Why have incels gotten so much attention?

[Manfred Belheim]

That was the standard bait and switch. Ryika never said anything remotely like "we should make someone date those people," so "picking up and going after it" was a dead end. That's a somewhat standard trap. And by using the "look at me, I overcome" argument the trap is made consistently tighter. It's just the usual issue of "How do you express distaste for the incel position, and point out that they are responsible for their own situation, without sliding into condescension?" Ryika managed to get Spot to just keep repeating his effort to "make his point" despite the reality that Ryika's responses were basically, "sure, but why are you being such a prig about it?"

I tried to bail him out with the irrefutable thing about "people in cells," but he just kept amplifying on "if I can do it anyone can." The more he harped on how tremendous the difficulties are that he has managed to overcome the more self aggrandizing and off point he got. All the way up to the "if you could only see how hideous I really am you would surely know how amazing my conquests are" point where things spun off into absurdity.

I'm not defending Ryika's actions. I find the "bait and switch, then antagonize as a distraction while they choke on the bait repeatedly" style to be unproductive and at least borderline uncivil. But it is what it is.

Is this a new definition of "bait and switch"? Person B keeps going after something Person A never said, therefore person A pulled a "bait and switch" on them? You're so cynical.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Is this a new definition of "bait and switch"? Person B keeps going after something Person A never said, therefore person A pulled a "bait and switch" on them? You're so cynical.

If person A said something like "I'm not racist, I just think flying the confederate battle flag from the back of my truck and driving through the projects is fun" and then acts surprised and offended when people keep coming after their racism, all the while pointing out "but I specifically said that I'm not racist, so why are you acting like I said I was" then, yeah, that's a bait and switch. It is saying something that is certain to take the conversation in a particular direction, while providing a technical semantics rabbit hole of "but I never said that" arguments.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

An Incel who has a girlfriend?

Had, not has.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

You may not have been talking about incels, but that's the conversation the rest of us are having. By all means start another thread where the topic is more broadly about dating difficulties, but right here, right now, incels are explicitly the point.

What a great idea! Let's make a THIRD thread, this time about "involuntary celibates". Couldn't possibly discuss that concept in an incel thread.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

What a great idea! Let's make a THIRD thread, this time about "involuntary celibates". Couldn't possibly discuss that concept in an incel thread.

At some point just about everyone has "dating difficulties." Most of them don't become incels over it.

 

[Ryika]

Had, not has.

That's not what she wrote.

I have a friend who just yesterday showed me something an incel posted, about how his girlfriend years ago had sex with another man, and he's thinking of beating her for this because she dares to feel her body belongs to her and she didn't "save herself for a nice man like him."

She reports a story from an "Incel" who is thinking about beating his current girlfriend (or was thinking at the time the post was made) because she had sex with another man years ago and as a result is not a virgin. Surely a terrible person, but that doesn't appear to be an Incel, not by strict definition of the identity at least. It may of course still be a person who frequents that community, but the whole line of reasoning about that being one of the reasons that makes Incels behave the way they do (that she follows that story up with) is utterly nonsensical.

 

[Farm Boy]

Ah yeas Tim, the stupid issue where our merry band of subjectivists become frothing objectivists.

Because that's totally what's going on. Okikaydere. Slaaaaaaveryyyyyyy.

 

[red_elk]

From what I read on incels forum, a man who ever had a girlfriend can't be considered incel.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

That's not what she wrote.


She reports a story from an "Incel" who is thinking about beating his current girlfriend (or was thinking at the time the post was made) because she had sex with another man years ago and as a result is not a virgin. Surely a terrible person, but that doesn't appear to be an Incel, not by strict definition of the identity at least. It may of course still be a person who frequents that community, but the whole line of reasoning about that being one of the reasons that makes Incels behave the way they do is utterly nonsensical.

While the structure is technically vague, the use of the phrase "his gf years ago had" establishes a pretty obvious time frame.

 

[Ryika]

While the structure is technically vague, the use of the phrase "his gf years ago had" establishes a pretty obvious time frame.

I don't see any such ambiguity. The phrase only works in one way in my opinion:

about how his girlfriend years ago had sex with another man -> his current girlfriend had sex with another man years ago

For the way you understand the phrase to work, it appears to me that there needs to be added another word: "about how his girlfriend from years ago had sex with another man".

Of course even then the rest of the sentece would not make sense either from a point of logical narrative; that she didn't "save herself for a nice man like him." implies that she had sex before they were together, not that they were together and then years later she had sex with somebody else.

So I think you're misinterpreting the story, the only way the story makes sense to me is the way I summarized it. She had sex with a random guy before they were together and as a result is not a virgin, he found out and now asks whether he should beat her for it.

But given that MaryBK has liked a post just a few minutes ago and thus seems to be following the development of the thread, maybe she can clear up what she meant by that phrase.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

From what I read on incels forum, a man who ever had a girlfriend can't be considered incel.

I'm pretty sure that a whole lot of incels have origin stories about a gf that "did them wrong."

 

[MaryKB]

My friend showed me an image of something a person posted at an incel forum, about how his only ever woman "friend" is now his girlfriend (he says he and she never are intimate), and she told him years ago she had sex with a "chad", and he's asking other incels what he should do, if he should leave her, beat her, and so on. And how upset he is how she's upset at him for wanting to control her body and her past, and how horrible a person she is because she didn't save herself for him. So to me it sounds like he feels she's his current girlfriend, I don't know what sort of qualifications you need to be embraced by some kind of incel club or something, but he really sounds like the kind of boy I've been talking about.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I don't see any such ambiguity. The phrase only works in one way in my opinion:

My bad.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

If person A said something like "I'm not racist, I just think flying the confederate battle flag from the back of my truck and driving through the projects is fun" and then acts surprised and offended when people keep coming after their racism, all the while pointing out "but I specifically said that I'm not racist, so why are you acting like I said I was" then, yeah, that's a bait and switch. It is saying something that is certain to take the conversation in a particular direction, while providing a technical semantics rabbit hole of "but I never said that" arguments.

And something equivalent to that happened here when?

At some point just about everyone has "dating difficulties." Most of them don't become incels over it.

Okay. Relevance to what I said about making a third thread though?

 

[Ryika]

If person A said something like "I'm not racist, I just think flying the confederate battle flag from the back of my truck and driving through the projects is fun" and then acts surprised and offended when people keep coming after their racism, all the while pointing out "but I specifically said that I'm not racist, so why are you acting like I said I was" then, yeah, that's a bait and switch. It is saying something that is certain to take the conversation in a particular direction, while providing a technical semantics rabbit hole of "but I never said that" arguments.

Such a thing did not happen in any way. I made a response quoting this exact part of a post...

I don't think "involuntary" celibacy exists at all for healthy functional people;

...saying...

Well, that depends on the expectations one has about the partner I would say. If you're really, really ugly, but at the same time want a partner who's not just leftover material that nobody else wanted to jump on, and then also want a partner that you can intellectually connect with at the same time, then I assume it would be pretty difficult to find a partner who is simultaneously willing to accept you and meeting your expectations.

...and then spot261 responded to that and in the posts that followed that kept talking about Incels, even though I told him during every step of that journey that I was not talking about Incels in the first place, but the idea of whether involuntary celibacy exists as a thing. He is the one who instigated that discussion, he is the one who continued that discussion and ignored again and again my attempts to explain to him that he's ascribing sentiments to my posts that I did not make.

I did absolutely nothing wrong, I was not being provocative, I did not make any outlandish statements, I did not bait him into making responses.

To say that I am responsible for his behavior, is ridiculous.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

My friend showed me an image of something a person posted at an incel forum, about how his only ever woman "friend" is now his girlfriend (he says he and she never are intimate), and she told him years ago she had sex with a "chad", and he's asking other incels what he should do, if he should leave her, beat her, and so on. And how upset he is how she's upset at him for wanting to control her body and her past, and how horrible a person she is because she didn't save herself for him. So to me it sounds like he feels she's his current girlfriend, I don't know what sort of qualifications you need to be embraced by some kind of incel club or something, but he really sounds like the kind of boy I've been talking about.

That's the kind of person that probably SHOULD be single. Leaving her might be the best option, given what else is under consideration that'd be doing her a favor and probably avoiding jail time while he's at it.

I'd recommend "don't be so messed up" if he can pick that option, but it doesn't look promising.

 

[Archon_Wing]

PlainsCowCel is just triggering. Arid world where Mali and only Mali has grasslands in some kind of cosmic irony no doubt.

Indeed, I mean in a plainscowcel situation, there's no population and that's extremely hard to find any love there. Meanwhile, Mali gets born with 3 gold and gets all the ladies!

 

[spot261]

...and then spot261 responded to that and in the posts that followed that kept talking about Incels, even though I told him during every step of that journey that I was not talking about Incels in the first place, but the idea of whether involuntary celibacy exists as a thing. He is the one who instigated that discussion, he is the one who continued that discussion and ignored again and again my attempts to explain to him that he's ascribing sentiments to my posts that I did not make.

I did absolutely nothing wrong, I was not being provocative, I did not make any outlandish statements, I did not bait him into making responses.

To say that I am responsible for his behavior, is ridiculous.

That's nice, but this is a discussion about incels, so tough luck.

You misrepresented my point about the nature of attractiveness not being linear, redirecting it to a scenario where I was failing to grasp the position of an incel rather than my obvious and stated intent to point out attraction is simply more personal, nuanced and complex than you suggest, but I gave you a pass because I (still) assume it wasn't done intentionally.

It was, however, a crucial juncture to understanding both incels (which is the subject after all, regardless of your repeated protests) and your own thinking as expressed, which veers incredibly close to sounding like the same thing at times. Not derailing, whether intended or otherwise, would have led to a much more productive exchange.

 

[Ryika]

That's nice, but this is a discussion about incels, so tough luck.

You misrepresented my point about the nature of attractiveness not being linear, redirecting it to a scenario where I was failing to grasp the position of an incel rather than my obvious and stated intent to point out attraction is simply more personal, nuanced and complex than you suggest, but I gave you a pass because I (still) assume it wasn't done intentionally.

It was, however, a crucial juncture to understanding both incels (which is the subject after all, regardless of your repeated protests) and your own thinking as expressed, which veers incredibly close to sounding like the same thing at times. Not derailing, whether intended or otherwise, would have led to a much more productive exchange.

I don't care about any of this.

What I care about is that @Timsup2nothin accused me of intentionally misleading you, of setting up a trap. That is something I did not do, and as you continue to show by ignoring the context in which my posts were made, (even now that you're fully aware of it) and still go on about nonsense that I didn't say, the only one who's trapping you, is yourself.

Tim should really apologize for him accusation, or at least take it back.

 

[spot261]

I don't care about any of this.

What I care about is that @Timsup2nothin accused me of intentionally misleading you, of setting up a trap. That is something I did not do, and as you continue to show by ignoring the context in which my posts were made, (even now that you're fully aware of it) and still go on about nonsense that I didn't say, the only one who's trapping you, is yourself.

Tim should really apologize for him accusation, or at least take it back.

No, he recognised a clear and visible pattern which raised suspicions for several people, me included. I just don't know you well enough to form any conclusions based on previous patterns, so I assumed ignorance rather than malice. There isn't a third option sadly.

In either case the "trap" failed and you still haven't addressed the point attraction doesn't work according to a linear scale, which is an inherent flaw in incel thinking.