Summary

Following Donald Trump’s recent election victory, Google searches for “4B,” a South Korean feminist movement advocating a “no sex, no dating, no marriage, no children” stance, surged in the U.S.

The 4B movement, popular among young women on social media, promotes individual resistance against conservative politics and the erosion of reproductive rights.

The trend reflects a broader ideological divide between young men and women in the U.S., where women under 30 are significantly more liberal than men.

    • Entertainmeonly@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      The bar is so low and yet they almost all fail. It’s down right scary. Just be polite and talk like a human being. Oh, and guys, don’t send the d pic unless asked. It really doesn’t do what you think it does.

      • Mac@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        The “bar” argument doesn’t exist. Plenty of women date shit bags. lol

      • Paddzr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        The issue is, they go with sole intention of meeting a partner. Women rightfully have their guard up. If you just interact with someone in a hobby you both share interest in, she’s more likely to be into you. But not after a fucking week for crying out loud!

      • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        What? You mean that awkward pose with us choking it like “the dog having something in their mouth,” is cool? Also me say hi then dick pic doesn’t get you going?

    • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      It’s really not that hard, I don’t get it. The only conclusion that I’ve been able to come to is that guys think being empathetic, polite and communicative will get them friend-zoned or something. That they have to be pushy about it or the gal will just be like, “you’re such a sweet guy, I think you’re a great friend”. You know, friends talk, partners fuck, or something like that.

      Does anyone actually say that? I swear I’ve heard it or something similar before…

      …Anyway, no, idiot, you’re getting friend-zoned because they’re just not into you that way. Being aggressive just gets you shut down faster too because you come off as impatient or desperate, or that you’re trying to do the song and dance because you have to, not because you want to. I don’t wanna be around a guy like that. That can be very concerning because it can indicate that all you want is sex and you’re just trying to find the right buttons to press on the “sex machine”. I get it, sometimes you just wanna fuck; but I’m a dragon human being, not a sex machine.

      But… If you want a reason why you shouldn’t be concerned about being friend-zoned: personally I’m more likely to trust and view someone favorably if they’re friends with someone I already know, or they’re surrounded by people who have good things to say about them (especially if they’re enbies and/or women). Doesn’t mean everyone’s like that, but if you have lady friends who enjoy just hanging out with you then that tells me that you’re way more likely to respect me, treat me like a dra… *cough* human, and that I’m probably going to be safe around you. Those are good things. Those are things I need to feel before I can feel anything else. Again, I can’t speak for everyone, but there’s a glimpse into how my feelings seem to work, and why I don’t think you really need to be scared of the “friend-zone”.

      Also, when it comes to wanting to “just fuck”; I’m waaaayy more open to that idea if we’re already good friends and neither of us are dating someone. Not everyone is like that, I’m probably kinda unusual in that regard, but… yeah.

      • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        There’s a clear difference between showing sexual interest and being pushy that I don’t think your post considers.

        If you’re dating a women and don’t show any signs of sexual interest she absolutely will be thinking “this guy isn’t interested” and move on.

        I don’t think it’s surprising to say that women also are often uninterested in being friends, but it’s still often an expectation that the men will make the first move.

        It’s one of the fine lines and grey areas that needs to be trodden in life if you want a satisfying relationship.

        • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          12 days ago

          I literally just said that what you’re talking about turns me off, and now you’re telling me that you know better than I do?

          Fuck being polite: go shove it up your ass.

          • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            12 days ago

            I know I generalised but I think what I said is mostly true and I’m just as entitled as you are to put my point of view forward, sorry that I have a different opinion.

            I’d like to make it clear that I’m not saying it’s OK to be pushy but making a distinction about showing sexual interest that can sometimes be a grey area and a fine line to tread.

            If you want to go on a hundred dates with the same person before you’re OK with sexual escalation to make sure someone has pure intentions or whatever, you do you, but it’s not typical and I expect that they’ll move on after enough time of wondering why they’re dating someone that appears frigid or un-interested in sex.

            One of my best friends said “if I’m on a third date with a guy and he’s not made a move, he’s probably got a tiny penis”. I know that’s a horrible thing to say and to hear, but it’s true. Most women expect men to make a move at some point and if they don’t, she’ll be wondering what’s wrong.

            There’s no need for the hostility, though given the election I understand you’re probably just lashing out and it’s not personal. I hope you feel better soon.

            • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              12 days ago

              If you want to go on a hundred dates with the same person before sexual escalation to make sure someone has pure intentions or whatever, you do you, but it’s not typical and I expect that they’ll move on after enough time of wondering why they’re dating someone that’s not interested in sex.

              No one said hundreds of dates. Hell, if we mesh well enough then it might only take a single date. However, coming up to me and being like, “hey girl, wanna fuck” is only gonna get you somewhere if I either already know (and trust) you fairly well, you have lady friends who I trust and can vouch for your character, or you’re a smoking-hot, literal, honest-to-god anthropomorphic animal person. That’s what I’m talking about. And no, I’m sorry, you’re not a hot dragon-man. As much as I like to pretend they exist, they really don’t.

              You don’t even have to say it out loud, if that’s the vibe you’re giving off then I’ll get sketched out. If I feel like you just wanna fuck, then the thought that’ll be going through my mind is: “can I trust what this person says, or are they only saying things to figure out how to get me to open my legs? Am I safe to put myself in their arms and let them fuck me, or should I be concerned that they won’t stop if I tell them to? Will they respect my boundaries and let them shrink naturally as our trust and relationship grows, or should I be concerned that they might injure, abuse or even kill me if I say ‘no’?”

              One of my best friends said “if I’m on a third date with a guy and he’s not made a move, he’s probably got a tiny penis”. I know that’s a horrible thing to say and to hear, but it’s true.

              *sigh* Here’s the thing though, women who say shit like that really aren’t worth your time. That’s a red flag, dude. That’s a sign that your relationship is going to be potentially based on an unstable foundation. Physical appearance is only temporary. What if you get into a bad car wreck and your penis has to be removed? A girl who’s only about dick size is going to give it some time before walking away. A girl who’s about you will probably be willing to come up with creative solutions to sexy problems and find ways around your lack of manhood (ever considered macguyvering a dragon dildo into a male-compatible strap-on?).

              I like a guy who’s willing to be vulnerable, who’s willing to take his time and so on. My view is that’s probably going to result in a much happier relationship than someone who judges based on penis size. Maybe it’s just because I’m not in my 20s anymore and most of the horny teenage hormones have worn off at this point (not that they did me any good, but that’s another story), maybe it’s because I grew up with a Dad who doesn’t like to talk about his feelings and was nearly impossible to read.

              However, I’d much rather have a guy who’s willing to talk about how he’s feeling than a guy who wants to fuck on the first date. The latter isn’t going to be able to give me a shoulder to cry on, but the former might (yanno, after he’s done crying on mine lol; which is not a problem). The latter probably won’t share my interests, but the former might.

              And you know what, maybe you’re right.

              Maybe I’m the weirdo here, for thinking that someone who cares that much about your dick size is shallow as fuck and not worth your time. Small peepee just means there’s all the more reason to get creative with sexy time.

              Maybe I’m the weird one for thinking that there’s a difference between a romantic relationship and “a friend you like to fuck” (aka “friends with benefits”).

              Maybe I’m the weirdo for thinking people need to be more chill about sex for this exact reason; because I suspect that many people think that the feeling you get from sex or lust is what love is.

              There’s no need for the hostility, though I understand you’re probably just lashing out and it’s not personal. I hope you feel better soon.

              It’s the “I know better than you” that gets to me. Maybe you didn’t mean that, if so then I apologize. There are a lot of people here, however, who seem to believe they know more about what a woman likes than women do; or they believe that a woman doing what she wants with her body is discriminatory.

              For those with a bad understanding of women: women get horny and lonely too, you really think women aren’t gonna struggle with this themselves? The only reason I don’t think I’ll personally struggle with it is because I’m only kiiinda straight lmao. I have other options. Furthermore, however, do you really believe that women don’t know what they want? Maybe they just don’t want you because you throw up all kinds of red flags.

              Learn to be empathetic, communicative, caring and respectful. You really don’t want the shallow girls who only care about dick size. They’ll just dump you the moment a guy with a bigger dick comes along or, at the very least, you probably won’t have a very fulfilling relationship. Sex shouldn’t be the goal you’re striving for, sex should be something that happens along the way; and guys who act like it’s the former are a huge turn-off for me.

              • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                12 days ago

                You make good points. You’re getting the wrong end of the stick but I don’t think it’s worth trying to explaine myself further.

      • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        Well said. I never worried about the friend zone bc I made my intentions known, “I like you and I want to date.” If she says she’s not into me then that’s it. 9/10 that women will be my “wingman” to find someone that likes me that way.

      • Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        Communicate and talk are two different things. People talk to get what they want. Communication means you have to listen and give a shit. So many guys talk for 1 reason, sex. Women want sex to but don’t an asshole that treats them like shit afterwards. Some guys cant get that and think women should be blessed in their presents.

        • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          13 days ago

          Oh I’m really good at the listening part.

          I don’t like the talking part. That’s the part I’m not good at. Or likely will ever be, which is ok. It’s scary.

    • HeyJoe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      Not really… from personal experience, I couldn’t find a single woman to date or show interest until I was 25. I was and still am super nice and polite, apparently too much for most.

      I fully believe I am just ugly, and it is what it is. After being rejected for so long and never having the chance to have those experiences growing up, it did leave me in a bad place for a while.

      Good news is I did meet someone at 25 and we’re married now over 10 years and have 2 kids. This was also right before the rise of dating apps, which I wonder what impact they would have had if given the chance to use them.

      • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        13 days ago

        Being too nice can definitely be a turn off for women, all though you’re never supposed to say it, if you put them on a pedestal it can lead them to think that they can do better. I know that sounds horrible to say, but it’s mostly true.

        A lot of women like “manly men”, in a world where gender roles are being broken down it’s another thing you’re not supposed to say, but it’s objectively true.

        Natural beauty is pot luck, although it’s true that “ugly” guys can do a lot to scrub up and become attractive in other ways. Statistically speaking, 80% of women want the top 20% of men, from that you can extrapolate that their are a lot of people in relationships that are settling. Another harsh truth, but that’s life.

        So in short, that’s what happens to most of us. Women chase the top 20% which most of us aren’t, then when they start getting worried about getting older and becoming a spinster, they settle. You’re probably a lot less ugly than you think and a lot more normal!

        • Nutteman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          12 days ago

          Using statistics and generalizing about women wanting only “top” men is very manosphere of you. Incel forums ban you so you had to come stink up Lemmy with the steaming shit that comes from your mouth or something?

          • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            12 days ago

            It’s factual. The source is Tinder, 80% of women are only swiping on the top 20% of men and I believe that extrapolates to real life, I also don’t think it’s surprising, I understand why anyone would want an attractive mate. Sorry that upsets you.

              • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                12 days ago

                Whatever the source, I don’t think it’s surprising that women are a lot more selective than men, it makes a huge amount of sense in evolutionary terms.

                And given that a small percentage of men are getting chased by the majority of women, it’s unsurprising that they’re used to getting screwed over, causing all men to get cast with the same aspersion.

  • Tygr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    They haven’t figured out that Conservatives see this as a huge win? No liberal babies…

  • BangCrash@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    Typical media BS.

    Found a story about a very small movement somewhere in the world than are blowing it out of proportion and saying this is actually a thing.

    This is why Dems lost the election but the media thought they would win.

    Fucking click bait sex sells story.

  • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    The first time you say no to someone you really want to be with, that is when the 4B life starts. Till then, it’s just business as usual (I really hope you don’t sleep with/date people you don’t like!).

    The life continues when you see them with someone else, and realise some things can’t be undone. People move on, they’re not static NPC’s you can just reload and date later.

    It goes ever on, life stops for no-one and it runs it’s course far too soon. To those who choose that path, make sure you know where it leads.

    • PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      No judgement, just curious, but is the idea here that conservative men should not be allowed to have sex since they don’t respect women? All for it, agree 100%. But i have a hard time imagining a feminist being with that type of man anyways, since the majority of feminist Ive met have self respect. So then you’re not sleeping with any men to punish them, and yourself, for conservative men? I feel like I’m missing something.

      Or is this article just implying 4B is something completly different than what it actually is? You know, cuz clickbait isn’t concerned with being factual…

      • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        12 days ago

        I think, and here the key word is think as this goes beyond my mandate so to speak, it’s more an act of resistance. A bit like protesting, but with less risk.

        I’d say the aim is to rallying over retribution, to push those “good men” into fighting more strongly. It’s not a bad tactic, it’ll be interesting to see how it pans out.

        It’s also not really that widespread, searches for it are up because it’s making the rounds is all.

  • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    So democrats will swear off men reducing their population in the future while the cons just carry on like normal? This makes no sense.

  • TORFdot0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    Good for them for asserting their autonomy but basically the end affect is the opening plot of Idiocracy

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      I get your point, but I wouldn’t worry about what might happen in 20 years when what is currently happening is bad.

      • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        Yes, women should rape themselves by having sex with men they are furious with to avoid the ending of a random documentary

      • noisefree@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        I get your point, but I wouldn’t worry about what might happen in 20 years when what is currently happening is bad.

        Ahh, the ol’ false bifurcation ostrich effect as a thought-terminating-looparoo.

          • noisefree@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 days ago

            Downvoting to save words in your reply - nice. Have another upvote.

            Your most recent reply actually conveys meaning/makes a specific versus broad point. To that point, I don’t necessarily think they were making a eugenics based argument (though I would agree with you in dismissing an argument based on that) since they didn’t explicitly state the reason for mentioning the movie was because they believe in some idea of politics being genetic versus simply being most effectively passed down via social means from one’s parents while living with them through adolescence. Call me crazy, but I think most of the folks posting here should be given the benefit of not assuming they’re talking about eugenics until they are explicitly promoting it versus something more widely accepted, such as the aforementioned idea that it’s highly likely that parents pass down their politics through social means to their children. I could, of course, be wrong and maybe they were intending to make a eugenics based argument, but they weren’t specific enough to divine that. All of that said, I should edit the phrasing in a sarcastic comment I made elsewhere about removing oneself from the gene pool being a bad strategy since I probably wasn’t clear enough to get across that I was using the very real right-wing perspective where they favor their “good genes” over others’ “genes” for added effect.

            Your initial (decidedly vague) comment, as quoted, presents a false choice as if the person you were replying to was worrying about a future problem that is totally disconnected from the current topic of discussion, but they’re not and I don’t think the person you were replying to gave any reason for one to infer that they were ignoring the current issue in favor of some future issue. If they were talking about disconnected topics/problems then what you were saying would make more sense (or if you had been more specific, like in your followup, that would help too). It’s as if the person noticed a ceiling was leaking and exclaimed to someone suggesting to just put a bucket under it “Ignoring a leak is exactly how my neighbor ended up needing to replace their roof, I don’t think the bucket plan is a good plan in the long term!” and you were there to reply “Don’t tell them to worry about the roof, they need to fix the leak!” It’s not wrong, it just doesn’t really say anything or lead to further thought beyond the loop and comes across as a “calm down!”

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    4B is doable! My wife and I haven’t had sex in 3 years and we sort of like each other.

    Just imagine not actually liking anyone at all, easy!

    For everything else, there’s pornhub.

        • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          12 days ago

          For the planet! We should have National Pornstars. Additionally, National Pornstar Social Security to provide for our loved pornstars after they retire or if they sustain health issues regardless of their origin…like if they have a fall from a ladder vs herpes rash, all covered. They give us sexual gratification and bring stability to the world. The least we can do is to take good care of them and all their arousing features and bodyparts.

          • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            11 days ago

            It’s fine, the president-elect is standing by to pay an out of court settlement to each and every porn star.

  • Allero@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    What’s the point?

    I understand why they would choose not to date men that advocate against abortions and stuff - that’s basic dignity and self-protection.

    But why not date any other men? To hurt demographics to the best of their ability state-wise? Then this is primarily a problem set 15-20 years into the future, and may not really see the government’s reaction for a while.

    • MonkRome@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      The article implies that this is a reaction to specifically conservative men. So I think there is nuance there that the article is choosing not to define. But until women get autonomy over their reproductive health, having sex with any men, conservative or not, comes with increased risk. So it has a certain logic to it even if they are truly swearing off literally all men.

      • qarbone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        12 days ago

        Ooh, that’s something I didn’t grok when I first saw these articles pop up. Everything is focused on the “no sex punishment” angle. But, for women, now sex is more of a Russian roulette with varying amounts of bullets based on luck and how much the man cares about contraception.

        An accident could saddle them with an unwanted child. Or death outside a hospital because doctors are immobilized by “abortion bans”.

    • girsaysdoom@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      It’s a protest about women reasserting autonomy over their own bodies. The majority of men in the US have voted for a regime that has shown it does not regard women’s rights. It could be different from person to person but it’s mainly to show the government that women won’t just be passive when laws try to force women to just be a submissive baby maker.

      Supportive men could do the same to maybe accellerate the cause until reasonable rights in the region are established for healthy childbirth and sex.

      • Allero@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        12 days ago

        I see. Think it’s an overkill and people can use contraception instead of going full separate, but there is kind of a point in there

        • IamSparticles@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          12 days ago

          Contraception is never 100% effective, which is one of the many reasons why abortion is necessary healthcare. I’ve seen many misogynists suggest women should just keep their legs closed. Seems like that’s what they’re deciding to do.

          • Allero@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            12 days ago

            Sure, but effective enough to make a drastic change to fertility rate.

            Still, I see where you’re going with it

    • john89@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      I genuinely believe there are trolls who throw shit like this at the wall just to see if it will stick.

      It’s sad when people actually mess up their families because they listen to trolls on the internet.

        • john89@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          12 days ago

          That’s not true.

          You should spend more time off of these forums so you don’t have such a myopic view of the world.

  • noisefree@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    Self-selective removal of oneself and those of probable left-leaning male partners from the gene pool is certainly one strategy left-leaning women could try in the fight for a political environment where their rights are protected and progress further. Probably a terrible strategy, but certainly one that could be chosen.

    I respect any individual’s bodily autonomy and am not trying to make a statement in favor of men having a right to access or anything like that. It’s just an illogical movement if the goal is a society that has more individuals likely to support women’s rights - the gamble that thirsty men of the left will somehow save the day or that it would affect men on the right is kind of silly unless we’re assuming that there is a statistically meaningful amount of (secretly) left leaning women out there choosing right wing men as partners. (I wonder if anyone has tried to focus a campaign on seeing if the latter group exists in a sizable amount and can be convinced to be vote left - somebody should look into that and see how it works out. /s)

    It’s almost like 4B is something that the right wing would push to further their current advantage in household size in the US…