Why have incels gotten so much attention?

[Birdjaguar]

Oh, we are back to Incels again.

 

[bernie14]

Still current article I read years ago giving a different take on the "porn problem" to individual males' sexuality https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2011/02/hes_just_not_that_into_anyone.html

Returning to answer the op...

Scapegoat(s)?

#301

 

[bernie14]

Being an incel isn't a psychiatric problem in and of itself, but the behaviours, deficits and cognitive patterns which typify the label are certainly indicative of pathological risk factors.

Each and every incel may not have psychiatric issues in the commonplace sense of psychosis but that in itself isn't the real concern.

The link between psychopathy and criminality is sketchy at best (some studies actually indicate just the opposite, that by and large sufferers of psychiatric illness are statistically at increased risk of being victims of violent and sexual crimes , whilst being less likely to actually offend). a lot depends on the source of the data, the diagnosing authority, the methodology, the statistical analysis employed to be frank.

What is the concern is the risks they pose and forensic mental health services deal in personality disorders and the associated risks with a frequency way in excess of that experienced by mainstream psychiatry. Social withdrawal, pathologising sexuality, rejection or abrogation of societal norms and conventions regarding individual reaponsibility are all red flags that a clinician with a forensic background would recognise. What I'm proposing is that early identification if high risk individuals would be potentially much more productive (not to mention cost effective) than the vastly more expensive custodial and clinical interventions we currently pour money into with dubious effect.

Leaving aside the fact that I'm talking myself out of a career here the main issue I see would be compliance, as you say, who wants that label attached to them from an early age and those who are at the greatest risk of offending behaviours would also be the hardest to engage with unless the process of assessment were carried in a setting where the state already has a pastoral role to the population under assessment.

Isnt this the plot to clockwork orange?

 

[Lexicus]

They are fringe group, essentially the same as radfems but with the opposite sign.

Can you quote even a single "radfem" who has argued that women should be able to rape men with impunity?

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

It's discrimination in a sense of the word. Of course, that is discrimination that everyone (the asexual aside) engage in. The sort of funny thing about incels is that most of them could get laid easily enough if they lowered their standards of physical attractiveness - if they were, ah, less discriminating...

You can't steal what nobody owned in the first place.

I love how propertarians always come out with some variation of this argument when the awkward question of slavery is brought up. In reality slavery is the raw essence, the truest form, of private property, which historically has always been associated with domination, oppression, violence, and so on. Of course, to relate this back to the point, the converse of that is the freedom, rights, etc. of the master class. The reaction of masters to any limitation on their power over their slaves is always to act as though they are being enslaved- which is precisely what we see with the situation of women today, and all the pathetic men in this thread who appear to genuinely believe men are being oppressed or "discriminated against" in some sense by social progress.

Ryika is pretty smart and the people doing this kind of academia are pretty smart, but the idea that they're authoritatively smarter is, let's say, wishful thinking.

Of course; I too weigh the words of random anonymous trolls on CFC equally with people who have spent their lives studying and mastering the subject of a thread.

 

[Lexicus]

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

If you tell me straight out that you don't take the physical attractiveness of potential sexual partners into account when deciding whether you want to have sex with them, I'll come straight out and call you a liar.

 

[Archon_Wing]

I love how propertarians always come out with some variation of this argument when the awkward question of slavery is brought up. In reality slavery is the raw essence, the truest form, of private property, which historically has always been associated with domination, oppression, violence, and so on.

Why is it an awkward question? It's been settled for like 150 years with the exception of exploitation of prisoners.

And it's not like it matters. If you don't accept private property as a concept, then there is still no harm done from freeing slaves because you can't be stealing anyways.

I have no idea why you chose to split hairs here or anything is dependent on a "propertarian" perspective, though I just assume it's a strawman where you just make stuff up about a rather simple sentence I typed, lol.

Of course, to relate this back to the point, the converse of that is the freedom, rights, etc. of the master class. The reaction of masters to any limitation on their power over their slaves is always to act as though they are being enslaved- which is precisely what we see with the situation of women today, and all the pathetic men in this thread who appear to genuinely believe men are being oppressed or "discriminated against" in some sense by social progress.

Two separate issues. But it's okay if you want to jam it all into an easy to digest package.

 

[Commodore]

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

Indeed. I find it sad that this has to be pointed out to some people.

 

[Archon_Wing]

My body isn't an equal opportunity space.

But.... suppose it could have its benefits.

 

[red_elk]

Can you quote even a single "radfem" who has argued that women should be able to rape men with impunity?

That would be strange for them, don't you think so? From what I know, most of them hate sex with men and men in general.
If you want quotes, you can read this: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Valerie_Solanas, taking into account that this is what relatively intelligent activist says.

 

[Archon_Wing]

That person, and I knew that was gonna be brought up, is not a radfem. She's just nuts in addition to people thinking all feminists are like that already which is hardly fair.

 

[Lexicus]

Why is it an awkward question? It's been settled for like 150 years with the exception of exploitation of prisoners.

And it's not like it matters. If you don't accept private property as a concept, then there is still no harm done from freeing slaves because you can't be stealing anyways.

I have no idea why you chose to split hairs here.

Slavery is awkward because it's a case of private property that completely upends the normal justifications for private property. It demonstrates how the freedom of property owners is the oppression of the propertyless, every. Single. Time.

Two separate issues. But it's okay if you want to jam it all into an easy to digest package.

They are obviously not two separate issues. In fact it's even the case that at ancient Rome the power of a master over his slaves was derived from that of a male patriarch over the female members of his household...

 

[caketastydelish]

That person, and I knew that was gonna be brought up, is not a radfem. She's just nuts in addition to people thinking all feminists are like that already which is hardly fair.

classic no true Scotsman.

"Elliot Rodger was 'not' an incel either. He's just nuts."

 

[red_elk]

She's just nuts

I guess so. About as much nuts as the incel who allegedly argued that men should be able to rape women with impunity.

 

[caketastydelish]

Slavery is awkward because it's a case of private property that completely upends the normal justifications for private property. It demonstrates how the freedom of property owners is the oppression of the propertyless, every. Single. Time.



They are obviously not two separate issues. In fact it's even the case that at ancient Rome the power of a master over his slaves was derived from that of a male patriarch over the female members of his household...

Please leave this discussion in the other thread.

 

[caketastydelish]

Going back to the original topic ferchristsake:

I think it's interesting that Reddit (I frequent Reddit all the time) has shut down and cracked down entirely on the 'incel' groups but has left MGTOW, Red Pill, MRA, etc up and left them alone.

 

[Lexicus]

the incel who allegedly argued that men should be able to rape women with impunity.

Once again

tl;dr people defending incels don't know what incels are

Please leave this discussion in the other thread.

Incels are quite reminiscent of Patrick Henry complaining that the King of England wants to put slave chains on him.

 

[caketastydelish]

I'm not defending them. I made that pretty clear in the OP and throughout the entire thread.

You're talking about marriage inequality, which obviously belongs in the other thread. This is about incels. More specifically, an incel is a guy who isn't married/in a relationship in the first place, so comparing them to men who are in abusive relationships with women isn't relevant here.

 

[Archon_Wing]

classic no true Scotsman.

"Elliot Rodger was 'not' an incel either. He's just nuts."

Cute, but nope....

I guess so. About as much nuts as the incel who allegedly argued that men should be able to rape women with impunity.

And I don't assume every incel goes out and stabs/shoots people. And they don't

 

[Lexicus]

I'm not defending them.

You kind of are but that was more directed at red_elk who obviously has no idea wth incels actually are

 

[caketastydelish]

How am I defending them?