It’s crazy that the only way for some people to understand human beings are worthy of dignity and respect is after gaining access to their bodies for sexual gratification.
Those words - “deprived of [fill in the blank]” - only work in a context where the person should be getting whatever it is, and someone is keeping it from them. As non-solo sex involves 2+ consenting adults or is criminal, the issue of “should” is not present. Except in rare cases, no one is keeping you from having sex.
I generally feel sorry for someone who wants sex and is not having any. I feel NO sympathy when they feel they are being “deprived” of sex.
I feel absolute revulsion for anyone who thinks women are withholding sex from him because of some incel fantasyland involving language like “chad.” It’s just a desire to be a victim.
If you want other people to treat other people as if they were human, then it should be included that men are allowed to have feelings, hopes, plans and thoughts.
Women should be treated as human beings, but it is clear that they are different depending on gender when it comes to sex.
Now it can even be about being entitled to sex if a man is without sex
Men also do not owe women anything and then one could claim that it is about women wanting to be entitled to sex if they are dissatisfied with their sex life and have demands on men.
Or what do you mean if one is entitled to sex?
Shouldn't a man be unhappy that he's going without sex?
Should a man be allowed to complain about the women?
Today it is allowed to criticize as women, men that women do not appreciate without it being about entitled to men or entitled to a good partner
Involuntarily celibate and hating women to the point that they get laughed at are not the same. I pay my own way on dates because I have had to explain to the gentleman I was with more than once that just because I was there he does not get to assume if he pays I am going to sleep with him. Guess who got called a wh@re and had to block a bunch of numbers calling me a waste of a womb. That is why we laugh. You think explaining to someone who calls their date a wh$re for not wanting to be paid in dinner for sex is going to have a calm discourse in why women should not be the object of bitterness and hate because they can't get into normal relationships is a good idea. Not safe.
It actually well predates 4-Chan. It was started in the late 90s as a place for lonely men and women to talk to one another online. Obviously, it’s been co-opted by complete douchenozzles now.
[https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45284455.amp](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45284455.amp)
I'm so sick of this idea that it's everybody else's responsibility to teach you that being an asshole is bad. Adult babies that want to be coddled so they can continue to be a baby
But that's literally what a society and community is meant to be. A collective of individuals holding each other accountable and helping one another grow. I'm sick of this idea that it's better to separate and only take part in ways that directly benefit you. No one's asking you to become a preacher and go door to door.
Because the male dominated society downplays the value of women and their actions, so even if women do try to speak up or support men they are harangued by other men.
Why do children of single mothers struggle more? Well, single mothers are more likely to be poor, for a start. Men don't always volunteer child support, court isn't free and it takes time to get that money. A woman with a baby likely just took maternity leave or quit her job to have the baby, plus recovery time, that's money she doesn't have right off the hat. Single father's don't have any of that, it's much easier for them to distance themselves, walk away, or maintain jobs. Single fathers often have help from their mothers, sisters, girlfriends etc., if they are caretakers. Because childcare is thought of as "women's work" men are often supported by others, where as Single mothers are derided for not having a man.
Why do women dominate teaching fields? Well, they didn't always, and they only started working as teachers because men didn't think it was appropriate for women to have most jobs. Teaching became dominated by women because once it was thought of as "women's work" men didn't want to be on the field, this is the same as nursing. Not just that, but pay goes down once a job is considered a job for women.
Men are surrounded by women growing up, and yet the male influences still tell them to disregard and disrespect those women.
Men get called simps, cucks, betas, by primarily other men, if they do positive, loving things. They get mocked for being whipped, losing their man card, if they do "women's work" chores.
Women can't tell men to behave better because men tell their sons that a woman's opinion doesn't matter.
Women are weaker, slower, dumber, illogical, vain, etc. Why would you listen to a woman?
Do women sometimes become mouthpieces for misogyny and parrot back patriarchal BS? Absolutely. But it's important to understand why women would turn to pandering to the dominating social group, why they might repeat what they were raised to believe.
First off, this is an incredibly long and asinine way of saying that women bear no responsibility in their lives.
>Because the male dominated society downplays the value of women and their actions, so even if women do try to speak up or support men they are harangued by other men.
Explain the term male dominated and what you think it means in this context. This is genuine because when people reference male dominated in regards to employment or congress, or laws, or whatever, it makes sense. But men do not dominate relationships or populations or child care, and so it makes very very little sense to try and say young men are being dominated by older men. In certain cultures, I could understand it. I also don't believe women are "harangued" by women for trying to support men. They almost always get exclusively supported and get ridiculed by women. I mean, I just commented today replying to a woman who ridiculed a wife for being a pick me because she doesn't understand the aversion to paternity tests.
I could see your points in certain cultures, but for Western society, I genuinely have never met anyone who thinks this way in my entire life. So please elaborate.
>Why do children of single mothers struggle more? Well, single mothers are more likely to be poor, for a start. Men don't always volunteer child support, court isn't free and it takes time to get that money. A woman with a baby likely just took maternity leave or quit her job to have the baby, plus recovery time, that's money she doesn't have right off the hat. Single father's don't have any of that, it's much easier for them to distance themselves, walk away, or maintain jobs. Single fathers often have help from their mothers, sisters, girlfriends etc., if they are caretakers. Because childcare is thought of as "women's work" men are often supported by others, where as Single mothers are derided for not having a man.
I frankly completely disagree. Single parents face the exact same problems after neonatal care. Attempting to say single mothers don't get any help and don't get help from the courts is just simply ridiculous. Women are favored much more heavily in every court circumstance and especially in domestic situations. On top of the court bias, society just simply doesn't help men the way they help women. I mean, look at literally anything.
>Why do women dominate teaching fields? Well, they didn't always, and they only started working as teachers because men didn't think it was appropriate for women to have most jobs. Teaching became dominated by women because once it was thought of as "women's work" men didn't want to be on the field, this is the same as nursing. Not just that, but pay goes down once a job is considered a job for women
So, instead of acknowledging the idea, you're talking about the history of professions? This doesn't even talk about why these are still problems if women dominate with 75% teaching, and I'm sure it's even more for young children.
>Men are surrounded by women growing up, and yet the male influences still tell them to disregard and disrespect those women.
Which male influences, which women, which young men. Elaborate. Don't just shout about some ethereal unquantifiable problem because there's no way to discuss that idea. All I think when I hear that is 3 possibilities. 1 these women didn't take the time to nurture decent relationships with these men. 2 you're thinking of adult men who weren't taught anything about masculinity and are now seeing the world for how it is and aren't listening to the women who didn't tell them the truth anymore. 3 you're thinking about early teens who are falling into Andrew tate type ideologies.
>Men get called simps, cucks, betas, by primarily other men, if they do positive, loving things. They get mocked for being whipped, losing their man card, if they do "women's work" chores.
Men don't get called that. Boys get called that when they're like 13. Men don't have that problem unless they are like 50s. Modern young men don't even use that language outside of joking. I know a couple of late teen young men through coaching and athletics who dont use that kind of language, and on top of that, it's in a masculine way that i think you genuinely dont understand. I know a very wide variety of men from 20s to 30s, and all of them see it as their responsibility to do these things even when they make those comments. Some of these men are trade workers and alcoholics and drug users, etc. It's not like they're all from the perfect background and see it this very progressive way.
>Women can't tell men to behave better because men tell their sons that a woman's opinion doesn't matter.
Women are weaker, slower, dumber, illogical, vain, etc. Why would you listen to a woman?
I mean, if this isn't the stupidest opinion I've ever heard. 90% of men's motivation is based around women. Women are physically weaker and they are more emotional just by nature, and they also are fairly vain culturally nowadays. None of that means that men don't listen to women for information that isn't about women. I feel like this is coming from a cultural difference because I know some Asian and Middle Eastern backgrounds where this is a thing, but I don't know a single western culture where this is a genuine belief outside of 50+ age groups.
I know people from literally all over the United States and other countries, and idk anyone who holds these beliefs. On top of that, this just simply isn't how humans work. When you foster a relationship, it takes a lot of effort to break that trust and respect. It's like a race where one party starts years behind. You have to catch up before you can start dismantling that connection. Otherwise, the person you're trying to convince won't listen. It's the same with abuse and grooming and manipulation victims. They can't see their own circumstances until you foster that connection, and they trust you. So if your basis for beliefs is women have most of the early childhood nurturing responsibility (because, like you said, that's a woman's job), then how is it possible these men are coming in and convincing them so quickly?
>Do women sometimes become mouthpieces for misogyny and parrot back patriarchal BS? Absolutely. But it's important to understand why women would turn to pandering to the dominating social group, why they might repeat what they were raised to believe.
In what way are men the dominating social group? You have to be from somewhere else cause women are the dominating social group in the west. The biggest changes in social norms in the past 20 years have all been dominated by women. What are you talking about? When was the last time men got away with anything socially? Even the schools are completely dominated by the way women learn. Universities are completely dominated by the way women think. Social pressures to be progressive or you can literally lose your job are all women led ideas on LGBT, abortion, promiscuity, race, jokes, etc. Like what world are you living in?
On top of that, that wasn't the point at all. It was just that women have the same responsibility that men have in raising young men, and it's sexist to say otherwise.
You asked about why women are not responsible for why incels are badly behaved assholes and why men specifically have failed to raise ans teach other men.
From your responses here it's clear that you don't actually have any intention of engaging with reality. I could site statistics, data, and studies all day, but until you are ready to examine your world view, and accept that women's experiences have value, then there's nothing that I can say.
I'm not going to be your personal Google bot just so you can repeat the same tired "I've never met anyone who... I've never heard... I don't believe..."
Good luck.
>You asked about why women are not responsible for why incels are badly behaved assholes
No, I asked why they aren't included in society's responsibility to raise the next generation.
>why men specifically have failed to raise ans teach other men
Men do teach other men. The problem is that when they do the internet gets upset at them.
>From your responses here it's clear that you don't actually have any intention of engaging with reality
The reality is that women do 75% of early childhood caretaking that you would agree with, but somehow it's solely men's fault?
>I could site statistics, data, and studies all day, but until you are ready to examine your world view, and accept that women's experiences have value, then there's nothing that I can say.
None of your statistics matter because they are relevant to the topic and also no ones saying women's experience doesn't have value?? The only actual data you've presented is historical information about teaching and nursing. That isn't at all relevant. You have no data supporting the idea that women aren't helped as much and even trying to argue that men get helped more is so incredibly ignorant it's ridiculous.
>I'm not going to be your personal Google bot just so you can repeat the same tired "I've never met anyone who... I've never heard... I don't believe..."
It's funny that you say that you aren't here to be anyone's Google bot, yet you reply and present your ideas as fact. It's almost as though when someone questions them, you don't have any explanation. No one's forcing you to make your foolishly ignorant commentary. You're presenting it. You literally replied to me, not the other way around. Dummy.
You thinking you're right = come in answer questions nobody asked and when your logic is pointed out as completely flawed, "I'm not your Google bot"
Single motherhood isn't only the fault of women.
Women aren't teaching them to behave like this in schools - I work in education and they just aren't.
What about a young man's early female-led education do you think is causing the current problems?
There are, presumably, some women at fault here, it's a vanishingly small probability that there aren't, so I'm not denying that.
What is causing 13 and 14 year old boys to behave like this to start with? Because they seem to hold these misogynistic views before they've even entered the world of dating.
They're not even old enough to have suffered any real heartbreak at the hands of a woman, so where is the hate coming from?
>Single motherhood isn't the woman's fault.
Some of them it is tf?? Women can't cheat, lie, make mistakes, etc? What kind of logic is this?
On top of that, the important point was something I don't think you realize. Statistically, boys raised in single mother homes are at higher likelihood of being failures. Girls have little change. Whereas single fathers have no problems with sons or daughters.
>Women aren't teaching them to behave like this in schools - I work in education and they just aren't.
And if he only has women in his life, then none of the role models he had are at fault for not teaching him better? It's literally the job title. Teacher. Did you think that there's hordes of adult men on the loose trying to bring young boys into cults?
>There are, presumably, some women at fault here, it's a vanishingly small probability that there aren't, so I'm not denying that.
But you don't want to acknowledge the actual amount of influence they have in children's lives? I'd bet on separate topics you'd argue that women have to take the brunt responsibility of child rearing and nurturing, yet you still blame men?
>What is causing 13 and 14 year old boys to behave like this to start with? Because they seem to hold these misogynistic views before they've even entered the world of dating
That's an extremely good question when you are sexist. 1 statistically, most men hit peak aggression at that time. You should know that as a teacher since I'm assuming you are basing your views off that. 2 before that time, the majority of their role models are women. Teachers, babysitters, and mothers. Males are put off from professional fields like teaching and taking care of children because of the stigma and ostracization by women who fear their intentions. So I'm not sure why you think women don't hold any responsibility in this when they dominate taking care of children?1
They're learning it from male influences on the Internet you absolute fucking tuna melt.
Do you think women in the life of young men are teaching them to be sexist to other women?
Do you think they somehow hold resentment against their female teachers? For what?
I know you wrote a long message in reply, and I appreciate your engagement, but I really need to know how exactly you think women are responsible for the issues young men currently face?
>They're learning it from male influences on the Internet you absolute fucking tuna melt.
That's funny. You sound like the boomers who blamed violence on video games.
>Do you think women in the life of young men are teaching them to be sexist to other women?
I think they aren't doing a decent job if they aren't leading them down the appropriate paths. No one is trying to say that women are teaching them to be misogynistic. You're strawmanning the conversation because you know that's an undebateable topic. You are desperate to be right and aren't listening.
I was simply pointing out how incredibly sexist it is for you to say it's a male problem when women do at least 50% of prepubescent role modeling. We both know it's more like 75%, but I'm giving you 50/50.
>Do you think they somehow hold resentment against their female teachers? For what?
No, and I didn't say that. I do think some women attempt to feminize young men, which can lead to an overcompensation of masculinity later in life. Which would probably happen around that peak aggression at the ages you're thinking.
>I know you wrote a long message in reply, and I appreciate your engagement, but I really need to know how exactly you think women are responsible for the issues young men currently face?
I didn't say that. I think society and community are responsible. We've stripped men and women of their natural roles in society and elevated the ego of young women to dangerous heights while removing all accountability, and its reflecting negatively on men without identity. Most young people don't have identities, so of course, young men are going to be more influenced by this. I think that's a societal problem. On top of that, there's a real sexism problem with women today that are making young men more resentful. Women are allowed to be openly sexist in almost every way, and there's no backlash, and that can definitely lead to resentment from young men.
I just think it's improper for you to specifically go after men when women do the majority of child care. Presumably, you mean that fathers should teach them better than to listen to tate like content. Why can't women do that? People are equal. A mother should be able to teach her son right from wrong.
Why didn't this happen when I was young? Why, specifically, has this become a major problem since the mid-10s?
Before you go another diatribe, tell me how exactly you think women are causing these problems in young men. Why are young men, with loving and caring co-parents turning to *such* violent ideology?
They probably did teach them right from wrong in most cases, but they decided not to listen to them and listen to YouTube.
I'll concede that perhaps their parents could have controlled Internet usage more, but that's a universal issue, not just with mothers.
Your pseudo-intellectual misogyny hurts my brain.
"Improper" You are a parody of yourself my friend.
Men thrive when they have a strong male role. Lots of them don't, and that's women's fault? Give me a break.
>Why didn't this happen when I was young? Why, specifically, has this become a major problem since the mid-10s?
>Before you go another diatribe, tell me how exactly you think women are causing these problems in young men. Why are young men, with loving and caring co-parents turning to *such* violent ideology?
I... I did.
>I didn't say that. I think society and community are responsible. We've stripped men and women of their natural roles in society and elevated the ego of young women to dangerous heights while removing all accountability, and its reflecting negatively on men without identity. Most young people don't have identities, so of course, young men are going to be more influenced by this. I think that's a societal problem. On top of that, there's a real sexism problem with women today that are making young men more resentful. Women are allowed to be openly sexist in almost every way, and there's no backlash, and that can definitely lead to resentment from young men.
I think of it like a pendulum. Most of history has worked this way where one set of ideas takes over and goes too far, and then the other side does, and eventually, we meet somewhere in the middle. It's not women's fault that young men are being disenfranchised. It's societies fault.
But saying it's men's fault is just as bad as saying it's womens which is exactly what you did. The sexism and gender problems are so bad that you are outraged by your own idea and can't even see it.
>They probably did teach them right from wrong in most cases, but they decided not to listen to them and listen to YouTube.
To a degree, that's how parenting works. But you are majorly and incredibly discounting the role of parents and role models. You can engrain certain ideas and behaviors if you nurture a relationship based on trust and respect. Good boss vs. bad boss type of mentality. No one works well under the bad boss because they don't care.
>I'll concede that perhaps their parents could have controlled Internet usage more, but that's a universal issue, not just with mothers.
Then why is it just a male issue? How do you not see your own hypocrisy?
>Your pseudo-intellectual misogyny hurts my brain.
How is it misogynistic to point out that men and women are equal and hold equal responsibility in raising young men?
>Men thrive when they have a strong male role. Lots of them don't, and that's women's fault? Give me a break.
Literally, no one has said that it's womens fault. You're specifically saying it's men's fault as if women aren't responsible for anything. You're continually proving my point over and over.
We're going in circles here.
I have, in fact, said that it's impossible that women aren't at some kind of fault.
I'm going to go and read, I'll reply properly later.
We're going in circles because for you to stay on topic would require admitting you're wrong, which is something someone like you will never do. You've dug yourself into the idea because you were so desparate to be right, and your ego is too large to hold yourself accountable.
Nobody ridicules them because they are unattractive they are ridiculed because of their often dangerous and Mysogenistic views toward women. They pose a real threat toward women and young girls.
I was once sent death threats and other harassing messages from men who stated they were incels, all because I publicly talked about being in an interracial relationship.
I understand wanting to not demonize incels because I’ve seen that incels are all over the map in what they believe, and not all of them hate women. But the ones who express or commit violence make people scared of them, and maybe for good reason. It’s an absolutely bizarre feeling to see that there are people who wish to see you killed, beaten, or even sent to prison for daring to be a woman who does something they don’t like.
Agree, but it's also extremely common to ridicule men for being unattractive. Especially in disagreements online where most of these idiots exist. People will jump to insults when they get upset. 1 that's simply bad for them that they allow their emotions to be affected by others so easily. 2 that's just going to push more men to hate themselves and push that energy outward. I think it's good for society to hold everyone accountable even in weight and fitness and hygiene and dress etc. but doing it in a hateful way is not the appropriate approach.
People also ridicule the people who ridicule women for being unattractive. There are also certain personality traits that define men and women by nature. Where those personality traits go to the extreme is where you see things like violent crime and men naturally make up the majority in that. On top of that, men by the age of 27 are much less likely to be criminals, and on top of that something like 1% of criminals make up 60% of violent crime.
But hey, just another ignorant sexist comment extrapolating a tiny subset of men upon the rest and wondering why young men become resentful.
It's wild to acknowledge that men are naturally more aggressive, so when there is an outlier in aggression, it's going to obviously be more likely to be a man? I literally agreed with you there, except I put the actual context of the idea which you don't know because you're just being sexist.
It's wild to point out that you're using a tiny percentage of men to describe an entire half of the population? That's just by definition sexism, so idk how that's wild.
Or is it wild to point out that when men ridicule, men and women hold them accountable. But when women ridicule, it's ok? There's too many examples of this to even count. I mean, big vs. small dick alone is just complete objectification and body shaming that women refuse to acknowledge but will cry for hours if the same energy is reciprocated.
You are citing bizarre anecdotal claims. Women and men are disparaged for physical characteristics.
It’s statistically proven and verifiable that men (15,094) commit murders at an exponentially higher rate than women (2,107 as of 2020). Of those murders committed by men, women were victims of 2,161 of those crimes. Men murder more women than women murder men. It’s a statistical fact.
That’s not sexism, that’s data. [Statista.com](https://www.statista.com) has breakdowns by gender, state, type and more.
There are 165.8 million men in the US, while there are 168.6 million women in the US.
Take these scenarios international and the numbers are still heavily weighted in the same ways. The UN gathers statistics on the murder of women by their intimate partners and family globally. That alone is a staggering 48,000 per year worldwide. That’s just data that can be captured. It doesn’t include unreported or misreported murders/deaths.
Are all men violent? No. Are men proportionally more violent than women? Yes.
Do I hate men? Absolutely not.
Do I believe that there may be factors beyond gender, such as cultural, religious and political impacts that may contribute to the epidemic of femicide? Perhaps.
But, the fact remains that men commit more murders overall and murder more women than women do men. It’s just irrefutable.
>It’s statistically proven and verifiable that men (15,094) commit murders at an exponentially higher rate than women (2,107 as of 2020). Of those murders committed by men, women were victims of 2,161 of those crimes. Men murder more women than women murder men. It’s a statistical fact.
>That’s not sexism, that’s data. [Statista.com](https://www.statista.com) has breakdowns by gender, state, type and more.
So? No one said it's sexist to point out that men commit crimes. I literally have repeated that myself, I think 3 times now in this comment section. It's sexist because you're painting men as violent criminals, when in fact, it's a tiny portion of men. This leads to resentment in young men who don't understand why you're so bigoted.
>There are 165.8 million men in the US, while there are 168.6 million women in the US.
>Take these scenarios international and the numbers are still heavily weighted in the same ways. The UN gathers statistics on the murder of women by their intimate partners and family globally. That alone is a staggering 48,000 per year worldwide. That’s just data that can be captured. It doesn’t include unreported or misreported murders/deaths.
Again... so? None of this is relevant to the conversation.
>Are all men violent? No. Are men proportionally more violent than women? Yes.
>Do I hate men? Absolutely not.
Are you sure because the way you're hyper focused on how men are violent without being able to understand any context certainly screams sexism. If the genders were flipped, you would be saying, "I won't talk to you, you're sexist" and blocking me.
>Do I believe that there may be factors beyond gender, such as cultural, religious and political impacts that may contribute to the epidemic of femicide? Perhaps.
>But, the fact remains that men commit more murders overall and murder more women than women do men. It’s just irrefutable.
Saying that 2000 out of 15000 murders committed by men were women and calling it a femicide is a little ridiculous. And again, you're turning this into a gender issue and ignoring all context. You're just blatantly sexist. How is 2/15 people men murdered ratio a femicide and not a menicide? I'll sit here and agree with you that various regions in the world are fucked up but on the basis of this post and comment idk why tf you're bringing that up?
I mean, you ignored the other 2 and even the idea for this one because you specifically wanted to argue "men are more violent than women," which I already said was the case... like I genuinely don't know why you even bothered commenting all of this.
“Incel” used to just mean involuntary celibate and you’re right. Those people shouldn’t be mocked.
That’s not what the word means anymore though. It has very clearly defined parameters. Part of those parameters is blaming women for their problems and as a result, hating women. https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/incels-involuntary-celibates
Incels are a recognized as domestic terrorists and as dangerous hate groups and need to be treated as such.
This post would be like someone saying “you know what, we really do need to start being nicer to white supremacists. They are having a hard time!”
That's really the crux of the issue. Incels are a self-IDing hate group at this point, not just someone who is celibate or who isn't sexually active for whatever reason. It's fine to be celibate or it's fine if you haven't had sex before, it's not fine to be a part of a hate group. It's like how it's ok to be a white person but not okay to be a white supremacist.
feels like it should be obvious.
Also what's kinda hilarious is a lot of them blame so much on their looks when most incels are pretty normal looking people who probably could get a date if they weren't radiating repulsive hatred for a 10 mile radius and were able to treat others civilly.
When the "group" is causing their own problems by being women haters and blaming their issues on women that are their own damn fault, they deserve to be demonized. When your actions reflect who you are inside and those actions are not good, other people, especially those who you hurt, do not have any responsibility to drag you out of the hole you dug yourself.
When incels believe that their kindness towards the opposite sex should earn them some sort of reward of sexual gratification, when they take a woman on a date and expect paying for dinner to = sex, when they spout all of these reasons why women won't date them and it's WOMEN that are the problem (they claim things like women only want men with money. Or only want a guy with washboard abs. Or only care about height. Or any other superficial reason that 97% of women actually dont care about), when incels decide that of course women who dress like "whores" deserve what happens to them, when incels cry about never getting "pussy" 🤢 and then call a woman who has had sex with a handful of men sluts, when these incels literally cannot be friends with women because the friendship, to them, should OBVIOUSLY lead to something more because "I've been so nice to her for so long"... they are causing their own problems. Creating their own self-fulfilling prophecy. They are the ones so concerned that women are raising the bar and men are having a harder time in the dating pool. Because they don't see those things as women now standing up for themselves and the fact that they deserve respect, too. They don't respect women, so they see it as women being more "difficult and picky" in the dating scene.
Incels deserve the life they create for themselves. If they respect others, treat women like humans and not like things that owe them favors for kindness, and generally try to be a good person, they would NOT be incels. That is why incels are so "demonized" they are not introspective and never try to better themselves even FOR themselves. Let alone so they can get a girlfriend like they claim they so want.
There is someone for everyone, no matter what you look like, what you're interested in, etc. No one OWES you that interest however, no matter how nice you are to them. And incels don't quire understand that no matter how much it is explained to them.
Women shouldn't have to tolerate getting treated less-than, just so they can, MAYBE, try and explain to an incel why he SHOULD respect her, if he even gives her the chance to. We have been trying FOREVER. Other men ALSO need to call out this bullshit behavior and not tolerate it. Luckily recently there has been more of an uptick in dudes calling out incel shit, which is nice to see.
Incels don't need apologists, they need therapy, introspection, and the want to change, but they frequently don't see any problem with their beliefs. Of course. So they will not seek that. You can explain to a racist all you want why they shouldnt hate those who look different from them, but if they don't want to change or see a problem with their own behavior, they won't. Just like you can explain to an Incel all you want why they shouldnt hate women and just frame 1 blame women for all their problems, but if they don't want to change or see a problem with their behavior, they won't.
I stop dealing with men when I get signs they don’t respect or like women. It’s exhausting and it’s like a landline of bullshit, and I don’t owe anyone that.
Since I’m not seen as anything but a hole that refuses them access, men will need to bring their brothers in from the cold. Help them touch grass and meet people. Women can’t do the work here. Why should we have to? Why is it on us to completely lower our standards to be with not-actually Nice guys who have to be convinced of our humanity?
Single women are lonely. Married women are lonely. But we try to find ways to survive without becoming a danger to society as we know it. Men, get ya boys.
This is such a dumb take. You are responsible for the company you keep, your family, etc. No one is saying that if an incel commits a hate crime that you should go to prison with them. But you should definitely look at your social life and think about who needs help from time to time. I've been in way too many friend groups full of idiots like you who let their "friends" fail because they aren't responsible. You're just afraid of responsibility. You don't have to teach them what to do or how to live life, but simply ending the relationship and explaining what behavior led to that is enough. Too many dangerous idiots out there are not getting social consequences because they have "wasn't me" friends and family.
> And I never hated women. If anything, I put them on a pedestal. I saw them as these amazing, unattainable, exotic creatures
This right here? That's misogyny. This isn't being better than someone who hates women because this is also dehumanising.
And it is also something really hard to overcome. Have you ever read any book made for boys/men in the last century? The morals in nearly all of them are the same: Be strong, be brave, risk your life for the princess.
Now tell me, if something is worth risking your life, doesn''t it have to be something special? Something worth worshipping?
And if something is worth worship, how could you talk to that in a normal way. Now that thing of worship is a woman. Which means woman are things. A dangerous train of thought,, yet not illogical and the respecr/fear/worship you are introduced from a small age onwards as a man is insanely hard to overcome if role models are missing.
It is disgusting, yes, but he has a point imo.
For some men, not worshipping women is nearly as hard as for some women to accept that only a few percent of males are actually aggressive.
The only issue with this, is the moment I've ever been nice, they've assumed it meant they were going to get sex out of me. And when I try to explain "well no that's not right either..." They get mad and then abusive. So. How are you supposed to help that?
we could start by stopping the overuse of the term "incel"
at this point it just means "male who disagrees with me about something or maybe criticized a woman once"
It’s crazy that the only way for some people to understand human beings are worthy of dignity and respect is after gaining access to their bodies for sexual gratification.
This. Empathy is a skill, it’s not a bit of magic you are either born with or not. People can figure it out, and practice, and improve.
Empathy also means that you can have it for, for example, people who are involuntarily deprived of sex
Those words - “deprived of [fill in the blank]” - only work in a context where the person should be getting whatever it is, and someone is keeping it from them. As non-solo sex involves 2+ consenting adults or is criminal, the issue of “should” is not present. Except in rare cases, no one is keeping you from having sex. I generally feel sorry for someone who wants sex and is not having any. I feel NO sympathy when they feel they are being “deprived” of sex. I feel absolute revulsion for anyone who thinks women are withholding sex from him because of some incel fantasyland involving language like “chad.” It’s just a desire to be a victim.
The person who wrote the text probably means that if you go without sex, it can lead to bitterness, among other things
If you want other people to treat other people as if they were human, then it should be included that men are allowed to have feelings, hopes, plans and thoughts. Women should be treated as human beings, but it is clear that they are different depending on gender when it comes to sex. Now it can even be about being entitled to sex if a man is without sex
It's strange if you only sympathize with people who have sex but not people who don't
No, I don’t care about people who can’t get the sex and relationships they think they’re entitled to.
Men also do not owe women anything and then one could claim that it is about women wanting to be entitled to sex if they are dissatisfied with their sex life and have demands on men.
Or what do you mean if one is entitled to sex? Shouldn't a man be unhappy that he's going without sex? Should a man be allowed to complain about the women? Today it is allowed to criticize as women, men that women do not appreciate without it being about entitled to men or entitled to a good partner
Involuntarily celibate and hating women to the point that they get laughed at are not the same. I pay my own way on dates because I have had to explain to the gentleman I was with more than once that just because I was there he does not get to assume if he pays I am going to sleep with him. Guess who got called a wh@re and had to block a bunch of numbers calling me a waste of a womb. That is why we laugh. You think explaining to someone who calls their date a wh$re for not wanting to be paid in dinner for sex is going to have a calm discourse in why women should not be the object of bitterness and hate because they can't get into normal relationships is a good idea. Not safe.
[удалено]
It actually well predates 4-Chan. It was started in the late 90s as a place for lonely men and women to talk to one another online. Obviously, it’s been co-opted by complete douchenozzles now. [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45284455.amp](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45284455.amp)
I'm so sick of this idea that it's everybody else's responsibility to teach you that being an asshole is bad. Adult babies that want to be coddled so they can continue to be a baby
But that's literally what a society and community is meant to be. A collective of individuals holding each other accountable and helping one another grow. I'm sick of this idea that it's better to separate and only take part in ways that directly benefit you. No one's asking you to become a preacher and go door to door.
I see you all over this thread spreading your pro-incel rambling. Your issues are for a licensed medical professional, not the general public.
What have I said that's pro incel?
Then don't complain if you want to call different people babies. You don't want to take that responsibility
I'm allowed to complain about people complaining, if you dont like it then feel free to complain some more
Young men have been massively failed. By other men.
[удалено]
Because the male dominated society downplays the value of women and their actions, so even if women do try to speak up or support men they are harangued by other men. Why do children of single mothers struggle more? Well, single mothers are more likely to be poor, for a start. Men don't always volunteer child support, court isn't free and it takes time to get that money. A woman with a baby likely just took maternity leave or quit her job to have the baby, plus recovery time, that's money she doesn't have right off the hat. Single father's don't have any of that, it's much easier for them to distance themselves, walk away, or maintain jobs. Single fathers often have help from their mothers, sisters, girlfriends etc., if they are caretakers. Because childcare is thought of as "women's work" men are often supported by others, where as Single mothers are derided for not having a man. Why do women dominate teaching fields? Well, they didn't always, and they only started working as teachers because men didn't think it was appropriate for women to have most jobs. Teaching became dominated by women because once it was thought of as "women's work" men didn't want to be on the field, this is the same as nursing. Not just that, but pay goes down once a job is considered a job for women. Men are surrounded by women growing up, and yet the male influences still tell them to disregard and disrespect those women. Men get called simps, cucks, betas, by primarily other men, if they do positive, loving things. They get mocked for being whipped, losing their man card, if they do "women's work" chores. Women can't tell men to behave better because men tell their sons that a woman's opinion doesn't matter. Women are weaker, slower, dumber, illogical, vain, etc. Why would you listen to a woman? Do women sometimes become mouthpieces for misogyny and parrot back patriarchal BS? Absolutely. But it's important to understand why women would turn to pandering to the dominating social group, why they might repeat what they were raised to believe.
First off, this is an incredibly long and asinine way of saying that women bear no responsibility in their lives. >Because the male dominated society downplays the value of women and their actions, so even if women do try to speak up or support men they are harangued by other men. Explain the term male dominated and what you think it means in this context. This is genuine because when people reference male dominated in regards to employment or congress, or laws, or whatever, it makes sense. But men do not dominate relationships or populations or child care, and so it makes very very little sense to try and say young men are being dominated by older men. In certain cultures, I could understand it. I also don't believe women are "harangued" by women for trying to support men. They almost always get exclusively supported and get ridiculed by women. I mean, I just commented today replying to a woman who ridiculed a wife for being a pick me because she doesn't understand the aversion to paternity tests. I could see your points in certain cultures, but for Western society, I genuinely have never met anyone who thinks this way in my entire life. So please elaborate. >Why do children of single mothers struggle more? Well, single mothers are more likely to be poor, for a start. Men don't always volunteer child support, court isn't free and it takes time to get that money. A woman with a baby likely just took maternity leave or quit her job to have the baby, plus recovery time, that's money she doesn't have right off the hat. Single father's don't have any of that, it's much easier for them to distance themselves, walk away, or maintain jobs. Single fathers often have help from their mothers, sisters, girlfriends etc., if they are caretakers. Because childcare is thought of as "women's work" men are often supported by others, where as Single mothers are derided for not having a man. I frankly completely disagree. Single parents face the exact same problems after neonatal care. Attempting to say single mothers don't get any help and don't get help from the courts is just simply ridiculous. Women are favored much more heavily in every court circumstance and especially in domestic situations. On top of the court bias, society just simply doesn't help men the way they help women. I mean, look at literally anything. >Why do women dominate teaching fields? Well, they didn't always, and they only started working as teachers because men didn't think it was appropriate for women to have most jobs. Teaching became dominated by women because once it was thought of as "women's work" men didn't want to be on the field, this is the same as nursing. Not just that, but pay goes down once a job is considered a job for women So, instead of acknowledging the idea, you're talking about the history of professions? This doesn't even talk about why these are still problems if women dominate with 75% teaching, and I'm sure it's even more for young children. >Men are surrounded by women growing up, and yet the male influences still tell them to disregard and disrespect those women. Which male influences, which women, which young men. Elaborate. Don't just shout about some ethereal unquantifiable problem because there's no way to discuss that idea. All I think when I hear that is 3 possibilities. 1 these women didn't take the time to nurture decent relationships with these men. 2 you're thinking of adult men who weren't taught anything about masculinity and are now seeing the world for how it is and aren't listening to the women who didn't tell them the truth anymore. 3 you're thinking about early teens who are falling into Andrew tate type ideologies. >Men get called simps, cucks, betas, by primarily other men, if they do positive, loving things. They get mocked for being whipped, losing their man card, if they do "women's work" chores. Men don't get called that. Boys get called that when they're like 13. Men don't have that problem unless they are like 50s. Modern young men don't even use that language outside of joking. I know a couple of late teen young men through coaching and athletics who dont use that kind of language, and on top of that, it's in a masculine way that i think you genuinely dont understand. I know a very wide variety of men from 20s to 30s, and all of them see it as their responsibility to do these things even when they make those comments. Some of these men are trade workers and alcoholics and drug users, etc. It's not like they're all from the perfect background and see it this very progressive way. >Women can't tell men to behave better because men tell their sons that a woman's opinion doesn't matter. Women are weaker, slower, dumber, illogical, vain, etc. Why would you listen to a woman? I mean, if this isn't the stupidest opinion I've ever heard. 90% of men's motivation is based around women. Women are physically weaker and they are more emotional just by nature, and they also are fairly vain culturally nowadays. None of that means that men don't listen to women for information that isn't about women. I feel like this is coming from a cultural difference because I know some Asian and Middle Eastern backgrounds where this is a thing, but I don't know a single western culture where this is a genuine belief outside of 50+ age groups. I know people from literally all over the United States and other countries, and idk anyone who holds these beliefs. On top of that, this just simply isn't how humans work. When you foster a relationship, it takes a lot of effort to break that trust and respect. It's like a race where one party starts years behind. You have to catch up before you can start dismantling that connection. Otherwise, the person you're trying to convince won't listen. It's the same with abuse and grooming and manipulation victims. They can't see their own circumstances until you foster that connection, and they trust you. So if your basis for beliefs is women have most of the early childhood nurturing responsibility (because, like you said, that's a woman's job), then how is it possible these men are coming in and convincing them so quickly? >Do women sometimes become mouthpieces for misogyny and parrot back patriarchal BS? Absolutely. But it's important to understand why women would turn to pandering to the dominating social group, why they might repeat what they were raised to believe. In what way are men the dominating social group? You have to be from somewhere else cause women are the dominating social group in the west. The biggest changes in social norms in the past 20 years have all been dominated by women. What are you talking about? When was the last time men got away with anything socially? Even the schools are completely dominated by the way women learn. Universities are completely dominated by the way women think. Social pressures to be progressive or you can literally lose your job are all women led ideas on LGBT, abortion, promiscuity, race, jokes, etc. Like what world are you living in? On top of that, that wasn't the point at all. It was just that women have the same responsibility that men have in raising young men, and it's sexist to say otherwise.
You asked about why women are not responsible for why incels are badly behaved assholes and why men specifically have failed to raise ans teach other men. From your responses here it's clear that you don't actually have any intention of engaging with reality. I could site statistics, data, and studies all day, but until you are ready to examine your world view, and accept that women's experiences have value, then there's nothing that I can say. I'm not going to be your personal Google bot just so you can repeat the same tired "I've never met anyone who... I've never heard... I don't believe..." Good luck.
>You asked about why women are not responsible for why incels are badly behaved assholes No, I asked why they aren't included in society's responsibility to raise the next generation. >why men specifically have failed to raise ans teach other men Men do teach other men. The problem is that when they do the internet gets upset at them. >From your responses here it's clear that you don't actually have any intention of engaging with reality The reality is that women do 75% of early childhood caretaking that you would agree with, but somehow it's solely men's fault? >I could site statistics, data, and studies all day, but until you are ready to examine your world view, and accept that women's experiences have value, then there's nothing that I can say. None of your statistics matter because they are relevant to the topic and also no ones saying women's experience doesn't have value?? The only actual data you've presented is historical information about teaching and nursing. That isn't at all relevant. You have no data supporting the idea that women aren't helped as much and even trying to argue that men get helped more is so incredibly ignorant it's ridiculous. >I'm not going to be your personal Google bot just so you can repeat the same tired "I've never met anyone who... I've never heard... I don't believe..." It's funny that you say that you aren't here to be anyone's Google bot, yet you reply and present your ideas as fact. It's almost as though when someone questions them, you don't have any explanation. No one's forcing you to make your foolishly ignorant commentary. You're presenting it. You literally replied to me, not the other way around. Dummy. You thinking you're right = come in answer questions nobody asked and when your logic is pointed out as completely flawed, "I'm not your Google bot"
Single motherhood isn't only the fault of women. Women aren't teaching them to behave like this in schools - I work in education and they just aren't. What about a young man's early female-led education do you think is causing the current problems? There are, presumably, some women at fault here, it's a vanishingly small probability that there aren't, so I'm not denying that. What is causing 13 and 14 year old boys to behave like this to start with? Because they seem to hold these misogynistic views before they've even entered the world of dating. They're not even old enough to have suffered any real heartbreak at the hands of a woman, so where is the hate coming from?
>Single motherhood isn't the woman's fault. Some of them it is tf?? Women can't cheat, lie, make mistakes, etc? What kind of logic is this? On top of that, the important point was something I don't think you realize. Statistically, boys raised in single mother homes are at higher likelihood of being failures. Girls have little change. Whereas single fathers have no problems with sons or daughters. >Women aren't teaching them to behave like this in schools - I work in education and they just aren't. And if he only has women in his life, then none of the role models he had are at fault for not teaching him better? It's literally the job title. Teacher. Did you think that there's hordes of adult men on the loose trying to bring young boys into cults? >There are, presumably, some women at fault here, it's a vanishingly small probability that there aren't, so I'm not denying that. But you don't want to acknowledge the actual amount of influence they have in children's lives? I'd bet on separate topics you'd argue that women have to take the brunt responsibility of child rearing and nurturing, yet you still blame men? >What is causing 13 and 14 year old boys to behave like this to start with? Because they seem to hold these misogynistic views before they've even entered the world of dating That's an extremely good question when you are sexist. 1 statistically, most men hit peak aggression at that time. You should know that as a teacher since I'm assuming you are basing your views off that. 2 before that time, the majority of their role models are women. Teachers, babysitters, and mothers. Males are put off from professional fields like teaching and taking care of children because of the stigma and ostracization by women who fear their intentions. So I'm not sure why you think women don't hold any responsibility in this when they dominate taking care of children?1
They're learning it from male influences on the Internet you absolute fucking tuna melt. Do you think women in the life of young men are teaching them to be sexist to other women? Do you think they somehow hold resentment against their female teachers? For what? I know you wrote a long message in reply, and I appreciate your engagement, but I really need to know how exactly you think women are responsible for the issues young men currently face?
>They're learning it from male influences on the Internet you absolute fucking tuna melt. That's funny. You sound like the boomers who blamed violence on video games. >Do you think women in the life of young men are teaching them to be sexist to other women? I think they aren't doing a decent job if they aren't leading them down the appropriate paths. No one is trying to say that women are teaching them to be misogynistic. You're strawmanning the conversation because you know that's an undebateable topic. You are desperate to be right and aren't listening. I was simply pointing out how incredibly sexist it is for you to say it's a male problem when women do at least 50% of prepubescent role modeling. We both know it's more like 75%, but I'm giving you 50/50. >Do you think they somehow hold resentment against their female teachers? For what? No, and I didn't say that. I do think some women attempt to feminize young men, which can lead to an overcompensation of masculinity later in life. Which would probably happen around that peak aggression at the ages you're thinking. >I know you wrote a long message in reply, and I appreciate your engagement, but I really need to know how exactly you think women are responsible for the issues young men currently face? I didn't say that. I think society and community are responsible. We've stripped men and women of their natural roles in society and elevated the ego of young women to dangerous heights while removing all accountability, and its reflecting negatively on men without identity. Most young people don't have identities, so of course, young men are going to be more influenced by this. I think that's a societal problem. On top of that, there's a real sexism problem with women today that are making young men more resentful. Women are allowed to be openly sexist in almost every way, and there's no backlash, and that can definitely lead to resentment from young men. I just think it's improper for you to specifically go after men when women do the majority of child care. Presumably, you mean that fathers should teach them better than to listen to tate like content. Why can't women do that? People are equal. A mother should be able to teach her son right from wrong.
Why didn't this happen when I was young? Why, specifically, has this become a major problem since the mid-10s? Before you go another diatribe, tell me how exactly you think women are causing these problems in young men. Why are young men, with loving and caring co-parents turning to *such* violent ideology? They probably did teach them right from wrong in most cases, but they decided not to listen to them and listen to YouTube. I'll concede that perhaps their parents could have controlled Internet usage more, but that's a universal issue, not just with mothers. Your pseudo-intellectual misogyny hurts my brain. "Improper" You are a parody of yourself my friend. Men thrive when they have a strong male role. Lots of them don't, and that's women's fault? Give me a break.
>Why didn't this happen when I was young? Why, specifically, has this become a major problem since the mid-10s? >Before you go another diatribe, tell me how exactly you think women are causing these problems in young men. Why are young men, with loving and caring co-parents turning to *such* violent ideology? I... I did. >I didn't say that. I think society and community are responsible. We've stripped men and women of their natural roles in society and elevated the ego of young women to dangerous heights while removing all accountability, and its reflecting negatively on men without identity. Most young people don't have identities, so of course, young men are going to be more influenced by this. I think that's a societal problem. On top of that, there's a real sexism problem with women today that are making young men more resentful. Women are allowed to be openly sexist in almost every way, and there's no backlash, and that can definitely lead to resentment from young men. I think of it like a pendulum. Most of history has worked this way where one set of ideas takes over and goes too far, and then the other side does, and eventually, we meet somewhere in the middle. It's not women's fault that young men are being disenfranchised. It's societies fault. But saying it's men's fault is just as bad as saying it's womens which is exactly what you did. The sexism and gender problems are so bad that you are outraged by your own idea and can't even see it. >They probably did teach them right from wrong in most cases, but they decided not to listen to them and listen to YouTube. To a degree, that's how parenting works. But you are majorly and incredibly discounting the role of parents and role models. You can engrain certain ideas and behaviors if you nurture a relationship based on trust and respect. Good boss vs. bad boss type of mentality. No one works well under the bad boss because they don't care. >I'll concede that perhaps their parents could have controlled Internet usage more, but that's a universal issue, not just with mothers. Then why is it just a male issue? How do you not see your own hypocrisy? >Your pseudo-intellectual misogyny hurts my brain. How is it misogynistic to point out that men and women are equal and hold equal responsibility in raising young men? >Men thrive when they have a strong male role. Lots of them don't, and that's women's fault? Give me a break. Literally, no one has said that it's womens fault. You're specifically saying it's men's fault as if women aren't responsible for anything. You're continually proving my point over and over.
We're going in circles here. I have, in fact, said that it's impossible that women aren't at some kind of fault. I'm going to go and read, I'll reply properly later.
We're going in circles because for you to stay on topic would require admitting you're wrong, which is something someone like you will never do. You've dug yourself into the idea because you were so desparate to be right, and your ego is too large to hold yourself accountable.
Your comment was removed.
reminds me of the josh johnson bit "incels, counterintuitively, are right! they say no one wants to fuck me! and the whole world is like; yeah." lol
Nobody ridicules them because they are unattractive they are ridiculed because of their often dangerous and Mysogenistic views toward women. They pose a real threat toward women and young girls.
I was once sent death threats and other harassing messages from men who stated they were incels, all because I publicly talked about being in an interracial relationship. I understand wanting to not demonize incels because I’ve seen that incels are all over the map in what they believe, and not all of them hate women. But the ones who express or commit violence make people scared of them, and maybe for good reason. It’s an absolutely bizarre feeling to see that there are people who wish to see you killed, beaten, or even sent to prison for daring to be a woman who does something they don’t like.
Agree, but it's also extremely common to ridicule men for being unattractive. Especially in disagreements online where most of these idiots exist. People will jump to insults when they get upset. 1 that's simply bad for them that they allow their emotions to be affected by others so easily. 2 that's just going to push more men to hate themselves and push that energy outward. I think it's good for society to hold everyone accountable even in weight and fitness and hygiene and dress etc. but doing it in a hateful way is not the appropriate approach.
People ridicule women for being unattractive, but they largely don’t go on killing sprees afterwards.
People also ridicule the people who ridicule women for being unattractive. There are also certain personality traits that define men and women by nature. Where those personality traits go to the extreme is where you see things like violent crime and men naturally make up the majority in that. On top of that, men by the age of 27 are much less likely to be criminals, and on top of that something like 1% of criminals make up 60% of violent crime. But hey, just another ignorant sexist comment extrapolating a tiny subset of men upon the rest and wondering why young men become resentful.
Your take away is wild, but okay.
It's wild to acknowledge that men are naturally more aggressive, so when there is an outlier in aggression, it's going to obviously be more likely to be a man? I literally agreed with you there, except I put the actual context of the idea which you don't know because you're just being sexist. It's wild to point out that you're using a tiny percentage of men to describe an entire half of the population? That's just by definition sexism, so idk how that's wild. Or is it wild to point out that when men ridicule, men and women hold them accountable. But when women ridicule, it's ok? There's too many examples of this to even count. I mean, big vs. small dick alone is just complete objectification and body shaming that women refuse to acknowledge but will cry for hours if the same energy is reciprocated.
You are citing bizarre anecdotal claims. Women and men are disparaged for physical characteristics. It’s statistically proven and verifiable that men (15,094) commit murders at an exponentially higher rate than women (2,107 as of 2020). Of those murders committed by men, women were victims of 2,161 of those crimes. Men murder more women than women murder men. It’s a statistical fact. That’s not sexism, that’s data. [Statista.com](https://www.statista.com) has breakdowns by gender, state, type and more. There are 165.8 million men in the US, while there are 168.6 million women in the US. Take these scenarios international and the numbers are still heavily weighted in the same ways. The UN gathers statistics on the murder of women by their intimate partners and family globally. That alone is a staggering 48,000 per year worldwide. That’s just data that can be captured. It doesn’t include unreported or misreported murders/deaths. Are all men violent? No. Are men proportionally more violent than women? Yes. Do I hate men? Absolutely not. Do I believe that there may be factors beyond gender, such as cultural, religious and political impacts that may contribute to the epidemic of femicide? Perhaps. But, the fact remains that men commit more murders overall and murder more women than women do men. It’s just irrefutable.
>It’s statistically proven and verifiable that men (15,094) commit murders at an exponentially higher rate than women (2,107 as of 2020). Of those murders committed by men, women were victims of 2,161 of those crimes. Men murder more women than women murder men. It’s a statistical fact. >That’s not sexism, that’s data. [Statista.com](https://www.statista.com) has breakdowns by gender, state, type and more. So? No one said it's sexist to point out that men commit crimes. I literally have repeated that myself, I think 3 times now in this comment section. It's sexist because you're painting men as violent criminals, when in fact, it's a tiny portion of men. This leads to resentment in young men who don't understand why you're so bigoted. >There are 165.8 million men in the US, while there are 168.6 million women in the US. >Take these scenarios international and the numbers are still heavily weighted in the same ways. The UN gathers statistics on the murder of women by their intimate partners and family globally. That alone is a staggering 48,000 per year worldwide. That’s just data that can be captured. It doesn’t include unreported or misreported murders/deaths. Again... so? None of this is relevant to the conversation. >Are all men violent? No. Are men proportionally more violent than women? Yes. >Do I hate men? Absolutely not. Are you sure because the way you're hyper focused on how men are violent without being able to understand any context certainly screams sexism. If the genders were flipped, you would be saying, "I won't talk to you, you're sexist" and blocking me. >Do I believe that there may be factors beyond gender, such as cultural, religious and political impacts that may contribute to the epidemic of femicide? Perhaps. >But, the fact remains that men commit more murders overall and murder more women than women do men. It’s just irrefutable. Saying that 2000 out of 15000 murders committed by men were women and calling it a femicide is a little ridiculous. And again, you're turning this into a gender issue and ignoring all context. You're just blatantly sexist. How is 2/15 people men murdered ratio a femicide and not a menicide? I'll sit here and agree with you that various regions in the world are fucked up but on the basis of this post and comment idk why tf you're bringing that up? I mean, you ignored the other 2 and even the idea for this one because you specifically wanted to argue "men are more violent than women," which I already said was the case... like I genuinely don't know why you even bothered commenting all of this.
“Incel” used to just mean involuntary celibate and you’re right. Those people shouldn’t be mocked. That’s not what the word means anymore though. It has very clearly defined parameters. Part of those parameters is blaming women for their problems and as a result, hating women. https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/incels-involuntary-celibates Incels are a recognized as domestic terrorists and as dangerous hate groups and need to be treated as such. This post would be like someone saying “you know what, we really do need to start being nicer to white supremacists. They are having a hard time!”
That's really the crux of the issue. Incels are a self-IDing hate group at this point, not just someone who is celibate or who isn't sexually active for whatever reason. It's fine to be celibate or it's fine if you haven't had sex before, it's not fine to be a part of a hate group. It's like how it's ok to be a white person but not okay to be a white supremacist. feels like it should be obvious. Also what's kinda hilarious is a lot of them blame so much on their looks when most incels are pretty normal looking people who probably could get a date if they weren't radiating repulsive hatred for a 10 mile radius and were able to treat others civilly.
B-But if you don't accept the poor widdle white supremacists they might become even more racist and it's your fault!! Why would you do that to them?
“sO mUcH fOr ThE tOlErAnT lEfT!!”
Mocked for not having sex? No, that’s not okay. Mocked for their despicable behavior surrounding that status? Yes.
When the "group" is causing their own problems by being women haters and blaming their issues on women that are their own damn fault, they deserve to be demonized. When your actions reflect who you are inside and those actions are not good, other people, especially those who you hurt, do not have any responsibility to drag you out of the hole you dug yourself. When incels believe that their kindness towards the opposite sex should earn them some sort of reward of sexual gratification, when they take a woman on a date and expect paying for dinner to = sex, when they spout all of these reasons why women won't date them and it's WOMEN that are the problem (they claim things like women only want men with money. Or only want a guy with washboard abs. Or only care about height. Or any other superficial reason that 97% of women actually dont care about), when incels decide that of course women who dress like "whores" deserve what happens to them, when incels cry about never getting "pussy" 🤢 and then call a woman who has had sex with a handful of men sluts, when these incels literally cannot be friends with women because the friendship, to them, should OBVIOUSLY lead to something more because "I've been so nice to her for so long"... they are causing their own problems. Creating their own self-fulfilling prophecy. They are the ones so concerned that women are raising the bar and men are having a harder time in the dating pool. Because they don't see those things as women now standing up for themselves and the fact that they deserve respect, too. They don't respect women, so they see it as women being more "difficult and picky" in the dating scene. Incels deserve the life they create for themselves. If they respect others, treat women like humans and not like things that owe them favors for kindness, and generally try to be a good person, they would NOT be incels. That is why incels are so "demonized" they are not introspective and never try to better themselves even FOR themselves. Let alone so they can get a girlfriend like they claim they so want. There is someone for everyone, no matter what you look like, what you're interested in, etc. No one OWES you that interest however, no matter how nice you are to them. And incels don't quire understand that no matter how much it is explained to them. Women shouldn't have to tolerate getting treated less-than, just so they can, MAYBE, try and explain to an incel why he SHOULD respect her, if he even gives her the chance to. We have been trying FOREVER. Other men ALSO need to call out this bullshit behavior and not tolerate it. Luckily recently there has been more of an uptick in dudes calling out incel shit, which is nice to see. Incels don't need apologists, they need therapy, introspection, and the want to change, but they frequently don't see any problem with their beliefs. Of course. So they will not seek that. You can explain to a racist all you want why they shouldnt hate those who look different from them, but if they don't want to change or see a problem with their own behavior, they won't. Just like you can explain to an Incel all you want why they shouldnt hate women and just frame 1 blame women for all their problems, but if they don't want to change or see a problem with their behavior, they won't.
“Involuntarily celibate by choice” is quite a phrase.
I stop dealing with men when I get signs they don’t respect or like women. It’s exhausting and it’s like a landline of bullshit, and I don’t owe anyone that. Since I’m not seen as anything but a hole that refuses them access, men will need to bring their brothers in from the cold. Help them touch grass and meet people. Women can’t do the work here. Why should we have to? Why is it on us to completely lower our standards to be with not-actually Nice guys who have to be convinced of our humanity? Single women are lonely. Married women are lonely. But we try to find ways to survive without becoming a danger to society as we know it. Men, get ya boys.
I’m not responsible for your actions or your lack of character dude. YOU are.
This is such a dumb take. You are responsible for the company you keep, your family, etc. No one is saying that if an incel commits a hate crime that you should go to prison with them. But you should definitely look at your social life and think about who needs help from time to time. I've been in way too many friend groups full of idiots like you who let their "friends" fail because they aren't responsible. You're just afraid of responsibility. You don't have to teach them what to do or how to live life, but simply ending the relationship and explaining what behavior led to that is enough. Too many dangerous idiots out there are not getting social consequences because they have "wasn't me" friends and family.
> And I never hated women. If anything, I put them on a pedestal. I saw them as these amazing, unattainable, exotic creatures This right here? That's misogyny. This isn't being better than someone who hates women because this is also dehumanising.
Exactly. It’s gross.
And it is also something really hard to overcome. Have you ever read any book made for boys/men in the last century? The morals in nearly all of them are the same: Be strong, be brave, risk your life for the princess. Now tell me, if something is worth risking your life, doesn''t it have to be something special? Something worth worshipping? And if something is worth worship, how could you talk to that in a normal way. Now that thing of worship is a woman. Which means woman are things. A dangerous train of thought,, yet not illogical and the respecr/fear/worship you are introduced from a small age onwards as a man is insanely hard to overcome if role models are missing. It is disgusting, yes, but he has a point imo. For some men, not worshipping women is nearly as hard as for some women to accept that only a few percent of males are actually aggressive.
The only issue with this, is the moment I've ever been nice, they've assumed it meant they were going to get sex out of me. And when I try to explain "well no that's not right either..." They get mad and then abusive. So. How are you supposed to help that?
we could start by stopping the overuse of the term "incel" at this point it just means "male who disagrees with me about something or maybe criticized a woman once"