[Blackpill] Debunking false findings and manipulation of data against incels

animucel

animucel

homucel
-
Joined
Jan 25, 2018
Messages
182
https://ifstudies.org/blog/male-sexlessness-is-rising-but-not-for-the-reasons-incels-claim

First let's approach their main conclusion:
The primary cause of the rise in sexlessness is simply the increasing delay of marriage.
This is not true because it applies only to males. Note the significant increase post 2008 in mainly male celibacy, not female one. If marriages were a problem, why does problem affect males much more significantly, perhaps twice as strong if not more, depending on the source?

Most people have premartial sex (depending on the country ofc). Marriage decline has more to do with culture rather than anything else. Many young people simply decide not to marry, despite making pairs. Or marrying much later. I however fail to see how being in marriage and sex correlate with each other, since seldom anyone but extremely religious people decide not to have it before marriage. I could go on and tell you how women have lower virgin age, have it easier by a sole fact that there's simply more males than females in the reproductive age(pure mathematics), teach you about economics, but this apparently seems irrelevant to this "amazing study".

Historically, never-married men have reported higher sexual frequency than never-married women. However, in the 2014 and 2016 GSS samples, that changed: never-married men now report slightly lower sexual frequency than never-married women.
You call the highest difference in over 25 years "little"? Relatively, women are having twice as much sex as men do.
Relative change for males compared to females from 2008 to 2016 in sexlessness rising by stunning ~100%, which means there's about twice the amount of men in the group not having sex compared to females. That's roughly ~43% increase for men and ~22.5% increase for women. That's just rough calculations from their chart. So about twice as many men than women, +/- 5%. You call this slightly? Weaselly at best, intentionally misleading at worst.

this is mostly because men are reporting less sex, not that women are reporting more sex. Female sexual frequency is essentially unchanged since 2000. In other words, a key piece of the incel story about rising female promiscuity just isn’t there.
Let's think about this for a second. If the problem concerned both sexes, the relative change between sexes would be unchanged. Why is the difference between males and females the highest now? If that was true, and people of both genders started having less sex, wouldn't the relative difference of sexlessness between males and females be similar to previous years? Not convincing enough perhaps. Maybe a logical truth-bomb? If women's sex frequency in some group didn't change, but male's did, who's doing all the fucking? A good theory would be that there's a smaller group of males who gets more sex that those males would otherwise get. What other way is there to explain this, considering females are having the same amount of sex, but males get less, and you need both to tango. You said it yourself: Female sexual frequency is essentially unchanged since 2000. And if less males fuck, someone has to keep up with all the fucking. I apologize for language, but I cannot possibly explain this in simpler terms.
So what piece did we miss, "ifstudies"?

The incel account of events thus far is maybe true in the GSS, but faced strong rebuttals from the NHANES and NSFG data. Not a glowing endorsement of the incel narrative!
Do you even read the data you show?
jfl-png.13801
:
GSS data contains: People who never married, and "average" of people who had zero sexual partners and no sexual encounters.
NSFG data contains: People who never married (JFL)
NHANES data contains: People who never married and who never married and live with a partner (JFLx2)
In 2018, where seldom anyone below 30 marries, what do you expect to see here? That people living with a partner that they are not married to are having sex? Well, data supports that one for sure. Not sure if we needed studies for this one, though.

Many incels quote a rule of thumb that 20% of men have 80% of the sex. Is this true?
It's a rule of thumb. It will never be perfectly 20% and 80%.
In reality, according to the GSS, the top 20% of the most sexually active never-married young men have about 50-60% of the sex. It’s about the same for women, and these shares are basically stable over time. Measuring the number of partners instead of sexual frequency, the top 20% most promiscuous men account for about 60% of male sexual partnerings, and the trend is, again, quite stable over time.
Damn, for a rule of thumb, that's pretty damn accurate. Small group of top males are having a go with majority of the females. Damn. And if it's truly stable, that means concerning to my previous findings that the standards are rising pretty damn hard. Since that top 20% of males will be in a lesser group. I think for now, 20/60 rule is fine by me. Still means that 80% of males fight for 40% of females. That's twice as much. Even if we pair everyone 1-to-1, what happens to the 40% of men for who there's no one? Weak argument considering they say "sex" and not "partners", and I don't know how to define it. Very misleading. Data missing on women as well. No real source given outside of "GSS" which has like billion different things.

The core incel story about what’s going on here—that a few Chads are hoarding a growing share of Stacies, depriving incels of mates—just doesn’t hold up. The top 20% of unmarried men are having about the same share of total sexual activity or sexual partnerings as has been the case for decades.
Your findings are not supported by any data. GSS Does not have 'Top sexual males" rankings. If you do not publish data, releasing statements might as well be treated as fantasy. I imagine they're, as has been shown, again misinterpreting existing data. I don't even know what GSS data they used to interpret this so I cannot verify it myself. Also it wouldn't make sense if it's true unless it's relative findings, since, as shown before, someone has to keep up with the additional "sex" even though less males have it.

The main factor driving this trend, however, isn’t Chads and Stacies, but just declining marriage rates among young men.
What the fuck? I mean marriage is when a woman and a man get together. Why is that problem only concerning males, then? Hello? You just said that female sexlessness is virtually unchanged, so, who are those women having sex with? Why do they not have a problem with marriage? Who are they marrying, if they are? Something is going on here. But marriages are on the decline in general! Why are you blaming young men for this?
Unmarried people have less sex in general
Then... if marriage is on the decline.. why is female's celibacy rate not rising? I mean, if young men don't marry, young women would not either. Most marriages are within the same age range, more or less. So I don't get what you're trying to say. It takes two to tango, you know? Both in sex and marriage. Or are they saying no marriage only leaves men sexless?


Thus, while the NSFG shows sexlessness declining, essentially involuntary sources of sexlessness, which I consider to be “other” and “lack of a suitable partner,” are stable or rising.
But the 68% increase from 2002 to 2015 in the incel share of the male, never-married, 22-35-year-old population is mostly due to a decline in marriage, not never-married men having less sex.
Why does it only concerns males if that's true? Wouldn't women's relative difference in sexlessness in never married females be the fucking same? But it clearly isn't according to data? Maybe they are saying women are having tremendously more sex outside of marriage compared to men and that it's terribly hard for males to have sex outside of marriage. Well that would make sense. Isn't that what we were saying for quite a while here on incels.is? It simply means some men cannot have sex without the institution of marriage, then. To some degree, at least.

But the big change isn’t a growing share of alpha males hoarding all the sex, nor women suddenly becoming far more choosey amid rising promiscuity; rather, it’s just that marriage is being delayed,
Again, then why does it not affect women relatively speaking?
You need two to marry. A woman and a man. Well, same-sex marriages exist too I guess. But I don't think that's relevant here.

I will skip the education and housing problem, it's obvious to everyone.
But whatever the direct effect of education on never-married men, the primary cause of the rise in sexlessness is simply the increasing delay of marriage. The delay in marriage has numerous causes, of course, but probably the most powerful driver of marital timing also relates to education. Men and women are much less likely to get married while attending school, and across times and countries, an increase in the years of schooling is associated with later age of marriage, though more-educated people do tend to get married eventually. Thus, as more and more schooling becomes necessary for a good middle-class job, marriage gets pushed later and later, leaving more young people (men and women!) companionless and lonely.
This whole argument is based on wrong data interpretation. Men are twice more sexless relatively speaking. Look at the data. If it was a marriage problem, we would see such a steep increase not only for men, but for women as well. And yet, relative difference between sexless men and women is the highest in recorded history. Explain this.
 
Last edited:
Intent

Intent

jbw or jkys
-
Joined
May 4, 2018
Messages
1,406
Einstein iq post, good job op
 
PrinceOfCope

PrinceOfCope

Banned
-
Joined
Apr 3, 2018
Messages
572
lol at this high IQ post not getting any replies while meme bait race war thread number 200 has 50 responses in three attoseconds

mogged by shitposts
 
satoshisacuck

satoshisacuck

Strategistcel/Muslimcel/HackERcel
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
908
Thank you, OP :)
 
Ra1d3n

Ra1d3n

WarriorSkull verified FBI Data Miner.
-
Joined
May 11, 2018
Messages
155
High IQ post, I enjoyed reading this at the original source material, thanks for post OP.
 
Richard spencer

Richard spencer

Banned
-
Joined
Dec 11, 2017
Messages
2,837
lol at this high IQ post not getting any replies while meme bait race war thread number 200 has 50 responses in three attoseconds

mogged by shitposts
Are you saying that whites aren't gods?
 
C

catfishman23

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
5,958
please put a TLDR summary so we can understand better.
 
Falling

Falling

Problem, officer?
-
Joined
Apr 9, 2018
Messages
686
Pin this thread please.
 
Bronzehawkattack

Bronzehawkattack

Mythic
-
Joined
Mar 16, 2018
Messages
4,748
Mega high IQ thread, should be pinned. It's a shame the author is unlikely to read it.
 
Inbuddhist

Inbuddhist

Major
-
Joined
Feb 26, 2018
Messages
2,081
Why didn't this post get a lot of replies ? It's Einstein level IQ.
 
D

Doomedanincel

Banned
-
Joined
Sep 7, 2018
Messages
124
men not marrying is the symptom, not the cause, of rising celibacy
 
Azaylias

Azaylias

ϟϟ 卐 ϟϟ
-
Joined
Aug 3, 2018
Messages
4,784
im sending u a medal
 
AsiaCel

AsiaCel

high fwhr ogrecel
-
Joined
Nov 24, 2017
Messages
6,636
Atomic engineer IQ. pin this.
 
OverIt

OverIt

Officer
-
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Messages
507
High IQ
Its nice to see data provided the obviously disputes what the original source is trying to say. They are completely ignoring the women's increase and men decrease just to call us liars
 
Top