[kjrose]

"According to him, he is a great man and could do extraordinary things, but he does not always try his best"

This is right here probably a major explanation for the whole phenomena. I have seen this exact attitude with individuals who are in their 30s and living with their parents. Something in their upbringing gave them this immense sense of worth but the world isn't rewarding them for the little work they do as much as they think it's worth.

So, since their whole worldview cannot be reconciled with how they are treated outside their family, it makes sense to retreat to that very same safe place as before.

He is right he could do extraordinary things, but first he needs to work hard to get there.

[slx26]

Not to completely deny your point, but we should be much more careful: in my opinion, a big part of mental illness stigma comes from the inability of society to see a culprit, and instead let the individual become the culprit. We are very biased to rationalize stuff. If we don't see an abusive family, economic problems, obvious disabilities, etc, we tend to rationalize something else and not admit that maybe there are psychological barriers and obstacles that are disabling a person. Being in social isolation is not easier than working hard. It's a complicated problem.

I personally believe the best attitude is to accept that if someone can't get out of a certain situation by themselves, they need help. No additional judgement required. Now, who you want to help or whether you want to help someone is your choice, as we often already have enough trouble in our own lives to also go helping others. That's ok. But anything else is trying to rationalize who needs more help, when we are always lacking context and perspective.

[dzolob]

> I personally believe the best attitude is to accept that if someone can't get out of a certain situation by themselves, they need help. No additional judgement required.

This is so true, and it’s so hard to fight our own prejudice. Seeing loved ones in bad mental states is hard, and as individuals and as society we don’t really know what to do to help, so it’s easier to blame them for being there and makes us feel bad, than to confront ourselves and be good companions, even if there is not much we can do to help.

[kiba]

This is right here probably a major explanation for the whole phenomena. I have seen this exact attitude with individuals who are in their 30s and living with their parents. Something in their upbringing gave them this immense sense of worth but the world isn't rewarding them for the little work they do as much as they think it's worth.

This is extremely presumptive and dismissive. Also living with your parents isn't necessary an indicator of a social reclusve.

[throwawayboise]

> living with your parents isn't necessary an indicator of a social reclusve

Assuming you mean living with your parents in their house, it pretty much is. It's different if you have an elderly parent living with you in your house.

Anyone in his 30s and living with his parents is going to have constrained social opportunities unless he's some kind of royalty.

[colmvp]

It's not uncommon for people to live with parents when they can so that they can save enough money for their future.

By the time my cousin got married, he was in his 30s and had lived at home all his life. He bought a condo immediately with his savings for him and his wife to move into.

My best friend lived at home until he paid off his student loans after which he saved enough for a down payment for a condo.

My other friend lived at home till her 30s, when she got married and moved in with her husband.

My other best friend is living at an apartment with his parents, and has a steady girlfriend as well as thriving businesses.

For some people I don't doubt living at home with your parents would be awful for development, but there's so many ways to live life that I would never generalize the outcomes without fully considering the circumstances.

[t-writescode]

This is a remarkably American perspective to the issue and may not reflect other countries’ experiences and results, at all.

[kiba]

Assuming you mean living with your parents in their house, it pretty much is. It's different if you have an elderly parent living with you in your house.

Anyone in his 30s and living with his parents is going to have constrained social opportunities unless he's some kind of royalty.

If you earn money, then you're independent enough. That's enough for me. It's a bit embarrassing to admit that you live with your parents, but ultimately so what?

[themagicalyang]

Clearly you need you need expand your horizon and explore other cultures.

[kjrose]

I am not referring to everyone who lives at home with parents, nor am I saying that living at home with parents is a bad thing or an indicator of social recluse.

What I said is I've seen this "exact attitude with individuals" (as in some individuals, not all.) For example, my daughter's kindergarten teacher lives with his parents, and I have absolutely no issue with it. However, I do know someone who is well into their 30s that is living with their parents because every job they've ever had did not "treat them well enough", in many cases they lasted less than a week, and their parents continue to allow them to basically get away with not working.

[msrenee]

This has been my same experience for what it's worth. Folks whose parents told them they hung the moon who won't accept a living wage for a hard day's work. Not bad people at all for the most part. But they think their entry-level skills should earn $35+/hour.

Worse yet, I work with a handful of guys who are making $22-28/hour to do a $20/hour job and they can't stop complaining about how boring and repetitive it is. For most of them, they went to trade school and have no idea how good they have it at this company.

If I'm not getting paid what I'm worth, I move on. If I can't find someone to pay me what I think I'm worth, I reevaluate my skillset. If no one is willing to pay you what you think you're worth, you're probably not worth that. And if a job is paying you more than the going rate for your skill, you shut up and do a damn good job.

And, finally, maybe it's how I was raised, but whatever I'm doing - whether it's beneath me or doesn't pay shit - I do a damn good job, because if I'm going to do something, I do it right.

[kiba]

You said it's a major explanation of the phenomena, based on your anecdotal experience.

[kjrose]

I M theorizing it is an explanation of the phenomena of hikikomori and similar phenomena.

[numpad0]

I think it's untreated underage burnout.

The imagined authority and declared lack of execution both allow him to reject expectations from others thereby taking out uncertainties. Absolutely in no offense, the last line of your comment is not an unpredictable response and also emotionally not aggressive, which I suspect is what he is expecting from people around. People in the state of burnout also won't work hard, because the soul is already spent from having previously done so. They don't seem to try to meet or exceed expectations despite looking mostly healthy, though they might think they're capable of or remember themselves to be.

Japanese education for a child in upper middle class during 2000s was horrible. It was essentially a 12 hours a day double work starting 10-12 years old that ends at university entry exam. That creates basis for excessive overtime and workaholism culture that will burn out some graduates within first three years of work if they had not already. Perhaps if they do and declines to be mourned early they'll end up here.

[saeranv]

I noticed this too, because it seemed to be a common theme for many of the men, and also, pretty relatable. Who doesn't think of themselves as capable of "extraordinary things"?

If they could recontextualize failure as adversity: a key part of learning, and making progress, the failure could build resilience instead of compounding to a point where they feel like they are better off giving up and isolating.

[laurent92]

Old farts always assume what we ask for is illegitimate.

I remember a “HR Collective Negotiation” teacher in my masters (one of the top schools of France). He said “When you need to fire 193 people, don’t ask for 400 to come back to 200. Ask for 193 and negotiate until you get it.”

I’ve always applied this rule in my life. (Socially it doesn’t work at all, but I do it because I’d like to see a world that works on sincere values).

So I never demanded anything from my father up to the point I needed him. At 35 years old I told him modern women were unmanageable and my life was turning sour, and I needed help, I needed people to understand that men are being mistreated by the system, but I said it with ample documentation (you could watch the excellent movie The Red Pill, which depicts pretty much the complexity of our position), and that the only answer of society towards us is “Incel”. By the time I asked my father, I had already created some networks through politicians, but on the topic that interests me, all still had the same dismissive position, because promoting men doesn’t work politically. I’m saying that so you don’t say that I hadn’t walked my walk.

So apparently I’m able to make about 3 million dollars, between one startup which IPO’ed and my own company which has 6 employees. But I’m still not good enough for women, and worthy of being treated as the scum of the earth.

So I asked my father whether at least in my family, the upsides of men could be acknowledged, and if in addition to admiring my sister’s climb of Everest, we could acknowledge that we could give men the same kind of help for finding affection as we give women at work. I gave specific examples and came back on several angles. My father refused to respond to my demand, treating me as a spoilt brat every single time.

I do not see, when one has already contributed to society more than his father’s entire life of taxes (along with thousands of hours of volunteering, don’t assume I’m only talking in money, it’s just a symbolic result), what gives society the right to treat us as a tax slave and never give us love in return. I’ve always tried to be the kindest of all, but that’s also a receipe to be stepped upon, which seems to be an attitude that we think is totally ok for women.

There aren’t many ways besides violence to be heard by people who refuse to hear us. I’ve already tried words! And more importantly for me: I’ve already tried taking positive action.

Remains violence.

Just saying.

[tux3]

You're threatening violence. And what then. Do you intend to take love by force, Laurent92?

Blaming old farts. Well, I'm younger than you, but you still will not hear, from anyone, that what you're asking is far beyond "illegitimate", will you?

What is someone to do after hearing you?

[luckylion]

> what you're asking is far beyond "illegitimate"

Wanting to be acknowledged is illegitimate? Because that's really all I read from that. Being acknowledged not even for one's self, but at least for what one does or has done.

[nickflood]

The comment of laurent92 doesn't read as if he needs acknowledgement.

It reads like he thinks he's done enough "good" or has enough "accomplishments" in his head that he is definitely owed affection from women now, because clearly he's good enough as he is now. While also "refusing to budge" on the amount of what he's owed.

And I also read an anger at the inability to receive what he's owed, and some violence angle on top of that.

(Sorry, at this point this turned into a reply to Laurent92 themselves.)

That's not how it works, however, - you don't take what you're owed in a personal relationship (if you want it to be good and long lasting, anyway), and you don't treat the other person like they have to give you what you're owed. You're not against your partner.

However bad you think men have it today, women have it worse, and had for a long time. It's really only fair for the pendulum to swing another direction till everything settles in a good fair balance.

And that balance will look like people from different social groups working together, understanding each other, instead of taking what they're owed from each other.

What you need to do is look at your partner as you look at yourself because they are a person, too, not a device that gives you your reward.

[luckylion]

He mentions his father that praises his sister's climb of Mt. Everest (whether figuratively or not), but does not acknowledge his achievements, even when they far surpass his peers'. I don't think that's unreasonable at all.

I totally agree with you that he's not owed anything from anyone, but I assume that we'd split about whether he owes anyone anything (e.g. taxes).

> However bad you think men have it today, women have it worse

In Saudi-Arabia? 100% agree. In France, Denmark, Germany or Sweden? No.

I think you're focusing far too much on the partner-angle. That's likely a part of it, but it sounds like an (especially painful) rejection in a long line of rejections.

I've witnessed that in multiple young men where they do achieve extraordinary things, but aren't part of the world elite in whatever they do, and they don't get the recognition they feel they deserve (usually rightfully so, imho). At the same time, a woman does something of much lesser difficulty and drowns in praise and opportunity (look up Aja Jaff for an example in Germany). Most of the men experiencing that get bitter and eventually become destructive.

It's easy to fix, but the whole "women have it worse, everywhere, always" shtick does get in the way. It doesn't hold up to reality either.

[davesque]

Maybe? Seems like that's assuming a lot about a person's life.

[mrtksn]

>immense sense of worth

Not necessarily sense of worth, I would argue. I doubt that it's the first time in history when parents told their children that they are very beautiful and smart, much better than anyone else.

IMHO cushion of enough wealth to allow a lifestyle of "prefer not to" combined with lowered expectations of the life is a total destroyer. Many people in developed countries can choose not to face the difficulties of the life and be entertained and fed through their adulthood.

If it's hard for you to face rejection or go through social situation there's enough infrastructure to let you live your life in a room. You may or may not have income if you don't have to pay rent, staying alive is extremely cheap so your parents can take care of you with almost no impact on their budget. You can also do some remote work that requires only tech literacy.

I myself had periods of "going back to parents home" when I was feeling "No expectations form my life but not interested in dying". What worked for me was forcing myself out of my comfort zone through changing cities/countries with no enough fund to sustain that kind of lifestyle.

It worked well for me 3 times so far. The state of "living in your room" is easy thanks to the internet, I don't remember getting bored because my schedule was always full with "projects", TV series, games and online discussions(forums->facebook->Digg->reddit). You notice the toll on your body and you disconnect at some point when your peers move on with their phase in their lives.

I'm not exactly an introvert(I simply need time alone too), I actually enjoy the company of people and what works for me is re-inventing myself somewhere else and meet completely new people. That's the phase I feel alive instead of content, suddenly I feel like I have a purpose(because I actually do have a purpose. I'm doing rebuild from scratch and there's plenty of stuff to do). At some point the things stabilize and I start feeling like disconnecting from the society for a while.

I just wonder why these other people don't seem to break their stay in the room period. The world is full of opportunities and it's actually very friendly place overall. The flaming extraverts are cool too.

I have a hypothesis for this too. One thing I noticed about my "live in the room phase" peers is that they tend to deny observations, they are extremist in their lifestyles and fight to the bitter end any evidence that another way of life is possible and it's within their reach. They are extremely cynical towards the outside world. I think this is required because, to maintain inaction you need to have a gap between what's possible and what you can do. If you accept that the world is full of opportunities, the only way to have a gap preventing you from picking these opportunities is to have low abilities. So yes, it does have a component of self worth.

[kjrose]

I agree fully with your addendum to my comment.

[heterodoxxed]

> Something in their upbringing gave them this immense sense of worth

Is there an abundance of this in Japanese culture that I wasn't aware of?

[jmchuster]

Probably just an abundance of this in humans in general?

A lovely John Steinbeck paraphrase/misquote from another thread:

"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires."

[kjrose]

We live in an age of underappreciated princes with no fiefdoms.