
Almost one in five men admits to having no close friends, a survey has found - laurex
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/all-the-lonely-people-are-men-a-fifth-have-no-friends-6rzvhl736
======
buro9
I run 300 forums, and I had a startup for them. The lofty goal of the startup
was to "cure loneliness" but I never told the users that.

My path to doing this was to encourage interest based communication, in a way
that would allow them to take it offline. How? Well to make it interest +
geography, i.e. horology nerds in Cumbria, cyclists in London, petrol heads in
Cornwall, audiophiles in Suffolk.

By binding together an interest, and a geography, it naturally encourages
trade, showing off, having a beer... and coming together. But not in a way
that ever was to "cure loneliness" (which few people admit to feeling, and
frankly most people find lonely people unattractive people from the
perspective of wishing to hang out with someone like that).

By providing a space to share a passion, the forums brought people together.

I had to make our own software to achieve this, i.e. a forum with events
built-in by default, etc. But it worked.

Except I couldn't get it funded beyond the crowd-funded angel round :shrug .
But still, 250k monthly users, hundreds of marriages, tens of thousands of
friendships, and still people meeting weekly for beer and chatting with
others.

And like all love, when the lust is gone what remains is something special...
these forums are evolving now, from the original interests, into just a group
of friends for life.

If I were lonely today, I would say... identify a hobby or interest you could
get into, start looking for entry things to dive in, and then look for groups
on MeetUp, or forums online, that will help you find other people.

~~~
garmaine
Just FYI, “have no close friend” and “loneliness” aren’t the same thing. I
have no close friends, and I prefer it. Don’t try to “cure” people like me.

~~~
hombre_fatal
Someone wrote this and had deleted their comment when I went to reply to them,
but I thought it was on point, so now I'm saying it:

Curious, why you took offense to OPs post? If you are enjoying not having
close friends, then good for you, really. This thread doesn't apply to you.

You remind me of Ricky Gervais' Guitar Lessons bit:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3dxMGzt5mU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3dxMGzt5mU)

In summary, it's like calling up a guitar teacher and telling them you don't
want to learn guitar. Why call?

~~~
garmaine
I didn’t take offense. Did it read that way?

He is on a self-professed quest to cure loneliness, and seems to equate that
with not having close friendships. I just want to make sure he is aware there
is a distinction and not everyone classifies that way.

~~~
omginternets
>He is on a self-professed quest to cure loneliness

It seemed to me that he was on a quest to cure _his_ loneliness.

Point is: It's interesting (perhaps even revealing) that you read it
differently.

If it's not a problem, then it's not a problem. Sometimes a cigar is just a
cigar.

~~~
garmaine
If so, I misread it. But going back I still can't see that interpretation.

> The lofty goal of the startup was to "cure loneliness" but I never told the
> users that.

And then he talks about building features for users to take their
conversations offline. I mean maybe it was all for himself, but it seems like
the goal was to get users to build long-lasting relationships.

Which is commendable, and I commend him for it. It sounds like an awesome
project.

~~~
jackbravo
With his ending I also implied it was to cure his loneliness:

> If I were lonely today, I would say...

------
paganel
As a man is pretty damn hard keeping friends after the age of 30, especially
if you happen to go trough a divorce when suddenly more than half (if not
more) of your friends get to “choose” the other side. Yeah, you get to ask
your friends back from high-school or college out for a beer but chances are
they’re also in a middle of a divorce or they’re too busy with family
requirements (can’t blame them) or too stressed out because of work reasons.
And then there are all those friends who have moved town or even country. All
in all things are not so easy.

~~~
jcims
I sometimes wonder if I’m broken when I see comments like yours, which seem
heartfelt and correct and as it should be (the desire for friendships that
is). Maybe it’s because my wife and kids fill the void, but I just have no
interest in making or maintaining friendships. My wife has a really cool
coworker that tries to get me out of the house but i just kinda flop on him. I
live in a secluded spot that you can’t see from the road and work from home
95% of the time.

I see it in my youngest daughter as well, and I do worry for her and am
applying gentle pressure to get her to socialize...but I’m pretty much good to
go. Maybe things will change down the road but I’m in my mid 40’s sooo.

~~~
reaperducer
You're not broken. If your family is your number one interest and
responsibility, then you're doing life correctly. Don't let anyone else tell
you differently.

~~~
scarface74
Yes my family is my number one interest, but not my only interest. My (step)
sons who loved to spend time with me when we met and they were 9 and 14 - now
one doesn’t live with us and the other is 17 with his own friends and
interests.

My wife’s interests and my interests are well enough aligned that we like
spending time together, but she has her own interests and own set of female
friends.

~~~
reaperducer
Then you should consider your life a success.

No Silicon Valley billionaire's fortune can compare to the responsibility and
reward of raising a good family.

------
reaperducer
I think part of the problem is that social media, and Facebook in particular,
has cheapened the meaning of the word "friend."

I see people on HN all the time saying that they have better friends far away
via social media than they have in their own neighborhoods and offices. It's
popular inside the tech bubble to believe that digital communication is as
good or better than real communication, but it isn't.

That's a lesson one of my family members is learning right now, and the rest
of us by proxy.

She was walking to work one day and got run over by a car. Living in a
different state, 1,300 miles from her family, she didn't bother making new
friends because she could still communicate digitally with the people already
in her online relationship cloud.

But where are they in her time of need? When she needs actual friends, not
social media friends? None of her Facebook "friends" are going to go to her
apartment and bring clean underwear and toiletries to her in the hospital.
None of her Twitter followers are going to move her car so she doesn't
accumulate tickets over the next six months when the street sweepers and snow
plows come. None of her Instagram people are coming to see her, to comfort
her, to see how she's doing and just talk to her during visiting hours.

When she regained the use of one hand, she started looking at social media
again, and realized it is all so hollow. Talk, platitudes, and shameless self-
promotion does not make a real relationship.

When she comes out of this, I hope she realizes the value of real human-to-
human connections. But because she's as addicted to social media as the
companies want her to be, I believe she will relapse into the void of fake
friendships once again.

~~~
lojack
I'm not sure I buy your explanation at all. Social media may make distant
friends feel closer, but I don't think this explains the lack of close
friends. I understand that this is a data point of 1, but this article and the
HN comments all ring true to me, and I hardly ever use social media.

Most of my not very close friends also don't use social media. A friend of
mine tried creating a group on facebook to help coordinate social events for a
group of dads and almost universally the wives ended up RSVPing for their
respective husband.

When we ended up getting together we ended up talking about work and our
houses and all the different things we're doing. Men have a tendency to
communicate differently (IMO society has trained us to do so) than women. When
my wife gets together with her friends they talk about how they're feeling
about things and their relationships. This leads to men having a tendency to
have more superficial relationships.

~~~
capableweb
It feels like a probable reason. Imagine moving to another place while still
keeping exactly the same contact with the same people in the old place and
imagine doing the same, with no contact of the same people.

In the later case, you will most likely force yourself out to meet and engage
with people because eventually you will long it. You might not need a lot of
it, but seems human really need at least some other human contact (most of us
at least).

In the first case, you get human contact, but only the surface. Would probably
take you way longer to realize you need that in-person human contact.

------
viburnum
Can’t find it right now, but I recall some research showing that friendship
for men is basically with whatever other men you’re around the most. If you’re
a man and want more friends, you probably need to get a new job. Or make a
long-term commitment to showing up to the same place where other men are also
committed to showing up (AA meetings, church, sports team, etc). Or just be
friends with the husbands of your wife’s friends.

The good news is you don’t need a sparkling wit or anything, you just have to
show up.

~~~
capableweb
> some research showing that friendship for women is basically with whatever
> other women you’re around the most. If you’re a woman and want more friends,
> you probably need to get a new job. Or make a long-term commitment to
> showing up to the same place where other women are also committed to showing
> up (AA meetings, church, sports team, etc). Or just be friends with the
> wifes of your husband’s friends.

I replaced "men" with "women" and it still feels true. Think this is just in
general how humans build friendships with each other. Maybe also add "making
an effort to hang out with your already existing friends friends"

~~~
viburnum
Not really. It’s possible for women to say, “I love your earrings,” and be
best friends ten minutes later. I dare you to try that as a man.

~~~
capableweb
Not sure if this is a joke, but it's neither as easy you believe it to be for
women, or as hard you think it is for men.

------
the_rosentotter
One thing I haven't seen mentioned: 'Friends' in your teens and twenties are
often really about having someone to hang around with while looking for a
mate. So you won't look like a lone loser at the club, or in social
situations, or so that you get to meet members of the opposite/preferred sex
through the group.

Once people get married and have kids, all of that falls away, and so do the
'friends'. You don't hook up with new people, because either they want
partners to ride shotgun with them while hunting for a mate, or they are set
up too. What's left are people you have a real connection with, usually people
you were friends with since you were kids, and those few family members you
can stand being around. For many, that is a small to non-existing group.
What's left is your wife and kids, and honestly? The best company there is,
IMHO. And I am not worried about what I will do when the kids leave and my
wife divorces me, silly me.

~~~
mettamage
I can attest that I had a couple of such friends. I didn’t realize it at the
time but once you get a girlfriend, they just fall away (I didn’t analyze as
to why but fall away they do).

I do think fondly of some of them. I’m grateful for having met them and for
all the fun.

------
intrasight
Here's an easy solution guys - make friends with more women.

A couple years ago my wife asked for a divorce (we are still married but
separated). It was very much a wake up call that I was very dependent upon her
emotionally and I had neglected my other friendships. I did two things. I
invested myself in some old friends from high school and college, but as none
of them are living in my city, I realized that I really needed to invest in
new friends.

Several friends that I did have were runners, and they suggested that I join
one or two local running clubs which I did. I wasn't and am still not a
"runner", but now I have so many friends I don't know what to do with myself.
I am I'm as happy as I've ever been in terms of having friends with whom to
socialize. There are presumably clubs like that in every city. Obviously would
help to be a runner, but like I said, I am not. I run for social reasons not
because I enjoy it.

Another interesting thing with socializing in middle-age is that 4/5 of my
friends now are women. I think that's because women make better friends. They
are more outgoing. They are more emotionally aware. They're more willing to
invest in friendships. I think guy friendships are harder because of social
expectations of of what a male friendship is - especially if like me you don't
enjoy drinking or spectator sports.

~~~
bradlys
> Here's an easy solution guys - make friends with more women

I'm male. And I'm going to say that most of the women I know would prefer you
didn't offer this advice. Women frequently do a ton of emotional labor for men
and receive little back. There's already quite a bit of imbalance. Many men
rely on the women in their life for support rather than the men.

Most women I know do enjoy their male friends but still wish the men in their
lives had more male friends.

~~~
balaksakrionon
Who on earth are you to tell someone not to make friends with women? I
struggle to interpret that charitibly

------
black_puppydog
Sorry, I know this will trigger some folks, but this is exactly why I never
understood the backlash against "toxic masculinity" that I see from (male)
friends whenever the term comes up. Who said it's supposed to be toxic only
for others?

Being a stereotypically "manly" man would prevent me in particular from
expressing some of the things that make me feel the least lonely, from simple
things like cooking and being proud of having made some simple art or
handicraft, to hugging friends when I feel down, or being able to vent
frustration, fear and other negative feelings in a non-violent way. And I'm
not even marginalized by any means. Straight white European tech bro, really.
In essence, if I felt bound to any common stereotype of "Man: as seen on TV"
I'd be barred from having meaningful connections with those I call friends.

~~~
ancarda
I think it's mostly due to the phrase "toxic masculinity"; it's far too easy
to misunderstand it as "masculinity is toxic" \- and it doesn't help when
someone asks for examples; stuff like stoicism and strength can come up. These
aren't toxic. I've also spoken to people who actually believe _independence_
(and wanting to be independent) is toxic.

As this is mostly a branding problem, I want to say I recently came across the
phrase "Man Box"[1]. That might be a better phrase to use?

[1] Example:
[https://mindfulmasculinity.com/blog/manbox](https://mindfulmasculinity.com/blog/manbox)

~~~
krapp
It isn't really a branding problem. "Toxic masculinity" consists of an
adjective and a noun - the former modifying the latter and therefore
describing a trait which applies to a subset of the latter. It's common
English. A "red apple" isn't easy to misunderstand as "all apples are red." A
"hot plate" doesn't imply all plates are always hot.

People who misunderstand this phrase refuse to do so even when the proper
definition is given to them. It's not simple misunderstanding, as simple
misunderstandings can be simply corrected, but willful ignorance. You can
argue for _hours_ and explain in _excruciating detail_ that "toxic
masculinity" doesn't mean "all masculinity is toxic," providing _sources_ to
that end, and at the end of the day people will still stand firm and refuse to
accept it.

>As this is mostly a branding problem, I want to say I recently came across
the phrase "Man Box"[1]. That might be a better phrase to use?

Case in point. This site describes exactly what toxic masculinity actually is
and what it actually means. But we need a "better phrase" because feminists
used the other one and therefore it's tainted? Despite the fact that toxic
masculinity as a term originated in the men's rights movement and as a concept
is hardly alien to male culture? We can have a conversation about the possible
negative aspects of male culture and masculine identity, but we just can't say
the bad words with the girl cooties on them?

The problem isn't branding, it's men refusing to accept that any concept they
consider "feminist" could be rooted in anything but hate and misogyny. Modern
male culture needs to mature and move past the victim complex its built around
itself and see the common ground it has with feminists.

~~~
belorn
In this great alternative universe people would also not misunderstand
"illegal immigration" to mean all immigrants or extremist to mean all Muslims.
It's common English. Is it not odd that when people talk about deporting all
the illegal immigrants, some think that implies all immigrants? When there was
an executive order to ban all extremists from traveling, even judges
interpreted it as a Muslim ban and they are usually pretty good with the
English language.

When people see explicitly hostility they interpret it as hostility. That is
common English.

------
bloody-crow
This is the post I've finally decided to start an alt HN account for.

I'm one of those men with no close friends. Or any friends, for what it's
worth. I've had a few people in my life that I had very good friendships at a
time, but all of them now live very far and we don't maintain any contact.

I'm married and my wife covers all my emotional needs. While I realize how
dysfunctional such state of affairs is, I just can't bring myself to approach
new people. Every time I'm in even remotely social situation, all I wanna do
is to go home and be alone most of the time. Even when I do find people with
similar interests, I never pursue the connection and follow up. I do realize
that total lack of social exposure makes me a dull, boring person and forming
connections will become even more difficult as time goes by.

I don't know how to get out of this.

~~~
sneak
Where do you live? What are your hobbies and interests?

~~~
bloody-crow
Seattle suburbs. Coding, videogames, cars.

I've recently fell out of all of my hobbies and even stopped playing online
games where I had some community going on.

~~~
abnercoimbre
This is basically a promotion since I'm the organizer. I'm hosting a
developer's conference called Handmade Seattle this November, where lots of
cool and personal coding projects will be showcased. You could show up with no
expectations of making connections, but, you never know.

~~~
RickS
I'm in Seattle as well, and this looks neat. Will check it out and try to
attend.

------
theferalrobot
I just switched from a job where I could work from home anytime I wanted
(which meant everyone on my team did so 100% of the time) to a job that
requires everyone to be in the office 90% of the time because I want more
face-to-face human interaction in my life. The convenience was great but, on
the whole, it made me less happy.

~~~
dleslie
I've been working from home for nearly five years now; it's been fantastically
convenient while I raise my daughters.

While I have found that my adult social interactions are severely limited, I
am no worse off than my old friends; one of whom remarked that after moving to
Montreal he's seeing friends and family just as often as he did before.

Where I find adult interaction is in more traditional venues: I made an effort
to get to know my neighbours, and am acquainted with some staff and patrons at
the local pub.

The key was not to rely on scheduled events; too many adults will ghost or
reject because they feel too busy or weary to attend. Impromptu social
interaction works better; have a beer with your neigh bour.

~~~
Faark
> I made an effort to get to know my neighbours, and am acquainted with some
> staff and patrons at the local pub.

I wouldn't even know how to approach that. Feel like this requires a lot of
knowledge/skill that my path through life didn't teach me.

~~~
dleslie
Talking about the weather, remarking on their gardens, and wishing them
happiness and good health; these are all acceptable openers.

Most people love to talk about themselves, so if they give you some personal
information it's safe to inquire further about it, most of the time. Cut it
off before you turn it into an interrogation.

------
humanrebar
I only see a couple mentions of religious organizations, but it's worth
pointing out that churches and other religious organizations put an _enormous_
amount of effort into making meaningful friendships convenient and healthy,
including casual events, lectures, classes, study groups, and group volunteer
activities. I'm not positive that the amount of attention given men in
particular is comparable to children, women, couples, or families, but it's
common enough to be normal to have men-specific activities, groups, and
events.

Point being, church participation rates are much lower for men (ironically so,
when men are out in men-filled bars looking for female companionship). I
believe men leave (or don't try) churches thinking there was/is nothing for
them, and then struggle with isolation and lack of respect.

Of course, churches themselves have a lot of work to do to actually
incorporate these realities into their teaching and culture. It's more common
for churches to treat men as extra flawed or lazy instead of unaware of these
problems.

~~~
nitrogen
It's a bit disappointing that community and belief system have to be
intertwined. If one changes (you change beliefs, or your local community
doesn't suit you), the other suffers (you lose your friends, or you have to
pretend to believe something you don't).

I used to be devoutly religious through my mid twenties. In hindsight that was
a mistake for me personally because the community surrounding that religion
didn't suit me, and eventually discovered flaws in the belief system that led
me to become an atheist. I missed many opportunities in life by trying to make
that religion work for me for far too long.

So it's true that if you find a belief and community that work for you in the
same place that it can be great, but I wish there were more options like that
independent of belief.

~~~
humanrebar
Good community takes work and consistency among other things. Often you put in
hard work, end up personally worse off, but everyone else benefits. Often, the
connection between action and benefit are very disconnected.

Point being, at least in my experience, it's not possible to separate belief
from community. Things like prioritizing forgiveness do not make both
intellectual and emotional sense. At least not enough to keep _families_
together, let alone groups less officially affiliated.

------
jcoffland
One of the big problems I find is that when I call or text my male friends
they often fail to respond. My female friends always respond. I've had
multiple discussions with my male friends about this and my conclusion is that
they are mostly overwhelmed with the responsibilities and demands of being a
modern man. Friendship falls low on the priority list. I, like many men, want
more camaraderie but it takes work that's difficult to commit to.

~~~
saddestcatever
I've had the same experience with my group of friends. I know it's a small
sample size, but I wonder of that's a common contrast for most folks my age.

When I message/call/text/email my mail friends, I know there's a 1h-24h time
window before I get a response. And that's if the message prompts a response.
Otherwise, they'll address it next time in person, or just let it fly by. On
the other hand, my female friends respond much quicker.

At the same time, I see my current girlfriend ALWAYS on her phone. There's
always someone she's in contact with - because it's a priority for her to
respond. My male friends when hanging out, are almost never texting/chatting
on their phone unless something immediate demands attention. It's an
interesting tradeoff

------
spodek
Decades ago three people independently said to me, "I've known you a long time
but I don't feel I know the real you." I saw I was the common element so
decided to change.

I learned social and emotional skills, which took years of social and
emotional work. It didn't cost time or money, but since I was used to
intellectual learning, I often felt hopeless, confused, and other emotions I'd
never felt from learning. Most things I tried didn't work, but some did and I
kept at it.

After a few years I found myself saying how nearly all my relationships after
that work were better than nearly any relationship before -- with friends,
family, girlfriends, coworkers.

I've concluded that the problem wasn't my work situation or social structures,
but that no one taught me social and emotional skills of self-awareness and
relationships. In the past, we learned them through things like sports, arts,
free play, and other performance-based activities -- the things schools
increasingly cut in favor of things amenable to standardized tests. I don't
mean art history or art appreciation, but creating and expressing yourself
where others will judge your painting, recital, stage performance, etc and you
learn to handle it. Nor do I mean sports where adults control everything, but
challenging yourself to improve, recovering from loss and failure, etc.

My publisher framed my book _Leadership Step by Step_
[https://www.amazon.com/Leadership-Step-Become-Person-
Others/...](https://www.amazon.com/Leadership-Step-Become-Person-
Others/dp/0814437931) as a business book, since it will probably sell more
that way, but it's the book version of the course I teach at NYU to develop
these skills. My point is anyone can learn social and emotional skills. When
you do, relationships improve and increase in number when you want. People who
do the exercises consistently tell me they thought they couldn't learn these
things, especially not in a classroom. I felt that way when I learned them. I
wish I'd learned them as a child, but it's never too late to learn them.

------
swiley
If you're an average single man the world hates you. The public considers you
a liability that has to be written off in order to stay consistent and most
people expect you to hurt them in some way.

~~~
guerrilla
"The public" ... which you have statistics on? I'm sorry you feel bad but try
not to speak for everyone.

~~~
hogFeast
He is talking about the UK. There is a huge bias against single males here.

To give one example: the number and size of tax benefits aimed at families is
massive. Spending on these is something like £33bn...that may or may not sound
huge to you but the total NHS budget (i.e. healthcare costs for 70-80m people)
is ~£115bn.

Not everyone thinks this. But it is definitely far to say that is the general
view (and it is why Daily Mail skews female, which basically doesn't happen
with right-wing news outside the UK).

~~~
throwaway66920
This is silly and naive. Tax benefits for families exist to help and encourage
families. Society is better off when people can afford to raise a family. To
twist it into an anti single man view is way off base.

~~~
hogFeast
Yes, when a powerful, politically active group forces another less powerful,
politically inactive group to subsidise them it is definitely not
discriminatory. You should tell that to India, those idiots thought making
them pay for their own colonisation was bad...their society was better off. I
can see now, it is so obvious.

> Society is better off when people can afford to raise a family.

Alternate theory: society is better off when people act like adults, and raise
a family when they can afford to do so. No subsidies. No govt holding your
hand. Even if you ignore the fiscal effect - it is huge because it is
politically impossible to cut welfare that such a substantial amount of people
receive, that is why govt spending in areas serving truly vulnerable people
like care had to be slashed so aggressively - that is not what the policy is
intended to do.

The (original) focus of the policy was to increase labour force participation
amongst single parents. This worked. But, as you are showing, it has become
something totally different. And it is now a big feeding trough for a huge
share of the population (something like 10%+ of the working population receive
WTCs).

Govt is not there for social engineering, it is there to help people who
cannot help themselves. If someone is poor then they should get help. And this
should be through focused policy that is aimed at poverty, not these insanely
complex systems that backfire (tax credits are the prime example of this kind
of policy). The system we have now means that the govt cannot actually take
care of people who need help because of the obscene cost (again, tax credits
alone are 30% of the NHS budget) of helping those who don't (but now feel
deserving because they are helping society or whatever bollocks you are trying
to say).

It is extraordinary to totally ignore how this policy has actually worked out
(esp. the cost and esp. against the original aims), offer some half-baked
inaccurate theory of govt (govt should be involved in the sex lives of
citizens), and then call an interpretation that is based in reality
naive...but that is basically where we are with govt spending now. Greedy
middle-class people scraping the bottom of the poor person's barrel.

~~~
throwaway66920
It is impressive how strongly held, yet also specific your beliefs are. Who
told you this.

~~~
hogFeast
It is impressive that you feel justified in making no arguments but will try
to bring down people who do. Are you British by any chance?

Inability to argue? Check. Inability to reason? Check. Becomes defensive when
asked to think about closely held but illogical views? Check. Judges a
person's argument based on their identity/background (I am assuming that is
what "who told you" is about)? Check.

At the very least, try to make an argument. Weak.

~~~
throwaway66920
Uh, no, not British. Nor do I really know what your background is? Are you
British?

I’ll confess I was kind of trolling in asking you what pundit you get your
stuff from, but I’ll be really frank here. Your post reads as sort of
obsessive and out of touch. You’re bringing in talking points to support your
anger but they’re really not related. You’ve taken a very benign issue and
reframed it as a huge deal. Then you went very aggressive in what seems to be
some sort of anti-British worldview.

You’re trying to position yourself as a better intellectual but it really,
really doesn’t appear that way to others.

Saying things like I can’t argue, reason, and am unwilling to put up an
argument is a really aggressive thing to say, and I’m not sure if you
understand that you’ve set up a really tiresome premise for having a
conversation.

------
wiremaus
I read here that loneliness is a significant problem for people in general
within the modern world, and somewhat moreso for men. Headline seems a bit
clickbaity, as the issue is clearly not exclusive, and the percentage
difference relatively small.

~~~
rconti
Agreed that it's clickbaity. I already felt bad for the (smaller) proportion
of women who would be turned off by this headline, and then when you read the
actual article, it's 12% of women and "almost one in five which would be 20%)
of men.

So, men's rate is not even double womens'.

Don't get me wrong, both numbers are serious, and I agree it's a lot harder
for us men. It's just that, particularly in the case of such an isolating
feeling, excluding people and minimizing them is truly damaging.

~~~
goatinaboat
You are illustrating the problem which is that men are “not allowed” to have
problems.

There are plenty of things, such as unrealistic body image portrayed by the
media, that affect both men and women, yet women claim it exclusively as
theirs, because men aren’t supposed to. Can’t men have a thing?

~~~
icebraining
> women claim it exclusively as theirs

This way of putting things, as if groups like "women" or "men" were clubs with
decision making processes, is absurd and only serves to cause division and
infighting.

~~~
nitrogen
Call it emergent behavior then; whether through uncoordinated coordination of
the media/marketing world, or uncoordinated coordination of peer/social
pressures, these expectations exist.

I have literally been shut down in a conversation, in person, at work, more
than once, because I was a white male in tech.

~~~
goatinaboat
It certainly takes a special kind of mental gymnastics to figure that a
problem that disproportionately affects men is another example of men
excluding women from something...

------
thrownaway954
Become an alcoholic... Join AA.. Boom!!! More friends than you can imagine :)

In all seriousness... I hear this all the time in the rooms... loneliness is a
killer. What's crazy is I have a sponsee, who specifically wanted to get sober
cause the loneliness was driving him insane. Any reason to get sober and stay
is a good reason in my book.

~~~
Gibbon1
Reminds me I think of a Dilbert strip where Wally takes up smoking so he has
an excuse to take breaks and hang out with people.

~~~
jimktrains2
I used to do non-smoking "smoking" breaks with my smoker friends at work. Why
should I be denied 10minutes of non-work every hour or two !

~~~
pferde
As soon as my place of employment starts handing out oxygen masks, I'll do the
same.

Wait, no, I'd need a full body suit, because I do not want to get my clothes
reeking of that crap. :)

------
cableshaft
I recently got married in my 30s, and I had a difficult time choosing who to
be my groomsmen, because while I do have quite a few people I could call good
friends, I no longer had anyone stick out that I could really call a "close"
friend or a "best" friend.

We get together and mostly do activities, like play games or watch movies or
go out to eat, and we will help each other out if someone needs it, but I
don't really feel too comfortable opening up to them emotionally (well,
nothing super personal at least).

I don't really feel lonely, and can talk about most things with my spouse, but
I miss having alternate opinions on things.

I especially miss when I had like 20 people on instant messenger that I could
have private conversations with on any given evening like I did 20 years ago,
because it seems like no one does that anymore, at least not my age. Or at
least it seems harder for me to find those people, at least.

Facebook Messenger has the problem where everyone is always online but you
can't tell if they're online because they want to chat or online because
they're checking their news feed.

~~~
starpilot
You are living this movie:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Love_You,_Man](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Love_You,_Man)

------
jl6
I sometimes feel guilty having the few friends I do, because I feel I can
never give them enough time, between work and family commitments.

Work is the easy one - it’s easy to say “I’m done working today because I want
to spend more time with my family”. It’s not so easy to say “I’m done with
family time today because I want to spend more time with my friends”. I’m
conditioned to feel selfish at such thoughts.

------
throwaway66920
The article states 18% of men had no close friends, significantly higher than
women at 12%. Honestly that’s doesn’t sound hugely different to me. For every
two women with none, there’s three men with none. The gap is a bit smaller for
best friends too.

~~~
daenz
>The gap is a bit smaller for best friends too.

It's not: 32% for men, 24% for women. Also, this attitude is why "men are the
disposable gender" is a thing. Real problems that are correlated with men are
dismissed and ignored as not significant.

~~~
throwaway66920
It’s not that significant though. For every 4 men with no best friend there
are 3 women in the same position. If being a man is so difficult, this is a
small part of it relative to being a woman; and I would wager that women do
better here simply because they put in more effort.

~~~
daenz
Acknowledging a real problem facing men is not the same as claiming "being a
man is so difficult," and you immediately jumping to that conclusion makes me
question your motives.

~~~
throwaway66920
I don’t know what ulterior motives I could have in pointing out that something
is not a man problem but a people problem.

------
motohagiography
These trends are set in contrast to times when fraternal organizations
provided a kind of social fabric that isn't the norm now.

For men who are recognizing that social isolation is a long term risk in their
lives and want to do something about it, I heartily recommend looking into
these organizations. They're a mixed bag, like anything, but a bunch of guys
who can hold anything together for decades should make anyone's list of
options to investigate.

~~~
Aloha
As a gay male, I often have an additional wrinkle - in the Masonic orders,
Eagles, Elks, or Moose Lodge, I feel I would be the odd man out in these
situation.

~~~
neverartful
I was in the Masons for a number of years and I was surprised to read your
post. I'm quite sure that some of the Masons were gay. It didn't matter any.
The only time that I could see someone feeling like the odd man out is where
there are events for couples and you didn't feel comfortable bringing a guest.
This would be more true for the Shriners than say the Blue Lodge (plain
Masonic lodge).

I recently became an Odd Fellow and I still feel the same with respect to
whether a member is gay or not. The big difference with the Odd Fellows is
that both men and women can be (and are) members. The Masonic orders are only
for men.

In any case, I wouldn't write them off completely due to your concern.

------
belorn
> The figures prompted charities to urge men to reach out by dedicating more
> time to hobbies and socialising in an attempt to stop hundreds of thousands
> living in isolation.

Rather than urge men, would it not make more sense to urge charities and hobby
organizations to do out reach programs towards getting more men to join? It is
what IT sector and the education system has been doing lately in order to
increase minority numbers.

------
wkrause
Find one friend.

I’ve moved around a lot since college, and have had to build a social network
from scratch a few times with varying degrees of success.

While the advice to join a social activity centered around a shared interest
is solid, it’s not sufficient by itself for making friends. Bridging the gap
between hanging out for a given activity to hanging out more generally to
being actual friends with someone is hard.

Make one friend that is just down to show up. With at least one friend that
you can consistently count on to show up, you can start inviting other
potential friends to things and build out your social circle. You have to be
open to rejection and to a bit of awkwardness that comes with two semi
strangers hanging out. But with one anchor friend it becomes so much easier to
make more and it’s the one piece of advice I wish I’d come across sooner.

------
ryanmarsh
I find it interesting that men seem to be at the polar ends of the friendship
spectrum. When lonely, they are the most lonely, and also when they have
friendship claim higher levels of trust in those relationships than women
would.

Women who express feelings of loneliness tend to have more human connections
than men expressing similar feelings.

Women claiming to have good friendships still do not indicate high levels of
trust like men reporting that they have good friendships.

I wonder why though?

It’s like men are either destined to be lone wolves or a tight knit squad.

~~~
xenihn
>Women who express feelings of loneliness tend to have more human connections
than men expressing similar feelings. I wonder why though?

There's a difference between feeling lonely and actually being lonely.

------
Abishek_Muthian
Is being lonely really that bad? I like being lonely, not that it makes me
happy, as a matter of fact it may be opposite but I really didn't like when I
was not lonely (or) say when I had to socialise, indulge in the small-talk
just for the sake of it; I felt like having to constantly fake emotions and
have insincere conversations.

I've almost completely cut off any realtime communication and my current
lifestyle seems like a luxury which I had been missing earlier. This has
helped me to focus on things which I would like to do.

~~~
kempbellt
You are describing being "alone", not being "lonely".

Lonely, is defined as "sad because one has no friends or company". Which I
would say is unfortunately common in the modern world, where we believe the
internet to connect people, but in reality it socially isolates.

Alone, simply meaning "having no one else present", is not that bad, no, until
you start to feel lonely. I enjoy alone time for the same reasons you
describe. However, too much of it leads to feelings of loneliness.

An ironic aside. I think many people, deep down, would rather feel slightly
annoyed by turning down or avoiding social situations with friends, than to
not have those situations available to them in the first place.

~~~
Abishek_Muthian
You're correct, by your definition I'm both alone and lonely. Lonely makes me
sad but has improved productivity, where as socializing gave me what I would
describe as 'Short term happiness which seemed fake & ridden with guilt
later'.

~~~
Ma8ee
Why is high productivity important to you? This is an honest question.

~~~
Abishek_Muthian
I was running a startup quite successfully for 5 years as a single founder,
single executive from an environment without a startup ecosystem. I recruited
and trained employees personally; productivity became a necessity and a habit.

Had to close the startup due to physical health problems, now that I'm
rebuilding my life I guess productivity has become more important.

~~~
Ma8ee
Of course productivity is important, but it isn't an end in itself. Neither
are high incomes or appearences of success. If you are lonely and have to
sacrifice your health you really have to start thinking about what it is all
for.

~~~
Abishek_Muthian
I agree completely, I'm cautious about physical health now and doesn't trade
it for anything. But, that has resulted in me having very little time for
productive work and hence I'm in a situation where I need to optimise every
bit for it.

------
feistypharit
I feel the real reason really is just lack of time. It takes a serious amount
of time to make and maintain a friendship.

This comes to a point with a family because you have so little extra time that
you're very careful to use it wisely. To spend the hours hanging out and
getting to know 10 strangers well enough that 1 may become a close friend is
just a hard trade-off to make.

As another comment said, it makes one feel selfish. Especially, when that was
time you could have spent with your wife and kids. It's hard.

The other thing I think we humans really end up dealing with is being alone.
As you age, you simply have fewer and fewer friends. They die. You have less
to offer to younger folks and are less mobile to get out. If anything, I think
perfecting the ability to make friends would be handy. But I think in doing
so, those friends would likely not be "deep" relationships...which gets back
again to time.

~~~
war1025
An idea I've had in my head for the past week or two, mainly because I have
several projects that I just keep "not getting around to".:

I think there is a difference between free time and idle time.

Free time is when you could be doing something that has been back-burnered,
such as a project around the house, or getting together with friends.

Idle time is when there is nothing going on, but you are sort "on call" as it
were (particularly in my case in the context of having young kids around).
These are the times when you do lazy things like watch TV or surf the
internet.

Most of productivity "hacking" is probably just making an effort to convert
more "idle time" into "free time", which is easy in some ways, but non-trivial
in others. I think the distinction between the two is very helpful in
considering why people say they don't have any time, but still manage to find
time to do all sort of unproductive things. If you are simply idle, it's
partly because you fully expect that you could be called away to do something
else at any moment. To have free time, you need to consciously block off that
time from other obligations.

~~~
feistypharit
Very true, I think there is a big difference too.

------
kerrsclyde
I don't have a single friend who I could ask to meet for a drink/socially.
When I was 20 I had numerous close friends, but no wife and family, which have
now replaced my friends.

The relationship I have with my family I feel is much higher quality than I
had with my friends.

Friends (like family) can be hard work, maintaining friendships takes time and
effort and I'm not willing to put in that effort, and I'm cool with that.

I think it is too simplistic to say having no close friends is good or bad, it
depends on your outlook.

------
sysbin
I think making friends is similar to wealth. Easier to make friends once you
already have friends than if you have nobody. I think men specifically suffer
from this dynamic because they're more closed in communication than women.

------
marmada
I see several people suggesting that men should get more hobbies in order to
meet with other guys, the issue is, hobbies don't form deep friendships (much
of the time). You just end up talking about the hobby and nothing else. At
least that's how I feel. Talking about anything more than the hobby suddenly
becomes unusual.

~~~
RickS
My experience is that a hobby gives a pretense for communication – which is an
opportunity for depth, but not a guarantee.

"Oh yeah, X guitar is so sick" is a shallow conversation.

vs

"Yeah, I've always had a soft spot for the strat. My best friend's dad was a
luthier, and I'd always be in his shop when things got rough at home"

Now you've got an opportunity to talk about something a little more real. A
somewhat dark example, but... I find that returns on depth are a function of
vulnerability invested. Tastefully, of course. Don't puke your trauma on the
first date. But it's fear of opening up, at least in my experience, that keeps
male relationships in the HobbyZone.

------
qj4714
This is a symptom of something. While it is not easy to identify a specific
underlying cause, I think if you’re not socialized at a young age in how to
make friends or you don’t come from a large, extended family, it is nearly
impossible to make meaningful relationships with others. Hobbies and social
clubs are fine, but they can be transactional and transitory. Even with your
spouse and kids and their friends/family, these relationships can be
transactional. You’ll have a hard time communicating beyond words, sharing at
a higher level.

------
cronix
I think this is a side affect of no longer having long term careers with a
single company. It's harder to build solid relationships when you move every
couple of years and change companies. You just don't get to know people as
well.

------
algaeontoast
Even at 25, I'm starting to find a lot of "adult" social "events" incredibly
contrived and stuffy. Relationships after college and in business are
different and I'm immensely okay with that. I still have great friends that
I've met through common activities but we're usually incredibly focused on
said activity and that's why we get together, not just gathering for the sake
of gathering.

Living in a big city quickly became something I didn't see value in after my
social life made this kind of shift. I also stopped drinking and stopping
seeing much value in "signaling" wealth / success to others. "going out" with
people I work with is simply unprofessional and weird (not because I don't
drink) and frankly I'm confused why my generation actively tries to facilitate
these kinds of overlapping "friendships".

I completely understand when friends of mine tell me they're just too tired or
don't have the energy to hang out. I do find it offensive when their reason is
"my girlfriend / wife said I have to do this" etc.

------
shard
This is likely exacerbated by the trends towards single family homes. A few
generations ago, when you lived together with aunts, uncles, cousins, nieces,
nephews, brothers, sisters, parents, grand parents, great grand parents,
there's always someone to interact with. But nowadays, if your spouse is at
work and your children are at school or some activity, there's nobody around.
The situation is even worse when you are single. I think the trend of
loneliness will increase due to technology unless the stigma in current
society of living with your family goes away, but I'm not holding out much
hope for that.

~~~
Markoff
you have unlimited time when you are single, just join some activity and very
to know people and it can work with someone, good luck finding time with
family, especially with small children

------
aussiegreenie
If only 20% of men had no close friends the problem would be much smaller. My
personal guess would be closer to 1/2.

------
buboard
What's holding them back though? Yeah people work a lot today, but they still
do have free time. They spend all that time dating? Gaming? Family? Spending
time with family is healthy , but, all the free time ? that s too much, and it
was probably never like that in history (at least for men). Men spend 0 time
in former male spaces too. And finding hobbies you dont like just as an excuse
to meet people feels forced and fake. Modern city lifestyle is hostile to
friendships.

------
gigatexal
That’s a sad finding. If anyone wants a friend to geek out with I’m game. Alex
at Alexandar Narayan (all one word) dot com

------
nojvek
I guess i’m one of them. I hate talking on the phone. Face to face yeah. But
with family commitments there isn’t much time to go out.

So you just be contempt by not having any friends and being busy with work and
kids.

Trust me having kids is not all they make it. Insomnia leads to fatigue which
leads to loneliness and depression. It hits eventually.

------
Markoff
well I moved to completely different city in different country two years ago,
on top of that I work from home 100% of time, on top of that I have two small
children. do you really think I have energy for close friend? I am happy to
rest in evening and not work during weekend, so I can spend more time with
children. there is basically no time for friends of hobbies some people
recommend to make friends (if I had energy in first place)

so you can count me as one of those 18% guys. it's just stupid not take into
consideration other factors, it's very different for single and/or childless
people and for married folks with children, I would like to see difference in
statistics for these two groups

my present socialization is just reddit, Twitter and some other mother in
playground I like to hang out

------
buboard
study result

[https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/docume...](https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/dro933l3yl/YouGov%20-%20Loneliness%20Results.pdf)

~~~
lolinder
Very interesting numbers. Of those men who indicated that it was difficult to
find friends, 26% responded that the reason was that they didn't feel that
they needed friends. Only 14% of women responded the same. (Page 43)

Others have commented that the gender gap in having no friends is much smaller
then the headline implies, and this difference may account for a good chunk of
it.

------
cryptozeus
Some of the comments here are taking about just “male friends”...point here is
about “close friend” not juts friends. I think its difficult to make close
friends in the digital world where you never see real side of the people

------
czr
> all

18% of men, 12% of women; 18/30 is... 60%? huh?

~~~
czr
ah, looks like admins fixed the title. this comment is in relation to the
title the article uses: "All the lonely people ... are men", which is
unsupported by the data in the self-same article.

------
nmstoker
Maybe this isn't a universal viewpoint, but to me if the concern is to
increase social connections amongst men, it seems odd to lump that in with
hobbies like it's some bonus goal.

I know there are some hobbies that force you into a social situation but most
hobbies seem a consumer of time in a reasonably solitary way and thus would
further reduce any opportunity to socialise in the scarce hours when one is
not working, asleep or traveling to work.

------
knorker
One in 5.55 men. One in 8.33 women. High for both.

------
sargram01
What happened to the movement that it’s ok to be bored? That was ok, but now
it goes out the window when it’s called “loneliness?”

~~~
lolinder
Bored and lonely are two very different things. "It's okay to be bored" is
about disconnecting from the constant feed of entertainment and information,
not about isolating yourself from other human beings.

~~~
sargram01
It’s the same thing, you’re just replacing a human for the content. And the
result is the same, this constant grasping, never a moment’s rest.

------
fouc
Strange, there was a nearly identical study back in 2014 polled by YouGov as
well? [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11026520/Lonely-
Brit...](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11026520/Lonely-Britain-five-
million-people-who-have-no-real-friends.html)

------
abrax3141
This very difficult to interpret, esp. as the article has over-simplified
things for reporting purposes. How many of the respondents without friends
wanted to be that way? Was family counted as friends? And what counts as a
friend anyway?

------
HeavyStorm
Count me in.

I can explain what moved me away from every friend I've had. Mostly life, and
maybe a bit of lazyness from my part...

What I say is: hold on to yours. It's really hard to make friends after a
certain age.

------
wozer
I wonder if this includes married men. Maybe those just don't think of their
spouse as a close friend although she actually is.

------
Arbalest
I think this is a symptom of a few things: dehomogenisation of interests and
urban sprawl, exacerbated by income requirements and children. From my
understanding: In the country, you integrate, or you're isolated. It's pretty
much always sports, and it's the lowest common denominator.

In the past 100 years, as people have moved to the city, and as knowledge has
diversified, there's this implicit promise that the city will allow you to
find others with your interests. In the earlier years, say at University, this
holds true. Young people who don't have many other commitments and are
supposed to be there anyway, are able to find their own "tribe". At this time,
travel time isn't an issue. As people start having to go to work, and travel
time is now utilised for breadwinning, there's not as much time and energy
slack left over for maintaining in person relationships. Then having children
exacerbates this.

So, now you don't talk to your neighbours because people do not group their
housing arrangements around their interests, but around market pressures.

So with sprawl, now everyone has to commute to see their friends. People also
have to commute to go about their daily business such as grocery shopping.
This means that you can't just "swing by" someone else's house, because they
might not be there and you've wasted your time. So we ring ahead. This
information sharing to be time efficient became an anxiety of "am I bothering
X", which now means those calls don't happen as often either. Now everything
has to be scheduled, and anyone who can't fit it in is screwed.

There's also one more keyword which I think isn't mentioned here enough.
Career. I have felt guilty at times for doing my utmost to maintain my one
free night a week to meet our friends meetup schedule. We shouldn't feel this.
The pressure for careers and work cuts too often cuts out the final bit of
capacity we have left to maintain even some relationships.

So in summary, people who have common interests are spread out by market
forces, increasing commute times, forcing scheduling of time together, and
that possibility is then snuffed out by the pressures of needing and income or
looking after children.

Rehomogenisation of interests is unlikely to happen, and probably shouldn't.
Children aren't going away. So that means the two points to address are: Urban
sprawl and career pressures. There needs to be more government oversight that
is not completely undermined by corporate interests (I'm sure most large
corporations would be more than happy if your work mates were the only human
contact you had). That government oversight needs to strengthen the
regulations around building of decent apartment complexes, not cash cows,
because we want people to live in them, not rush out to the edges of suburbia
because they can only afford either a garbage apartment or to move out to the
suburban edge. Career pressures are best addressed by increasing people's job
mobility. People who are anxious about losing their job do not have mobility.
If someones workplace is unreasonable about their time, they're going to
frequently be unable to schedule things with friends.

------
blackwhip
I try to get into friendship but most of them fall away easily. I know the
feel and wish I could build better ones.

------
paulpauper
i think we're in a "loneliness bubble" in terms of how discussion about
loneliness there is on HN lately

[https://www.google.com/search?q=site:news.ycombinator.com+lo...](https://www.google.com/search?q=site:news.ycombinator.com+loneliness)

------
RocketSyntax
Really?! In USA it feels like all the guys are friends and all the women
alienate each other.

------
akash7
Gotta say, this article is really good to get more subscriptions.

------
flax
Article is behind a paywall, so I wonder if it addresses what portion of these
men find this to be a problem. I have never had close friends other than
whoever was my significant other at the time. This is more than sufficient for
me, and I don't think it's unhealthy at all. Some people just aren't social.

------
memmcgee
I wonder if this has a lot to do with the economic system we live under. Marx
wrote a lot about the alienation of labor, and one form of alienation was
alienation from fellow workers. I wonder if we surveyed company executives or
small business owners whether you'd find a different breakdown.

------
jamesb93
Sounds like a result of increasingly drab and formalised work environments.

~~~
whatshisface
Work friends aren't real friends because what happens if you get fired?

~~~
Angostura
In my ... case carry on being friends? Assuming you socialised outside of
work.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
I spent 6 years in a job, lunched with the same few colleagues most days,
thought they were good friends, knew their partners, met up out of work, that
kind of thing. Left to start own business ... None of them offered any
support, nor visited, nor anything. Completely floored me, I thought I had
good friends at work.

One colleague, a very loose acquaintance, visited a couple of times, asked
after us; I need to find that person and thank them ... [people I knew through
a club, who happened to work in the same place continued to be friends
however.]

Anyway, I'm now working with some of those people again, and talking with them
it feels like they're friends... but in retrospect I think for them I was just
like background noise to their jobs?

So, at least for me "carry on being friends" was the expectation but I was
miles off.

------
oauea
Article is paywalled

~~~
CraneWorm
[https://outline.com/HfKXpm](https://outline.com/HfKXpm)

~~~
apearson
That doesn't show the full article

------
acen06
Help me

------
solipsism
What is the point of posting articles that are behind paywalls? Why isn't it
against HN rules? Is it a test of just how many people actually try to read
the articles they're responding to?

Have fun conversing about a headline...

~~~
Myrmornis
This is a good question.

------
patientplatypus
Somehow we just all “decided” that two parent families, where we work jobs we
hate (and that if we get fired we’re on our own), where the social space is
dominated by corporate interests, where if we get sick we are forced into
poverty - this is society. Of course everyone is alone and terrified.

------
qes
I disagree with the apparent premise (article's paywalled) that having no
friends means you are lonely.

I have no friends that I'm not also in a romantic relationship with, and I
wouldn't call myself lonely at all outside of a rare fleeting feeling here and
there.

------
Merrill
Men have acquaintances.

Women have friends, with all the emotional baggage that entails.

