Why have incels gotten so much attention?

[schlaufuchs]

Uh...what exactly is the topic? Guys who can't get laid?

"Why we care about Incels"

and the answer is because 4 of the most deadly and prominent shooting/murder rampages of the last 15 years are explicitly associated with the movement, and claimed the philosophy underpinning the movement as a specific motivating factor behind the attack.

/thread. Can we go back to a more interesting discussion now Lemon Merchant?

 

[spot261]

"Why we care about Incels"

and the answer is because 4 of the most deadly and prominent shooting/murder rampages of the last 13 years are explicitly associated with the movement, and claimed the philosophy underpinning the movement as a specific motivating factor behind the attack.

This, but there is I think more to it.

The question isn't simply one of negative attention, the studying of a dangerous phenomenon, but also about the increasing validation these people are getting.

The world is becoming more partisan and any positive movement in one direction causes antagonism amongst those with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.

Incels don't represent a majority, nor any form of establishment, but their views do align with extremist political movements which are increasingly mainstream. That by itself increases their visibility and perceived relevance, along with making them bedfellows (no pun intended) with the sort of alpha male power players who would traditionally be their antithesis.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Ok, then we shouldn't let guys who are virgins/celibate and over 18 have access to guns. Videos of them having sex would allow them to buy guns.

 

[spot261]

Ok, then we shouldn't let guys who are virgins/celibate and over 18 have access to guns. Videos of them having sex would allow them to buy guns.

Ummmm, I have no idea how to respond to this.....

you don't work in a gun store do you?

 

[schlaufuchs]

Ok, then we shouldn't let guys who are virgins/celibate and over 18 have access to guns. Videos of them having sex would allow them to buy guns.

But it's not virgins. And it's not celibate people. It's a specific community that subscribes to a specific, horribly misogynist worldview. #NotAllVirginalTwentySomethings

 

[red_elk]

"Why we care about Incels"

and the answer is because 4 of the most deadly and prominent shooting/murder rampages of the last 15 years are explicitly associated with the movement, and claimed the philosophy underpinning the movement as a specific motivating factor behind the attack.

We had a school shooting rampage in Russia just a few days ago, which may be related to it too. 20+1 people killed.
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/ask-a-russian.189262/page-69#post-15244356

 

[Birdjaguar]

Ummmm, I have no idea how to respond to this.....

you don't work in a gun store do you?

No I don't; I am retired, mostly, kinda. I am just trying to fulfill Lemon's request within the context of Owen's post.

 

[spot261]

But it's not virgins. And it's not celibate people. It's a specific community that subscribes to a specific, horribly misogynist worldview. #NotAllVirginalTwentySomethings

Bonus points for linking contrapoints

 

[TheMeInTeam]

What exactly are we talking about when you say "besmirch"?

This isn't a court of law, we aren't by and large talking about legal proceedings, reasonable doubt need not apply. Even there there really is no such thing as "confirmed", not in an absolute sense.

On an individual level we besmirch people all the time, every time we gossip and whisper, every time we voice suspicions in private or public, every time we speak badly of someone we just dislike, it's normal human behaviour but we've never really seen it in this context and to this level. We are talking here though about broader conversations which are happening across society, conversations where women's views are finally being heard, their experiences finally being shared. Those experiences and the views which come from them are ugly, far uglier than most of us would like to have imagined.

Society has allowed men to be bullying, misogynistic, violent and controlling, it has turned a blind eye at every level, the family, the workplace, religion, the legal systems, the political structures. Every power base has without exception been dominated by men and structures which enable us (yes I'm male, and straight), shaping society to favour us at every turn, turning a blind eye, enabling and even sanctioning abuse throughout history.

What we are seeing now is a shift in that power balance, a shift away from a place where women were silent victims. Absolutely the odd decent man will suffer as a consequence and that is truly terrible on a personal level, but on any pragmatic reading of ethics the greater harm is being reduced and restricted. Under reporting of sexual offences (which themselves are only the tip of the iceberg when considered against the backdrop of "legal" but still misogynistic behaviour openly accepted by society) has long been and remains a far greater problem, to focus so adamantly now on such a small number of injustices as an ethical stance is a fairly uncertain proposition unless you were already making far louder noises against the greater evil.

Violating the law is not a requirement to be unethical, and I see no reason to prefer abject unethical behavior to abject unethical behavior. I'd rather see both as such. Holding broad prejudice against a group of people based on characteristics they can't control is garbage and a position doing this while simultaneously arguing against discrimination is objectively hypocritical.

Incels don't represent a majority, nor any form of establishment, but their views do align with extremist political movements which are increasingly mainstream. That by itself increases their visibility and perceived relevance, along with making them bedfellows (no pun intended) with the sort of alpha male power players who would traditionally be their antithesis.

They are somewhat ironically associated with one end of a political spectrum while using a rationale more typical of the other side. Kind of fascinating in that regard.

 

[spot261]

Violating the law is not a requirement to be unethical, and I see no reason to prefer abject unethical behavior to abject unethical behavior. I'd rather see both as such. Holding broad prejudice against a group of people based on characteristics they can't control is garbage and a position doing this while simultaneously arguing against discrimination is being objectively hypocritical.

Yet I stated I was arguing from a pragmatic ethical standpoint. Where one has to choose between two evils, one chooses the lesser as measured by the impact on suffering. We've had thousands of years to make the changes which would have created a fairer, more balanced and ethical society yet time and again the outcome has predictably been abject failure. No one wants innocent men to be accused and I don't believe we're seeing a culture of acceptance towards that developing. We're seeing a culture that's starting to listen to women the way it's always listened to men.

When you can say honestly you "besmirch" nobody, you do not badmouth them, gossip about them, speak ill of them, then by all means make the claim this position is purely based on ethics, but I doubt you can do that, nor can any of us. That you have taken this specific ethical position, arguing against the injustices against men as a priority over the much more commonplace and serious injustices being addressed speaks volumes about how you prioritise and bias your ethical standpoint.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Yet I stated I was arguing from a pragmatic ethical standpoint. Where one has to choose between two evils, one chooses the lesser as measured by the impact on suffering.

The least evil action is to not actively discriminate against people based on physical characteristics they can't control.

When you can say honestly you "besmirch" nobody, you do not badmouth them, gossip about them, speak ill of them, then by all means make the claim this position is purely based on ethics, but I doubt you can do that, nor can any of us.

I never claimed I was perfect, or that other people should be.

That you have taken this specific ethical position, arguing against the injustices against men as a priority

That's quite some straw.

 

[Birdjaguar]

But it's not virgins. And it's not celibate people. It's a specific community that subscribes to a specific, horribly misogynist worldview. #NotAllVirginalTwentySomethings

I watched it all!! Great video.

 

[spot261]

The least evil action is to not actively discriminate against people based on physical characteristics they can't control.

Yet that is what we are doing daily, have been doing for millennia. Why is it suddenly an issue when it is a couple of men as opposed to billions of women? If your objection is about the ethics of the situation, why are you so focused on the (admitted) suffering of those few men but staying silent on the suffering of so many women? Do you not see the discrimination inherent in that bias?

That's quite some straw.

No it isn't, if you were seeking equality you'd take each and every injustice as a quantity equally worthy of your outrage. In that case you'd never get around to discussing those men because your lifespan wouldn't accommodate giving equal consideration to the women who have suffered consistently down the centuries and continue to suffer now. Instead you are focusing exclusively on the comparatively tiny level of collateral damage caused as they seek out some measure of equitable treatment.

 

[red_elk]

Why is it suddenly an issue when it is a couple of men as opposed to billions of women?

Because you use arbitrary, self-defined criteria of what's fair from ethical standpoint. "Millennia of suffering" and "billions of women as opposed to couple of men" can be used to justify pretty much any kind of opposite discrimination. The whole idea of alienating or discriminating one broad social group is unethical.

 

[Archon_Wing]

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/155/Relative-Privation

Anyhow, applying greater trends to individual scenarios is always a problem. It only goes one way.

 

[bernie14]

But it's not virgins. And it's not celibate people. It's a specific community that subscribes to a specific, horribly misogynist worldview. #NotAllVirginalTwentySomethings

Watched it.. makes me think that people with poor self esteem seek out the like minded to justify their viewpoints and the "normals" look on in disgust or horror or mockingly.... guess those are better coping mechanisms than self loathing or going out and killing other people. But as the young lady in the video says, ultimately its about insight and self control. Blaming "the system" is good enough excuse for irresponsibility...same as "the devil made me do it...it was the video games, i was born that way...i am just a victim", bla, bla, bla...

Yet I stated I was arguing from a pragmatic ethical standpoint. Where one has to choose between two evils, one chooses the lesser as measured by the impact on [one's own] suffering. We've had thousands of years to make the changes which would have created a fairer, more balanced and ethical society yet time and again the outcome has predictably been abject failure. No one wants innocent men to be accused and I don't believe we're seeing a culture of acceptance towards that developing. We're seeing a culture that's starting to listen to women the way it's always listened to men.

When you can say honestly you "besmirch" nobody, you do not badmouth them, gossip about them, speak ill of them, then by all means make the claim this position is purely based on ethics, but I doubt you can do that, nor can any of us. That you have taken this specific ethical position, arguing against the injustices against men as a priority over the much more commonplace and serious injustices being addressed speaks volumes about how you prioritise and bias your ethical standpoint.

Ftfy.... the rest is defensive narcissistic sanctimony

EDIT: imo, of course

 

[red_elk]

Society has allowed men to be bullying, misogynistic, violent and controlling

From my experience, society has very little tolerance to public violence or bullying - and especially if it's man-to-woman violence.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Yet that is what we are doing daily, have been doing for millennia. Why is it suddenly an issue when it is a couple of men as opposed to billions of women? If your objection is about the ethics of the situation, why are you so focused on the (admitted) suffering of those few men but staying silent on the suffering of so many women? Do you not see the discrimination inherent in that bias?

I've already called out both in this thread. My position is consistently that discrimination of this sort isn't okay no matter who does it.

No it isn't, if you were seeking equality you'd take each and every injustice as a quantity equally worthy of your outrage.

Don't have infinite time or even infinite outrage. I'm not going to spend any of the latter in this thread either, mild annoyance at hypocrisy and wrong-attributions to what I've said will suffice.

Make no mistake, attributing an assertion of priority to me *is* straw. Doubling down on that is disingenuous. What part of "all discrimination is bad" is hard to understand? Complaining about discrimination loses an awful lot of credibility when engaging in it simultaneously.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

/thread. Can we go back to a more interesting discussion now Lemon Merchant?

Personally, I'm enjoying the newer discussion as well. As I suggested, why not open a new thread on it?

I've been asked to close this thread, but I would rather not in case someone has something else to say about incels. I would really like to see this discussion on marriage and genders branch out to a new thread so it can have a topic and life of its own.

 

[caketastydelish]

Please, thank you. I only wanted incels to be discussed here.