The INCEL anathema

[Skyweir]

Ok I thought long and hard about posting this .. 1. because its incredibly disturbing and 2. it touches on a range of sensitive and popularly controversial issues .. ie mens groups, feminism, and perceived feminism, the metoo movement, among others ... probably should be in the Tank but not 100 percent sure about that .. maybe but for me its a tricky one ..

Its a social issue, that straddles human psychology, elemental behavioural and and criminal violence. Its nasty in its ideology and its potential sociology and it has been brushed on before .. but not even close to this.

Its not an easy or pleasant read .. but it is one that there should be awareness concerning, so fair warning.

Its about an actual movement self titled INCEL .. meaning involuntary celibacy. It might sound humorous but it is not, there isnt anything funny or fun about this group. The glorify a man killed 10 and injured 15 others and they dub him Saint Elliot. They hold that rape should be legal and hold other similar outrageous pronouncements and deeply held beliefs.

www.bodyforwife.com/incels-are-a-hate-g ... nd-murder/

I am astounded such a group exists at all let alone has a growing membership.

I will leave it here and if you believe it belongs elsewhere .. all good move it .. or delete it.

[wayfriend]

There're two kinds of guys who can't get laid. Those who are unfortunate. And those who are a-holes. It looks like the power of the the internet has brought all of the a-holes together.

[samrw3]

There has always been idiot men who have held women should be subject to their sexual whims and women should just subject themselves to the man. As wayfriend states the power of thee internet has just found a way for these deviants to gather and form a group.

[Skyweir]

You are absolutely correct .. idiots come in all shapes, sizes and genders ...

What concerns me and I hope would concern everyone that has daughters, wives, partners that such a movement exists at all.

It confounds me that a disturbingly large group of men have formed a movement that promulgates such hate narrative ..

It seems to me that it is beyond a reasonable response to not having everything you want, even sex. And to be honest, I cant see how THAT is so very difficult to get.

As the article pointed out .. Saint Elliot .. invested his 5k savings in arming himself, not paying for sex, which he could have as easily done .. if sex actually WAS the issue .. but sex is NOT the issue.

They hold to that, sure .. but the issue is far more deep rooted, there is a much deeper psychology at work here ..

They want to exercise POWER, to reclaim or claim a sense of their ALPHA. They feel impotent, they seem to feel UN masculine.

They hate women and successful men for emasculating them simply because they are women or successful men.

They seem not to be able to rationalise or have the capability to address their short coming through personal actions or personal improvement ... ie if you want to be a Chad .. exercise what you need to do to improve your success quotient.

I dont know why this has gotten under my skin .. but I find it deeply disturbing ..

I worked in family law for a very short time, would never return to that branch of law as its nasty. But in doing so I did a little work with a few mens groups. I could empathise with their issues and their views .. but there was always, always an underlying rage. An anger that the woman that was once in their lives and under their control .. had abandoned them .. and a lot of the time .. their abuse, had deprived them of THEIR children and their lives were shit now as a result .. of what SHE had done to them.

It was victimisation at its worst ..

I met few genuinely good guys in those groups. And many very angry men .. who held on to that anger as a weapon.

Its ALWAYS sensitive when two humans seperate, it dismantles their worlds as they once knew them, and where children are involved .. they are used in the ensuing battles. There is anger at the cost of child support .. and that I do get.

Child support aside .. there was this same disturbing psychology of vengeance, anger and hatred. I found it difficult to work with.

[wayfriend]

It's inevitable that when one group of people who has had it better than the others is now subject to true equality, or even see it coming, they feel threatened and diminished, and react as if the world is now against them. Incapable of coping with equality, they demonstrate that they are especially incapable of handling the kind of actual repression that they have meted out for so long to others. Sadly, instead of saying, "now I have an idea how you guys felt - sorry!" they instead construct byzantine arguments for reclaiming unequal-and-better status.

[Skyweir]

You are a wise man WF .. as is demonstrated by your insights. I think you are probably right on all points.



And its a huge tragedy ..

The author offered some interesting insights also .. of particular interest was that society holds men up to an unreasonable and arguably irrational set of expectations. You know .. ie remaining a virgin is a sign of weakness, presenting a virile macho front, real men dont cry, real men dont communicate their feelings, I mean god .. perfect example is in the Tank .. lol

I mean .. dont you agree Z, Cail, SB, RER, ..youre all so concerned about ... feels

Im not talking about about subjectivity .. because to my mind totally benchmark objective assessments .. definitely the preferable and most reliable standard.

However .. these attitudes form part of the problem. I totally think this.

Also women also feed also contribute to this paradigm by demanding men behave and act in certain ways and NOT in others. And in conflict to voiced expectations, the majority of women are attracted to macho men, even if they are aggressive .... and they prioritise them over.... the emotionally available, or the more sensitive human male

My point is society prescribes still how a man should be, should behave .. I was talking to my husband today and he said it is the same for women . and has been this way for generations.

And yeah ok .. point noted. But how do we change what we as a society expect from each other How do we get to a more equitable appreciation of each other

I think society is moving in this direction .. slowly but still moving .. by not denoting gender specific activities and expectations. But we have to stand against every negativity that would hinder progress in this regard.

I think this is part of why this particular movement has disturbed and concerned to the degree it has.

[Skyweir]

Plus Im a bit high lol .. atm .. so theres that

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

[...]

My point is society prescribes still how a man should be, should behave .. I was talking to my husband today and he said it is the same for women . and has been this way for generations.

And yeah ok .. point noted. But how do we change what we as a society expect from each other ...

[...]

You mean, how do you/we prescribe something else for them? Some other way that they "should be, should behave"?

See the problem here?

[Vraith]

+JMJ+

[...]

My point is society prescribes still how a man should be, should behave .. I was talking to my husband today and he said it is the same for women . and has been this way for generations.

And yeah ok .. point noted. But how do we change what we as a society expect from each other ...

[...]

You mean, how do you/we prescribe something else for them? Some other way that they "should be, should behave"?

See the problem here?

Don't be a dick, Wos, you're better than that.
It doesn't have fuck all to do with how they MUST behave [that's what things like religion and fraternities and nationalism and conservatism are for]...it's about VALUING more paths/types than one.
If they'd been valued from the beginning, we wouldn't be here.

It's VERY important to note that though many seem to blame women for stomping them down, the root/source is an underlying masculine power structure.

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

[...]

My point is society prescribes still how a man should be, should behave .. I was talking to my husband today and he said it is the same for women . and has been this way for generations.

And yeah ok .. point noted. But how do we change what we as a society expect from each other ...

[...]

You mean, how do you/we prescribe something else for them? Some other way that they "should be, should behave"?

See the problem here?

[...]

It doesn't have fuck all to do with how they MUST behave [that's what things like religion and fraternities and nationalism and conservatism are for]...it's about VALUING more paths/types than one.


[...]

Okay, change the terms if you want.

People must be prescribed the values that you/we want them to value. The things that they "should" value.

FWIW, I'm not seein' a dime's worth o' difference.

[Vraith]

+JMJ+

FWIW, I'm not seein' a dime's worth o' difference.

Well, then, now you're being lazy or absurd.
Like the folk who MOST hate illegal Mexican immigrants [cuz criminals, for one thing!] don't know any Mexicans, less than zero illegal ones, negative minus more criminal ones.

They should START by valuing people. Period.
Value isn't earned, it's the starting point.
Respect isn't earned, it's the original default.
A fair number of these INCEL folk are vanilla Nazis but with a caramel twist.
But some of them are victims of evil expectation enacted by close authoritarians and bullyism.

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

[...]


Like the folk who MOST hate illegal Mexican immigrants [cuz criminals, for one thing!] don't know any Mexicans, less than zero illegal ones, negative minus more criminal ones.

They should START by valuing people. Period.
Value isn't earned, it's the starting point.
Respect isn't earned, it's the original default.
A fair number of these INCEL folk are vanilla Nazis but with a caramel twist.
But some of them are victims of evil expectation enacted by close authoritarians and bullyism.

Then why aren't you valuing their POV? I mean, these "INCELS" shouldn't have to "earn" your respect, right?

Srsly, we could do this dance all day, but I'm generally not one to beat a dead horse. So, more to the point ...

We can talk Mexicans or Immigrants or Nazis or whatnot, but my Spidey-sense tells me that the elephant-in-the-room is (radical) Gender Theory. Your earlier nod to "masculine power structures" only seems to further confirm this.

But if not, 'sall good. Carry on.

[Skyweir]

Ok Wos .. you have a point .. but its not my point. Im not suggesting the way forward is to replace one set of shoulds with another.

... gender specific roles have been imbedded in human consciousness for generations .. since the dawn of humanity quite possibly. However, they have managed to avoid adapting as society has progressed.

For generations of time, women held the status of property, couldnt own property, couldnt vote. These things have changed .. in the 21C .. women are in many areas now, in the West at least, deemed equal to men, generally speaking in worth, wages, work, education etc. Women have a lot more power in todays world than ever before.

But still certain social stigma remains fit and well. You see this in various situations, but from my experience in rape cases where the role of a victim is still deemed to have a complicit value in the act of violence against her. Oh the way she was dressed was provocative, the way she walked, talked, etc.

Still today this is a problem. There are STILL a certain expectation that a womans body is fair game because what else did she expect walking alone at night etc. We as a society still view women as Eves. They SHOULD be at home, dressed a certain way, acting a certain way. Thats what we want from a human female.

I think as bad as that is ... societies expectations of what men ought to be are even more concerning actually.

Society expects male humans to be strong, dominant, virile, protective, providers, wielders of weapons, wise, intelligent, .. they all should be ALPHAS.

And on, and on, good looking, emotionally available, possessed of humour, gentleness, kindness, romantic, sexual, etc etc.

No one human can realistically be everything to everyone.

Its irrational, has no basis in logic ... and we need to set aside such unreasonable expectations of what it means to be male.

Its less about replacing one should with another .. and more about setting aside the SHOULD PARADIGM entirely.

Perhaps by celebrating attributes that challenge this paradigm. Celebrating sensitivity, celebrating diversity, celebrating gentleness, celebrating intelligence. I honestly dont think there is any ONE way to combat archaic thinking. It requires a suite a small changes. Valuing the role of male nurturing and male nurturers.

Hahahaha ... to a some degree comfortable embracing the ... feels .. as opposed to seeing them as a signifier of weakness.

[Skyweir]

And on you point re radical gender theory .. I dont see that as at all relevant to addressing the issues surrounding social expectations of male behaviour. Or for that matter what drives INCEL groupies and advocates.

[Fist and Faith]

I don't think it's archaic thinking. You're talking about changing human nature. Women can think, can know[/], all the things you said. But what happens when the big guy comes into the room, and the smaller guys move aside for him? Or the rich guy drives up in his Rolls? Who are the women looking at for the rest of the evening? Are they striking up conversations with the weak guys, or the ones whose clothes look a little worn?

[Skyweir]

Wow .. I see your point .. but it is entirely rejectable and fundamentally flawed .... because ... it evidences the precise problem we have with social expectations of men, the role of men, what society values about men.

Look Im not suggesting there is no place for success, leadership, male attractiveness etc. Its not about removing these elements from society, social interelationships or from the social narrative .... for a million various and presumably obvious reasons.

I don't think it's archaic thinking.

How so .. do you suggest that in contrast, its a contemporary approach

You're talking about changing human nature.

You are quite probably right. But more accurately I am talking about changing the WAY we THINK about human nature, if you will.

What do you think about human nature Because before we can progress on a discussion on this point ... we need to understand what precisely we can agree human nature is and what attributes and characteristics comprise it.

Women can think, can know, all the things you said.

Yes indeed .. they can .. and

But what happens when the big guy comes into the room, and the smaller guys move aside for him?

A big guy and a small guy are in the same room

Or the rich guy drives up in his Rolls?

A rich guy drives up in his Rolls. The end.

Or rather I am suggesting that is the only result from that action. But if I understand your point, I think youre suggesting that there is greater relevance to this action for a woman, a potential mate possibly. That the Rolls is equivalent to peacock feathers

But in todays human world .. it does not HAVE a relatable relevance. Arriving in an expensive car only presents a competitive advantage if observed and compared to the vehicles other men arrive in .... AND if the male intends to attract a female mate that is UTTERLY superficial and shallow and without any sense of character. It does not follow that driving an expensive vehicle means you actually ARE or will be a desirable or even viable sexual partner.

Who are the women looking at for the rest of the evening?

Again .. all of life is not, all evenings, all social engagements are about bagging a sexual partner. So what if a woman LOOKs at the big guy or the guy in the Rolls .. the CHADS.

Perhaps you missed the point .. that thats exactly the perspectives the INCELs have of the CHADS. The big guy will bag the girl because hes the big guy.

Are they striking up conversations with the weak guys, or the ones whose clothes look a little worn?

^^^^^ THIS
This is exactly the issue the author raises and that needs combatting. The guy that steps aside ISNT the weak guy .. ever considered hes the polite guy, the smart guy, the decent guy.


To my mind, this is the rhetoric that is damaging .. the automatic assumption of WEAKNESS. These two hypothetical guys arent wild lions competing for a mate. There two guys who happen to be at the same social engagement .. the label WEAK is irrelevant in that context, its disproportionate to the context.

Its not WEAK to be short, a persons dress doesnt denote their character, a persons size doesnt denote their character.

Im saying we need to combat .. rethink how we judge worth and reassess what is of value.

[Wosbald]

+JMJ+

And on you point re radical gender theory .. I dont see that as at all relevant to addressing the issues surrounding social expectations of male behaviour. Or for that matter what drives INCEL groupies and advocates.

I agree that it doesn't have to be relevant, at least not in the context of this thread. However, in many people's minds and motives, it may well be a player on the field of competing ideologies.

At any rate, if yer not intending to put it in play on this thread, then 'nuff said.

[Skyweir]

No way man .. Im not the boss of this thread .. if you think it may be a player on the field of competing ideologies .. please explain.

I will read your views and discuss.

[Avatar]

As WF points out, there have always been people like this, the 'net just allows them to find and validate each other.

Is their viewpoint valid / worthy of consideration? Depends on your starting point I guess. Most of us start off with certain base assumptions about what is the right way to treat others etc.

Those assumptions are inculcated into us as part of what society tells us is right and just and fair and equitable.

Should society decide those norms no longer apply and others do, technically it can. Does the fact that there is no right or wrong have any bearing on it? Again, only socially. Only in the context of what "normal" decent" people believe right now.

In terms of the big picture, these guys aren't going to change anything. At worst they will rack up a few victims, which sucks for the victims, but doesn't really impact society much I suspect.

--A

[Fist and Faith]

But what happens when the big guy comes into the room, and the smaller guys move aside for him?

A big guy and a small guy are in the same room

Or the rich guy drives up in his Rolls?

A rich guy drives up in his Rolls. The end.

I guess you're right. This entire thing is a non-issue.