A common BP (and sometimes TRP) notion is that when foreveralone people and incels feel sad, angry or otherwise negative about those situation, those feeling are unwarranted because sex and companionship are not needs. That is, one can have a happy and fulfilling life while never having (mutual) sex and being more or less socially isolated.

Now, I personally don't agree with that and I think the desire to love and be loved is hardwired into human nature, but for the sake of this post, let's accept the notion.

So now we have a society of people, some of whom will always be alone. Doesn't it then follow that society has a duty to provide those people with care in old age, at society's expense? The only other option is a death isolation, which has a high chance of being slow and very painful, and by not providing universal care for such people, society would essentially be condemning them to such a death... or to suicide, which society also strongly discourages and condemns.

So, essentially, as it stands now, older FAs and incels have no recourse, unless they are rich and can BUY that care. If society is supposed to be fair and humane, and to be inclusive for all kinds of people with special needs, doesn't it then make sense that society has a duty to care for older outcasts the same way society has a duty to care for disabled people, people with medical emergencies etc.?

Alternatively, if you believe that society has no such duty, do you think it's humane to condemn such people to physical suffering unless if they can't afford care? What other recourse do you think there could be?