Lets not kid ourselves, most incels are already degenerate. They just have a daily period of denial that's just long enough to call other people degenerates for things they don't like. I address this in the article. If you're going to be a degenerate anyway, you might as well pick the degeneracy that might contribute to a possible future of not being a degenerate.
*edit*
I think you have a point that my article might be leaning a bit too far into the degeneracy. Imma remove the "fuck a stripper or hooker" part. It's a bit extra.
I have many other questions in another reply here... but this brought up another one.
This sounds a bit to me as if society is supposed to be a place where degenerate behaviour is to be tolerated somehow? If someone voluntarily declares himself a degenarate and states he can't control his behaviour as a result of that... And needs to do degenarate things... Then that person should not be allowed the same freedoms in society as non-degenerates right? It would require supportive and punitive efforts to make clear to both the degenerate and the non-degenarate that this behaviour and way of thinking about contributing to society is simply not condoned or allowed.
Or is there a reason why this version of degenaracy should be... allowed somehow?
And I'm also still trying to figure out what it even means to"be an incel" ... What changed for you between.. "being" one ... and no longer "being" one... Because I have to admit, the whole article sounds like what I vaguely imagined an Incel to be?
Which is why it confused me even more. How and were did you "become" an incel? What changed then? And how was the change back out of being an incel happen? And what changed there?
You stopped paying the membership fees or something? I really have no clue!?
Yes, women hate weak men. Weak men can't stay away from whores. They are so involved in porn that they don't know how to talk to a woman who is not for sale, creeps.
It's kind of absurd how you're saying this on an article that objectively wasn't written for you. If incels and loser men bother you so much, were you just here to hate-read my article? The main point here is that men need to spend some time and effort humanizing women if they want a relationship one day. You're pretty much doing the opposite of that, but to men. Maybe chill out a bit.
What I'm trying to say is, it's not your business to know if a man is weak by your standards. You think I'm gonna be telling my future wife that I went to strip clubs? Not at all. You've perfectly demonstrated the reason why not to. Sit with it, honestly.
By your standards, sure. It's easy to sit with because your opinions of men aren't worth taking seriously. They only serve to illustrate the cautionary tale of when women like you have too much scorn and no people who care enough to let you take it out on them.
What about the average man, with average income, average looks, average physique, average height… who can’t get dates, and almost certainly can’t find a suitable partner for marriage?
Most women’s self esteem is in the gutter and their standards are abysmally low. They’re only saying that stuff online. Go find a fatty and take her in gym dates/healthy restaurants and you’ll be fine.
Their standards are insanely low? Have you seen the marriage and divorce rates and compared them to the past? How do you reconcile these changes? Economic deprivation won’t explain it, as time has tested that theory already.
But also those women are only getting divorced because most women don’t have a sense of self and need constant validation, and men needing things to solve to validate them, and not endless words just disconnect.
Women aren’t getting divorced because they just up and leave, they’re getting divorced because they are incentivised by the state and others to find what will make them happy, if not their husbands.
They also aren’t reliant on a sole income anymore so there isn’t any imperative to talk things out, take the hard path out to reconciliation.
That’s not high standards. That’s emotionality and impulsive behaviour being rewarded because society generally has become hyper-independent.
Effectively, the same reason women leave marriages is the same reason children cut their parents off and leave them in age care centres, the same reason why people consume more substances.
But leaving has nothing to do with standards. That’s their cope.
What in gods name women don’t get divorces because they are impulsive. Most women get divorces because they have communicated 1000000 times what they need, bent over backwards to need it less, negotiate, adapt, compromise and give back and they have yet to be heard. 1000 papercuts is what I see in my work. The opposite of impulsivity.
I understand that too, but I don’t feel compelled to be sympathetic because of it. Neither am I sympathetic to men who complain about divorce rates, or women not marrying. People do not think through, or vet their romantic partners adequately. Both men and women overlook behaviour that is indicative of long term issues in favour of the illusion of love. But love is an active choice, and if you love the wrong person, you should take responsibility if that.
When I call them impulsive, I am referring to a common neuroticism in women generally, not that every divorce is the result of just waking up and saying “ooo time to be single!”
My point is they wouldn’t have to do that if they picked a competent person. But since most people are too selfish to be good parents, they elect to settle and overlook things. You don’t date someone that refuses to participate in a meaningful way to the relationship, marry them, have children with the and then act shocked they are still not performing. I see this a lot with women who complain about boyfriends forgetting anniversaries then move on to marry these men just to complain they forgot about Mother’s Day. It’s not shocking and it’s tiresome because we, other women have to deal with the fallout.
So the majority of divorces (done by women) are because in all of these cases, the men are the primary problem, so much so that the women are doing gymnastics in trying to get basic things? Do you know how egregiously biased that sounds? Do you not understand how once you step back for a second, how absurd this theory of divorce sounds?
You’re quite literally making the problem worse and incentivising* it by running a coaching program that validates blanket ideas of man bad, woman good, divorce unless he changes. This is peak radical feminism 101, Women Are Wonderful effect on steroids.
If women had higher standards we wouldn’t hear these sob stories about men forgetting Father’s Day while they stay with their husbands. In fact, other women are actually tired of hearing them complain about how supposedly bad men are when they could elect to choose someone stable.
All most women really care about in relationships is validation. They will go 50/50, they will clean your apartment before you even become offical, they will let you cheat in peace for validation.
If anything, the divorce stats are proof they married with low standards. Who leaves someone competent? They know they chose wrong, they’re angry that the man never changed. The divorce is to self-sooth with the harsh reality than in any other paradigm, they would be stuck with what they believe they deserve. Post hoc they “deserve more” but if they really believed that, they would have never married.
I’m telling you this, as a woman with high standards, I’ve managed to only have sex with 2 people in 21 years and one is my ex-fiancé, who had to relocate to help his family and the other is my current fiancé. You know why I don’t use dating apps? Because I have real standards.
Those women don’t have standards, they have check boxes for how they want to play men they aren’t attracted to. Let it be Michael B Jordan and forget 50/50, the woman would be the provider!
Oh I’m sorry, I wasn’t aware dating apps for degenerates was the entire dating pool.
If women’s standards are so high, why are there so many single mothers?
If women’s standards are so high, why are there so many prostitutes and OF workers?
If women’s standards are so high, why do they claim men are evil every-time they are ghosted by Chad?
Look at real life. These standards are not real. They say they have standards, but they don’t. The only thing they don’t tolerate is unattractive or short men. And honestly? If you’re tall, you could have the ugliest face and women would still drop their pants for you.
What part of that is high standards?
Women’s standards are low as hell and you can see it through their anger towards men that have wronged them.
Nigga no. You can’t be mad about biology. Stop being a sook and get your money up.
I’ve dated men that are 5’3. 5’8 and 6’0+ because I value investment more than just appearance but be honest with yourself.
You don’t want to date an obese woman with no hair. It’s useless to be angry at women for wanting tall men when every female mammal prefers for their breeding partner to be larger than themselves.
I’m not gonna sit here and tell a fat bitch she deserves Chris Hemsworth.
Most females will settle and already have. Given less than 10% of the male population is over 6’2, it’s obvious that women will still procreate with short men since they are still in the gene pool.
Only a few select people from our species will choose their partner first round.
I thought your take on this was really interesting and potent. Definitely appreciate your approach to seeing the problem and finding an accessible path. Way to go, most don’t do their own research like this and then share it. I hope this will help many.
Full disclosure: I've been married for 33 years and out of the dating scene for 35, but I see things from the female side by having three grown daughters.
Your advice seems solid to me. That said, more should be done. The single guys I know--from work or friends who have single sons are often making some big mistakes: They don't bother to dress in a presentable fashion. They often have weird and excessive hair/beard combinations. They don't work out, at all. I think taking care of these three issues, plus your advice, would be pretty unstoppable--unless a guy is truly hideous looking or has actual diagnosable mental health issues.
Additionally: Getting fit, dressing well and grooming all provide opportunities to strike up conversations with women--like at the gym, the hair salon and the clothing store.
Could I ask you a few question... purely out of an autodidacts educational interest?
I'm European... And it seems to me that the concept of "Incel" is an American cultural invention... I might be wrong about that too. Because it's simply based on the fact I heard the word uttered for the first time over there.
But there's something about the whole term itself that has always completely blocked any interest that I might have had to even understand how it's possible for someone to use a description like that to himself. It's true right... that it's a "male" thing that call themselves Incel's? Or or are there women in that concept too? I mean... being celibate is something a woman can be too right?
And the whole reason for me, to never really try and understand any of it, is because the entire naming of it makes no logical sense to me whatsoever..; So I'm hoping you might be willing to try and explain a few of my questions to me. Pick any of all these question you feel free to try and give me some insight about. This topic is really like a leaf on a trea in a different solar system hearing about Schrodingers cat for the first time sort of thing.. It's that alien to me , and there was this random relfex of me to check wether or not your article could provide me insights about the concept... But I've only gotten more confused about it now, since I'm not quite grasping something underneath it all obviously.
So it's called... "Involuntary Celibate".. correct? As in... I want to be in a physical relationship with a person , but I currently am not. In the world that I understand , we call that "being single" ... and it's a thing women can be too. Homosexual people can be it too on both sides , and as for non-binary interests... They can be single too. It's the first thing I don't understand about this whole thing. What was wrong with the nomenclature of being ... "Not in a physical relationship at the moment" ?
Summarising that concept into "Involuntary celibate" ... sort of means that it starts out of the already grounded perception that it's an absolute right to be "given" another human being that "has" to want this ... and that this right is granted based on the action of being born? Is "being in a physical relationship with a human being" added to the human rights charter without me realizing it or something? Is the first though that always comes up when I hear that term. And this feels like the first time I get a chance to ask some questions about the whole thing from someone who identifies as such.. And is apparently capable of complex narrative... Which is a rare thing from anyone using that term as i've seen it so far.
I truly don't understand why it's considered a "problem" , that a suitable mate has not been found... yet.
I also consider the start of any mutually consensual physical relationship to be human understanding and respect , with a very strong interest to learn and understand more about the other person out of an emotional desire called.. "attraction" ... Is that not perceived as such by "Incel's" ?
Because I simply cannot grasp why the renaming of "I'm currently single" into "incel" even happened? What is gained by reframing a simple reality into this ... somewhat... self-diminuitively named concept?
It feels to me like I would suddenly start refferring to myself as ... "Involuntarily not the master of the entire universe and space and time" ... But I don't do that, since I never expected that to happen unless I make it so... I don't consider myself to be born with the absolute and un-alienable right to be the master of the entire universe and space and time.
And I'm really sorry.. but if someone I meet or know.. suddenly would start referring to itself as "Involuntarily not being bowed down to by each and every human in existence" ...
I would have only one reaction to that... walk away and never think about that person ever again .. since.. That's an unrealistic , untrustworthy, dangerous and unpredictable way of thinking for a human being...
I can only imagine myself being overcome with a sudden desire to completely remove myself from the presence or perceptions of a person who thinks like that?
How is this dynamic perceived in "Incel" culture? How is it possible that a human mind gets to the point that using that name somehow.. "Improves" the state or awareness of "being single at this time" ?
I just do not understand any of that.
The whole article also seems to revolve solely around the sex part...
A mutually consenting loving relationship between 2 human beings entails much more than just the act of sex together... Sure... the sex is an important part... but not more important then for instance cognitive understanding, support and intimacy ... there is also the emotional and ittelecutal freedom , space and synchronisation that is required... and endless freedom in other things that could become important in that loving relationship.
Is all of that ... non existant in "Incel" thinking ? Or just considered not important? Or not perceived?
And my final question... Do you know people who started feeling better about anything once they started calling themselves "Incel" ? Instead of just... "being single at the moment" ?
Did it ever help anyone that they start calling themselves that? And if so? How?
What I think of migrants? What does that have to do with it?
And I personally believe that any rethoric that starts with a division of humanity is completely flawed... I'm a migrant myself for instance... There's nothing think about "migrants" ... What do you think about the kind of pebble that's more round than the one next to it but less round than the other one lying on the beach?
What a ridiculous answer... And turning it into a transaction... A trade as an answer to a question.
Ok.. I already learned a bit about what sort of thing is driving the "thinking" process of an incel... Tha is for that atleast I guess.
Yes, I do have something to say of consistency. You are a worthless faggot who has no business packing my lunch, let alone critiquing my article. I'm glad you're a European, because you have no business being in my time zone either. Kindly vacate your thin-lipped slobber from my dick.
It's true... It is consistent. So "Incel" is about being proud you've managed to regress into the emotional and cognitive state of the ebola virus while still being able to form a sentence somehow?
It's quite a feat of engineering honestly.
And then thinking that restacking it would somehow... what... make me feel worse about it?
I was wondering how it's possible that a human being would consider a label that only makes them sound less competent in anything , as a statement of rebellion about the fact they're incompetent...
But we're getting there.
Please show me more... It's quite fascinating to see this ebola virus squirm in this perty dish of absolute nothingness. It's better then watching the news atleast.
You're like a UFC cage match where both opponents are you , the fence and the floor is electrified... And you're own movements are being used to power the electricty... And the rest of us sit here wondering... Why does it keep doing that to itself while the door is open and it can stop whenever it would want?
But it chooses to keep doing that , in an attempt to create as much pain for itself as possible... ok... You're succesfully removed yourself from society , since you're obviously a danger to any other human out there... So... all good. :)
This experiment is proving very valuable for educational purposes. Sorry you're the lab rat... but please remember... The door is open and you're here voluntarily doing this to yourself. So I'm ok with the moral paradigm of this experiment.
The term incel was originally a fringe term anyway, but has become so widely adopted here in America because the country has a deeply entrenched rape culture. The rights and privileges afforded to women are apparently incredibly expensive and come at cost to American men. A lot of people here, both men and women, especially men, lack the emotional experience and maturity to not view sex as something owed to men.
The term incel is a subsequent reversal of this logic. Being sexually dominant is supposedly the most important thing a man, or even a child (as this training starts for most in adolescence) can be.
That it's all about sexually repressed disfunctionality... That's sort of the obvious part.
But that would probably mean there's a high precentage of sexual abuse victims in that group I guess...
I didn't know it's considered widely adopted though , and that its considered there's a deeply entrenched rape culture even ...
That would sort of explain many of them obviously ... if they only grow up with men around them that find this all normal...
But then again.. so many deep societal problems there are still debated as if it's normal to even debate them like racism and child labour and so many obvious things. The cultural norms of which sort of things are even still open for debate are so different over here in Europe...
There's no way anyone here in europe would even consider giving someone calling themseves an "Incel" a second of their attention really.. And for instance , knowing what we know about the movement there... Simply wearing a T-shirt with that name on it, is easily grounds to be kicked out of any respectable establishment on the spot. There would be no debate about that at all... but over there... So it's all really complicated to latch on too in any kind of meaningfull understanding for me.
If this weird "incel" thing is worn as a badge... it must be something bigger then I could have imagined indeed...
And what I still don't get is why these Macho men would then choose the most derogatory and demasculating name for themselves to point that out...
That I really don't get. Calling yourself an involuntary celibate is basically declaring yourself a woman in a derogatory term in their vocabulary and perceptions right?
Is it just latent homosexuality perhaps , but they're all too scared to say it too eachother? Like the mirror palace of perpetually closeted gays gathering perhaps...
I just don't get that. If felt myself motivated to rename "Being single" into something... revolutionary to try and form a movement about it as a man... I would imagine coming up with something like.. "Disenfranchised Adonis" or "The inquisition against blasphemers against Gods gift to women " or something delusional like that.
But atleast it would make my faltered ego bigger in my eyes then right? Why do they go for this naming convention that makes them seem even less worthy of the thing they complain about not deserving in the first place. That sort of keeps screwing up my understanding of this.
That i found this article was sort of a way to try and figure that out. My first reaction to it was... whut! I thought this was just a thing that creeps use as a word when noone's around... A word they use to a word to when they cry in the dark alone...
but here there's a substack post about it, with someone saying they sort of are one... was such a strange experience to me...
It was like reading a post from someone titled "I need to inject random people on the street with deadly poisons, and here is how society should make that possible for me! " sort of thing... So I am obviously missing something here... So I ask questions...
I've never had a chance to hear it from the horses mouth ... So I'm just intruiged to hear it from one of them ... Is this some sort of rape club using this name to try and hide their crimes in humbleness or something? Or trying to invoke the fact that they're involuntary priests and monks or something? Are they rebelling against their religion this way?
I'm interested in their rationale here... I understand it exists , I can imagine many ways how someone goes wrong with these things... But I just cannot understand what they are even trying to say this way?
I have no clue how and where and how much it actually "exists" ... or "what" it is even. Is it a club? An ideology? are there membership cards..; is there merch or something?
They seem.. "proud" of the name too? Do they have gatherings where they have chanting sessions with pumping fists in the air and all of them going "In-cell ! " "In - cell !" ?
And what does it mean to be "cured" of it... because this person seems to suggest he'll always be an incel untill death... there's nothing he can do about it... except for some potential few minutes of his life where his penis could be inside a woman .. perhaps... if he's lucky or a deranged criminal or pays for it? do they consider it a genetic disorder or something? Is it their duty to suffer this for the good of something else or something?
The whole thing is just... completely incomprehensible to me for the reason that they choose THAT name for this "gathering" of sorts.
I'm really hoping the author responds to my questions here.
Ignoring most of your verbal diarrhea, the reason incels use the term to describe themselves is the same reason people use the terms “unemployed” or “homeless”; partially because it’s an accurate description and partially because it’s an attempt to elicit sympathy and gain traction for a societal fix for their problems. As a general rule, most of them consider themselves too ugly/poor/weird to find a sexual partner, in the same way that the homeless are too poor/weird to find housing.
I agree it’s weird and counterproductive and entitled. As a general rule, I personally think we shouldn’t cater policy to poorly socialized weirdos. Then again, I’m also much further to the right of most Euros, so I’m genuinely baffled as to why so many people are cool with legislation benefiting the homeless or trans people but then sperg out about incels. They’re all the same type of person, and as a general rule, I think we shouldn’t have to cater to any of them.
Everyone who is in "incel" would like to delude themselves that they're a.) beyond hope and b.) it's womens' fault.
There are truly hopeless cases, in terms of physical attractiveness or disposition/disorder, and that really does suck and my heart goes out to them. But those hopeless cases (or, again, those who would like to think themselves hopeless cases) will often then hop on some sort of RETVRN train, as though their neurotic-disagreeable-barely-high-functioning autism would have been better tolerated in 1950, or 950?
You'd have probably been dead or even less likely to reproduce back then. Your chances are better now than ever, but it's easier to just throw your hands, give up and play vidya, boohooie. Fucking femoids.
If that's your response then I'm glad you're not fucking, you dysgenic pussy.
Ignore the inevitable kvetching and pearl-clutching over your strip club idea, I think it's a great bit of outside-the-box thinking to help give lonely men a bit of socialization training with women. Very creative approach.
My own recommendations would probably run along different lines, but I'm long-since married and my wild frat-boy jock days going out clubbing/partying with chicks are almost 20 years behind me, so I know any counsel I can provide would be long outdated/impractical to the average modern incel lad.
I think the real authority on this matter, while he can be a bit corrosive, is Roissy, alias Heartiste. Zoomers might not know him: he was the author of the very popular blog "Chateau Heartiste" back in the 2010s. He coined or popularized a lot of important phrases of the manosphere milieu: "cock carousel", "thousand cock stare", "agree and amplify", etc. He's got some brilliantly written and succinct bits on the matter.
In the piece "The Shortest Definition of Game," he sums up seducing women as "the practice of challenging women". "Amused mastery" is the phrase he coined defining the attitude one must possess with women: not envy, not contempt, not submission, but a willing spirit of engaging with the world in a playful and light, yet confident way. "Thinking like a Woman" is another nice article.
You Cannot Become Anyting Other Than What You Already Are. If you're not an 11/10 Genetically Ordaind Super-Chad, you'll never get anything. Stop Lying to the people just because you're squeamish about feeling bad.
Will, on a particularly inspired and drunken night, I put a lot of my experience and reason into this article. I genuinely believe that there is hope because I was once hopeless. I think there's some good points in here, but you are Will Martin. Simply say the word and I will unpublish this article.
The vast majority of so called incels were once boyfriends, husbands, devoted, in love in a way that women cannot replicate nor understand. Female nature in the real world changed them. Some, many, like me have it all, money, peace, land, animals and don’t plan to lose it, or our mental health anytime soon. PS Your picture is horribly mislabeled, it depicts Samantabhadra, the Buddha with his consort, a common symbol that symbolizes the union of male and female principles.
Why is the correct labeling of the statue so important to you? Didn't you agree with the guy who was saying it's creepy? I'd think that the guy saying it was creepy would be more offensive to you than the guy who gave it a joke description (that I never told you to take seriously).
It’s wrong. I don’t take offense as I believe in free speech. But it’s sloppy and incorrect and I can’t abide that shit.
The other guy is obviously under educated or not very bright, it certainly isn’t “creepy”. Indeed, the idea of incubus and succubus is genuinely creepy in a gothic horror context, but that European tradition has nothing to with this, unless you look into the sometimes very mischievous behavior of Dakinis, but that’s out of my wheelhouse.
It was an intentionally sloppy description, it's a fucking joke you boomer. The dude wasn't referencing the gothic style as creepy, he was agreeing with another commenters sentiment of that symbol being pedophilic due to the size difference. And you said they were sound comments. Drop your reverence for the image I used because it looks stupid in the face of that.
Thanks for the parley and going easy on me. Conflict has never been my thing, through wiring and experience. These issues do matter to me though, and I don’t really know how to engage in ways that lean towards dialogue with issues about men. Lot of wounds there, and I don’t like where my anger or fear take me when I try to respond. Hard to hold a middle ground when you start with your hackles up. I appreciate your response, and I’ll keep working on how I engage. Thanks.
I don't think so, I know chicks older than me who have a similar size difference to me. It might be the fact that they gave the Buddha a disproportionately large head. I thought the cultural meaning that the Tibetan Buddhists gave the statue fit well with the article, but if enough people think it's inappropriate I can just change it.
Actually... that was the whole reason I thought to read that thing too... because I wanted to make sure to report exactly that, if this would have been an advocation of why children need to go cure incel's or something... I simply do not understand from any direction, or from any direction what this whole "incel" thing even means... Or how it's possible that a human being starts calling "being single" with a term that's obviously just self-insulting to the people calling themselves that. I do not understand why using the saddest name possible for something someone refuses to learn about or do anything about...
It's like we're all "Involuntarily not as smart as einstein , involuntarily not capable of wiping my ass, involuntarily not the richest person on the planet and involuntarily not capable of deciding anything for myself or doing anything really" And we urgently need to complain to the world about all those involuntarily things immediately.
I just... totally... don't... understand how that name even exists..; and why a human would choose to use it describe itself. Why are they doing this to themselves? What's the thought process here? How does one of them, convince another one to start calling himself that way? Not in my entire life have I ever heard a 5 letter word that is so completely incomprehensible to me. Why does it exist? How is it possible a human being comes up with this name and actually sounds sort of "proud" to start calling themselves that way , and use it as if it's a normal word to use.
Totally beyond me... like totally... I think it's the one word i am simply incapable of grasping any meaning or origin of whatsoever.
What a strange thing... and this article definitely didn't help... and yes... that's a super creepy foto to use for that article.
First off, re-claiming a word that originally had negative or neutral/negative (see article below) implications is a common tactic of marginalized groups (i.e. "n-word", "pussy hats", etc). It's an effective, largely unconscious strategy to invert a societal power dynamic by claiming it for oneself. This is a common tactic for neurotypical people and therefore can be a source of confusion for neurodivergent people, which I'm guessing may be part of why you are struggling with it so much.
Secondly, for the record, the term "incel" was coined by a woman and was originally gender neutral. It speaks to the dominance of patriarchal culture and thought and the utter cluelessness of many sad, lonely, angry men that they "took over" a term that was originally gender neutral. The woman who started it was trying to form a community for people who, for a variety of reasons, experience a lack of physical intimacy in their lives and who felt alone in their aloneness (which has never actually been the case, but most of us feel our suffering is unique in some way). Women (and plenty of men) have sought mutual support and understanding for this sad predicament, but a very vocal minority of male evoloutionary misfits (and a smaller cadre of women who encourage and support incel culture because it makes them feel like valuable objects) have leaned heavily in to gross distortions of gender, biology, and evolutionary psychology to justify what is fundamentally a narcissitic personality disorder. Namely, "I am miserable because other people don't see me the way I want to be seen and I deserve to be seen the way I want to be seen so every violent, misogynistic thought that comes into my feverish mind is justified - and necessary to keep my fragile ego from completely crumbling to dust." Here is an article about the origins: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45284455
Fair point on objectifying. It was an incomplete thought. I try to respect that people make their own choices, as you sort of seem to, and I recognize that both women and men can choose to see themselves as objects. If consent matters at all, I have to accept people consenting to being objectified.
I assume you’ve saved my comment in a separate post for future roasting or something. I’d protest, but I lit the torch with my roasty comment, so light me up if you must.
I don’t understand the whole incel thing, though I’ve experienced male unhappiness and anger my whole life - my own and others. I try to consider multiple perspectives to make sense of it, but I admit I’ve got plenty of anger built up about men believing and acting like women (or anyone else) owe them something simply because they’re men. I expressed that anger in my comment, indirectly, which is to say, unskillfully. I own it.
Your perspective in this post is, I guess, somewhat unique in encouraging unhappy, lonely dudes lacking in social experience to see women as humans they need to practice relating to. Maybe they’ll feel better and possibly get laid? Seems a better plan than most of what I’ve seen over the years.
Seeing women as people is the only thing that ever made sense to me when I was younger and now that I’m old and in shit shape, it’s mostly what I have left. Being in a loving, respectful, and pretty awesome relationship with my wife is all that really matters to me. Not everybody gets that in their lives, and I try not to take it for granted.
I honestly thought that you'd be more adversarial, which is why opened with the roast. That is how it tends to go, but I can respect that you aren't actually going that way. For what it's worth, roasting the slightly red hue of your pfp is not a very strong roast anyways.
Advocating for strip clubs and hookers is not actually how you solve it. That degeneracy lead to inceldom
Lets not kid ourselves, most incels are already degenerate. They just have a daily period of denial that's just long enough to call other people degenerates for things they don't like. I address this in the article. If you're going to be a degenerate anyway, you might as well pick the degeneracy that might contribute to a possible future of not being a degenerate.
*edit*
I think you have a point that my article might be leaning a bit too far into the degeneracy. Imma remove the "fuck a stripper or hooker" part. It's a bit extra.
I have many other questions in another reply here... but this brought up another one.
This sounds a bit to me as if society is supposed to be a place where degenerate behaviour is to be tolerated somehow? If someone voluntarily declares himself a degenarate and states he can't control his behaviour as a result of that... And needs to do degenarate things... Then that person should not be allowed the same freedoms in society as non-degenerates right? It would require supportive and punitive efforts to make clear to both the degenerate and the non-degenarate that this behaviour and way of thinking about contributing to society is simply not condoned or allowed.
Or is there a reason why this version of degenaracy should be... allowed somehow?
And I'm also still trying to figure out what it even means to"be an incel" ... What changed for you between.. "being" one ... and no longer "being" one... Because I have to admit, the whole article sounds like what I vaguely imagined an Incel to be?
Which is why it confused me even more. How and were did you "become" an incel? What changed then? And how was the change back out of being an incel happen? And what changed there?
You stopped paying the membership fees or something? I really have no clue!?
There Are No Incels. You're jut a fucki g degenerate that belongs in a Titanium Burkha.
Yes, women hate weak men. Weak men can't stay away from whores. They are so involved in porn that they don't know how to talk to a woman who is not for sale, creeps.
It's kind of absurd how you're saying this on an article that objectively wasn't written for you. If incels and loser men bother you so much, were you just here to hate-read my article? The main point here is that men need to spend some time and effort humanizing women if they want a relationship one day. You're pretty much doing the opposite of that, but to men. Maybe chill out a bit.
Touchy, touchy you. I enjoyed your article and did not complain about it. I made a comment that should be helpful for men to know.
What I'm trying to say is, it's not your business to know if a man is weak by your standards. You think I'm gonna be telling my future wife that I went to strip clubs? Not at all. You've perfectly demonstrated the reason why not to. Sit with it, honestly.
As you prove you are a weak man ... sit with that.
By your standards, sure. It's easy to sit with because your opinions of men aren't worth taking seriously. They only serve to illustrate the cautionary tale of when women like you have too much scorn and no people who care enough to let you take it out on them.
Dude, flirt with women, go on dates, and marry one. It's simple.
Ok. Write your own article that's just that comment. I don't care about how simple you think it is, or the degree of ick you got from the headline.
Engagement!
What about the average man, with average income, average looks, average physique, average height… who can’t get dates, and almost certainly can’t find a suitable partner for marriage?
Most women’s self esteem is in the gutter and their standards are abysmally low. They’re only saying that stuff online. Go find a fatty and take her in gym dates/healthy restaurants and you’ll be fine.
Their standards are insanely low? Have you seen the marriage and divorce rates and compared them to the past? How do you reconcile these changes? Economic deprivation won’t explain it, as time has tested that theory already.
Well firstly, no fault divorce.
But also those women are only getting divorced because most women don’t have a sense of self and need constant validation, and men needing things to solve to validate them, and not endless words just disconnect.
Women aren’t getting divorced because they just up and leave, they’re getting divorced because they are incentivised by the state and others to find what will make them happy, if not their husbands.
They also aren’t reliant on a sole income anymore so there isn’t any imperative to talk things out, take the hard path out to reconciliation.
That’s not high standards. That’s emotionality and impulsive behaviour being rewarded because society generally has become hyper-independent.
Effectively, the same reason women leave marriages is the same reason children cut their parents off and leave them in age care centres, the same reason why people consume more substances.
But leaving has nothing to do with standards. That’s their cope.
What in gods name women don’t get divorces because they are impulsive. Most women get divorces because they have communicated 1000000 times what they need, bent over backwards to need it less, negotiate, adapt, compromise and give back and they have yet to be heard. 1000 papercuts is what I see in my work. The opposite of impulsivity.
I understand that too, but I don’t feel compelled to be sympathetic because of it. Neither am I sympathetic to men who complain about divorce rates, or women not marrying. People do not think through, or vet their romantic partners adequately. Both men and women overlook behaviour that is indicative of long term issues in favour of the illusion of love. But love is an active choice, and if you love the wrong person, you should take responsibility if that.
When I call them impulsive, I am referring to a common neuroticism in women generally, not that every divorce is the result of just waking up and saying “ooo time to be single!”
My point is they wouldn’t have to do that if they picked a competent person. But since most people are too selfish to be good parents, they elect to settle and overlook things. You don’t date someone that refuses to participate in a meaningful way to the relationship, marry them, have children with the and then act shocked they are still not performing. I see this a lot with women who complain about boyfriends forgetting anniversaries then move on to marry these men just to complain they forgot about Mother’s Day. It’s not shocking and it’s tiresome because we, other women have to deal with the fallout.
So the majority of divorces (done by women) are because in all of these cases, the men are the primary problem, so much so that the women are doing gymnastics in trying to get basic things? Do you know how egregiously biased that sounds? Do you not understand how once you step back for a second, how absurd this theory of divorce sounds?
You’re quite literally making the problem worse and incentivising* it by running a coaching program that validates blanket ideas of man bad, woman good, divorce unless he changes. This is peak radical feminism 101, Women Are Wonderful effect on steroids.
Nope. They are generally impulsive
If women had higher standards we wouldn’t hear these sob stories about men forgetting Father’s Day while they stay with their husbands. In fact, other women are actually tired of hearing them complain about how supposedly bad men are when they could elect to choose someone stable.
All most women really care about in relationships is validation. They will go 50/50, they will clean your apartment before you even become offical, they will let you cheat in peace for validation.
If anything, the divorce stats are proof they married with low standards. Who leaves someone competent? They know they chose wrong, they’re angry that the man never changed. The divorce is to self-sooth with the harsh reality than in any other paradigm, they would be stuck with what they believe they deserve. Post hoc they “deserve more” but if they really believed that, they would have never married.
Don’t beat yourself up about it.
Hi! I’m a relationship coach, actually divorce rates are dropping at a crazy rate.
That's great to hear! Nature might be healing, at least a bit...
I’m telling you this, as a woman with high standards, I’ve managed to only have sex with 2 people in 21 years and one is my ex-fiancé, who had to relocate to help his family and the other is my current fiancé. You know why I don’t use dating apps? Because I have real standards.
Those women don’t have standards, they have check boxes for how they want to play men they aren’t attracted to. Let it be Michael B Jordan and forget 50/50, the woman would be the provider!
Oh I’m sorry, I wasn’t aware dating apps for degenerates was the entire dating pool.
If women’s standards are so high, why are there so many single mothers?
If women’s standards are so high, why are there so many prostitutes and OF workers?
If women’s standards are so high, why do they claim men are evil every-time they are ghosted by Chad?
Look at real life. These standards are not real. They say they have standards, but they don’t. The only thing they don’t tolerate is unattractive or short men. And honestly? If you’re tall, you could have the ugliest face and women would still drop their pants for you.
What part of that is high standards?
Women’s standards are low as hell and you can see it through their anger towards men that have wronged them.
I’m sorry but I don’t respect the victim narratives from men and women. Be the person you want to be picked by or shut the hell up.
That’s not a standard that’s a biological imperative. Taller + larger means offspring will survive longer.
Nigga no. You can’t be mad about biology. Stop being a sook and get your money up.
I’ve dated men that are 5’3. 5’8 and 6’0+ because I value investment more than just appearance but be honest with yourself.
You don’t want to date an obese woman with no hair. It’s useless to be angry at women for wanting tall men when every female mammal prefers for their breeding partner to be larger than themselves.
I’m not gonna sit here and tell a fat bitch she deserves Chris Hemsworth.
Most females will settle and already have. Given less than 10% of the male population is over 6’2, it’s obvious that women will still procreate with short men since they are still in the gene pool.
Only a few select people from our species will choose their partner first round.
The rest have to settle.
You do as much of it as you can.
You are replying to the wrong person
Ok thank you
Maybe prioritizing romantic relationships to be the only thing worthwhile in society is a problem
I thought your take on this was really interesting and potent. Definitely appreciate your approach to seeing the problem and finding an accessible path. Way to go, most don’t do their own research like this and then share it. I hope this will help many.
I appreciate that. Thx for reading in good faith.
Full disclosure: I've been married for 33 years and out of the dating scene for 35, but I see things from the female side by having three grown daughters.
Your advice seems solid to me. That said, more should be done. The single guys I know--from work or friends who have single sons are often making some big mistakes: They don't bother to dress in a presentable fashion. They often have weird and excessive hair/beard combinations. They don't work out, at all. I think taking care of these three issues, plus your advice, would be pretty unstoppable--unless a guy is truly hideous looking or has actual diagnosable mental health issues.
Additionally: Getting fit, dressing well and grooming all provide opportunities to strike up conversations with women--like at the gym, the hair salon and the clothing store.
Could I ask you a few question... purely out of an autodidacts educational interest?
I'm European... And it seems to me that the concept of "Incel" is an American cultural invention... I might be wrong about that too. Because it's simply based on the fact I heard the word uttered for the first time over there.
But there's something about the whole term itself that has always completely blocked any interest that I might have had to even understand how it's possible for someone to use a description like that to himself. It's true right... that it's a "male" thing that call themselves Incel's? Or or are there women in that concept too? I mean... being celibate is something a woman can be too right?
And the whole reason for me, to never really try and understand any of it, is because the entire naming of it makes no logical sense to me whatsoever..; So I'm hoping you might be willing to try and explain a few of my questions to me. Pick any of all these question you feel free to try and give me some insight about. This topic is really like a leaf on a trea in a different solar system hearing about Schrodingers cat for the first time sort of thing.. It's that alien to me , and there was this random relfex of me to check wether or not your article could provide me insights about the concept... But I've only gotten more confused about it now, since I'm not quite grasping something underneath it all obviously.
So it's called... "Involuntary Celibate".. correct? As in... I want to be in a physical relationship with a person , but I currently am not. In the world that I understand , we call that "being single" ... and it's a thing women can be too. Homosexual people can be it too on both sides , and as for non-binary interests... They can be single too. It's the first thing I don't understand about this whole thing. What was wrong with the nomenclature of being ... "Not in a physical relationship at the moment" ?
Summarising that concept into "Involuntary celibate" ... sort of means that it starts out of the already grounded perception that it's an absolute right to be "given" another human being that "has" to want this ... and that this right is granted based on the action of being born? Is "being in a physical relationship with a human being" added to the human rights charter without me realizing it or something? Is the first though that always comes up when I hear that term. And this feels like the first time I get a chance to ask some questions about the whole thing from someone who identifies as such.. And is apparently capable of complex narrative... Which is a rare thing from anyone using that term as i've seen it so far.
I truly don't understand why it's considered a "problem" , that a suitable mate has not been found... yet.
I also consider the start of any mutually consensual physical relationship to be human understanding and respect , with a very strong interest to learn and understand more about the other person out of an emotional desire called.. "attraction" ... Is that not perceived as such by "Incel's" ?
Because I simply cannot grasp why the renaming of "I'm currently single" into "incel" even happened? What is gained by reframing a simple reality into this ... somewhat... self-diminuitively named concept?
It feels to me like I would suddenly start refferring to myself as ... "Involuntarily not the master of the entire universe and space and time" ... But I don't do that, since I never expected that to happen unless I make it so... I don't consider myself to be born with the absolute and un-alienable right to be the master of the entire universe and space and time.
And I'm really sorry.. but if someone I meet or know.. suddenly would start referring to itself as "Involuntarily not being bowed down to by each and every human in existence" ...
I would have only one reaction to that... walk away and never think about that person ever again .. since.. That's an unrealistic , untrustworthy, dangerous and unpredictable way of thinking for a human being...
I can only imagine myself being overcome with a sudden desire to completely remove myself from the presence or perceptions of a person who thinks like that?
How is this dynamic perceived in "Incel" culture? How is it possible that a human mind gets to the point that using that name somehow.. "Improves" the state or awareness of "being single at this time" ?
I just do not understand any of that.
The whole article also seems to revolve solely around the sex part...
A mutually consenting loving relationship between 2 human beings entails much more than just the act of sex together... Sure... the sex is an important part... but not more important then for instance cognitive understanding, support and intimacy ... there is also the emotional and ittelecutal freedom , space and synchronisation that is required... and endless freedom in other things that could become important in that loving relationship.
Is all of that ... non existant in "Incel" thinking ? Or just considered not important? Or not perceived?
And my final question... Do you know people who started feeling better about anything once they started calling themselves "Incel" ? Instead of just... "being single at the moment" ?
Did it ever help anyone that they start calling themselves that? And if so? How?
Tell me what you think of migrants in Europe and I'll see what I can do for you.
What I think of migrants? What does that have to do with it?
And I personally believe that any rethoric that starts with a division of humanity is completely flawed... I'm a migrant myself for instance... There's nothing think about "migrants" ... What do you think about the kind of pebble that's more round than the one next to it but less round than the other one lying on the beach?
What a ridiculous answer... And turning it into a transaction... A trade as an answer to a question.
Ok.. I already learned a bit about what sort of thing is driving the "thinking" process of an incel... Tha is for that atleast I guess.
So... Anything actually consistent to say?
Yes, I do have something to say of consistency. You are a worthless faggot who has no business packing my lunch, let alone critiquing my article. I'm glad you're a European, because you have no business being in my time zone either. Kindly vacate your thin-lipped slobber from my dick.
It's true... It is consistent. So "Incel" is about being proud you've managed to regress into the emotional and cognitive state of the ebola virus while still being able to form a sentence somehow?
It's quite a feat of engineering honestly.
And then thinking that restacking it would somehow... what... make me feel worse about it?
I was wondering how it's possible that a human being would consider a label that only makes them sound less competent in anything , as a statement of rebellion about the fact they're incompetent...
But we're getting there.
Please show me more... It's quite fascinating to see this ebola virus squirm in this perty dish of absolute nothingness. It's better then watching the news atleast.
You're like a UFC cage match where both opponents are you , the fence and the floor is electrified... And you're own movements are being used to power the electricty... And the rest of us sit here wondering... Why does it keep doing that to itself while the door is open and it can stop whenever it would want?
But it chooses to keep doing that , in an attempt to create as much pain for itself as possible... ok... You're succesfully removed yourself from society , since you're obviously a danger to any other human out there... So... all good. :)
This experiment is proving very valuable for educational purposes. Sorry you're the lab rat... but please remember... The door is open and you're here voluntarily doing this to yourself. So I'm ok with the moral paradigm of this experiment.
You write like a gay retard
I Bet He's Jewish.
The term incel was originally a fringe term anyway, but has become so widely adopted here in America because the country has a deeply entrenched rape culture. The rights and privileges afforded to women are apparently incredibly expensive and come at cost to American men. A lot of people here, both men and women, especially men, lack the emotional experience and maturity to not view sex as something owed to men.
The term incel is a subsequent reversal of this logic. Being sexually dominant is supposedly the most important thing a man, or even a child (as this training starts for most in adolescence) can be.
That it's all about sexually repressed disfunctionality... That's sort of the obvious part.
But that would probably mean there's a high precentage of sexual abuse victims in that group I guess...
I didn't know it's considered widely adopted though , and that its considered there's a deeply entrenched rape culture even ...
That would sort of explain many of them obviously ... if they only grow up with men around them that find this all normal...
But then again.. so many deep societal problems there are still debated as if it's normal to even debate them like racism and child labour and so many obvious things. The cultural norms of which sort of things are even still open for debate are so different over here in Europe...
There's no way anyone here in europe would even consider giving someone calling themseves an "Incel" a second of their attention really.. And for instance , knowing what we know about the movement there... Simply wearing a T-shirt with that name on it, is easily grounds to be kicked out of any respectable establishment on the spot. There would be no debate about that at all... but over there... So it's all really complicated to latch on too in any kind of meaningfull understanding for me.
If this weird "incel" thing is worn as a badge... it must be something bigger then I could have imagined indeed...
And what I still don't get is why these Macho men would then choose the most derogatory and demasculating name for themselves to point that out...
That I really don't get. Calling yourself an involuntary celibate is basically declaring yourself a woman in a derogatory term in their vocabulary and perceptions right?
Is it just latent homosexuality perhaps , but they're all too scared to say it too eachother? Like the mirror palace of perpetually closeted gays gathering perhaps...
I just don't get that. If felt myself motivated to rename "Being single" into something... revolutionary to try and form a movement about it as a man... I would imagine coming up with something like.. "Disenfranchised Adonis" or "The inquisition against blasphemers against Gods gift to women " or something delusional like that.
But atleast it would make my faltered ego bigger in my eyes then right? Why do they go for this naming convention that makes them seem even less worthy of the thing they complain about not deserving in the first place. That sort of keeps screwing up my understanding of this.
That i found this article was sort of a way to try and figure that out. My first reaction to it was... whut! I thought this was just a thing that creeps use as a word when noone's around... A word they use to a word to when they cry in the dark alone...
but here there's a substack post about it, with someone saying they sort of are one... was such a strange experience to me...
It was like reading a post from someone titled "I need to inject random people on the street with deadly poisons, and here is how society should make that possible for me! " sort of thing... So I am obviously missing something here... So I ask questions...
I've never had a chance to hear it from the horses mouth ... So I'm just intruiged to hear it from one of them ... Is this some sort of rape club using this name to try and hide their crimes in humbleness or something? Or trying to invoke the fact that they're involuntary priests and monks or something? Are they rebelling against their religion this way?
I'm interested in their rationale here... I understand it exists , I can imagine many ways how someone goes wrong with these things... But I just cannot understand what they are even trying to say this way?
I have no clue how and where and how much it actually "exists" ... or "what" it is even. Is it a club? An ideology? are there membership cards..; is there merch or something?
They seem.. "proud" of the name too? Do they have gatherings where they have chanting sessions with pumping fists in the air and all of them going "In-cell ! " "In - cell !" ?
And what does it mean to be "cured" of it... because this person seems to suggest he'll always be an incel untill death... there's nothing he can do about it... except for some potential few minutes of his life where his penis could be inside a woman .. perhaps... if he's lucky or a deranged criminal or pays for it? do they consider it a genetic disorder or something? Is it their duty to suffer this for the good of something else or something?
The whole thing is just... completely incomprehensible to me for the reason that they choose THAT name for this "gathering" of sorts.
I'm really hoping the author responds to my questions here.
Ignoring most of your verbal diarrhea, the reason incels use the term to describe themselves is the same reason people use the terms “unemployed” or “homeless”; partially because it’s an accurate description and partially because it’s an attempt to elicit sympathy and gain traction for a societal fix for their problems. As a general rule, most of them consider themselves too ugly/poor/weird to find a sexual partner, in the same way that the homeless are too poor/weird to find housing.
I agree it’s weird and counterproductive and entitled. As a general rule, I personally think we shouldn’t cater policy to poorly socialized weirdos. Then again, I’m also much further to the right of most Euros, so I’m genuinely baffled as to why so many people are cool with legislation benefiting the homeless or trans people but then sperg out about incels. They’re all the same type of person, and as a general rule, I think we shouldn’t have to cater to any of them.
Everyone who is in "incel" would like to delude themselves that they're a.) beyond hope and b.) it's womens' fault.
There are truly hopeless cases, in terms of physical attractiveness or disposition/disorder, and that really does suck and my heart goes out to them. But those hopeless cases (or, again, those who would like to think themselves hopeless cases) will often then hop on some sort of RETVRN train, as though their neurotic-disagreeable-barely-high-functioning autism would have been better tolerated in 1950, or 950?
You'd have probably been dead or even less likely to reproduce back then. Your chances are better now than ever, but it's easier to just throw your hands, give up and play vidya, boohooie. Fucking femoids.
If that's your response then I'm glad you're not fucking, you dysgenic pussy.
This strikes me as being like recommending an alcoholic to go to a bar because they might make friends there.
Ignore the inevitable kvetching and pearl-clutching over your strip club idea, I think it's a great bit of outside-the-box thinking to help give lonely men a bit of socialization training with women. Very creative approach.
My own recommendations would probably run along different lines, but I'm long-since married and my wild frat-boy jock days going out clubbing/partying with chicks are almost 20 years behind me, so I know any counsel I can provide would be long outdated/impractical to the average modern incel lad.
Dam why am I only finding this now. I need to find a strip club near me
Very good advice.
I think the real authority on this matter, while he can be a bit corrosive, is Roissy, alias Heartiste. Zoomers might not know him: he was the author of the very popular blog "Chateau Heartiste" back in the 2010s. He coined or popularized a lot of important phrases of the manosphere milieu: "cock carousel", "thousand cock stare", "agree and amplify", etc. He's got some brilliantly written and succinct bits on the matter.
In the piece "The Shortest Definition of Game," he sums up seducing women as "the practice of challenging women". "Amused mastery" is the phrase he coined defining the attitude one must possess with women: not envy, not contempt, not submission, but a willing spirit of engaging with the world in a playful and light, yet confident way. "Thinking like a Woman" is another nice article.
Elisha Longsword has some good, simple stuff too.
Deplorable.
Sounds like Bullshittey and Hopium Delusion.
You Cannot Become Anyting Other Than What You Already Are. If you're not an 11/10 Genetically Ordaind Super-Chad, you'll never get anything. Stop Lying to the people just because you're squeamish about feeling bad.
Will, on a particularly inspired and drunken night, I put a lot of my experience and reason into this article. I genuinely believe that there is hope because I was once hopeless. I think there's some good points in here, but you are Will Martin. Simply say the word and I will unpublish this article.
No. The Article Stays Up. Let no man, yea; not even me, the Herald of Eternal Misery cause you to Punk Out and take your words back. Never Back Down.
You are a real one 🫡
The vast majority of so called incels were once boyfriends, husbands, devoted, in love in a way that women cannot replicate nor understand. Female nature in the real world changed them. Some, many, like me have it all, money, peace, land, animals and don’t plan to lose it, or our mental health anytime soon. PS Your picture is horribly mislabeled, it depicts Samantabhadra, the Buddha with his consort, a common symbol that symbolizes the union of male and female principles.
Why is the correct labeling of the statue so important to you? Didn't you agree with the guy who was saying it's creepy? I'd think that the guy saying it was creepy would be more offensive to you than the guy who gave it a joke description (that I never told you to take seriously).
It’s wrong. I don’t take offense as I believe in free speech. But it’s sloppy and incorrect and I can’t abide that shit.
The other guy is obviously under educated or not very bright, it certainly isn’t “creepy”. Indeed, the idea of incubus and succubus is genuinely creepy in a gothic horror context, but that European tradition has nothing to with this, unless you look into the sometimes very mischievous behavior of Dakinis, but that’s out of my wheelhouse.
It was an intentionally sloppy description, it's a fucking joke you boomer. The dude wasn't referencing the gothic style as creepy, he was agreeing with another commenters sentiment of that symbol being pedophilic due to the size difference. And you said they were sound comments. Drop your reverence for the image I used because it looks stupid in the face of that.
Has anyone wondered if that statue is an adult and a child? It really looks inappropriate. Very uncomfortable.
Thanks for the parley and going easy on me. Conflict has never been my thing, through wiring and experience. These issues do matter to me though, and I don’t really know how to engage in ways that lean towards dialogue with issues about men. Lot of wounds there, and I don’t like where my anger or fear take me when I try to respond. Hard to hold a middle ground when you start with your hackles up. I appreciate your response, and I’ll keep working on how I engage. Thanks.
I don't think so, I know chicks older than me who have a similar size difference to me. It might be the fact that they gave the Buddha a disproportionately large head. I thought the cultural meaning that the Tibetan Buddhists gave the statue fit well with the article, but if enough people think it's inappropriate I can just change it.
Actually... that was the whole reason I thought to read that thing too... because I wanted to make sure to report exactly that, if this would have been an advocation of why children need to go cure incel's or something... I simply do not understand from any direction, or from any direction what this whole "incel" thing even means... Or how it's possible that a human being starts calling "being single" with a term that's obviously just self-insulting to the people calling themselves that. I do not understand why using the saddest name possible for something someone refuses to learn about or do anything about...
It's like we're all "Involuntarily not as smart as einstein , involuntarily not capable of wiping my ass, involuntarily not the richest person on the planet and involuntarily not capable of deciding anything for myself or doing anything really" And we urgently need to complain to the world about all those involuntarily things immediately.
I just... totally... don't... understand how that name even exists..; and why a human would choose to use it describe itself. Why are they doing this to themselves? What's the thought process here? How does one of them, convince another one to start calling himself that way? Not in my entire life have I ever heard a 5 letter word that is so completely incomprehensible to me. Why does it exist? How is it possible a human being comes up with this name and actually sounds sort of "proud" to start calling themselves that way , and use it as if it's a normal word to use.
Totally beyond me... like totally... I think it's the one word i am simply incapable of grasping any meaning or origin of whatsoever.
What a strange thing... and this article definitely didn't help... and yes... that's a super creepy foto to use for that article.
Sound comments. BS article. Disgustingly incorrect labeling of the Buddhist statue
First off, re-claiming a word that originally had negative or neutral/negative (see article below) implications is a common tactic of marginalized groups (i.e. "n-word", "pussy hats", etc). It's an effective, largely unconscious strategy to invert a societal power dynamic by claiming it for oneself. This is a common tactic for neurotypical people and therefore can be a source of confusion for neurodivergent people, which I'm guessing may be part of why you are struggling with it so much.
Secondly, for the record, the term "incel" was coined by a woman and was originally gender neutral. It speaks to the dominance of patriarchal culture and thought and the utter cluelessness of many sad, lonely, angry men that they "took over" a term that was originally gender neutral. The woman who started it was trying to form a community for people who, for a variety of reasons, experience a lack of physical intimacy in their lives and who felt alone in their aloneness (which has never actually been the case, but most of us feel our suffering is unique in some way). Women (and plenty of men) have sought mutual support and understanding for this sad predicament, but a very vocal minority of male evoloutionary misfits (and a smaller cadre of women who encourage and support incel culture because it makes them feel like valuable objects) have leaned heavily in to gross distortions of gender, biology, and evolutionary psychology to justify what is fundamentally a narcissitic personality disorder. Namely, "I am miserable because other people don't see me the way I want to be seen and I deserve to be seen the way I want to be seen so every violent, misogynistic thought that comes into my feverish mind is justified - and necessary to keep my fragile ego from completely crumbling to dust." Here is an article about the origins: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45284455
Don't liken women to objects or link to BBC news articles in my comment section you hotdog-red faggot.
Fair point on objectifying. It was an incomplete thought. I try to respect that people make their own choices, as you sort of seem to, and I recognize that both women and men can choose to see themselves as objects. If consent matters at all, I have to accept people consenting to being objectified.
I assume you’ve saved my comment in a separate post for future roasting or something. I’d protest, but I lit the torch with my roasty comment, so light me up if you must.
I don’t understand the whole incel thing, though I’ve experienced male unhappiness and anger my whole life - my own and others. I try to consider multiple perspectives to make sense of it, but I admit I’ve got plenty of anger built up about men believing and acting like women (or anyone else) owe them something simply because they’re men. I expressed that anger in my comment, indirectly, which is to say, unskillfully. I own it.
Your perspective in this post is, I guess, somewhat unique in encouraging unhappy, lonely dudes lacking in social experience to see women as humans they need to practice relating to. Maybe they’ll feel better and possibly get laid? Seems a better plan than most of what I’ve seen over the years.
Seeing women as people is the only thing that ever made sense to me when I was younger and now that I’m old and in shit shape, it’s mostly what I have left. Being in a loving, respectful, and pretty awesome relationship with my wife is all that really matters to me. Not everybody gets that in their lives, and I try not to take it for granted.
I honestly thought that you'd be more adversarial, which is why opened with the roast. That is how it tends to go, but I can respect that you aren't actually going that way. For what it's worth, roasting the slightly red hue of your pfp is not a very strong roast anyways.
Love ain't the answer. Escorts is.
That's retarded. No, the answer is to Ban Sex. Titanium Burkhas. Inshallah, Death To The Eex Havers.