Apparently incel played a role in Chris Harper-Mercer’s rampage killing last week. And he reportedly derived inspiration from Elliot Rodger’s example last year. I suspect we’ll see more of these guys because of all the media attention the previous ones receive, and the next incel mass murderer will probably leave documentation behind about his admiration for Mercer.
Mixed-race parenting and absent or disengaged fathers seem to act as secondary causes in both Rodger’s and Mercer’s alienation and generally screwed up lives, but no one wants to talk about those factors for some reason. Setting aside the miscegenation and the disrupted family relationships, that leaves the growing incel phenomenon, the sexual eviction of more and more of the male population, as the elephant in the room that people really don’t want to talk about, because it raises inconvenient questions about feminism, women’s sexual freedom and hypergamy.
No, point to shiny distractions like guns, “mental illness,” “misogyny,” etc., instead of naming the main issue here.
I saw a blogger who linked to discussions on reddit and dailykos where apparently women demand that the state round up incels and put them in “camps” or otherwise do away with them. I found that striking, because I’ve noticed that women freak out when I say that we need to restore a healthy patriarchy where women can’t get sexual experience until marriage.
Now, at first blush the usual Manospherean reason suggests itself: This proposal unsettles women because they find most men sexually repulsive, even though in monogamous societies where most women have to marry ordinary men and have sexual relationships with their allegedly yucky husbands, they find the experience tolerable and they make a go of it. Some of these women might even wind up respecting their husbands after seeming these men’s character in action.
But another reason for this reaction suggests itself to me: Guilt. Women know on some level that they have done wrong by embracing feminism, sexual freedom and hypergamy, and they don’t want to face accountability for their transgressions. The ones who advocate online the murder of incels apparently do so for the same reason criminals try to murder their victims and the witnesses to their crimes: They don’t want these men around to testify against them.
My understanding is that in the patriarchies of the past there were a small number of prostitutes and bad girls which young men could use to gain some experience and confidence before settling down and marrying nice, virgin girls.
Um. I upvoted CellBioGuy because I assumed ‘Not just women’ meant ‘Not just women freak out when advancedatheist says stuff like that’. Was my interpretation wrong?
Huh. I interpreted it as “not just women can’t get sexual experience until marriage in a healthy patriarchy,” but now that you mention it, your interpretation seems correct.
You need to get off the internet and start interacting with normal people who don’t advocate state-sanctioned massacres of any kind. You can find extreme enough opinions of any colour on the internet if you try hard enough. That doesn’t mean any significant number of people hold them, it means there are billions of people online and someone went out of their way to find the most rhetorically useful targets.
Do you feel motivated to channel your frustrations through a gun? If your answer is yes, you need to deal with bigger problems than your celibacy. If your answer is no, you are actually in the majority of the incel population, and you need to stop inventing causal connections where there are none.
I saw a blogger who linked to discussions on reddit and dailykos where apparently women demand that the state round up incels and put them in “camps” or otherwise do away with them.
The context matters here. Were they talking about rounding up any virgin male? Or was it virgin men who make threats of violence against women specifically?
In principle this could be a topic worth discussing, but we need way more cool-headed data analysis and way less political overtones, the way any good sex research is done. On some level, I sympathize with your need to vent. On another, you have to elevate your writing beyond relatively unfiltered venting.
Apparently incel played a role in Chris Harper-Mercer’s rampage killing last week. And he reportedly derived inspiration from Elliot Rodger’s example last year. I suspect we’ll see more of these guys because of all the media attention the previous ones receive, and the next incel mass murderer will probably leave documentation behind about his admiration for Mercer.
Mixed-race parenting and absent or disengaged fathers seem to act as secondary causes in both Rodger’s and Mercer’s alienation and generally screwed up lives, but no one wants to talk about those factors for some reason. Setting aside the miscegenation and the disrupted family relationships, that leaves the growing incel phenomenon, the sexual eviction of more and more of the male population, as the elephant in the room that people really don’t want to talk about, because it raises inconvenient questions about feminism, women’s sexual freedom and hypergamy.
No, point to shiny distractions like guns, “mental illness,” “misogyny,” etc., instead of naming the main issue here.
I saw a blogger who linked to discussions on reddit and dailykos where apparently women demand that the state round up incels and put them in “camps” or otherwise do away with them. I found that striking, because I’ve noticed that women freak out when I say that we need to restore a healthy patriarchy where women can’t get sexual experience until marriage.
Now, at first blush the usual Manospherean reason suggests itself: This proposal unsettles women because they find most men sexually repulsive, even though in monogamous societies where most women have to marry ordinary men and have sexual relationships with their allegedly yucky husbands, they find the experience tolerable and they make a go of it. Some of these women might even wind up respecting their husbands after seeming these men’s character in action.
But another reason for this reaction suggests itself to me: Guilt. Women know on some level that they have done wrong by embracing feminism, sexual freedom and hypergamy, and they don’t want to face accountability for their transgressions. The ones who advocate online the murder of incels apparently do so for the same reason criminals try to murder their victims and the witnesses to their crimes: They don’t want these men around to testify against them.
Not just women.
My understanding is that in the patriarchies of the past there were a small number of prostitutes and bad girls which young men could use to gain some experience and confidence before settling down and marrying nice, virgin girls.
Um. I upvoted CellBioGuy because I assumed ‘Not just women’ meant ‘Not just women freak out when advancedatheist says stuff like that’. Was my interpretation wrong?
Huh. I interpreted it as “not just women can’t get sexual experience until marriage in a healthy patriarchy,” but now that you mention it, your interpretation seems correct.
Your interpretation is possible too. It’s just that I saw the other one first, and I didn’t even think of yours till I saw your post.
For the record, your interpretation was correct.
There’s nothing nice about virgin girls ;)
You need to get off the internet and start interacting with normal people who don’t advocate state-sanctioned massacres of any kind. You can find extreme enough opinions of any colour on the internet if you try hard enough. That doesn’t mean any significant number of people hold them, it means there are billions of people online and someone went out of their way to find the most rhetorically useful targets.
Do you feel motivated to channel your frustrations through a gun? If your answer is yes, you need to deal with bigger problems than your celibacy. If your answer is no, you are actually in the majority of the incel population, and you need to stop inventing causal connections where there are none.
And you have evidence of this because...?
This post just went from −10 to 0 in about 3 minutes. I’m calling bullshit (again) on your trolling and vote-gaming.
EDIT: A further 7 upwards to +7 in another 5 minutes after I originally posted that. Seriously?
EDIT 2: A downvote? Really?
The context matters here. Were they talking about rounding up any virgin male? Or was it virgin men who make threats of violence against women specifically?
In principle this could be a topic worth discussing, but we need way more cool-headed data analysis and way less political overtones, the way any good sex research is done. On some level, I sympathize with your need to vent. On another, you have to elevate your writing beyond relatively unfiltered venting.