiety. I think it's also potentially easy to retreat into rather than face and resolve difficulties.

 

[Here Comes Tomorrow]

I don't really buy into the whole " anti porn" propaganda that has been going around, people have had sex openly in front of others since the dawn of man and watching others have sex in no way affects ones own ability to have sex or a relationship.

But it wasn't until recently that porn was easily available to people from a young age. 12 year old kids have access to all kinds of shit now that I couldn't even have dreamt of at that age. I don't think I had "easy" access to porn until I was like 15 or 16, even then I had to be sneaky about it because the family computer was shared. Now you have kids literally a few finger taps away from the really crazy shit and they're growing up with no context or understanding of what actually sex is like. I mean there weren't many reports of 16 year olds trying to replicate quadruple anal penetration when I (presumably we) were younger.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6595871/amp/Online-porn-horror-Girl-16-forced-colostomy-bag-attempting-group-anal-sex.html

No one puts a warning before porn saying "we have a literal gallon of lube on set for this scene".

 

[RobertEHouse]

Low sex numbers usually are in tandem more with economics of a nation than from social media use.

In highly developed countries around the world; Nations with high GDP* usually have lower sex and birth rates. High GDP nations have higher tax rates; higher inflation rates which make the cost of living expensive. This leads to people working more for longer hours to be able to pay for necessities.

Even the notion of having two or even three jobs to make ends meet is no longer a oddity in nations like those.This mentality though does effects future generations to think money,work become more important than human urges.Also those that want to may not have the time between work to "feel the Moment". Simply put it's a "loop" we have know about it for years, it does have an official name.

*Gross Domestic Product- used normally to determine how economically powerful a nation is.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2158244017736094

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2016/04/30/the-trouble-with-gdp

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I don't really buy into the whole " anti porn" propaganda that has been going around, people have had sex openly in front of others since the dawn of man and watching others have sex in no way affects ones own ability to have sex or a relationship.

Sure. If you mean real sex, with all the goo, sweat, unwanted body hair, flab, grunting, (a lot) less-than-perfect sculpted bods, premature ejaculation and failure to achieve orgasm, occasional discomfort or even pain, etc. But that's not what you tend to get in porn.

A bit of porn is harmless or fun. But I think potentially it can give people very unrealistic ideas about what sex is, what to expect from partners or the act itself. Particularly in the case of men and more so inexperienced ones, it may increase performance anxiety. I think it's also potentially easy to retreat into rather than face and resolve difficulties.

That isn't how the "sex show" ceremonies that have been going on for thousands of years that Native American Tribes put on went at all. Ceremonies for my tribe were an elaborate stage production with costuming and sex toys and props, no body hair, not unlike modern porn, may be considered a bit more elaborate than most porn, but live on stage for everyone to watch.

I don't really buy into the whole " anti porn" propaganda that has been going around, people have had sex openly in front of others since the dawn of man and watching others have sex in no way affects ones own ability to have sex or a relationship.

But it wasn't until recently that porn was easily available to people from a young age. 12 year old kids have access to all kinds of shit now that I couldn't even have dreamt of at that age. I don't think I had "easy" access to porn until I was like 15 or 16, even then I had to be sneaky about it because the family computer was shared. Now you have kids literally a few finger taps away from the really crazy shit and they're growing up with no context or understanding of what actually sex is like. I mean there weren't many reports of 16 year olds trying to replicate quadruple anal penetration when I (presumably we) were younger.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6595871/amp/Online-porn-horror-Girl-16-forced-colostomy-bag-attempting-group-anal-sex.html

No one puts a warning before porn saying "we have a literal gallon of lube on set for this scene".

Except for thousands of years there was not really an age limit for viewing tribal sex ceremonies and this was considered entertainment for the whole family.

 

[Schadrach]

One hopes an individual can determine the difference between the two and how the existence of one does not mean the other is also guilty by association - especially when the innocent party existed before the offending.

What seems to be ignored by one side of this whole mess is that the other side is arguing that meaning is irrelevant - this *can* be an anti-Semitic dogwhistle, or at least can be perceived to be such by people on certain political sides, therefore it's offensive hate speech. Because dog whistles can be literally anything regardless of context or meaning, and if people on a side or opposed to that side decide that a thing is a dog whistle for hate, then it *becomes* hate speech regardless of the context in which it is used.

For example, if you talked to a handful of known far right personalities who get media attention, asked them to all use the same arbitrary turn of phrase the next 3-4 times each of them was on camera, then that turn of phrase (regardless of it's meaning or context) would be deemed by the left to be a dog whistle for some far right concept or position (whatever the speakers are perceived to have in common). Just needs to be enough times to get at least one media talking head at a "reliable source" to make the connection.

, or that there are chemtrails in the air making the frogs gay.

That's crazy, the chemicals turning frogs gay are in the water, and by "gay" I mean genetically male but developing a female reproductive system (some of them are even fertile but only produce male offspring), and by "chemicals" I mean synthetic estrogens and endocrine disrupters like atrazine. I guess "turning the frogs intersex" just doesn't sound as snappy?

Remember that incels and mgtow (men going their own way) are growing movements and these are men who are unlikely to be in places and situations where they could find a partner.

I don't know that I'd call incels a movement any more than I'd call "not getting a dog because every dog starts growling and snapping at you when you approach so you eventually decide to stop trying and just assume dogs are vicious by nature or you're too broken to ever appeal to one" a movement. MGTOW could maybe be considered a movement, but they're not necessarily celibate - the very core of MGTOW is essentially "the laws as they are set up make certain kinds of interactions with women unnecessarily risky to men, so I'm choosing not to do those things, and if that limits my romantic and sexual options, so be it" and there are arguments about exactly where those lines lie (marriage being the big obvious one).

I'm neither of those. I'm actually engaged. We met online, using OKCupid about a year and a half ago. Moved in together last September, proposed last Feb.

Think about that. A significant proportion of the men who were messaging my friend on her real profile had either just looked at her picture and sent a stock message because they liked her physical appearance, or were so indifferent to her sincere desire for a relationship that they considered that profile interchangeable with one that ranted about being a communist phone but had a pair of tits on it.

A lot of guys do exactly that - send a stock message to, say, every account within a certain radius they haven't already sent a message to. It's not terribly effective and not a strategy I employed, but I imagine it hurts less to get rejected repeatedly if you don't invest as much in the attempt. It's also probably more successful than being invested, because even if you put effort into it and put yourself out there, you are going to get ignored something like 9/10 of the time - if you send out stock messages, so long as the response rate is better than 0 you can probably make up for it in volume (simply because you can send out literally a couple of orders of magnitude more messages).

TBH I really have to wonder WHY there are so many men that act so creepy to begin with? WHY are they doing these things at all?

You don't have to *do* anything to be deemed creepy. Sometimes it's just how you look, or your posture, or the gait with which you walk.

 

[the December King]

That isn't how the "sex show" ceremonies that have been going on for thousands of years that Native American Tribes put on went at all. Ceremonies for my tribe were an elaborate stage production with costuming and sex toys and props, no body hair, not unlike modern porn, may be considered a bit more elaborate than most porn, but live on stage for everyone to watch.

Personally, based on what you have said, I'd say it has more to do with frequency of exposure as a factor then. Performers in porn are at hand (so to speak) all of the time, 24/7, at the press of a button, for hours and hours or at whatever whim the viewer has, not staged, planned events that have no cuts and no editing. Constant exposure to (or on-demand viewing of) sex might be something else entirely as far as the psyche of the viewer is concerned, male or female.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

Of course, people, both men and women notice appearance first and find certain people more attractive than others. Not everyone however, bases a persons value on that or harshly judges them that way. Infatuation is fleeting. You can have a crush on someone one day and have zero attraction to them the next.

To me this sounds like a neat excuse to lead guys on and then completely reject them the next day. Then again beer vision is a thing and works both ways.

I was not actually thinking of it at all like that, in fact, I was thinking of this guy I had a huge crush on in school when I was 12 until one day he came real close to me, pressing his body up against mine pinning me up against the locker and looked me in the eye and said " You like me don't you?", from that point on I lost all attraction of him and became utterly repulsed by him for being such a jerk. Me having a crush on him at the time was not permission to touch me without my consent or to say something stupid and arrogant to my face. To this day the thought of him being anywhere near me makes me want to puke. I had never spoken to him prior to him doing that and that is one of the worst first things you could say to a girl in the first place. He ruined the infatuation by his actions and opening his mouth.

What people find attractive can greatly vary as well, even among men. Both men and women find many different things attractive. While one guy may look at a woman and shallowly judge her to be ugly, another may see her as being the most beautiful woman in the world to him. If a guy thinks a woman is a 4 so she should be "happy" he is giving her attention, he is completely screwed in the head in the first place and should address his own issues before he will be ready for any relationship, as there are plenty of other guys out there that are just happy she is giving them attention instead and think the world of her. Some people just " don't get it".

quoThat does sound like an obnoxious mindset to have, yet it's one of many, all with their intricacies. What you can pin down is only a bunch of people at once, and then hopefully more people can relate to that. Maybe there is someone who really isn't the most beautiful woman in the world even subjectively, or maybe she doesn't know how to approach men even though she wants to. I personally find it difficult to reconcile with having hopeless crushes on many women but feeling nothing for the few others who actually show interest in me.

Of course this varies by culture, but in the US where I live, women, for the mot part do not have to approach men, women can if they want to, but there isn't a real " need" to, as so many men approach women that women usually are the one's who get to choose which invitations to consider. Even women that some men see as unattractive, overweight ect, usually still have plenty of men approaching them first. It is just how this tends to work.

Far too often a man thinks of a woman more of as an accessory to his life, like " he needs a woman" to join him rather than him becoming a part of her life and them building a new life together instead.

All in all this sentiment seems to be in short supply, though this is one aspect of relationships (how to make them long-lasting) that sees plenty of different reasons for how it goes. Like, for someone "let's see what happens" is way too slow and sometimes it ties into people really wanting their partners to be the same age as them, which can be a limiting factor.

[/quote]It isn't even about making a relationship lasting. Even when you want to " just date" someone, it takes a giving, empathetic mindset to even get it that far. This matters from the very point in time he first approaches a woman as to how he views and treats her from the first word out of his mouth. The guy who treats her as an accessory often shows himself to be self centered from his posturing, manner, tone, words and everything he does from the go. This is not just " maintenance" for a lasting relationship, this is how they view the person they want to be dating as a whole.

 

[McElroy]

Of course this varies by culture, but in the US where I live, women, for the mot part do not have to approach men, women can if they want to, but there isn't a real " need" to, as so many men approach women that women usually are the one's who get to choose which invitations to consider. Even women that some men see as unattractive, overweight etc, usually still have plenty of men approaching them first. It is just how this tends to work.

Tends to work the same way here too, but there are outliers. Moreover I'd put more emphasis on people seeking other options as they are denied sex/relationships on their own terms. Before they would go as far as exploring the same sex they would give up their standards for looks/personality/health/etc. I'm sticking with mine, however, even if I have to go for ""easier"" women in Southeast Asia.

 

[Trunkage]

In a broader perspective, we must not forget that men have fewer close friends, spend less time hanging out with friends that are not family and tend to put more stock in workplace friends then women do. A lot more men then women find themselves without any close friends and with barely any contact with their co-workers.

Where are you getting this from? Is this a cultural difference thing because just about every man I know has several close friends they met years ago while their wives tend to drop/lose friends and make new ones depending on circumstances in their life.

You're evidence sounds way shakier than Gethsamani's. That's just anecdotal. Gethsemani would be generalizing as well, similar to the claim men are stronger than women. Some women are stronger than the average but pick two random people and men are more like to be stronger. You may just have a batch that doesn't follow the generalization

 

[Here Comes Tomorrow]

In a broader perspective, we must not forget that men have fewer close friends, spend less time hanging out with friends that are not family and tend to put more stock in workplace friends then women do. A lot more men then women find themselves without any close friends and with barely any contact with their co-workers.

Where are you getting this from? Is this a cultural difference thing because just about every man I know has several close friends they met years ago while their wives tend to drop/lose friends and make new ones depending on circumstances in their life.

You're evidence sounds way shakier than Gethsamani's. That's just anecdotal. Gethsemani would be generalizing as well, similar to the claim men are stronger than women. Some women are stronger than the average but pick two random people and men are more like to be stronger. You may just have a batch that doesn't follow the generalization

I didn't give any evidence. Why are you trying to start an argument?

 

[Baffle]

I didn't give any evidence. Why are you trying to start an argument?

There's no evidence that he did.