this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2023
40 points (97.6% liked)

Ask Lemmygrad

63 readers
1 users here now

A place to ask questions of Lemmygrad's best and brightest

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So there is a loneliness epidemic caused by capitalist alienation. However, I wonder if lack of material conditions also adds to this. I just keep seeing lots of my broke guy friends depressed because they can’t find a partner and it is so hard for them to meet new people. This makes me wonder if their financial situation is the main reason.

all 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yes. This can be answered by a simple question.

If you are continually working to just barely survive, where are you supposed to find the time, energy, and money to date or go out to find a partner or friends?

Also where are you supposed to go to make friends? Third places have been all but destroyed, and unless you like going to a bar (you have to spend money), or get extremely lucky, then you’re completely out of luck.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 months ago

Neoliberalism has been particularly efficient at atomizing people and replacing many social and cultural things with products to be consumed. Low income obviously contributes to loneliness but its truly an epidemic across all income levels.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It could definitely play a role. Emily Nagoski's book puts forth the "dual control model" of sexual motivation. You have the accelerators, which are things what get you all hornt up, and you have the brakes, which are things that you have to urgently take care of before you can prioritize having sex. If you're not financially secure in modern America it will be hard to relax enough to have sex. If you press on the accelerator and the brake really hard for long enough you can get a kind of incel situation going on. It's not a good place to be in.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What do you mean by “pressing the accelerator and the breaks at the same time”?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Present people with situations that are sexually relevant but leave them without the bandwidth to properly deal with them due to other external circumstances like not being able to pay their rent and food and medicine at the same time

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Which are these sexually relevant situations?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Absolutely, but one factor that is overlooked on the matter of romantic relationships is the manufacturing of unreasonable beauty standards, especially of women, most men are looking for a "trophy" wife, and that limits much of the people who they look for to begin with, or reduces the motivation to start because they feel that "lowering their standards" is a failure so why even bother?

So I think that it is a cumulative pile of factors that reaches that point, by the side of women toxic masculinity, regular systemic misogyny, in particular domestic abuse, could probably play a factor on the issue too.

Other things are as I believe you mentioned, the tendency of capitalism to individualize peoples lives and for sure not having the means to go out and do things that are viewed as couples things like dinning out going to the movies, or going to the bar,or equivalent,with your friends as well, and the fact that being broke makes you put most of your energy into not being broke, and the rest of it into managing how to.survive on such few resources

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What is “women toxic masculinity”?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I haven't read this one yet, but Ghodsee's "Why Women Have Better Sex Under Socialism" might be interesting to you. I've listened to some of her interviews and she still peddles some lib propaganda here and there, but her points on gender equality and material conditions (which directly impact relationships) are still pretty good IMO.

It's definitely not the only factor, but in a society so individualistic that the mere act of organising anything that aren't consumption-based events is viewed as weird or dangerous, I reckon the barrier for entry gains a monetary dimension. A while back when I was morbidly looking at dating advice, a lot of it was "join something," which usually was a gym, a sports club, some hobby group, and sadly most of those take money and time, things we have to ration radically just to survive. There's effectively no "free" place to meet people irl (because if it became popular it'd immediately be commodified), so your only options are either work or some service place.

But I've heard political parties are great places to meet like-minded people ;)

I also have a bit of a beef with the monogamous life partnership expectation being such a normalised thing, as if not being in a relationship made people some kind of failure. If you look at it objectively, relationships are not magic, are actually a load of responsibilities and definitely are also affected by material conditions. If a person is too tired, broke or depressed to meet new people, how likely are they to be able to maintain a whole relationship? But now I'm volcel vanguarding.

There's also some Parenti quote somewhere about standing for "the people too tired to have sex when they come home," but I can't find it right now.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

The quote

In the United States, for over a hundred years, the ruling interests tirelessly propagated anticommunism among the populace, until it became more like a religious orthodoxy than a political analysis. During the Cold War, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.

-- Michael Parenti, Blackshirts And Reds

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the admins of this instance if you have any questions or concerns.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

It's a whole combination of factors. This is a big part, not knowing where to meet new people is always hard.

Capitalism also commodities relationships, people can be trained by capitalism to view relationships in an entirely transactional way, this is how we get things like incels.

Another factor is that a lot of places for people to get to know each other are bloody expensive. It costs money to get to know someone. So some people just "can't afford" to date. This works in terms of time too, where people are "too busy working" to get to meet new people.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

My financial and living situation is 100% the reason I haven't tried. It was always one more goal to get to as the posts keep getting moved. Now I am at an age where I don't even know how to start if I wanted to. I know a lot of guys like this. Sadly some of them go the incell route on what the cause of it. Those that have I cut off from because it's not worth trying to argue with that level of toxic bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

May I ask how old are you?