This trend of people having fewer friends and social connections was already well underway long before the internet was invented. It has nothing to do with internet pornography or masturbation. Robert Putnam found that since about the 1960s, social interaction in the US has been gradually declining. People are less active politically besides voting; they socialize with their neighbors less; they have fewer friends; they trust both strangers and neighbors much less than they used to.
Just because the decline in social interactions has been continued from the much earlier decades, doesn't mean that porn or masturbation hasn't had an effect at all. This trend has in fact been exacerbated due to the high accessibility of internet pornography and internet use in general. This can be examined by looking at a UCLA national survey started in 1987 showing that the decline in real-life interactions with each other has accelerated from around 2004.
Figure 6, pg 6.
Male bonding/co-operation and male investment in offspring are what made us the apex species of this planet. And they are things women seem naturally inclined to undermine. The sexual revolution has given women free reign to dissolve the family unit and incite unbridled male competition and rivalry. In the good ole days, bars were places guys of any social status hung out after work to socialize, drink, and make friends, today they're places of simps buying women drinks and competition for pussy. It's hardly surprising that in such an environment, men have fewer friends than women.
We know women see male corporation away from female supervision as threatening, which is why they always try to destroy male spaces. I think they may also see it as insulting. We're naturally more a tournament mating species than a pair-bonding species, and so I think they have an instinctive belief that men should be locked in competition with one another for the right to mate with them. There are no more stable "packs" of 20 to 30 men who build stable, working "microsocieties" among themselves over a lifetime by being a part of a church, organisation, or a team, or an industry.
It's why female fiction is so full of love triangles and men fighting over women. Even formerly best friends will suddenly start fighting for the heroine. You very rarely see male friendship and comradery in female fiction. So I think women find male bonding to be unmasculine and vaguely insulting to women.
I believe this to be UNTRUE. It's a big leap to say that a sexual revolution has created areas of hostility and ambiguity among men. It may be probable in a clubbing or dating scene where women aren't seen as property and now men have to step up to win women over. But it doesn't provide a probable answer at to why men are having less friends outside of these venues. Friends in uni, work, gym, etc are harder to make.
Social anxiety is to blame along with social media replacing face-to-face interactions. Social anxiety has been long rumoured among those who do NoFap to mitigate or even disappear during a long streak. Streak meaning days without PMO (Porn, Masturbation & Orgasm). Many over in the NoFap forum have said this.
An article created by GroupTherapy listed the signs of low dopamine. Low dopamine can be caused through the overstimulation of the brain from alcohol, drugs and porn. The symptoms reported from having low dopamine were:
- Depression
- Problems with motivation or concentration
- Working memory issues, such as difficulty remembering the first part of a sentence a person just spoke
- Restless leg syndrome
- Shaking hands or other tremors
- Changes in coordination
- Low sex drive
- Inability to feel pleasure from previously enjoyed activities
These are also the same feelings experiences by those with a porn/masturbation addiction who then start NoFap. Once on a streak, you start to experience benefits and see these symptoms go away. The results of those who do NoFap are the following:
- Rock-Solid Confidence
- Endless Motivation and Willpower
- You become a Productive Monster
- Boost in Testosterone Levels
- Legit Libido
- Renewed Interest in little things
- No More Erectile Dysfunction
- Crystal Clear Thinking
- Kills Premature Ejaculation
- Do Better in GYM
- Women Start to Notice you More
As you can see, a-lot of these benefits overlap with the symptoms given before. It's not by coincidence. Also the female attraction benefit of NoFap is 100% real. The reason why some people don't feel it is because they're not sexually charged during NoFap. You need to have a high libido during your streak and be channeling your sexual energy away from your nuts in order to experience the benefits. You won't get the benefits to the full extent if you just sit there without any charge and sexual vigor. If you're not horny then you're not becoming more sensitive to dopamine in the process.
Some incels will do NoFap for months without benefits and think NoFap is BS. It's not. It's because they weren't building up their sex drive in the process. They just had low libido. Ofcourse its not going to work if you're not struggling atleast a little bit.
Build up sex drive through good lifestyle + hold it in with NoFap = Benefits. Radiating energy.
You need to really try NoFap for 7-14 days while eating meat, protein, lifting heavy at the gym (especially legs), sleeping 7+ hours, etc. Trust me you'll feel the difference. But of course you have to get out of your house to SEE the benefits.
These days you could have a friend for years only to get ghosted by your normie friend for some girl that he's known for two days. Friendships among men are becoming increasingly difficult to maintain. I don't think many people are very sympathetic of how difficult it is for men to form friendships in the modern age. There are very few places where men can gather now with out the social pressure of competing for women. It's obviously easier for attractive men to form friendships because they have already obtained sexual access and have less reason to view other men as competition.
This just isn't true. The 80/20 rule is not the basis of inceldom. I don't know where you got that from. There are incels in all types of societies, including mongamous ones. This doesn't change the fact that women's sexual liberation has exacerbated inceldom and increased sexual inequality between men.
Perhaps the 80/20 rule doesn't apply to all groups. However, women's sexual liberation has NOT increased inceldom. Obviously, men with good looks have always done better with women than ugly men have. This hasn't changed, but the whole idea of incels now came about in the past years due to an increase in single, frustrated men. We like to believe that normies and chads are getting sex while we rot here alone. It's not true. Normies, chads, incels, women, stacies, whatever are ALL having less sex. Women are not having as much sex as you'd like to believe. Just because they can, doesn't mean they are.
I'll keep saying this if I have to.. and I'm sorry to tell you this, but if we agree on one thing, its that this whole dating system is wrong. What we've been taught by the incel community. This community believes:
-Most (if not all) Chads are sleeping with new women every week.
-Women are banging a new hot guy from tinder every week.
-Ugly women and average women are getting sex from good looking guys too.
-Ugly women can get hot guys, so why should she settle with you.
-There are no female virgins and they just lie about being pure.
This philosophy is untrue and completely made up. There's no proof this is actually happening to the extent that we say it is.
The dating world is MORE like THIS:
-Top 1-2% slayer chads are getting sex with their plates (if you will) every week.
-The next 8-9% of men (chads) have gfs, have a fwb or are banging a new girl every few months.
-'Normies' are the majority and most are single and some have girlfriends who they're betabuxxing.
-Incels can't get anything.
-Stacies (top 20%) are having sex weekly with their boyfriends or an fwb.
-Beckies, or regular women are having little to no sex, or have an fwb.
AMS said that he got tired of banging 60 women a year and had to stick to rotating through a handful of women. Just imagine having sex with a new girl every week. No matter how many matches you get on Tinder, that is WORK to sleep with that many women. You gotta swipe on them, you gotta message them, you gotta chat, you gotta date them, then you gotta invite them over and then sleep with them. Then after that you gotta do it all again for another girl. That's work man. Most chads just stick to a rotation or just a fuckbuddy. Because of this, there's no way that every girl out there is sleeping with chad. All incels do is pull up tiktoks of thirsty girls lusting over chad and then assume all girls are like that while calling the virgin girls liars. It's not true man. There's a decent amount of virgin girls out there and lots of low n-count women.
As shown by the article I linked, young people today are more likely to have FWBs than to engage in one-night stands with strangers. That's why they have fewer sex partners.
Finally, somewhat more people these days (10 to 15 percent) report sex with a friend or casual date/pick-up, but they do not report more sexual partners or more frequent sex overall. This suggests there may be a modest shift toward casual sex, but it’s a tendency toward replacing some regular partners with more casual partners—not adding more partners. Also, the fact that the most frequent casual type of partner is a friend rather than acquaintance or pick-up is telling: This is more of a friends-with-benefits situation than sex with random strangers. [Source}
The 80/20 rule is not complete accurate, but it's not that far off from reality either. The best estimates currently come from
GSS data, and it seems it is more like between 54/20 and 74/20 for males and between 34/20 and 63/20 for females. The 20% of men who are having 54-74% of all the sex are the Chads; they were born with attractive genes and women sexually select for them. The 20% of women who are having 34-63% of all the sex are not the Stacys; they are simply women with a high sex drive who are having lots of sex with attractive men. There is evidence that unattractive women are
more promiscuous than attractive women.
I have already provided evidence that 20% of men are having most of the sex. AlphaMaleStrategies looks more like a high-tier normie than a Tyrone. He's not in the top 1% of men. Of course, that doesn't mean he can't have quite a bit of success. Chadfish experiments have proven beyond doubt that decently attractive men can easily get sex from dating apps and don't need to be very charismatic.
We know that men have higher sex drive because of hormones. We can see this in male-to-female transsexuals, or
testosterone therapy. We also know that lesbian couples
have less sex than straight couples and that straight couples have
less sex than gay couples. In addition to Schwartz's survey, another study concluded that the female sex drive
greatly diminishes once a woman is in a secure relationship. The idea that women have the same sex drive as men is completely ridiculous. If that were true, straight couples would be having as much sex as gay couples. It's not as if straight men have less desire for sex than gay men.
One moment its women have way lower sex drives, the next moments its women are always sleeping with chad non-stop.
I never claimed that women are asexual, just that they have significantly lower sex drive. They're obviously interested in having sex with attractive men. Women need clitoral stimulation to orgasm when they're having sex with men who aren't attractive enough to give them vaginal orgasms. But unlike men, women can still enjoy sex even when they don't orgasm. Almost every man knows that women want more than just intercourse. Women will settle for average guys if they have a sufficient amount of money or social status. But they have a lower sex drive than men.
If you think internet porn is causing men to become less attractive, you need to prove that young men are masturbating significantly more frequently you than they did in the 1980s and 1980s. It doesn't make any difference what type of material you masturbate to. If men today aren't masturbating more than they did back then, there is no way internet porn could have those effects.
It does make an effect what type of material it is. It increases your dopamine spike more if you masturbate to pornographic material compared to cooming to magazine covers back in the day. Its also a-lot easier to access than before which means that people are more likely become addicted to masturbation as they have endless stimuli to masturbate to. It's not just that porn causes men to be less attractive, but fucks up society's drive to pursue each other romantically with porn being in the way. If porn suddenly stopped existing, both men and women would find a way to connect better and see each other for more than our bodies.
"If you want to destroy a nation without war, make adultery or nudity common in the young generation" - Salahuddin Ayyubi, Liberator of Jerusalem 12th Century CE
Most young women don't consider oral sex or mutual masturbation to count as sex. So yes, some of them are lying. Others just have a low sex drive and high standards. There just aren't anywhere near as many female virgins as there are male virgins.
Some do, some don't. In the video titled "
Do all virgins think the same" made by Jubilee, when asked the 1st question, "does oral sex count as losing your virginity", two of the female respondents disagreed while the other two agreed that oral sex counts. I also know girls in real life that are strangers to blowjobs and handjobs.
The gender ratio of that subreddit actually
proves my point. 85% of its users are males and only 15% are females. Most women who are virgins are perfectly happy about being virgins.
Fair enough.