Deradicalising hateful incels | LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Itchy-Breadfruit1315 · 2021-05-27T13:35:21+00:00

Alright people, let's talk. There are people who browse this subreddit who are hateful incels and are obviously radicalised. Reddit aside, I personally...

[–]DistrictAccurate 42 points43 points44 points 5 years ago* (23 children) | Copy Link

I believe the ridiculously open and severe bullying and body shaming towards men to be highly problematic. As long as prime time TV women tell men with inadequate bodies that thyare of no use to anyone or that they should kill themselves to laughing audiences, it will be hard to convince them of anything other than to react with hatred.

Unfortunately, most who unsuccessfully try to address this issue are completely uneducated on the reality of many men and just claim them to be paranoid regarding things that are literally everywhere. Acknowledging that what they see in this world is de facto real and horrible will be essential in reaching them and any approach dismissive of that reality, which is everything but a utopia, will inevitably fail in the long run.

Of course, after that there are the things that are then incorrectly spun further from what is real and so on until you do lose reality - but from what I saw it's a way to further and further rationalize the ignorant behaviour of society towards men. Therefore, that's something that needs to be made clear from the get go.

[–]Oncefa2left-wing male advocate 18 points19 points20 points 5 years ago* (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]PricklyGoober 12 points13 points14 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 12 points13 points14 points 5 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]Oncefa2left-wing male advocate 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 14 points15 points16 points 5 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NotARealTiger 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 13 points14 points15 points 5 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

The red pill (from the PUA years) came with the Internet, and was originated in Toronto, one of the most difficult cities to date in the entire world. It was a series of techniques to convince women that you're the cool guy that they're looking for. There was an increase in competition, in an increasingly expensive city divided in sub-cultures where status is very important.

Mystery, Roosh V, etc etc. Those were the years of (some) men traveling to Eastern Europe to secure a wife. Yep, mostly misogynist.

The black pill belongs to the Tinder Era (2012....). Basically, "it's over", you are Chad or you are not Chad. It is strongly based on a famous data study of OkCupid, where women found only the top 20% of men to be "average" while men rate women on a normal curve.

The grand-daddy of all of this is the book "Whatever (Extension du domaine de la lutte)", by the enfant terrible of French Literature Michel Houellebecq. I read it back in 2000 and I could not believe that he would think that the dating market was an extension of the economic market based on a kind of erotic capital. Back then I believed that social class (capital and related status) plus similar educational backgrounds where the backbone of human mating.

But I never expected the "Tinderpocalypse" and the new power of erotic capital. It was and it still is a surprise.

[–]ImportantResults 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ImportantResults 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm gonna copy a good answer from Quora:

Urbanism:

Toronto is really a few cities in one. People grow up in bubbles, that become more geographically sparse (university/college) with time. If you don’t spend enough time in one of the bubbles or don’t make connections within your bubble, you’ll be socially isolated

Identity politics and multiculturalism:

Diversity can actually make dating harder ironically (...) if you belong to a group that isn’t “preferred”, you will find yourself stuck learning the nuances of every ethnic group you deal with, on top of starting from a lower place on the totem pole (...) Financially successful people from smaller ethnic groups, don’t have a large community of people who look like them and are at the same socioeconomic level. (...) The gaps in economic representation also create messed up perceptions of certain groups. This is a barrier to dating across some groups.

Socioeconomics:

Many people are three or more generations removed from their migrant relatives. Housing prices and growth of the employment market have made Toronto a city of upper-middle class and rich people. Many people own homes worth $800′000–1.2Million. (...) If you don’t grow up in an upper-middle class area or better, you’ll be left out of many social experiences. There also is a pressure to have slightly nicer things to keep up with everyone else.

the cost of home ownership and increased acceptability of women to focus on career growth has made dating and relationships lower on the totem pole. People feel like they’ll never be able to settle down and buy a home, so they don’t try.

Technology and the free market:

Toronto has become a cool, cosmopolitan city almost over-night. How is an average guy supposed to compete in a city where women he knows from school have pictures at parties with NBA superstars and platinum recording artists?

Toronto is Instagram. Every guy has the same pair of sneakers, every woman has the same dress. Everyone takes the same trips to Cancun and goes to Veld. Everyone posts photos or Stories of themselves at Warehouse on Queen St. All of this is documented and posted on Instagram. People will judge your desirability based on how many Instagram followers you have. “Clout” is everything here.

Other stuff that dude wrote is just right wing rantings, but the parts I copied are logical.

https://qr.ae/pGK6Av

[–]OirishM 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]utopista1141 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

just not sure how these aren't applicable to most other cities

Became a city for rich people very fast, thus you need a lot of capital to be desirable.
Multiculturalism is not common around the world, you have the Canadian identity politics ideology combined with the American capitalist life in a city. Everything is then status compounded by ethnic and geographic bubbles.
The urban landscape of far apart neighborhoods, and a centered nightlife ill-suited to the needs of dating.

You need to live in a certain neighborhood, pertain to a certain ethnicity, look better than high-status men and have a certain amount of capital/career yourself.

Better to move.

And an extra one: I lived in a city with a high percentage of gays. In that environment, if you're not ultra-masculine, women automatically put you in the "gay" category since they compare you with those around.

[–]mrmensplights 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It’s important to realize these terms have nothing to do with dating or gender. They are just general terms that act as metaphors in lots of contexts.

Red pill is a metaphor for the loss of blissful ignorance. You learned the truth about something and now you’re red pilled. Like how Morpheus gave Neo the choice between the red pill (the truth) and the blue pill (blissful ignorance) in the Matrix.

Being black pilled is a term derived from being red pilled where the knowledge gained ends up being self destructive. E.g. You learned something you couldn’t live with or really screwed you up. You chose the red pill and couldn’t deal with what you learned. Connotations of suicide, giving up, or your life going totally off the rails.

That’s how I see them used almost everywhere these days. There was a community online dedicated to male dating strategy that also called itself “the red pill” or TRP.. but that’s just branding.

[–]MelissaMiranti 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NotARealTiger 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]DistrictAccurate 13 points14 points15 points 5 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

This post includes the link to the comdienne saying men with small dicks should just kill themselves and another about a black man with a micropenis and how men who don't want to immediately fuck want to trap women by sparking feelings and how his black friends wanted to assasinate him for damaging their reputation. BLM protesters were using "racism is small dick energy" signs which were then posted by celebs with tens of millions of followers - the reddit post includes some pictures of the signs. It also includes the story of the suicidal man who was bullied for his size (so the mental health team saw it in his record) and was brought to the hospital by police because he wanted to kill himself - but sent away by the mental health crisis team because they figured his episode would be caused by his dick size whilst refusing to look at or talk to him. They were described as brazen and in a jokey manner when telling the nurse in charge to send him away and were later seen making fun of his dick - he didn't survive:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/j81aw1/nsfwhigh_effort_man_denied_lifesaving/

Steve harvey said in his show that the root of hitlers issues / the holocaust was his penis size.

Another comedienne I'd have to look up said something like: "And I asked: what abilities could a man with a small dick have? Finding big dicks?"

Sophie hermann told chloe ferry on celebs go dating: the mansion 2021 that nobody wants someone with a small dick and there would be nothing more offensive than a guy with a small dick.

I'd have to look up names but it is too much and would take too long. It's everywhere - anti-speeding ads that were somehow addressing this, peta had a campaign saying that sons of meat eaters got smaller dicks, some porn subreddit had a smaller dick as the downvote button (well and the pewdiepie big PP small pp thing exists as well). There's music, podcasts, games... You get the point.

Haven't even touched anything from being short to erectile dysfunction.

[–]NotARealTiger 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]DistrictAccurate 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Forgetaboutthelonely 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The key ways to deradicalize incels is Imho to give them decent advice.

Most of the dating advice today is shit. It's written by feminist women and men who see male sexuality as inherently predatory. And have no understanding of what dating as an unsuccessful man is like.

They don't want men to succeed. They want guys they deem creepy to stop making other women uncomfortable.

That's why being forward about your interests in any way is frowned upon. But being passive and nice is encouraged. And so guys are being nice. And it isn't working.

And this is part of the patriarchy mindset. Men have to change because we're the oppressors but women are fine just the way they are and never need to change anything about how they act because they're only ever victims to be acted upon.

But the reality is.

The dudes who act creepy? Who put their hand on a woman's back way too comfortably.

The dudes who are too forward?

They wouldn't be acting like that if it never worked. Men don't have a built in guide to dating. We have trial and error.

And that means We've gotta figure out what works by trying new things and refining our efforts.

And when something works. Even once. We stick with it.

And guess what that means? If those creepy tactics didn't work. We wouldn't be using them.

What we need is a better conversation about dating outside of a feminist framework that condemns men from the getgo.

[–]BloomingBrains 10 points11 points12 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Most incels I've seen (not just in this sub, which I don't even think is many, but in general) aren't hateful towards women. If anything, they're more of a danger to themselves than to anyone else. I was never really one of them, but I used to talk to those guys, and the suicidal ideation and self-loathing is so pervasive and depressing that I had to walk away. These are severely depressed, suffering people who have internalized the mantra "if you're alone there must be something wrong with you" deep into their being.

That said, ever since the main incel subreddit was banned, the new main incel sub is r/incelswithouthate, so perhaps my perception is filtered by confirmation bias. However, I think that a lot of the type of guys who say "femoids" and other inflammatory things are doing so as a means of catharsis, without really believing it. It's still wrong, but its also more of a coping mechanism than anything else. The percentage of incels that really believe the hateful stuff is probably smaller than we think it is, but by how much is hard to say, since incel stuff is saturated with so many layers of satire, trolling, edginess, etc.

[–]88mmAce 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]BloomingBrains 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]88mmAce 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BloomingBrains 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LettuceBeGrateful 8 points9 points10 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]complaiment 10 points11 points12 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]lorarc -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]complaiment 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 15 points16 points17 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate[M] 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (56 children) | Copy Link

[–]Oncefa2left-wing male advocate 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

I’m not all the way black pilled.. I’m in between redpiled and black pilled.. kinda wishy washy.. I don’t use terms like “foid” or anything.. I’m just your below average guy that just gave up on dating because women just want and can access way better options than I... that’s it.. Contrary to what most people believe I’m not one trigger away from lighting up the mall lol.. But my blackpill belief is that there are some men who are so screwed that even the redpill can’t save them.. but I think the redpill can still help majority of guys (to varying degrees Ofcourse)

Looks matter? Ofcourse.. that’s what gets you in the door..

height? Depends.. if you’re 5”10 like me.. I don’t think you’ll get rejected by a 5”2 woman if you meet all her other standards solely because of height

What else do incels usually say? Can you remind me? I forgot

And issues i face in life? Ehh I’m just your average broke(temporary) college student trying to build a career and wealth.. Apart from total unsuccessful dating and ugliness which I think cannot be remedied in my case and just lack of friends.. nothing else.. but it’s still very very significant to me

[–]Oncefa2left-wing male advocate 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Itchy-Breadfruit1315[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]funnystor 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (50 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]funnystor 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I've pretty much never had any success either in Japan or in Russia - women just aren't attracted to me and in fact outside of professional environments mostly refuse to interact with me at all.
I actually have been in one relationships, that even developed into a marriage. I found that it's actually very easy to interact, be intimate and have a deep emotional relationship with a woman who is interested in me.
However, eventually that relationship ended I've yet to meet another woman who would be open to even giving me a chance, let alone interested in me. And this is the situation of the overwhelming majority of incels - they're simply not attractive enough to be appealing to any woman. I'm sure you haven't met any such people and don't know what specific struggles they face in life and what some typical coping mechanisms are. Off the top of your head, what kind of advice would you give to me or other such men?

[–]funnystor 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Whoa, old thread but okay.

You could find a tailor and get some nice clothes really well fitted to you.

Already done - I own two tailored suits. I still look bad in them.

You could hire a personal trainer to make your body more attractive.

Also done - I went through five different personal trainers in my youth when I found myself struggling to gain muscle after losing a lot of weight (I was obese through my teens).

You could experiment with growing a beard and see if that makes things better or worse.

Also done. I personally like how I look with facial hair more, but the general consensus among people is that I look even worse with a beard/stache.

You could move somewhere with a favorable ratio of singles

Uh, no I couldn't. I have no skills that I could market in the western hemisphere and my Russian citizenship severely restricts my ability to travel for anything but tourism.

You could hire a professional match maker.

No, I couldn't. Matchmaking is a thriving industry in Japan and I do know the ins and outs of it quite well. I could have maybe applied to one of those services before COVID destroyed my business, but now I simply don't meet the income requirements - those places only accept men who are upper middle class or wealthier.

But overall, someone who knows you personally could probably give better advice.

Bro, I'm almost 40. Don't you think I've asked close friends for advice?

[–]funnystor 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I've heard that many people in Japan don't even want to date

I've lived most of my adult life in Russia. My success rates in both countries are equally low.

Or have you considered just lowering your standards for physical attractiveness?

To what, exactly? When I was in college I knew a woman who was so obese she literally couldn't take some classes because she couldn't fit through the auditorium doors. She was also balding, epileptic and diabetic. I can confidently say she's the least physically attractive woman I've ever met. Now, I personally wouldn't date her, but if I did pursue her, she would have rejected me because during the time I knew her all her boyfriends (and she was never single) were far more conventionally attractive than I am. If someone like that is out of my league, to what exactly am I supposed to lower my standards?

[–]funnystor 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

I’m fairly young.. in my 20s.. let’s just say between 20 and 23.. majority? I don’t think so.. most die alone.. it’s an almost inescapable negative feedback loop..

And it’s easy to say to just worry about other things but hear me out: most of the time if you haven’t experienced by a certain age it’s less and less likely you will.. most social cues, interactions with the opposite sex are learned during high school and college years.. after that for most people it’s just go to work, sleep, repeat.. the window to meet women after college really really reduces.. and if you haven’t already learned to talk to women or have any dating experience during the years where you were around the most number females in a conducive setting to gain that experience(college high school), it’s very very unlikely that you will succeed when opportunities become even narrower.. and the more you stay a virgin the more difficult it will take to lose it because at one point it kinda becomes part of your identity.. and women would fuck a virgin but not a guy who being a virgin is visibly part of his identity

[–]funnystor 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago* (13 children) | Copy Link

The thing is it's increasingly normal for relationships to be delayed. In California, the average marriage age for men is 30.5. Yes, over 30!

You're correct that identifying as a virgin probably doesn't help, so how can you solve that problem? I think the key is avoiding online incel communities because they have a crabs in the bucket mentality and don't want anyone escaping.

Instead fill that free time (once covid is passed) with other activities. The best activities are social or physical, or even better both at once. For example social dancing lessons give you a chance to get comfortable touching girls in a platonic but close up way. It's great to get more comfortable in your body. Improv lessons, also a great way to get comfortable moving, talking and being spontaneous around other people. These things are often easy to find as a college student for "free" (really paid for by your tuition), but there are also classes aimed at young adults outside college.

There are also some good ideas in the pickup artist literature, even if the community itself isn't great. For example how women expect to be touched to show that you're interested in them. Without that knowledge, if you're too scared to touch women, it's easy to go on many first dates but no second dates because of "lack of chemistry". Which is also why I recommend dancing, it's helpful to learn how to touch romantic interests but also to read their reactions so you can keep it a mutually enjoyable experience.

Does it take work to make up for lack of earlier experience? Yes, but it's definitely possible, and much better than wallowing in echo chambers online.

The fact is there are almost certainly girls out there who would be happy to date a version of you that's in a better headspace (and if you don't exercise much, getting fitter wouldn't hurt). I know "be yourself" is trite, so I guess I'd say, be a better version of yourself. Do things that make you more datable.

[–]Carkudo 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Nah marriage is delayed not relationships. Relationships/dating start earlier than ever.

Look when I say identitying as a virgin i don’t mean having it tattooed on my forearm and having an “i am a virgin” shirt with glasses on..I’m saying at a certain point it becomes part of your being.. like a limb.. It just gets hooked to your personality..

It’s easy to say to avoid incel communities but for incels it’s literally the only place incels feel we belong... incels are hated and ostracized every where else.. why would an incel leave the only place they feel at home?

Dancing? I wouldn’t feel comfortable dancing with a woman because I know she probably won’t wanna dance with me.. I don’t wanna get physical with a woman when I know she clearly doesn’t want to but still does it anyways.. I don’t wanna make I and her uncomfortable.. I struggle to imagine a girl would wanna get that up close to me.. I’m not the best sight you’ll ever see I tell you that buddy lol..

Touching a woman to show interest? Oooff might as well write myself on the sex offenders list in advance. Touching women is for guys they already somewhat find attractive.. I would be labeled creepy if I did that. Im not uncomfortable around women by any stretch but I know how to respect my boundaries and not make unwanted advances..

I’m really thankful for your suggestions and for trying to help but I’ve long given up.. I’ll just try to have a somewhat respectable life without women because dating is impossible for me..most guys are simply better options.. it is what it is.. I’ll survive it’s ok..

[–]funnystor 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]funnystor 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]funnystor 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight0 points 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

"Go to dance class" is a bit cliched advice for this stuff, but I do still recommend it and second what you're saying here.

Formal dance is better than trying to pick someone up in a club because dances are time-limited, and the interaction is more structured. It's a hell of a lot easier to pull off than trying to impress someone in a club in an unstructured way. Because the dances are time-limited, if you ask to dance with someone and you don't manage to impress them (or heck, maybe they won't impress you)...it's like a five-minute dance, tops, and then you wish them a good night and move on to find someone else.

The dances also have structure in that they're way more rules-based - they're not sexualised like club dancing invariably ends up being, and couple that with an expectation that people will be asking people to dance, it means women are a heck of a lot likelier to dance with you in that environment.

Source: a lot of ceilidh dancing at uni and in my home city.

[–]Carkudo 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]orion-7 -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]orion-7 -2 points-1 points0 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TintelFrootleft-wing male advocate -2 points-1 points0 points 5 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]TintelFrootleft-wing male advocate 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]TintelFrootleft-wing male advocate -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]TintelFrootleft-wing male advocate -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight2 points 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TintelFroot1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight2 points 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TintelFroot1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight2 points 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TintelFroot1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 12 points13 points14 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]funnystor 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 8 points9 points10 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]funnystor 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate[M] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheQuestioner235 -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BloomingBrains 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]BloomingBrains 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheQuestioner235 -5 points-4 points-3 points 5 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]BloomingBrains 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheQuestioner235 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]BloomingBrains 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BloomingBrains0 points 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Geiten 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate[M] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 11 points12 points13 points 5 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[–]Skirt_Douglas 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 15 points16 points17 points 5 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]Skirt_Douglas 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago* (28 children) | Copy Link

My actual take on this is rather nuanced, so much that It would take a long time to type out in this phone, so I have to keep it short.

I’m not saying we should be banning people, and I’m not saying we should silence people anytime they want to talk about hypergamy, I’m saying we should be a little more critical of the mentalities that emerge when we talk about it. Whenever hypergamy is the topic, that’s when you start seeing the most anti-women mentalities come out of the woodwork, that’s when you start seeing Mgtow and redpillers come and start generalizing women as all being money hungry, incels dogwhistles like “why am I alone just because I’m lacking a couple millimeters of jaw width”. My point is not that we need to turn into Menslib and start banning people and delete threads, my point is that we need to figure out a way to support perpetually lonely men without joining them in lamenting about how terrible women are for not jumping at the chance to date then, or validating this idea that women are all conspiring to not have sex with them personally. That is what I am saying is invalid.

The Hypergamy conversations that are just complaining about hypergamy are not even useful though, no solution ever comes out of them. Never in a million years are we going to be able to control who women sexually select, and we shouldn’t want to do this either. This is not an issue of men’s rights, nobody has the right to get laid. This is however an issue of male advocacy, and we need to figure out how to advocate for these men, without validating anti-women sentiments caused by the pain of endless wanting.

Also, come man. If this sub get’s shut down it won’t be because there are too many pro-feminists on here, and you know that. Personally I’ll take men’s lib light over Mgtow and redpill any day of the week.

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate[M] 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Skirt_Douglas 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I will definitely report when I see a clear black and white case of rule 6, however there are cases that are in a gray area, technically not overtly breaking rule 6 in plain English, but using subtext to imply or nod at woman hating. For instance that thing I said earlier “I shouldn’t have to be alone forever just because my jaw is a few millimeters too narrow” that sounds like an innocuous statement that doesn’t break rule 6, but the statement is a wink and a nod to the blackpill notion that all women can’t help but exclusively select men with a wide enough jaw, and having merely too few millimeters is enough to make the difference between a regular live life, and never having sex either. Now if you said that verbatim, it’s a clear breaking of rule 6, but if all you do is subtly hint at it, there is plausible deniability. This is what I mean by “soft misogyny”, it doesn’t break the rules but it lands just the same as if it did. I don’t know what the answer to that is other than calling it out as a commenter, it’s those cases that I’m not so sure reporting will do anything.

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DistrictAccurate 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]Skirt_Douglas 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago* (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]BloomingBrains 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]Skirt_Douglas 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago* (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]BloomingBrains 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

I didn't think you were talking about me, but I just wanted to be sure--and clear the air about this whole thing.

Have people left those kinds of comments on my threads? I may need to go back and check. Whenever I tend to see a stupid comment I just ignore it, so its possible I'm looking at this with rose tinted glasses.

women’s sexuality isn’t supposed to be egalitarian, it’s not a fucking government service.

I'm not claiming its a government service. Since when do things have to be a government service in order for the question of whether or not they are egalitarian to be relevant? My point in saying hypergamy isn't egalitarian is drawing attention to the fact that, it does not make sense for a woman who considers herself strong and independent--an equal to any man--to employ a mating strategy suggesting that she isn't, and needs a man to support her.

This is kind of similar to how one might say that men selecting women purely for looks (really its signs of fertility) isn't egalitarian because it reduces them to sex objects, and therefore not equal. But I know you disagree with me about that.

[–]Skirt_Douglas -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

We disagree on that because why would anyone’s sexuality apply equality in the first place? Sexuality isn’t supposed to be democratic, it is inherently discriminatory and from an evolutionary stand point, it’s supposed to be. I just don’t know why you think anyone’s sexuality is obligated to adhere to these idealistic standards about what a modern women should be like. Nature isn’t obligated to adhere to anyone’s standards. You know many women don’t consider themselves strong and independent, some of them consider themselves homeless, and in those situations, I cant blame them for finding the guy with a house a little more attractive. Women’s sexuality is what it is, it’s not up to a vote, it is theirs to do what they want with, you’re going to have to make peace with that.

[–]BloomingBrains3 points 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

We disagree on that because why would anyone’s sexuality apply equality in the first place? Sexuality isn’t supposed to be democratic, it is inherently discriminatory and from an evolutionary stand point, it’s supposed to be.

You are distorting my point by responding to something I didn't say. Of course sexuality is inherently discriminatory, by virtue of the fact that you are choosing one person instead of someone else. That isn’t what I’m taking issue with. I’m taking issue with the reasons behind some choices, which isn’t the same as arguing against the entire concept of exclusivity itself.

I just don’t know why you think anyone’s sexuality is obligated to adhere to these idealistic standards about what a modern women should be like.

“Obligated” isn’t the word I would use. If a woman doesn’t believe she is equal to men, then she has a right to that view and to act on it, though I find that quite sad and would hope that I could convince her otherwise, because ultimately that view is self-harming.

“Idealistic”? Really? Since when is it “idealistic” to view women as equally capable of earning money, being independent, a surviving in society? As far as I know, this is a fairly common view (especially on this sub), and many societies in the world demonstrate that by having laws that guarantee equal rights for women. Forgive me if I mischaracterize you, but you see how this sounds like you are going against the idea of egalitarianism itself, right?

Nature isn’t obligated to adhere to anyone’s standards.

Nature would dictate that we frail humans die of easily preventable illnesses and shiver through cold nights mud huts. But you are presumably reading this on an electronic device that exists in stark defiance of nature, so clearly you don't really believe in the supreme divinity of what is "natural".

Instead, you evidently realize we humans impose our will over what is natural, and that this is not inherently a bad thing.

You know many women don’t consider themselves strong and independent,

I’m well aware this is (sadly) the case; in fact, it’s the whole reason why I’m committed to pointing out how inegalitarian hypergamy is whenever I can. To expose, by making an argument where the only way to contradict it is to admit the same thing you just said, that they don’t consider themselves strong and independent. Because if lots of women do feel that way, we should have a conversation about it as a society, with the aim of making real social progress, instead of acting like they don’t and letting the inferiority complex stew under the surface.

some of them consider themselves homeless,

Either they are homeless or they are not. I think it would be a bit weird to say you “consider” yourself homeless, but I digress.

and in those situations, I cant blame them for finding the guy with a house a little more attractive.

You are avoiding my point by talking about an extremely specific case when I am speaking much more broadly. Of course anyone can come up with a highly specific example that invalidates a point. “Murder is wrong!” “Yeah what about someone who kills in self-defense?” “That obviously isn’t what I meant.”

Women’s sexuality is what it is, it’s not up to a vote, it is theirs to do what they want with, you’re going to have to make peace with that.

Whenever we talk about this, you always use words like “vote” or “obligated” and its really starting to annoy me, because you’re characterizing me as someone who wants to control women’s sexuality when I never said that. There is a HUGE difference between saying “This behavior doesn’t make sense, it contradicts core values that you claim to have and here’s why” and saying, “This behavior doesn’t make sense, therefore I wish to exert legal power to have it banned.”

I’ll admit there is some self-serving aspect about me arguing against hypergamy, but I do firmly believe that it is incompatible with egalitarian values, that as an egalitarian I can therefore not support it, and that women would be happier if they didn’t practice it. But I can’t actually “make peace” with the fact that women don’t want an authentic and genuine relationship because I do think that many of them do secretly want that (even if the biological essentialism that is so pervasive in our society has done them the disservice of convincing them otherwise). Saying that women are helpless machines who can do nothing but mindlessly follow their biological programming seems more sexist to me than anything else.

But hey, if I’m wrong and hypergamy is making them legitimately happy, then so be it. If you love something, let it go as they say, even that means you don’t get to have it for yourself.

[–]Skirt_Douglas1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You are distorting my point by responding to something I didn't say. Of course sexuality is inherently discriminatory, by virtue of the fact that you are choosing one person instead of someone else. That isn’t what I’m taking issue with. I’m taking issue with the reasons behind some choices, which isn’t the same as arguing against the entire concept of exclusivity itself.

I was responding to something you did say. In your last paragraph you did say that sexual selection that is not equal is wrong, and I’m saying NOBODY’S SEXUAL SELECTION IS EQUAL. Equal sexual selection is literally not a thing, and it isn’t supposed to be a thing. You are now saying that’s not what you meant, but you did choose those words, so maybe you should use different words if that’s not what you mean. You are taking issue the reasons behind the choices that hypothetical hypergamous women made as if all real women have the exact same reasons. The vast majority of cases are probably light hypergamy, middle class to middle class where there is a wealth gap but not a substantial one. And in the majority of cases of hypergamy, women are probably not going to list money as the reason they selected their partner. Partly because it obviously makes it sound like they don’t love their husband if they admit that, but also because it probably wasn’t even one of the top reasons she picked him. Just because a women ends up in a hypergamous relationship doesn’t mean she was scheming to get the richest guy, it might just mean all of her suitors had more money than her.

”Obligated” isn’t the word I would use. If a woman doesn’t believe she is equal to men, then she has a right to that view and to act on it, though I find that quite sad and would hope that I could convince her otherwise, because ultimately that view is self-harming. Hypergamy has to do with wealth and it status, it’s got nothing to do with legal rights and or mentally feeling like you are equal to a man. A woman could still rightfully be in a hypergamous relationship while also believing in her equality to men. It’s not one or the other.

“Idealistic”? Really? Since when is it “idealistic” to view women as equally capable of earning money, being independent, a surviving in society? As far as I know, this is a fairly common view (especially on this sub), and many societies in the world demonstrate that by having laws that guarantee equal rights for women. Forgive me if I mischaracterize you, but you see how this sounds like you are going against the idea of egalitarianism itself, right?

Since literally always, yes, the idea that women should be strong and independent is an ideal. Just because you are confident that it’s true doesn’t mean it’s not still an ideal. There is a reason you hear some feminists say “I never want to end dependent on man” and that’s because that isn’t their ideal, their ideal is to be strong an independent.

I fully believe in egalitarianism for law, institutions, education, other civic services, and just peer to peer respect, but your reasons for sexual selection are your business and shouldn’t adhere to anyone else’s standards or ideals but your own. I am not a sexual egalitarian and I have no qualms about being upfront about that.

Nature would dictate that we frail humans die of easily preventable illnesses and shiver through cold nights mud huts. No it wouldn’t. Nature gave us an immune system and we are already killing animals for food, might as well use their hides for warmth.

But you are presumably reading this on an electronic device that exists in stark defiance of nature, so clearly you don't really believe in the supreme divinity of what is "natural".

Are you serious? You know electric-magnetism is a natural law right? Smartphones work because of nature, we aren’t defying shit, we are playing by it’s rules.

Instead, you evidently realize we humans impose our will over what is natural, and that this is not inherently a bad thing.

We don’t impose our will over what is natural, we learn about the laws of nature so we can play by its rules better. Breeding a dog is not imposing our will over nature, that’s just nature effecting itself, which it always does. Also why are we even talking about imposing our will over nature in this context when you are about to tell me below that you don’t want to control woman’s sexuality?

I’m well aware this is (sadly) the case; in fact, it’s the whole reason why I’m committed to pointing out how inegalitarian hypergamy is whenever I can. To expose, by making an argument where the only way to contradict it is to admit the same thing you just said, that they don’t consider themselves strong and independent. Because if lots of women do feel that way, we should have a conversation about it as a society, with the aim of making real social progress, instead of acting like they don’t and letting the inferiority complex stew under the surface.

What does independence actually mean to you? Because I don’t think it means the same thing to me. Independence is not a state of mind, it means you are capable of taking care of yourself without the need for others. Not everyone just gets this right off the bat. If you live with your parents because you can’t afford rent on your own, you are not independent, if you have to live with roommates, you are not fully independent. A person becomes independent when they have access to resources and means of survival on their own, that more often than not means money, independence is not simply a positive attitude. If a woman feel like they are dependent, it’s probably not just a bad self-esteem , it’s probably because they actually are financially dependent at that point in their lives.

Either they are homeless or they are not. I think it would be a bit weird to say you “consider” yourself homeless, but I digress. Sigh. Really dude? You don’t need to comment on every single thing.

You are avoiding my point by talking about an extremely specific case when I am speaking much more broadly. Of course anyone can come up with a highly specific example that invalidates a point. “Murder is wrong!” “Yeah what about someone who kills in self-defense?” “That obviously isn’t what I meant.”

I don’t think it is possible to even tackle this issue broadly because you have no idea what women’s motivations are on a broad scale. You have to look at it in a case by case basis, but I also don’t think women should have to explain and justify their selections in the first place, it’s none of your business.

Whenever we talk about this, you always use words like “vote” or “obligated” and its really starting to annoy me, because you’re characterizing me as someone who wants to control women’s sexuality when I never said that. There is a HUGE difference between saying “This behavior doesn’t make sense, it contradicts core values that you claim to have and here’s why” and saying, “This behavior doesn’t make sense, therefore I wish to exert legal power to have it banned.”

Okay Brains, you’re right, I am jumping to a conclusion here and that isn’t fair to you because at no point have you ever said “we need to figure out how to solve Hypergamy”. I’m sorry I’m mischaracterizing you with that rebuttal, and you’re right to be offended because that wasn’t in good faith.

The reason I landed on that conclusion though is because of the context. By context I mean the fact that we are talking about Hypergamy along side other Men’s rights type topics that should be solved. MGM needs a solution, male bias education gap needs a solution. This is why the Hypergamy conversation makes me nervous, because we are talking about it in the context of other “rights” type issues that should be solved, and I feel like talking about it along side rights based issues makes it seem like Hypergamy is also a rights based issue, which it isn’t. When you say that Hypergamy is a problem, and then just leave it at that, then the implication “and we need to solve it” is still hanging in the air. This is why I feel the need to actually call attention to that silent part, and actually point out that we shouldn’t be implying to ourselves that fixing women’s sexuality is in the men’s rights agenda, because it isn’t and it shouldn’t be. I’m sorry that in addressing this I am making it seem like it was your intention all along, and that was wrong of me. I’m sensitive to subtext and read between the lines, but if you’re telling me that’s not what you mean then I’ll believe you.

[–]BloomingBrains1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I was responding to something you did say. In your last paragraph you did say that sexual selection that is not equal is wrong.

No, I did not in fact say that. Once more, I am not saying that the process of selection or even that any individual selections are wrong. I’m specifically talking about the logical dissonance between believing in women being equal and hypergamy. Unless you’re going to actually acknowledge and respond to that statement, I don’t see any point in responding to the rest of this paragraph.

Since literally always, yes, the idea that women should be strong and independent is an ideal.

You’re correct in saying that its an ideal, meaning “a concept or goal one strives for”. But you specifically said “idealistic”, which, to me, means something like “a naïve/perfectionist expectation that is unrealistic to expect”. Perhaps I should have asked you to clarify your meaning first. It’s possible we are both using different definitions.

So just to clarify, do you think that being equal to men is an unfair standard to hold women to?

Are you serious? You know electric-magnetism is a natural law right? Smartphones work because of nature, we aren’t defying shit, we are playing by it’s rules.

I think we may be having a semantic problem here, too. Yes, one can argue that smartphones are “natural” since they obey physical laws. But typically when people say natural they mean things in nature apart from humans or things made by humans, or some definition synonymous with “primitive/archaic”. That’s the connotation I was going for, but perhaps I should have been more precise in my wording. I was comparing outdated human instincts (like hypergamy) to other outdated artifacts that aren’t relevant in the modern world.

Also why are we even talking about imposing our will over nature in this context when you are about to tell me below that you don’t want to control woman’s sexuality?

Because the bringing up the idea of imposing our will over nature is meant to show that what is “natural” (again using the colloquial definition I outlined above) is not always good and what is “unnatural” is not always bad. For example, we impose our will over our own “natural” instincts all the time, but lots of people don’t hold sexual behavior to the same standard. All I’m saying is that the answer “hypergamy is natural so its fine” isn’t a sufficient answer in and of itself. I’m asking you to provide some reason to think it is a good thing in and of itself without appealing to a naturalistic fallacy. And hey, maybe that reason is because it actually makes women happy--in which case, I don't understand it, but whatever, more power to them. I just wish society would admit it (though I'm evidently a hopeless romantic, so what do I know).

What does independence actually mean to you?

It is certainly true that some women are dependent on men for whatever reason. Hell, I’m dependent on others in some ways. Most people are. But when the topic of independence is brought up in the context of discussing women’s rights, its typically meant in the broad sense of “being able to provide for oneself and manage their own life, having agency and competence”. So, if an individual woman is dependent on a man (maybe she can’t work for whatever reason, for example) I’d still say she’s “independent” in the sense that she is an adult deserving of equal agency. Or in the very least, her lack of independence isn’t because she is a woman.

I don’t think it is possible to even tackle this issue broadly because you have no idea what women’s motivations are on a broad scale. You have to look at it in a case by case basis, but I also don’t think women should have to explain and justify their selections in the first place, it’s none of your business.

Of course, they don’t “have” to anything. They can choose to explain or not. I’m not holding a gun to anyone’s head, nor would I want to.

The data shows that women do overwhelming choose men that make more money than them, for example, but you’re absolutely right, we can’t know what the motivations are unless we ask the women themselves. Which is why I asked for women on this sub to respond to my big post about biological essentialism. I do care what they think, but if they don’t want to tell me about it, again, that’s their right.

Still, you can see how someone who hasn’t had any experience with relationships might look at the overwhelming evidence for hypergamy and jump to conclusions about the motivations, right? I’m actively trying not to do that, and I’m more than open to the idea there could be some other explanation. Engaging with this topic is intended to show where I’m coming from so as to start that process.

Okay Brains, you’re right, I am jumping to a conclusion here and that isn’t fair to you because at no point have you ever said “we need to figure out how to solve Hypergamy”. I’m sorry I’m mischaracterizing you with that rebuttal, and you’re right to be offended because that wasn’t in good faith.

Thank you.

The reason I landed on that conclusion though is because of the context. By context I mean the fact that we are talking about Hypergamy along side other Men’s rights type topics that should be solved.

You know what, everything you said in this passage is totally valid. When you phrase it this way, I can see that I could have approached this subject with more tact. Sometimes I forget how many troglodyte hot takes there are on this subject (which you were right to point out to me in that other comment), so making sure to be extremely clear about what I am saying so as to distance myself from that is probably a good idea going forward.

The subject of rights is a totally valid one as well. I’ve actually been dwelling for a while now on the fact that a lot of people talk about things like MGM and gender bias in policy on this sub, and I do feel like an outsider sometimes because I’m not as knowledgeable or passionate about those subjects, when maybe I should be. Sometimes I wonder if topics like dating struggles for men are really worth talking about in light of those other issues—which not only seem more important, but are a different domain entirely (legal vs. cultural).

[–]Skirt_Douglas1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I’ll admit there is some self-serving aspect about me arguing against hypergamy, but I do firmly believe that it is incompatible with egalitarian values, that as an egalitarian I can therefore not support it, and that women would be happier if they didn’t practice it.

I don’t even disagree with you that Hypergamy isn’t egalitarian, but as I’ve said, I don’t think sexuality is supposed to be egalitarian so I don’t know why it is being held to that standard. Also, I don’t think you can claim to know what‘s best for all woman without knowing what they are individually going through. Where did you hear that hypergamous women are unhappy? That’s a new one to me.

But I can’t actually “make peace” with the fact that women don’t want an authentic and genuine relationship because I do think that many of them do secretly want that (even if the biological essentialism that is so pervasive in our society has done them the disservice of convincing them otherwise). Saying that women are helpless machines who can do nothing but mindlessly follow their biological programming seems more sexist to me than anything else.

So this is where you kind of come off as a little misogynistic, because you seem to be willing to just buy in to the idea that all hypergamous women are in inauthentic relationships. I have several friends with wives who had less money than their husbands when they met, and I don’t think any of their relationships seem inauthentic. Of course women want authentic relationships, but this idea that you can only have an authentic relationship when no Hypergamy is present is a false dichotomy. I’m not saying women are hapless machines with no choice, it is the exact opposite, I’m saying they specifically do have a choice and sometimes that choice is the option of Hypergamy. I’m saying they have a right to choose, that’s the whole point.

[–]BloomingBrains1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don’t even disagree with you that Hypergamy isn’t egalitarian, but as I’ve said, I don’t think sexuality is supposed to be egalitarian so I don’t know why it is being held to that standard.

I’m not saying that sexuality itself should be egalitarian (i.e. that women should love, or at least be attracted to, every man equally). That’s absurd. I’m merely pointing out the dissonance I described before.

Do women really not feel like they are equal and therefore need to practice hypergamy to survive? If so, why do they feel that way? These are important questions, no? I think western countries have achieved great successes in ensuring equal rights/opportunities for women, so either we need to address why they still feel oppressed in light of that fact, or challenge that fact itself by re-examining if things are really as equal as we think.

Or is there some other reason why hypergamy still happens in light of the fact that it isn’t necessary? Again, I find the red pill idea that women are soulless, greedy robots repugnant.

Also, I don’t think you can claim to know what‘s best for all woman without knowing what they are individually going through. Where did you hear that hypergamous women are unhappy? That’s a new one to me.

Remember that post I made about the female dating coach advice I was given saying that men should use fake pictures to lie about their status of wealth? Well, that isn’t just some random advice I’ve heard, I’ve seen guys actually do that. A lot. And guess what, it works. By sheer coincidence, I’m sure (/s), I also tend to hear lots of women complain these days about how so many guys are fuckboys, liars, assholes, they’ll do anything to get into your pants, etc. And that actually makes sense to me, because a guy that is willing to do all that probably isn’t the most genuine and quality person. I was raised to think that women do want to be treated with respect, and want a genuine romantic connection, not superficial things like wealth status, so it seems logical to me that there would be a causal link between hypergamous behavior and unhappiness in women.

To say otherwise would be to say “nope, women don’t want a good guy, they are happy with a superficial guy because they are attracted to superficial things because they are superficial”, which is incredibly sexist. It’s leaning heavily into niceguy *TM territory.

Of course, a guy can be a good match in terms of chemistry, and a good person who is not superficial, but just so happen to be richer than his partner by sheer coincidence. But then, why do women date up in 99% of cases instead of some number closer to 50%?

So this is where you kind of come off as a little misogynistic, because you seem to be willing to just buy in to the idea that all hypergamous women are in inauthentic relationships.

The paragraph you quoted this in response to was just me talking about why the red pill notion of female psychology is sexist bullshit. I didn’t say all hypergamous women were in inauthentic relationships.

I’d imagine that some certainly are. But to generalize so hard that I’d say “all” is ridiculous and sexist. I’ve learned through experience in my life that things are rarely ever “all” anything.

I certainly think hypergamy opens the door to more inauthentic relationships, and I question why it still exists in the face of both women’s equality and their non-superficialness, but I don’t think its impossible to exist in authentic relationships.

That said, don’t you agree it is a primitive relic of the past, more suited to a time when women didn’t have rights like they do now?

[–]Carkudo 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Skirt_Douglas 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]BloomingBrains3 points 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]BloomingBrains1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Skirt_Douglas 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Whether or not women sexually accept a man heavily shapes his life.

Irrelevant. Women don’t owe you a happy life.

Companionship, family, health, taxes, career opportunities - all of those things are impacted by whether a man is sexually appealing to a woman.

Irrelevant, women don’t owe you social status.

Since sex appeal is to a large extent immutable, the current system is extremely unjust.

Irrelevant. No one is entitled to a fair sexual selection process from either sex.

Unless you want to just accept that injustice,

You call it accepting an injustice, I call it living in reality.

egalitarianism is indeed required to resolve it - either women's sexuality should become more egalitarian or society should change to treat attractive and unattractive men equally.

Or else what? What are you going to do about if they don’t, rise up and make them with force? Shame them with a propaganda campaign? How do you propose we drop the hammer of justice on women’s sexuality?

[–]Carkudo2 points 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate[M] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earth1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It isn't. There's actually quite a lot you can change in that regard.

That's a disagreement on something that is essentially a subjective evaluation - men can do some things to improve their sex appeal. I think the extent of that is very limited, you think it's "quite a lot" Don't you think it's a bit over the top to call my evaluation 'dangerous delusion'?
I would also like to address the topic further because your reply made me feel I didn't argue my point well enough. We can certainly start to consider that men indeed can do 'quite a lot' to improve their sex appeal, but the important issue is that no matter whether you see that potential for improvement as small or large, there are men out there who exhaust all their options for self-improvement and still find themselves under the minimum threshold of attractiveness and completely unable to attract any partner at all. The important issue is that there are men out there who cannot choose to stop being unattractive. Even if we somehow agree that it's just to punish unattractive men who can be attractive, punishing men who cannot is still a huge injustice.

You can't change something that is largely biological / instinctual.

I merely mentioned it as one of the two theoretical ways by which that injustice could disappear. I neither made any mention of the practical possibility of it, nor endorsed it in any way.
Two other users have interpreted that mention as endorsement, but both of them are feminists (I think?) and it's strange that you made the same leap of logic. Why?

But you can't force attraction, and we really don't want more government intervention in dating.

Again, you seem to be berating me for saying something I didn't say. I also don't think government intervention in dating is desirable or possible and not really interesting in discussing it either.

So far it seems that the 'dangerous delusions' in my comment come down to... a subjective evaluation of an abstract property that you happen to disagree with (and that I'm perfectly willing to concede to you, actually), and two things that aren't in that comment at all. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you think I intentionally inserted some sort of dogwhistle in the comment. I assure you I didn't - I really like this community and don't want to poison it with bad faith behavior.

[–]AdventurousShepherd 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hendrixski 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Oncefa2left-wing male advocate 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DaBlockObama 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[–]LettuceBeGrateful 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[–]DaBlockObama 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yes you literally can. Incel is not a worldview. It’s guys who are not having sex. It can instantly be flipped off if they have sex. It’s extremely common for a person to be like “I was incel, then I had sex, so now I’m not”.

I would disagree with this to a point.

Yes, an incel who manages to get laid is no longer technically an incel.

I would still argue the general dialogue on dating woes for men coming from manosphere-type groups is still very cynical and can engender hopelessness in men who are technically non-incels. It might be a shallower degree of hopelessness, but it is still derived from the same sorts of sources.

It's a spectrum, I would say. I wasn't ever an incel (one could argue maybe briefly until I lost my virginity, but I don't think one should automatically equate youthful virginity with inceldom) but I heard a lot of those same arguments about how unfair dating is to men and it made me feel like the few dating successes I'd had were flukes and I had little certainty of future dating success. It also fuelled my Nice-Guy mindset, which was definitely a barrier to me exploring what I wanted.

[–]LettuceBeGrateful 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

The term incel has carried much more baggage than simply being "involuntary celibacy" for like a decade. It's synonymous with black pill. I see people fighting this battle every now and then, but that particular battle was lost long ago.

If their lives are improving, then they're doing hard work to unlearn the helplessness and bitterness that they use to define their lives. I have no idea why anyone would think it's so easy to change that. The human brain isn't a computer where you can feed it new data and all of a sudden things are different. That's the whole reason therapy exists. Working on mental health is hard. It takes commitment and determination. There's a lot more to it than just dropping a DM in an incel's inbox saying, "hey bro, there are butterflies and puppies, life is kinda great!"

They're in a lot of pain, and to cope with that, their hurt has calcified into hate. Like many mental health issues, it's a misguided defense mechanism. Telling them that there are other things worth living for isn't fixing them, it's invalidating them. They will almost certainly dismiss you if you attempt what you're saying.

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate[M] 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]LettuceBeGrateful 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DaBlockObama 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]DaBlockObama -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]DaBlockObama -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]DaBlockObama0 points 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]OirishM0 points 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Probably not the case if we actually took the time to explore it, with things like more academic terminology and concepts. No-one learns language from first principles from a dictionary, that’s not how they work. People learn language from other people, more basic language is formalised and has more consistent meaning, but for more exploratory/investigative language (like on the frontiers of a sociological topic like current dating practices, say), people make terms up to describe something, and dictionaries may pick them up.

And all this is somewhat incidental to my earlier point that groups of people may also end up developing common viewpoints and terminology. Sure, not all incels are going to think alike - but that won’t alter the overall point. This, again, is not something this board is going to argue over when it comes to a viewpoint they largely disagree with, like feminism.

[–]DaBlockObama0 points 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]lorarc -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DaBlockObama -2 points-1 points0 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]LettuceBeGrateful 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]LettuceBeGrateful -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]LettuceBeGrateful 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You're just trying to disagree now.

I didn't say it was only about depression and hopelessness, I was just trying to share that I've experienced the pain. I also never said that my personal experience is a universal rule, just that there's an understood pattern to how this stuff works, which there is. Of course there are diverse experiences among incels, just like any other group.

First you say dO yOuR rESeArCh. Then when I say I know what the pain is like firsthand, you discount that. You aren't looking for any sort of conversation, you just have an axe to grind, and your argument amounts to repeatedly suggesting that I have no idea what I'm talking about - even though I do.

I've gotten embroiled in enough social media slapfights for a week. I'm not going to keep talking with someone whose take on things is, "nobody knows what they're talking about except me!" This conversation is pointless.

[–]Carkudo 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]CShmmd 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I am a blackpilled incel and i really don't know if you can actually "deradicalise" an incel without having them experience anything postive with women. Since many incels already came into the fourms having low self esteem i don't think the solution here is to "deradicalise" because the views incels have aren't wrong. Hypergamy, lookisim, heightim and racism in dating are real issues and i would say since most incels never had any postive interactions with women and that's what's causing us to go into these fourms. i would say it would be difficult to pull someone out because of that. Sure, these things might be overblown by the mind of a lonley man with low self esteem , but when all you ever experienced is rejection then how can a man still be postive about dating or have a postive outlook about women with having such experiences? This is something i am still batteing with. I'd appreciate a different perspective.

[–]DanteLivra 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]DanteLivra 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Itchy-Breadfruit1315[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Itchy-Breadfruit1315[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mr-X1 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Itchy-Breadfruit1315[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]88mmAce 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Thats not the issue. Incels get that.

I don't think there was a line, no single moment where you really go 'welp, that's it, I'm done.'

It's like a long, slow fall. First of all the 'pool' gets smaller after school. If you were bullied in school and had few friends its over. If you switched schools too much, it's over. If you have autism as a man it's over. And then there's every failed attempt you make increasing your assessment of the amount of effort you'd need to mount to overcome the barriers against you. Where you would have seen opportunities even a matter of months ago, only walls and locked doors remain.

Over time you'll lower your standards to try to maintain that intersection between "I meet her standards" and "she meets my standards", until you realize your standards are on the floor and you can't lower it any more. Except you can. You can always get that shovel and go lower, and the universe will delight in watching you lower yourself to try to hold on to that glimmer of hope.

Right up until the blackpill finally sets in, and you end up moving from forever alone or whatever MGTOW or redpill coping method you had, and then into r/incels, or shortcels, or any of the other million subreddits that were there and are now gone.

Hobbies, talents, passions, all of it ceases to have any meaning over the course of this fall. Hobbies become coping methods, then those coping methods for the isolation become too taxing to do. Your talents waste away as your passions die. Or maybe you keep going because of them, it's all you really have. No one loves you, you cannot relate to anyone because you are missing basic aspects of social life all others around you have, so you bury yourself in your particular talent or hobby, hoping it will fill that void.

It never works. In fact it fails every time.

So then you turn to hate, and finally you have something that really fills in the holes. Easier to leave it all behind when you hold nothing but hate for those things. The fall is complete, and at no point starting after high school was this really avoidable, because it was never about you or your behavior.

Seriously, there were people who were firemen, people who made themselves rich from nothing, people who run soup kitchens for the poor. And you know what?

Because of physical characteristics they couldn't change, the only people who remember them now that they're all gone are those like me, and u/incelgraveyard, who has a collection of suicide notes from the various subs.

Its how you look, not how you act.

[–]DanteLivra 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]88mmAce 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]DanteLivra 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]DanteLivra 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]DanteLivra 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

You are making the same mistakes as incels, the world isn't like pokemon where people in the same social class shares the same abilities and goals. It's not women who hates incels because of their looks it is a group of individual people who happens to be all women but they are in no way representative of every single women on earth. Thinking that everyone acts the same based on a physical characteristic is not a good way to represents the complexity of humans. We aren't eusocial insects, we thinks for ourselves, or we have the capacity to do so atleast.

Which brings me back to my point, generalizing everyone of the same group tends to gets you rejected by other humans. Hence the value in knowing that women aren't a hive mind who all thinks the same things.

In any case, someone who depends on the approval of others to be happy will pursue happiness until his death. So even if all women hates you because you are an incel, it's irrelevant, relationships aren't the way someone becomes happy.

[–]Carkudo 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You are making the same mistakes as incels

Mate, I am an incel. And a wizard at that. Vex me no further or I shall turn thee into a toad.

Which brings me back to my point, generalizing everyone of the same group tends to gets you rejected by other humans.

That's a moot point. Most women avoid interacting with unattractive men at all, so there's not really a chance for them to find out how those men feel about women and whether or not they generalize them. And even when they do find out, it really doens't matter as much as you think - plenty of sexually and romantically successful men generalize women as much as incels do.

I mean, I don't dehumanize women the way some incels do, but I absolutely do generalize them because it's a generalization that works. If I meet a woman, she's more likely to be hostile to me than not. She is also more likely to be hostile to me than a man would be. It's a rule of thumb that seems to work pretty godo for me.
For incels who do dehumanize women it's usually a coping strategy. It's hard to deal with constant antipathy from half of the human population, so the incel handwaves that antipathy away by devaluing the people expressing it. "They're women. It doesn't matter that they hate me. They're basically a hivemind anyway" As much as I personally don't subscribe to such views, I know how hard it can be to deal with women's constant hostility and totally understand why a man would go down that way.

So, let me just pose my question to you again: Let's say you magically taught that to an ugly incel. He now knows that women are 'decent human beings' and women still hate him. What changes?

[–]chudsupreme -5 points-4 points-3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

If someone of that worldview is actively spending time browsing or posting in incel groups and it's not actually helping them (and I've honestly yet to see any cases of this actually helping them, though I'm sure a few outliers exist), the first step is to encourage them to skip spending time there. Telling yourself you have no hope and things can't change pretty much guarantees that outcome as a self-fulfilling prophecy.

What also helped me (I've had sexual relationships, so have never considered myself an incel, but one can still get caught up in the usual discussion of how unfair the dating world is to men and that engenders a similar form of hopelessness) was avoiding the kind of outrage bait type of discussion on this, where the issue is constantly picked over in forums, boards etc but few constructive solutions are given. My way out was reading Mark Manson's Models (former PUA iirc, but I'd argue he's pulled out what was decent about PUA and TRP and discarded the rest of the guff that tends to accompany it) and a lot of work on my self-esteem, with the help of a therapist. I appreciate there are cost reasons why this isn't available to everyone, so I acknowledge my way out will not work for everyone. But stopping constantly exposing myself to writing that engenders a sense of hopelessness was a big factor for helping me, not least because it reduces your chance of holding an adversarial mindset towards women you want to date, which won't help your odds.

[–]Carkudo 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

avoiding the kind of outrage bait type of discussion

As I'm sure other incels (I'm a former one) will attest, the extent of things that trigger distress over the incel situation go far, far beyond just discussions on the internet. I get sad seeing families together at the park. I get angry when I do my taxes and see the marriage tax deduction section. I get sad again when my local restaurant does a couples only event. I get angry again when a night club turns me away because they have a no single men policy. I get sad when my real estate agent tells me it might be difficult to find a landlord willing to rent to an older single guy (I'm late thirties). And sometimes I'm lying in bed and think about my future and how so many of my relatives suffered strokes that left them paralyzed and requiring care, and how I don't even have anyone to call an ambulance for me should that happen to me - those are times when I get really, really scared.
Note, I help myself as much as possible with therapy, meditation, breathing techniques, hobbies, exercise etc. and it's still very distressing. And there are many men who are less privileged than I am, who don't have access to such techniques and knowledge, no opportunities to learn about them.

[–]OirishM 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Alright, I take your point. For what it’s worth, I do appreciate the extra detail you’ve added to the thread regarding your personal experiences, I found them interesting and useful to read. And I appreciate my situation wasn’t as extreme as someone who’s had or is going through a period of being involuntarily celibate - but part of the reason I said elsewhere that I think there’s a bit of a spectrum that you can end up on with inceldom at one pole and related mindsets like NiceGuyness being a less severe case of the same problem. I certainly believed a lot of the same things about the dating world as a lot of incels seem to, for example, and I don’t think that actually really helped me overcome my situation. And I talk about what worked for me not because I think it’ll work for everyone, but because I was (and still am) surprised that I came out of similar kinds of thinking and feeling unloveable and still relatively unsuccessful with women, and I don’t want people to feel like they can’t ever improve their situation.

Elsewhere again in the thread someone else posted about viewing subs that hate on incels, which isn’t an incel support group by comparison to what you’re talking about - and I don’t really see how that’s going to help someone feel more positive or more supported about what they’re going through.

[–]Carkudo 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don’t think that actually really helped me overcome my situation

The methods for overcoming inceldom are pretty well-known and obvious - it comes down to becoming more attractive. Changing one's mindset will not compel women to be attracted to him - only changing one's attractiveness will. The goal of evading distress from incelhood is not "overcoming" incelhood - the goal is to feel less distress.

Elsewhere again in the thread someone else posted about viewing subs that hate on incels, which isn’t an incel support group by comparison to what you’re talking about - and I don’t really see how that’s going to help someone feel more positive or more supported about what they’re going through.

I don't do that often, but I do view such spaces from time to time. For me it helps by reminding me that the people who stand against me are wrong. That they're not heroes fighting a monster (you) but just a bunch of bullies preying on weaker acceptable targets. I suppose this is also the value in browsing such communities for other incels as well - it helps reaffirm our humanity.

[–]Weary-Invite1606 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Enzi42 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Feroste 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nyauknow 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 10 points11 points12 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate[M] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DIES-_-IRAE 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mustbeaight[🍰] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hungry-Nebula -4 points-3 points-2 points 5 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Itchy-Breadfruit1315[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hungry-Nebula 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Itchy-Breadfruit1315[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hungry-Nebula 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Itchy-Breadfruit1315[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hungry-Nebula 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Hungry-Nebula 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bubi1234 -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Oncefa2left-wing male advocate 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Oncefa2left-wing male advocate 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]adam-lThe empress is naked 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bubi1234 -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Oncefa2left-wing male advocate 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheLWMA 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]OirishM 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Carkudo 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]bubi1234 -2 points-1 points0 points 5 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mr-X1 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mr-X1 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Much of the stuff she claims is flat out wrong though, even though it is very popular to believe in it. The same goes for some of the bullshit claimed by the reviewer e.g. about bonobos. And this:

Instead, Stoverock presents detailed solutions, specifically her proposal is to return to a female choice world where women select few men for mating while the larger rest goes around without ever having sex at all. It gets better: she wants a society which recognises such “sexually undesirable” boys early, educates them about their future and offers them opportunities for sexual release so they don’t become murderous incels or vote for the AfD. The proposed outlets are: homosexuality, feminism-approved pornography (including violent Manga animation), sex dolls and sex robots, and finally: state-supplied sex workers (aka prostitutes) upon application, evaluation and governmental approval. I do not exaggerate, this is what the book specifically discusses.

Is outright disgusting. As is the obvious bias of the reviewer.

[–]DistrictAccurate 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]adam-lThe empress is naked 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]adam-lThe empress is naked 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm in the process of the research, hope I'll have an article in a couple of months.

Briefly,

1) they are both based on emotions rather than arguments,

2) they are both oxytocin-fuelled, "us-vs-them", dehumanizing "thems",

3) mobilizing masses in order to overrun the public place (streets for historical fascism, institutions and the internet for feminism)

4) there are no possibilities for debating

There are many more parallels, (e.g. their ultimate subservience to capitalist power), but these four are the main points. The main difference being, of course, that since feminism is, well, feminine, it uses others (the state) to excercise hard power, while historical fascism did it itself.

Back in the '30s there were a few bright political minds that had grasped the nature of fascism without needing to first see the concentration camps actually happening...

[–]Carkudo 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bubi1234 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Comments