Why have incels gotten so much attention?

[TheMeInTeam]

As of their last estimate, the bureau of justice estimates that 94,030 family violence offenders are imprisoned or jailed in the United States. 93 percent of the offenders were male, victims were 80 percent female (male/male couplings and father/son offenses make up the 13 percent difference). Further, the prosecution, investigation into family violence crimes, and conviction rates are co-equal to all crimes reported or better! However, the rate of reporting is estimated at between 1/2 to 1/4 of all cases, depending on how you look at the evidence.

Man on woman violence is usually private, and society totally looks the other way.

Both of these can't be true at the same time. Not super easy to get data, but if US Dept of Justice is trustworthy then men are jailed for committing domestic violence (even rape/sexual assault/homicide levels of bad) disproportionately frequently based on quoted numbers, since we'd expect a jail rate closer to 85-15 or so.

It is a problem that society looks the other way when there is legitimate evidence in general, but evidence doesn't fit the narrative that this is particularly disadvantageous to women.

 

[seasnake]

The difference between the 93 percent male incarceration and the 80 percent female victim ratio takes into account domestic and sexual abuse of fathers on sons and gay partners as well, meaning that 13 percent we're dealing with male victims. Not sure about this, need to look it up, but my gut and what other things I've read indicate to me is that male victims of DV, especially in same sex couples, might actually be much worse at reporting the crime than females.

The low reporting rates mean, if these crimes were reported as often as other types of crimes, that we should expect 180,000 minimum offenders incarcerated, and maybe as high as 360,000. The under-reporting makes a big difference.

EDIT: also, it should be noted that the U.S. population is roughly 327M at this time, meaning the incarceration of convicted offenders, if reporting rates were equalized compared with other crimes, would constitute .1 percent of the population. To me, that supports the notion that domestic violence is, while far too prevalent, not endorsed by society as a whole by any stretched nor practiced. And that assumes each offense is a different offender, which is simply not true, as many are repeat offenders.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The difference between the 93 percent male incarceration and the 80 percent female victim ratio takes into account domestic and sexual abuse of fathers on sons and gay partners as well, meaning that 13 percent we're dealing with male victims. Not sure about this, need to look it up, but my gut and what other things I've read indicate to me is that male victims of DV, especially in same sex couples, might actually be much worse at reporting the crime than females.

The low reporting rates mean, if these crimes were reported as often as other types of crimes, that we should expect 180,000 minimum offenders incarcerated, and maybe as high as 360,000. The under-reporting makes a big difference.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv16.pdf

There's some ambiguity here though, because I had to find an older summary report where ~80% of the offenders against male victims were women in that year. Still the numbers I see keep suggesting that *everyone* gets away with serious domestic crimes too frequently and that women are actually more likely to get away with either no sentence/report or lighter sentences than men.

On a somewhat more cheery note, at least this type of crime has seen a downward trend over the past two decades.

 

[caketastydelish]

https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...just-get-along-from-the-incels-thread.637527/

 

[Lemon Merchant]

Moderator Action: All non incel discussion has been moved to his thread:

https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...just-get-along-from-the-incels-thread.637527/

 

[spot261]

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.



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.

Yet your singular focus remains on a handful of male victims, not the infinitely greater swathes of female ones. Why?

 

[spot261]

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.

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.

Except we aren't doing anything of the sort, nor is anyone advocating for it. Each and every case is still individual and taken on it's own merits, there are no blanket rules being applied. What is happening is the books are being balanced in terms of visibility and vocal presence, women are creating a situation where their voices are being heard alongside men's, where they aren't simply silent because the options to speak up are so limited.

That's not discrimination, that's removing the inherent, implicit discrimination which has become so comfortable for men we have rarely questioned it. No one's ever really questioned a man's right to call a girl by gender loaded perjoratives, to harass her in the sub legal sense and treat her as sub human in the way these incels are wont to do. Women taking the right to answer that challenge isn't "reverse discrimination", nor is it committing the logical fallacy of subsuming an individual case into a blanket rule, it's simply allowing a far broader section access to the tools of influence which they have previously been denied.

The incel movement is gaining prominence and sympathy because their interests in dehumanising and blaming women for their inadequacy dovetail with the reactionary position of those who are so accustomed to those social norms they can't tolerate a situation where male dominance is challenged.

 

[Traitorfish]

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

Not wanting to have sex with somebody is not "discrimination", bloody hell.

 

[Hygro]

they've already been taken into consideration by people much smarter than you.

Ahahaha you kill me. They got nothing Ryika but professional focus.

 

[red_elk]

No one's ever really questioned a man's right to call a girl by gender loaded perjoratives, to harass her in the sub legal sense and treat her as sub human in the way these incels are wont to do.

Like, seriously, no one has ever questioned man's right to harass woman?

 

[Akka]

Not wanting to have sex with somebody is not "discrimination", bloody hell.

Well, it seems that this actually changes depending on who is subject to this refusal of having sex. I remember "debates" where a lot of "ism" and "phobic" were thrown around because some people didn't want to have sex with others.

 

[red_elk]

Not wanting to have sex with somebody is not "discrimination", bloody hell.

You missed the context, that statement wasn't about incels and refusal to have sex.

 

[spot261]

Like, seriously, no one has ever questioned man's right to harass woman?

No, not until comparatively recently or at any level which really challenged the culture of it.

Until not that long ago a lot of what we now see as workplace harassment was harmless fun or hi jinks, women were routinely expected to smile and play along if men saw it as acceptable to behave in many of the ways we are now starting to appreciate in a totally different light.

Nurses, female police officers, women working in mostly male offices or factories, actresses were all just a few examples of professions that were seen quite jovially as being legitimate targets for misogynistic behaviour, the butt of sexual jokes and banter, even the victims of sexual assaults masquerading as simply "good fun".

As a high profile illustration the Hollywood "casting couch" was so ingrained in the culture of the entertainment industry that it was barely questioned, much less reported on. It was just the done thing.

 

[spot261]

You missed the context, that statement wasn't about incels and refusal to have sex.

The thread is about incels, the whole context is the way in which incel attitudes and behaviours actually align with that of the mainstream far more so than most of us are particularly comfortable acknowledging. The difference between an incel and a misogynistic womaniser or violent and controlling partner is frequently quite a fine divide, delineated primarily by the latter cases having whatever requisite attributes allow them to be in a position to act on their dominance fantasies.

 

[red_elk]

No, not until comparatively recently or at any level which really challenged the culture of it.

Until not that long ago a lot of what we now see as workplace harassment was harmless fun or hi jinks, women were routinely expected to smile and play along if men saw it as acceptable to behave in many of the ways we are now starting to appreciate in a totally different light.

If you are talking about problems with workplace harassment and others which must be addressed, nobody in this thread disagreed with this, as far as I can see.
But putting it in a form that men allegedly have right to harass women and nobody ever questioned it [until you came in, wearing shiny armor], doesn't really help your cause.

The thread is about incels, the whole context is the way in which incel attitudes and behaviours actually align with that of the mainstream far more so than most of us are particularly comfortable acknowledging.

Incel attitude is not mainstream by any stretch of imagination. They are fringe group, essentially the same as radfems but with the opposite sign.

 

[spot261]

If you are talking about problems with workplace harassment and others which must be addressed, nobody in this thread disagreed with this, as far as I can see.
But putting it in a form that men allegedly have right to harass women and nobody ever questioned it [until you came in, wearing shiny armor], doesn't really help your cause.

It's a direct rebuttal of your position that men have never been allowed to harass women without question. It's a clear set of instances where exactly that has happened for decades without redress. If you say a thing hasn't happened and I reel off a list of instances where you cannot deny it has, then you don't get to claim it hasn't helped my case.

Incidentally I have no need for shiny armour, the "white knight" trope is based around men adopting a position in order to attract female attention. Feel free to ask the poster in question (who I've known for a long time) about my behaviour in that regard, from a woman's perspective. If you can't establish that as a motive, all you've got is that I simply disagree with you.

Incel attitude is not mainstream by any stretch of imagination. They are fringe group, essentially the same as radfems but with the opposite sign

Read the quote again, I didn't say it was mainstream. The key word was "align".

 

[Patine]

Ok, first of all, I'm going to say they're awful people and that they're nuts.

That said: they are a fringe minority group.

There are also people who believe that the earth is flat, or that the moon landing is fake, etc. There always going to be crazy people who believe crazy things. But the 'incels' are a fringe minority of morons, like the rest of them.

So I'm trying to understand why they've been under the spotlight so much considering they're just a fringe minority group of idiots.

I'll chalk the answer to the opening post question to the same answer as for a lot of questions posited in opening posts on this OT forum, actually - a hyped-up zeitgeist driven by general, base-line human stupidity. Note that I, myself, have never lost any sleep these idiots, and this post is only the second I've dignified them with any (both dismissive) mention on the Internet (the other time on another forum over an Independent candidate running in a House of Representatives electoral district in 2018 in Virginia who claims prominent membership in the 'movement' - I use the term lightly), and never to anyone in personal in conversation in RL.

 

[red_elk]

It's a direct rebuttal of your position that men have never been allowed to harass women without question.

I never held that position.

Incidentally I have no need for shiny armour, the "white knight" trope is based around men adopting a position in order to attract female attention. Feel free to ask the poster in question (who I've known for a long time) about my behaviour in that regard, from a woman's perspective. If you can't establish that as a motive, all you've got is that I simply disagree with you.

... and I don't care about your motives or relations with Mary.
All I can comment is your ridiculous assertion that people are allegedly okay with harassment of women, which implies you are better than others in this regard.

My position is that most of men do not consider abuse or harassment as acceptable behavior and treating men as potential abusers is counterproductive. People must be judged by their actions, not by what kind of stuff they have in their pants.

 

[spot261]

Like, seriously, no one has ever questioned man's right to harass woman?

I never held that position.

Ok.

... and I don't care about your motives or relations with Mary.
All I can comment is your ridiculous assertion that people are allegedly okay with harassment of women, which implies you are better than others in this regard.

[until you came in, wearing shiny armor],

Ok again, must have been someone else invoking the white knight trope. I have no idea whether she intends to weigh in, but I suspect she'd find you clear implication I was trying to impress her somewhat...humorous to say the least.

So, any actual response to the selection of instances I gave of harassment having been normalised for years?

 

[MaryKB]

You can definitely see men getting better at not tolerating domestic abuse, but it's still incredibly common, and you'll definitely see men oppose it when they can see it, but still too often they'll keep silent when they can ignore it. And domestic abuse of women by men is still so common, how do you think that's happening? Those are obviously men committing those crimes, right?

And you can see men sympathizing with other men who abuse women all the time, like in so many #MeToo related cases, you'll see men immediately defending men who are accused, and women who dare to speak up are met so often with hatred, and you can see what happened with Dr Ford (she receives death threats, and her abuser gets honored). I mean I'm very glad I'm not living in a time like when my grandmother was told by social workers to stay with her husband who was routinely beating her, because of her "wifely duties", but if you think we've come 100% you're either ignorantly or willfully blinding yourself to realities women live through. Sadly it's still just a thing how men seem to sympathize and side with other men against women.

And I feel this really directly relates to incels, because I've seen so much about men suggesting things that are abhorrent to women. You know some men have blamed women for mass shootings, because those poor affection-starved killers aren't getting attention from women? I don't remember who it was, but I saw someone actually say girls should open themselves up to sleeping with these boys as a solution to stop school shootings. And I've seen men suggest making prostitution legal and easily available is how you could "cure" incel suffering. My feeling is many men feel sorry for these boys who are being mistreated by cruel women who won't give them what they deserve (and I've even seen people here posting how these men "deserve" affection from women!)