Show transcript
Screenshot of a Tumblr post by nongunktional:
when i first heard about the male loneliness epidemic i was like oh yeah close camaraderie and bonding between men is often discouraged in favor of competition or, if not discouraged, at least filtered through a lens of individualism that precludes deep connections. and then i learned what people meant by it (men arent getting laid) to which i say skill issue
to all the men out there not getting laid: try less hard to get laid and try more hard to be an enjoyable and relaxing presence
OK, but…no? That’s not what people are talking about with the male loneliness epidemic. They’re talking about how an inability to connect with their peers on a more than superficial level, coupled with a lack of older male role models, are causing Gen Z and Millennial men to report extremely high levels of loneliness.
It’s tangentially related to, “getting laid,” as many of these men are driven towards misogynistic monosphere influencers who make sexual conquest a measure of self-worth, but that’s a symptom of the problem, not the totality of it. Also, some people debate the existence of the loneliness epidemic altogether, but no one defines it as, “men aren’t getting laid.”
I think theres also more competition for people’s attention than in previous generations, as well as increasing responsibilities as aging population and wealth disparity increased in proportion.
Yeah, for sure. Also, I should be clear that I’m not certain how much I believe in the male loneliness epidemic. I think a lot of it can be explained as people who were conditioned to view themselves as the primary earners having to cope with the conditions of late stage capitalism. But I think that representing the male loneliness epidemic as, “men aren’t getting laid,” is a fundamental misunderstanding of the argument, and ironically, what the original commenter thought of when they first heard of male loneliness is a much more accurate description than what they think, “people really meant by it.”