>>2461432>But it correlates.Sex doesn't correlate much, only relationships do. And only because of there being direct social interaction, those people who also possessed involved community social interactions also reported similar levels of being less lonely. Getting into a relationship out of loneliness also does not guarantee (and anecdotally more over leads to) the relationship lasting in any long term way.
>If you disagree with Marx and Engels on a handful of things I'm sorry to tell you that you probably wouldn't be seen as their compatriots and they'd admit it, the difference is I admit it too. And your basis for this? Marc and Engels had multiple compatriots that they didn't agree with everything on, and Marx is clear the preamble to Capital I that his theory isn't static and will have to be built upon. The issue is that you don't build upon it, rip the very core out of it and try and puppet the corpse.
>I did, and you missed the points Marx and Engels were making completely. These aren't just "This isn't some external point which upon further scientific study and social evaluation, we come to better understanding and recognize it's faults," they're anti moralist and anti ethical consumerist stances that by discarding you are also discarding core tenets of Marxism. They aren't though? What core tenet specifically am I discarding? And be specific. Marx himself retracted much of his views regarding colonialism later in life, is he now discarding his own "core tenet", or just building on his analysis in way that he understood as incomplete?
>In many cases it absolutely is, leading to suicide, but also direct attacks on men for trying to ask women out.>https://abcnews.go.com/US/assumption-university-catch-a-predator-case/story?id=117754960This is clout based "pedophile hysteria", not an example of men getting attacked for asking woman out. Men not having sex isn't equivalent to physical abuse, someone having bodily autonomy isn't the same as someone violating it.
>Men aren't joking when they say they don't ask women out anymore because if they do they go "Pigs come here and crack this uyghurs skull open for breaking the law of being a sub 5 and talking to me" and then that is exactly what happens.Give me statistics, this practically never happens and you have to be incredibly sheltered to believe so. When men don't ask woman out, it's more out of shame from their peers witnessing it and a fear of rejection. It's the same reason you might not ask a question that may have an answer you don't like.
>Women and false accusations leading to imprisonment or death is just a taste of what they could do. Does it happen? Sure. Is it extremely common? No, especially compared to other crimes, and especially among white men. The vast majority of false accusations isn't all woman vs all men, the vast majority with consequences is white woman and black men, for obvious reasons related to racism and how media portrays black men.
>Women could straight up holocaust men they just don't because they view us as garbage who pose no threat at the moment.Bro, the only way woman could "Holocaust" men would be through men. It's men largely enforcing men at the end of the day. Also this is hysterical and pathological, it's like saying minorites in the US could rise up any day now and start killing white person because they have a theoretical numerical capicity to, but don't because they don't see whites as a big enough treat yet. It implies that that's a thing non-whites would even want to do, its absurd. And even then, men make up the majority of female sexual abuse and murders, so if there was any kind of "Casus Belli" to be had in your fantasy world, it's already here. Yet woman don't. If anything, woman are weirdly more tolerable (likely because of social factor and pressures) then men in regards to solutions, because while there may be some small amount that go "kill all men", the vast majority go "Men should go to therapy, they need help, we need to have classes to teach sensitivity and not be toxic in how they practice their masculinity blu blu blu :'(". If a lot of current men were treated the same way, you would have men calling out for blood.
>Wozers, Chad fucking his Chad boyfriend, but I don't remember asking, I could tell from your cope posts, albeit from using Marxist terms to mask it, that you just want to deny the reality of modern class inversion.The bourgeoisie are still the bourgeoisie, and the proletariat the proletariat, so I'm not seeing any class inversion in the modern day. Sexes aren't classes. Also, why the continued mention of boyfriend? Is it meant as an insult? What's wrong with being gay anyway?
>Alienation affects everyone, but it doesn't affect at the same rates, not at all. I think it does, but it just does so in different ways, due to us living in a patriarchally informed society. The disintegration of third places as well as how men are expected to act in the role of being a "man" creates a difficult path for men to make deep bonds with other men that aren't done through the medium of some external activity. Making social bonds in a shared hobby is easy, but without any IRL hobbies, men are forced to try and make friends by directly talking and asking to be friends. That isn't how men are conditioned however.
>As for your other study understand you gave me 40 pages and yet the moderators in Manchester admit that there is variety in the participants.Of course there is variety? That's how studies on populations work, they go into more detail in the study as well.
>No shit that older women are going to skew things, and frankly older men for that matter, older men will be more quiet, while older women are materially more lonely, actually so. Up to 50% of them end up divorced or widowed in their 50s. How is this a counter argument? It's largely an assumption regarding the study, you don't have actual basis to state that the only reason is that older men don't report (in a study that specifically asked people) and older woman skew.
>size of the overall effect is small, it is statistically significant at the .05 significance level, p = .005, suggesting that males are slightly lonelier than females.
I said close, not a perfect 50-50. This is a petty thing to bring up.
>Now that aside and this is more important in my opinion: When we speak of alienation here we speak of material conditions. You linked me a non Marxist study.
When we speak of alienation, we speak of multiple forms, whether it be alienation from ones labour and what one creates, and alienation from self and from others. These derive from the material conditions of capital. Whether this is a non-marxist study is unimportant, because it contains information regarding what seems to be an alienation from others. The study doesn't need to be marxist to use it for Marxist means, like how Cockshott might use publically available data regarding labour time and production to help with his proof of the LTV.
>Things like "How many friends, supportive people, lovers, how confident are you in a support net, that you could count on someone if you lost your job, etc" are all things that matter exponentially more than self reporting for a statistic.Absolutely, and have studies that ask that.
>And when you look at modern first world women, there is a reason it's ok to still insult white women today and be as openly racist towards them as possible:Huh? Where do white woman face racism? The worst white woman get are snide jokes, usually made by white woman. They don't face the same actually open racism non-white woman face on sometimes a daily basis.
>They are the least alienated group of people in human history.We are talking about woman in general, not white woman. Alienation is not the same a privilege, which white woman undeniably have. They can get away with there whiteness being mocked by the less privileged, because in the end there is little affect on their actual conditions.
>They're inverting the gender pay gap, soon they'll be the dominant earners. Bruh, where? Show me stats. Younger woman may now be going into jobs that in the current capitalist market pays better, but I have seen no proof of men as a statistical while showing any trend of being on the "other side" of the pay gap.
>First world women are anything but alienated.Stop conflating first world woman with first world white woman, you know what you're doing. And they are, it's unavoidable.
>In fact their loneliness comes from privilege. It is not toiling under capitalism that has brought it to them itIt has, woman work in factories, in kitchens, in fields, as cleaners, as retail workers, etc. All these jobs, as with many, entail alienation.
>is the entitlement to Chad and ignoring the existing means of reproduction in front of them that leads to their loneliness.You have issues. Let me ask you this, because you think I'm some great Chad. Would you expect me to say yes to someone and have sex, maybe even a relationship with them, even if I'm not attracted to them, simply because I'm lonely? No, that would be pathetic and pityable, a diservice to both of us. I would be with her only because I want to dull my own feelings and have her as a crutch, and she would have to live her life knowing that I'm not actually attracted to her and only using her physically to satisfy myself emotionally. Is that the world you want? Where all woman just get with people they don't like, that they cannot feel emotional and sexual attraction to, and just tolerate it while the men know they are just being used to get over loneliness? That's a complete pathetic state of affairs for both.
>Now you can argue that this stems from alienation of Gattungswesen,Yes!
>but it still would have to admit that they have the feelings, regardless of where they came from of deep bourgeois entitlement to the best for themselves.We are all socially shaped by our environment, sometimes in ways we are unaware. Do I pretend that relationship and our feelings about them aren't in some way affected by capitalism? No, but I don't prescribe then that relationship and love is itself capitalistic. These things preceded capital as a whole.
>And so to you my friend I rather, ask what then is your solution?Fighting against capitalism, constructing third spaces as an offset to the enclosing walls of private business, and fostering a mutual sense of community among all of us.
>Because Engels likewise thinks destroying capitalism will improve the dating market, but if alienation only enables the worst of humanity, then how can you trust a infected species to leave behind those notions?Because we aren't static permanently "infected" creatures? This is like asking how can the proletariat in the USSR be trusted to perpetuate the revolution when they lived in pseudo-feudal realtions for so long? People are always in flux, we are always in a state of change. We both act upon on the fire, and the fire acts upon us.
>I guarantee you they'll just want hot labor Chad over rich slave owning Chad if that happens.Can you guarantee this? I cannot. Standards change, people change. The people half a century ago would likely recoil at what we find attractive now.
>We're not talking about some self reported survey asking "Do you feel lonely? Yes :( or No:) ?"Self reporting is always but one part, but you have to do it to get any meaningful data.
>We're talking about material conditions and every single one is reporting more and more that society is turning from a patriarchal capitalist one to matriarchal capitalist one,Where? Show me your basis for this, because I'm actually in a stereotypically working class job, and this 100% not the case. We still live in what is fundamentally a patriarchal society, and until you show me a society in which woman compete for men and use them to show off their womanhood to other woman, and men are largely the ones having to manage reproductive labour in the family and take a passive/supportive role in social affairs, we're still going to be in one.
>and if history tells us one thing well, men are never as king when it comes to gender liberation as women are. In fact I'll go as far as to agree with radfems. Men are very violent when it comes to getting their fair share. Every day it gets worse, and it's less of a "When" and a more "How much more can they take before they make bronze age patriarchy look like a joke?">Tick tock tick tock tick tock…Edgy. In my view, gender liberation help both sexes, but if you think men are inherently patriarchal and can't except gender liberation, I think you hate men and have more self loathing then you could ever accuse me of having.