Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
i don't know any incels, but from what i've seen and read i think all incels are either mentally ill or physically very unattractive. these incel men, in my opinion, would be better off addressing their serious problem issues (mental and physical health) than "demystifying sex".
it is unproductive to look to women as the reason for their personal problems instead of owning up to their own personal choices and doing the hard work to change themselves.
And it's not so much as so many go without, it's that the top men who sleep with hundreds and thousands of women just drive the averages of up of those with low counts and virgin men. There is more of huge disparity of numbers between the 'top' males and females with who they sleep with. That's my takeaway.
But if this is true, shouldn't incels have a beef with the "desirable males" and not with women in general?
But if this is true, shouldn't incels have a beef with the "desirable males" and not with women in general?
A lot of them do. ("Chad") Actually they seem to have a problem with pretty much everybody except other incel men.
Oh, and how about as a distinguishing feature for ya, the ones I consider to be a problem, very likely do not believe that actual incel "females" exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stockyman
My takeaway was that women build up an unreasonable expectation of whom they can actually be in a relationship with when desirable men put next to no effort sleeping with average to below average looking women, especially online. They aren't in a harem but expectations are a bit deluded after all the constant attention and messages they receive online and the sex with desirable males.
And it's not so much as so many go without, it's that the top men who sleep with hundreds and thousands of women just drive the averages of up of those with low counts and virgin men. There is more of huge disparity of numbers between the 'top' males and females with who they sleep with. That's my takeaway.
Yes and no.
I do think that women's standards have shifted. But the question is... Say a woman decides she will not settle for less than x, y and z in a life partner. She has a vision, a mission, and goals for where she wants her life to go and any man who will hinder more than help, is not getting on board with her. IF she can be content enough with being single... It is her life, isn't it?
Or is she obligated to pair up with the first man who wants her to, because holding herself back is denying some guy a chance?
That's part of the issue too, though. Again with women as commodities. Her own experience of her life is not anywhere near as important as some hypothetical figure of a man out there who doesn't have a partner, whose lonely woes she could solve by agreeing to be his mate.
Another piece of the puzzle is that a lot of men do not have decent self awareness about what they do or don't bring to the table. When I lived in Colorado Springs, I did not want to date soldiers (I'd been married to the military before and didn't want to deal with that bundle of challenges again) or stoners. In a town with five active military installations and legal weed, that ruled out a LOT of men on the dating apps. Most of them, really. But one guy I did not respond to might be sitting there thinking that I am stuck up waiting on a Chad and who do I think I am, with my divorce ongoing and two kids, I am damaged goods, how DARE I reject him??? Must be he wasn't tall enough or rich enough or something! When in fact, it was all the 420 friendly talk and the pot leaf hat and the fact that otherwise he looks like a semi-homeless guy in his profile pic. "Oh I'm not talking about homeless looking guys, those are outliers!" THEY ARE NOT. Every other profile was either that, or a 20 something enlisted guy showing his abs in a dirty bathroom mirror. Ya'll get the duckface, we get that nonsense.
And yet, despite ruling out the most common by far kinds of guys in my area at the time, along with a host of others, and despite having my own baggage and respecting the ways in which it'd be a dealbreaker for some, I did in fact find some acceptable options and remarried. But the only reason I bring all this up, is that to every guy I did not choose, I'm sure my reasons were totally unreasonable, whatever they were, he could only imagine...just because at the end of the day it wasn't him. And he doesn't see a damn thing wrong with what he's offering.
And just like around here when I have told guys at times how their mindset is hurting their chances, I could tell one of those dudes his profile pic makes him look like a scrub and I'm sure he wouldn't listen.
Also? Where are all these bitter, angry women who can't find a man to be with? 'Cause to kinda circle back, the only women I know who are long term single, are also OK with it. (Incidentally they have dogs, not cats, too...not that it matters.)
The only cat lady spinster I can think of was a 50+ year old weirdo who was the female version of Bubbles from Trailer Park Boys, and she was obsessed (really obsessed) with some boy band at the time, and given those guys looked like teenagers her interest creeped me right the hell out, as did pretty much everything about her. She was a coworker ages ago. Freaked me out though she was probably harmless.
But the masses of normal, average women, that guys think are so very picky and unrealistic, are in fact partnering up with normal average men left and right all over the place.
My takeaway was that women build up an unreasonable expectation of whom they can actually be in a relationship with when desirable men put next to no effort sleeping with average to below average looking women, especially online. They aren't in a harem but expectations are a bit deluded after all the constant attention and messages they receive online and the sex with desirable males.
And it's not so much as so many go without, it's that the top men who sleep with hundreds and thousands of women just drive the averages of up of those with low counts and virgin men. There is more of huge disparity of numbers between the 'top' males and females with who they sleep with. That's my takeaway.
I'm not sure this is true. I don't think the majority of women who reject "incels" (or anyone else for that matter) are then immediately jumping in bed with the top whatever percent of "desirable" men.
I think for the most part, those women are more content going home alone, compared to those men who think something along the lines of: going home alone is a life not worth living.
Or course there are exceptions and none of that is 100% one way or the other.
In the name of analogies and metaphors, let me make one. Imagine everyone having a house, and people wanting to swap houses. Some people are happy with their own house, but are open to swapping houses with someone whose house they find appealing, and who finds their house appealing. Others are absolutely desperate to swap houses and think they have no purpose in life unless they swap their house with someone ASAP.
Now of course those who are desperate to swap houses will think that the whole system is against them and that they don't have any power in the house swapping dynamic. Yes they don't have power - they don't have power because they are absolutely desperate to swap houses, and anyone who has bought or sold houses would know that if you are desperate then you are in a position of no power and no control.
While those who are happy to wait for a good offer, have a lot more power and a lot more control.
So my simple suggestion to "incels" would be to find a purpose in life other than sleeping/being in a relationship with women. Letting go of that toxic desperation would likely make them come off better and actually make it easier for them to date. Not to mention it would give them a better overall quality of life.
I do think that women's standards have shifted. But the question is... Say a woman decides she will not settle for less than x, y and z in a life partner. She has a vision, a mission, and goals for where she wants her life to go and any man who will hinder more than help, is not getting on board with her. IF she can be content enough with being single... It is her life, isn't it?
I think a large part of the problem is that for a subsection of guys, their vision, a mission, and goals for life entirely revolve around having sex with/being in a relationship with a woman. Their sense of self worth, their motivation, their confidence, everything is tied into romantic relations with women. And that is unhealthy - both for the person themselves, and for women they come into contact with.
Those men would do well to find a vision, a mission, and goals for life that they can achieve regardless of how their dating goes. Then when they are more at peace with themselves, start dating looking for women who add value to their already valuable life.
Basically, those men can learn from the women that reject them, on how to live life.
Whether or not it's the root cause, a/the core problem which got buried in the mix (probably due to the lengthiness of my post) but was restated more succinctly in Avondalist's post on page 5 is that women's preferences are totally incompatible with reality/society, with their desires to find a suitable-to-them, lifelong, monogamous partner. It's mathematically impossible for it to even approach fruition. Yes, some may still be [apparently] succeeding, but many are failing, like 2-3x as many as there were 40-50 years ago.
It has been proven in studies that women believe the 'average man' to be approximately the 80th to 90th percentile of men (in terms of height, looks, money, insert other quantifiable marker), not the 50th. Meaning the 60th to 80th percentile are below-average, 'settle' material, the 40th to 60th are the dregs to be avoided, and the rest essentially don't exist. Whatever the exact numbers, whether it's 25%, 35%, 45%, you have a huge percentage of men who are totally off the radar. This is not a new phenomenon, as only 40% of men historically have reproduced (usually in a context of polygamy/polygyny), while I believe 80% or more of women have reproduced. We can't keep ignoring this as a factor and saying that it's all just a defective mentality in the incels.
I've been on the good end of it and gotten far more than my 'share,' but that statistically means so many men got little or nothing. No, woman aren't at all obligated to have sex with them, but it does suck, and I don't think their self-identifier is inaccurate. I do believe it has gotten dramatically worse since online dating became the norm. Self-improvement and changing perspective are not apparent solutions, because evidence indicates women will just raise their standards to match what's out there. And as the most in-demand men stay in the market far longer (into their early/mid 30s and beyond, where they used to be married by early 20s), they fool huge numbers of women into thinking they have a chance of permanent commitment (many of these guys will go through hundreds of women without committing), when only one (or none) of them ever will. Cue the Bachelor/Bachelorette.
Like I said before, the only apparent solution (other than band-aid distractions for said men; porn, prostitutes, OnlyFans, sexbots, or whatever; or bringing in foreigners who don't abide by Western dating culture) is some radical social restructuring, whether that's normalization of polygamy, more gay guys, some non-traditional vocation for huge numbers of men that doesn't involve an expectation of marriage (which used to be the priesthood/monastery, being a pirate/mercenary, eunuch, slave, etc), or something else. You could say I'm blaming women, but I'm really not, since they probably can't help it, just as men can't voluntarily change a lot of the things we think and do. Society needs to change, whether by design or organically. But if you want to keep talking about Q-Anon (a disinfo campaign; with plenty of truth mixed in) and a fake shooting (the Elliott Roger incident), I can't stop you.
Please cite these studies of women's expectations and for BALANCE, I'm sure you can find something similar for men's expectations. I'm not buying what you're selling (in terms of the typical male and female) but show me a decent study or two and I'd consider it. Otherwise, it's just your biased supposition and when you use words like eunuch and slave...yeah, it's definitely biased.
I actually think that this is connected to a bunch of other things. It's easy to pin it to the subject of sex since it seems like that's "the problem." But I believe that there is more going on in a much bigger sense, that is leading to this stuff.
Because the worst bad actors of the incel movement are not simply guys who can't get laid. If anything that is more a symptom than the disease, and just gives them one complaint to focus their anger and grievance.
It is the sense of frustrated entitlement, hopelessness and despair and ensuing rage about it...that is the real issue. What feeds that?
1. The sheer extent of wealth inequality in many nations is a contributor. When conditions are like this, everyone (including, actually, the wealthy) gets less happy and more prone to focus on perceived wrongs. People in general get more hung up on whether or not the are getting what they feel they deserve, or whether they feel they deserve what they have. And those who don't start out with any really great advantages or opportunities might wonder if they will ever even be able to afford what used to be middle class milestones, like owning a home or having children without constantly fearing for if they can reliably provide for them. It's not just people's net worth on the ropes in an economy like America's is now...it's their dignity.
2. The internet. The sheer flooding of porn and the ability for people to spiral into increasing isolation and troll/bully mindsets and to see their nasty attitudes validated and mirrored if they find other incels in groups or forums.
3. A highly divisive social atmosphere driven by international political actors. It has been a very deliberate tactic to feed the mentality into people, "You're not getting the life you deserve, want, and should have, and it is THOSE other people's fault! You should hate them. You might even consider making war against them, for surely they are the enemy of your happiness!" This particular instance simply happens to be men getting that way about women and successful men. But their perception of reality is distorted, and it is done ON PURPOSE.
4. And all of this is happening against a backdrop of female empowerment. Women can control our reproduction, we can vote, we can become successful in college and the workplace. We can lead nations and companies. We can conduct all of the financial and property transactions that men can. This has been the case for less than one full lifetime in America. We are no longer helpless to live a full life without a man (or a charitable family) to help with our basic support. We can go just as far as any man and some of us can go much further than most. And no fault divorce is now the law of the land. Which means that in order for a man to find, catch, and keep, a loving relationship with a woman, and one that isn't fraught with problems, he must step up and get said woman to LIKE HIM. He's got to be a more appealing option, than a woman's own company alone is to her. Neither of my Grandmothers liked my Grandfathers. They both made it until death did them part, and by the time it happened those couples were more hate than love, but if they'd been young people today they would have split up long sooner. No woman will tolerate what either of my Grandmothers did, or their mothers or their mothers' mothers. Men however, have been slow to catch up and stubborn about changing their behavior, and it's been very unclear about what aspects they even SHOULD consider changing or not. I do not blame men for feeling confused and uncertain sometimes. And how are they supposed to adapt, anyways, if we've all been driven to hide in our homes staring at screens rather than interacting with other PEOPLE?? (Pandemic lockdowns, while perhaps necessary, I suspect have set a lot of people back in this regard.)
I do think that women's standards have shifted. But the question is... Say a woman decides she will not settle for less than x, y and z in a life partner. She has a vision, a mission, and goals for where she wants her life to go and any man who will hinder more than help, is not getting on board with her. IF she can be content enough with being single... It is her life, isn't it?
That's part of the issue too, though. Again with women as commodities. Her own experience of her life is not anywhere near as important as some hypothetical figure of a man out there who doesn't have a partner, whose lonely woes she could solve by agreeing to be his mate.
Another piece of the puzzle is that a lot of men do not have decent self awareness about what they do or don't bring to the table.
But the masses of normal, average women, that guys think are so very picky and unrealistic, are in fact partnering up with normal average men left and right all over the place.
Of course women should never settle or have sex with people they don't want. It's just their standards are very high. Just like men, some women don't have self awareness of what they do or don't bring to the table.
Of course women should never settle or have sex with people they don't want. It's just their standards are very high. Just like men, some women don't have self awareness of what they do or don't bring to the table.
Your complaint is valid for women who have high standards and then complain that they can't find good dates. Well maybe their standards are too high.
But it is not valid for women who have high standards and are happy being single if men don't meet those standards. Nor is it for women who have high standards and can find dates even with those high standards. And I think a fair few women fall in these categories.
To go back to the house analogy, someone who has very high standards for selling their house and is happy not selling their house unless they receive a very high offer, is not really deluded or lacking in self awareness. If they are also getting a lot of offers then having high standards is not delusional or lacking in self awareness.
While a person who is desperate to buy/sell a house with few offers and has very high standards - they are lacking in self awareness. That person would be better advised to find other options and become less desperate to sell the house, or improve the house to get more offers, or better market the house.
Last edited by Peter600; 03-09-2022 at 07:25 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
