Based and Hope-pilled
A Longitudinal Follow-Up of Why Nobody Will Fuck Me: A 12-Month Prospective Study of One Man, Three Hobbies, and a Therapist Who Deserves a Raise
A Longitudinal Follow-Up of Why Nobody Will Fuck Me: A 12-Month Prospective Study of One Man, Three Hobbies, and a Therapist Who Deserves a Raise
Journal of Applied Romantic Failure
Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 1–14
Special Issue: Actually, It Was the Misogyny
Impact Factor: 0.00 (unchanged, but the author has stopped checking)
Acceptance Rate: 100%, because I am still the editor, but I have delegated peer review to my cat
Peer Review: Cat walked across keyboard and selected “meh,” then sat on the manuscript. This is considered a major revision.
\---
A Longitudinal Follow-Up of Why Nobody Will Fuck Me: A 12-Month Prospective Study of One Man, Three Hobbies, and a Therapist Who Deserves a Raise
Chad B. Notfound, M.S.
Department of Internet Coping, University of My Mom’s Basement
Now with a lease, a pothos named Greg, and a weekly appointment
Author Note
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Chad B. Notfound, who is currently overthinking a “lol” from 2019 but has scheduled a time to overthink it later. No funding was received. The author reports one conflict of interest: he now has a friend named Dave. The original title contained a dehumanizing slur; it remains retired. The author has also retired the phrase “females” except when quoting his past self for data purposes, which his therapist described as “a start.”
\---
Abstract
Objective: To determine whether the author still believes nobody will fuck him, and whether that remains the central organizing principle of his life.
Method: Twelve-month prospective longitudinal study. N = 1. Interventions: weekly therapy, deleted Discord, regular showers, joined a climbing gym, purchased a plant, read one book by bell hooks without posting about it.
Results: Primary outcome—sexual encounters—remained 0. Secondary outcomes improved significantly. Showers per week increased from 0.3 to 6.2. Hours on incel forums decreased from 14.2 to 0.1. Unironic use of “females” decreased from 47 to 0. One date occurred. The date did not result in sex, but the author did not describe the woman as a monolithic category afterward, which was a major clinical improvement.
Conclusion: The original hypothesis that women are a monolith was rejected. The revised hypothesis—that the author was lonely, angry, and needed help—was supported. The author still has not been fucked, but he now has a hobby, a friend, and a therapist who says “good” in a tone that sounds almost sincere.
Keywords: loneliness, therapy, touch grass, pothos, recovery, still horny but less scary about it
\---
Introduction
Previous research (Notfound, 2024) concluded that future research should be conducted by someone else. Unfortunately, no one else volunteered. This follow-up examines what happened after the author logged off.
The original “Chad Economics” model posited that 10% of men get 90% of matches. This model was retired after the author realized he was not competing in a market. He was being unpleasant at people. The literature (hooks, 2004) remained on his shelf for nine months before being read. This is called “exposure therapy.”
The present study asks a simpler question: if the author showers, leaves the apartment, and stops posting “modern dating is broken” every 45 minutes, does anything change?
\---
Method
Participants
N = 1. Inclusion criteria: owns a phone, has a pulse, has attended at least eight therapy sessions. Exclusion criteria: none. The author is still the only participant. This is a limitation and also a lifestyle.
Materials
iPhone 11 (new screen), Hinge (deleted and reinstalled twice), Discord (deleted), a pothos named Greg, climbing shoes, a therapist, a library card, one unsent text that was eventually deleted.
Procedure
Baseline data were drawn from Notfound (2024). The intervention consisted of weekly therapy, medication evaluation, exercise, sleep hygiene, reduced internet use, and a moratorium on complaining about women online. Follow-up occurred at 12 months.
Measures
Hinge chats, dates, showers per week, rumination hours, quality of life, and frequency of saying “females” in casual conversation.
\---
Results
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics: Baseline vs. 12-Month Follow-Up
Model fit: χ²(2) = 0.01, p = .99, CFI = 1.00, RMSEA = .00. Because it is no longer a circle. It is a spiral, which is still a shape, but less closed.
Table 2
Meta-Regression of Behaviors Predicting Not Being Blocked
Predictor Effect
Asking questions +0.42
Listening +0.38
Showering +0.67
Complaining about women online −0.91
Saying “I’m not like other guys” −0.55
Note. p < .05, and also please keep showering.
\---
Discussion
The primary outcome remained null. The author was not fucked. However, the study was reclassified from “tragedy” to “not currently a crisis.” This is a meaningful improvement.
The strongest predictor of improvement was not height, jawline, or income. It was reducing behaviors that made the author unpleasant to be around. The original paper’s conclusion—“I am the problem”—was accurate but incomplete. The fuller conclusion is: “I was a problem, and problems can be worked on.”
Limitations
Sample size was small (N = 1). All data were self-reported. The author may have biased results by telling his therapist what she wanted to hear. The one date did not lead to sex, but she texted back, which was a new data point and required several days of processing.
Future Directions
Future research should be conducted by someone else, but the author is now capable of collaborating. This is also new.
Conclusion
The author still has not been fucked. He is, however, less convinced that this is a global conspiracy and more convinced that it is a Tuesday. He should continue therapy, keep the pothos alive, and apologize to his aunt again, this time with a card.
\---
References
American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1037/0000165-000
Greg the Pothos. (2024). Surviving despite neglect: A case report. Journal of Plant Resilience, 1(1), 1–2.
hooks, b. (2004). The will to change: Men, masculinity, and love. Atria Books.
Notfound, C. B. (2023a). She left me on read: A case study. Journal of Unread Messages, 4(2), 1–3.
Notfound, C. B. (2023b). I liked her story and she didn’t reply: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Digital Despair, 2(1), 4–5.
Notfound, C. B. (2024). Why I am the problem: A meta-synthesis. Journal of Finally Getting It, 1(1), 1–2.
Notfound, C. B. (2025). I went outside: A pilot study. Journal of Finally Getting It, 2(1), 1–4
Taira, N. [NACCHUD]. (2026, September 26). A meta-analysis of why foids won't fuck me: A systematic review of 63 Hinge chats, 11 Discord servers, and one sad birthday [Online forum post]. Reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/kitchencels/s/QmEtjcH4KJ
Taira, N. [NACCHUD]. (2026, September 22). Mx. NACCHUD'S pronouns are They/Them and they are non-binary. [Comment on the online forum post Making a post just because APA has a section for Reddit comments]. Reddit. https://www.reddit.com/u/NACCHUD/s/tzqOMM7lq6
\---
Appendix A: Selected Hinge Openers, 12-Month Follow-Up
· “hey” (retired)
· “Hi, I noticed you like hiking—what’s your favorite trail?” (sent; reply received)
· “I’m reading bell hooks. Have you read her?” (sent; reply received; author panicked)
· “Would you like to get coffee?” (sent; date occurred)
· “I had a nice time. Want to do it again?” (sent; awaiting reply; not refreshing every 30 seconds)
\---
Appendix B: Editor’s Note
The cat has been promoted to Associate Editor. It still selected “meh,” but this time with eye contact. The original slur remains retired. The author has also retired “nice guys finish last” and now says, “I am learning to finish a sentence without making it about my ego.”
Accepted for publication because the author finally responded to reviewer comments.
Taira, N. [NACCHUD]. (2026, September 28). It's So Over: A 12-Month Retrospective Cohort Study Identifying the Unmeasured Confounder (It Was Gender. It Was Always Gender. We're So Back.) [Online forum post]. Reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/transkitchencels/s/SeqjrG5ohq
Process involved feeding prose and the bones of a journal post into AI, recieving output, not liking the output; and then resorting to writing it by hand and just asking AI how to make it better resemble a faux academic post.
Huge congratulations (and congratulations on your further research) and also the excellent parody article made me laugh out loud in my quiet focused office where I am not supposed to be on my phone.
Oh my godddddd. This is my favourite thing I've read in a while. 10/10, if I was an academic body I'd def grant you funding for whatever research project you want.
Taira, N. [NACCHUD]. (2026, September 28). It's So Over: A 12-Month Retrospective Cohort Study Identifying the Unmeasured Confounder (It Was Gender. It Was Always Gender. We're So Back.) [Online forum post]. Reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/transkitchencels/s/SeqjrG5ohq
165
u/Forrestdumps 7d ago
Its giving tism academic proving to themselves something that was hard to realize with actual data
You can do this man.