Incels:

[Heartofice]

28 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Is this just/almost exclusively an american thing? I have never come across anybody or group that would fit what is being talked about here. 

I mean I've met a few of these kind of people here in the UK, maybe they didn't always identify with a Incel label but they certainly shared a lot of th same characteristics.

One thing to note is that I think one survey carried out on an incel site had at least a quarter of those responding identifying as autistic in some form. It certainly seems consistent with what I thought when talking to some of these guys. I didn't find any way to get through and reasons with any of them, it was like they were talking an entirely different language and were looking at the world in a completely different way to me. 

 

[Jace, Extat]

17 hours ago, Starkess said:

 

Right, sorry. I should have phrased it differently--while probably (and now confirmed) unintentionally, this line of reasoning makes me feel uncomfortable due to what could be seen as arguing for sort of correlation between gender and logic that would preclude someone reasoning in that way.

This is a little batshit.  Relic asked "Would you feel differently if you were..." like the most basic, easy-to-grasp empathetic setup a human being can organize. He was then answered by the poster to whom he posed the question and the matter appeared ended. There is no good faith argument of any form to misinterpret Relic's very basic comment. "Would you feel differently if you were..." is not an attack. On anyone, anything. In fact it's pretty much the opposite, asking for sympathetic analysis. 

The fact that a collection of very common words put together in a very common order made you feel uncomfortable is not Relic's fault. You're bringing your own ants to that picnic, partner. 

[Conflicting Thought]

1 hour ago, BigFatCoward said:

Is this just/almost exclusively an american thing? I have never come across anybody or group that would fit what is being talked about here. 

the incel ideology moves through the internet, so for example we have them here to, in Chile, but of course they dont manifest in the same way that in the U.S, we dont have that culture of violence and guns but they do exist, they just express their hate and sorrow in other ways. 

I think Toth is right, its not a mental illnes, even though i think  some or maybe many of them have some type of mental illnes, but its a separate issue.

 like some other posters, i to was/am a cis, "white", hetero, introverted with little experience with romantic relationships but i was never close to being an incel type, and i have ADHD and depression. what im trying to sy is that mental illnes doesnt come close to explain it.

[Heartofice]

39 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said:

the incel ideology moves through the internet, so for example we have them here to, in Chile, but of course they dont manifest in the same way that in the U.S, we dont have that culture of violence and guns but they do exist, they just express their hate and sorrow in other ways. 

I think Toth is right, its not a mental illnes, even though i think  some or maybe many of them have some type of mental illnes, but its a separate issue.

 like some other posters, i to was/am a cis, "white", hetero, introverted with little experience with romantic relationships but i was never close to being an incel type, and i have ADHD and depression. what im trying to sy is that mental illnes doesnt come close to explain it.

I think that defining it as being caused by 'mental illness' is the wrong conclusion. I think that those who are somewhat autistic or who view the world a little differently are more likely to be susceptible to it, especially if they have experienced a lot of bullying and rejection in their lives. Its not the cause but it might explain why it makes sense to them. 
 

[Relic]

1 hour ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

This is a little batshit.  Relic asked "Would you feel differently if you were..." like the most basic, easy-to-grasp empathetic setup a human being can organize. He was then answered by the poster to whom he posed the question and the matter appeared ended. There is no good faith argument of any form to misinterpret Relic's very basic comment. "Would you feel differently if you were..." is not an attack. On anyone, anything. In fact it's pretty much the opposite, asking for sympathetic analysis. 

The fact that a collection of very common words put together in a very common order made you feel uncomfortable is not Relic's fault. You're bringing your own ants to that picnic, partner. 

Thank you. I've been puzzled over the reply I received, tried to understand it and couldnt, and decided to just stfu. 

[Ser Reptitious]

On 10/27/2020 at 5:04 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

“I’m such a nice guy when I see a guy abuse a woman my first thought is why she isn’t sleeping with me? And I think women only go for assholes which basically means I think the majority of guys are assholes.”  Says the “nice guy.” As he stalks a woman he’s currently infatuated with. 
 

I haven’t caught up on this thread yet, so apologies if someone has brought it up, but as soon as I saw this quote I thought of Shawn Mendes’ song “Treat you better”. Every time it comes up on the radio I feel like this is the ultimate “nice guy”/incel anthem. 

The lyrics address a girl whose boyfriend is clearly a jerk and so why is she “wasting time when you could be with me instead”? He then then goes on to state how, if she were to do that, he would put her on a pedestal (“I’d stop time for you”, etc.). 

It’s probably the most cringe-worthy song I’ve heard in recent times. But I bet if someone asked Mendes about it, he’d probably characterize it as a love song. (I hope I’m wrong about that last bit, but I doubt it...)

[Red Tiger]

2 hours ago, Relic said:

Thank you. I've been puzzled over the reply I received, tried to understand it and couldnt, and decided to just stfu. 

In your defense, I too was puzzled over the reply.

[Larry of the Lawn]

26 minutes ago, Ser Reptitious said:

I haven’t caught up on this thread yet, so apologies if someone has brought it up, but as soon as I saw this quote I thought of Shawn Mendes’ song “Treat you better”. Every time it comes up on the radio I feel like this is the ultimate “nice guy”/incel anthem. 

The lyrics address a girl whose boyfriend is clearly a jerk and so why is she “wasting time when you could be with me instead”? He then then goes on to state how, if she were to do that, he would put her on a pedestal (“I’d stop time for you”, etc.). 

It’s probably the most cringe-worthy song I’ve heard in recent times. But I bet if someone asked Mendes about it, he’d probably characterize it as a love song. (I hope I’m wrong about that last bit, but I doubt it...)

So much pop music, especially love songs, is extremely creepy and misogynistic.  

[Guy Kilmore]

On 10/29/2020 at 6:16 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

The position of everyone or almost can change really isn’t.

It doesn’t rely on economic perspective that can be looked at as “leftist”

No more looking at history.

”Don’t shop at any store that won’t call you sir.” was roughly the call of many boycotts.

It was a call to Disassociate with people who’d refuse to see as a human being even in terms of buying something from them.

You had no way of knowing this but I’m black, and I have little shame in calling people who would kill/subjugate/ me or family as bad people for wanting to do that.

I’m not dehumanizing them. I’m saying them dehumanizing me for my race, makes them bad people.

I would say it has decreased in recent decades.

I’d say it is on the rise again through more people showing tolerance for the worst forms of it, and thinking the bigotry either is good, or doesn’t make someone bad enough to dissociate with or repudiate.

Now imagine the amount of red hats  worn if the Republican Party had condemned Trump after the start of his campaign.

This may be a thought experiment as well.

But I think it’s reasonable to guess it’d less.

And to not hold as many open lynchings.

Or bomb as many churches.

And not want to be bigots.

Yes.

I see no reason for why facists, incels, and other extreme bigots should have an easier time.

Telling them that their gross bigotry doesn’t make them a bad person doesn’t facilitate change.

Agreed on using personal relationships as a tool can be effective tool individually.But societally how/why should that personal relationship matter as much if a community has already said your bigotry isn’t a personal fault.

Hell Hitler had a select few Jewish people he didn’t personally hate;https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-46192941

To the bolded.

Not necessarily contradicting me.

Most people think they are good true.

Now do good people wave nazi flags around, or lynch people? Also true.

Okay, I will be honest here.  My work week, dealing with stuff like this, has been insane and is continuing to be insane and I wander here to de-stress, I apologize for my mental fatigue and weakness.

I want to clarify something.  I think, a caveat that I made in my statement, wasn't clear and something that I am going to highlight again.  If you are in a position of being a victim, being victimized, and/or defending someone else then yep, call people whatever you need to call them.  Your life and health matter first.  Sometimes the "bully" needs to be "punched."

I am glad you are having the experience of it decreasing.  I dunno, the past couple of years and especially months, my friends/clients/coworkers of color have been sharing some pretty nasty stuff, I'm not comfortable to say that it is decreasing.  I have lived in Minnesota most of my life, and, well, you know, you shared this, entertaining the idea that it flips Red.  Minnesota has never flipped red and the fact that it is a possibility....isn't a comforting feeling.

My message is more to the Cis Gendered White Dude who is not endangered by this category of person.  A conversation about this topic needs to happen and needs to pull people in.  We are in the best societal position to have that conversation.  I don't think that stigmatization is effective in DOING that, or in leveraging change.  It is effective at other things.

I will also say, that in taking people through the changes in their core beliefs is incredibly uncomfortable and unpleasant for them.  You have to make it that way, or they won't change.  Just, the right kind of uncomfortableness needs to be made to prevent them from closing off or getting defensive.

And maybe it is the humanist in me, or just training, I struggle with calling people bad and good.  I like to call behaviors bad and good, because I think that those are dangerous categories to put people in.  I like to be an effective agent of change, there is not much that I can do on the societal level for shift, but there is a ton I can do with the interactions I have with people in my everyday of light to be that agent of change.

I only entered this conversation to really point out there is a reason to draw empathy is not to....support people in these belief systems....but to facilitate change, so we can lesson the impact and influence of these belief systems. I hope that clears up my perspective.

[Guy Kilmore]

Edited:  Nevermind, already addressed, my apologies.

[Guy Kilmore]

On 10/29/2020 at 6:56 PM, karaddin said:

I think what Relic was going for is what Jace had said she does feel - that being the target of a groups hate gives you a more direct connection to it and grounds for strong negative feelings on them - this would be applicable to all marginalized groups. I get why you're concerned about the potential for that narrative to raise it's head Starkess.

On Guy's point - I do think there need to be people taking on the burden of working with them and attempting to rehabilitate them back into pro-social society, and that the people doing this work probably need to avoid alienating them. Where I disagree is that society broadly should condemn them and make that condemnation clear.

As I've said already I have a lot of sympathy for men that are suffering on the path of mental struggles that leave then vulnerable to being recruited into the various manosphere movements, but that sympathy ends when they make the choice to externalise their issues and blame all women for their problems. They need to make the choice to return to their humanity and society, and the ostracism is one of the ways society tells them that their current path is unacceptable. It's when their wavering that those who choose to try rehabilitate them can make an impact, and I'm glad that there are people like Guy willing to step in and attempt that. I do not think it should ever be on the targets of their hate to do that though, so that is where it needs to be cis men doing the heavy lifting. Let's be real though, this shit is very frequently interwoven with racism as well - so that's probably predominantly cis white men that need to do it.

It is this 100%.   

You said it much more clearly than I did, so thank you.  My message was meant as an explanation on why I was taking a position of empathy, because, as that White Cis-gendered male, I am in a position where I can facilitate change.  I have to exhibit empathy to do that.

[Starkess]

9 hours ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

This is a little batshit.  Relic asked "Would you feel differently if you were..." like the most basic, easy-to-grasp empathetic setup a human being can organize. He was then answered by the poster to whom he posed the question and the matter appeared ended. There is no good faith argument of any form to misinterpret Relic's very basic comment. "Would you feel differently if you were..." is not an attack. On anyone, anything. In fact it's pretty much the opposite, asking for sympathetic analysis. 

The fact that a collection of very common words put together in a very common order made you feel uncomfortable is not Relic's fault. You're bringing your own ants to that picnic, partner. 

Ah I see, my bad for being batshit...

7 hours ago, Relic said:

Thank you. I've been puzzled over the reply I received, tried to understand it and couldnt, and decided to just stfu. 

 

5 hours ago, Red Tiger said:

In your defense, I too was puzzled over the reply.

As I explained before, I misread the tone of the post. Imagine reading through a thread with interest, nodding along with a post, and then the next post is like "I bet you wouldn't think that if you were a woman." It can be jarring. However it was clarified that I misread the tone of the post and therefore misinterpreted it, and I apologized. That's all  

[Jace, Extat]

9 minutes ago, Starkess said:

Ah I see, my bad for being batshit...

 

 

Ah, don't beat yourself up. Batshit will power half of Miami when the end tides are upon us. Yes, the end tides. They approach on velvet waves of floating detritus, eager to avenge the pillaging of seas! 

[karaddin]

I think one of the points of contention on this subject arises from unclear language, and I don't think English has a succinct differentiation between the two so it's no one's fault.

Being an incel is an ideology and a choice, it is not itself an actual illness or disorder. However the people making it are very rarely making it from a position of good mental health and I think this is what people like Guy are talking about. These men are often suffering from mental health issues which are extremely common - depression, anxiety, terrible self esteem, probably social anxiety, they represent a small subset of people with these issues and are dealing with them in an extremely toxic manner that damns their character.

But part of coming out of that position, once they make the decision to stop being an awful shit, includes treating these normal mental health issues much like anyone else will need to.

Those who object to discussing this in a mental health context are, I think, pushing back on the idea that being an incel is itself a mental disorder that would in any way abrogate their responsibility for their decisions. Those that want to discuss it in that context are, I think, instead simply saying that these other mental health problems still need to be addressed after they have taken responsibility.

[Fury Resurrected]

I think another point that might be causing some tension is that it is very difficult for people to see outright hateful behavior ascribed to mental health. It perpetuates stigma around mental health in addition to shifting some blame. It is true that a lot of these people can easily be said to be mentally ill, but I think it’s also important to bear in mind how overwhelmingly common mental illness is and how it must feel for a huge number of us to see all manner of atrocities chalked up to mental illness all the time.

[Heartofice]

I’m not sure using the term ‘mental illness’ like it is a singular condition is all that useful here either. A lot of people with autism or who are on the spectrum wouldn’t describe themselves as mentally unwell either.

[karaddin]

And there's a rare thing we can agree on, being on the spectrum is not something I'm considering in my list of things I was talking about. I much prefer talking about it in the context of neurodivergence rather than illness or health. If there's any mental illness at play with those individuals I'd expect it to be things like social anxiety caused by difficulty parsing social cues. 

Fury - absolutely agreed, my commenting on it being a small subset was attempting to address that point but it's much clearer to state it explicitly and I should have.

[Varysblackfyre321]

8 hours ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

OK so long thread is getting long, but pretty much all of this, particularly the bolded. There's a real big difference between what people will term sad white boys on the internet and actual incels. I think other people have brought it up. My connection is being really weird today. 

As others have also said I don't like equating any of this hateful ideology with mental illness/mental disorders. Might as well just say oh well Nazis are just mentally ill. It's a fucking disservice to people who have actual mental disorders and doesn't help with shit.

 

Edit: Ok so what Fury said above x1000

 

“He didn’t kill those people because of his  extreme misogyny! He did it because he was crazy!” Some virulent misogynists after a man kills people citing the beliefs they hold.

Its an easy backdrop for them to push any extreme actions as being merely the result of troubled individual.

Because they don’t want the ideology of the killer—if it’s similar to theirs—to be scrutinized.

[Varysblackfyre321]

On 10/30/2020 at 6:26 PM, Guy Kilmore said:

I am glad you are having the experience of it decreasing. 

I’ve stated I’ve felt it rising in recent years.

Because people—particularly Republicans—have started to show more tolerance for the grossest types of bigotry, particularly because of political gain.

I don’t think most republicans are racist.

If I was pro-life I’d pressed to vote for Trump just on those grounds.

But I do think most are either ignoring, or excusing the worst of his bigotry because he’s proven so effective in terms of fulfilling their goals in other areas.

On 10/30/2020 at 6:26 PM, Guy Kilmore said:

I have lived in Minnesota most of my life, and, well, you know, you shared this, entertaining the idea that it flips Red.  Minnesota has never flipped red and the fact that it is a possibility....isn't a comforting feeling

It isn’t.

On 10/30/2020 at 6:26 PM, Guy Kilmore said:

I will also say, that in taking people through the changes in their core beliefs is incredibly uncomfortable and unpleasant for them.  You have to make it that way, or they won't change.  Just, the right kind of uncomfortableness needs to be made to prevent them from closing off or getting defensive.

I agree to a point

On 10/30/2020 at 6:26 PM, Guy Kilmore said:

And maybe it is the humanist in me, or just training, I struggle with calling people bad and good. 

There’s a danger in this type of thinking; that it’s inappropriate to call certain people good or bad based on idealogy.

In that virulent bigots will use it for why they should looked at as bad people when they push for things that would hurt others through actually dehumanize them.

On 10/30/2020 at 6:26 PM, Guy Kilmore said:

I like to be an effective agent of change, there is not much that I can do on the societal level for shift, but there is a ton I can do with the interactions I have with people in my everyday of light to be that agent of change.

Here’s a question; without a societal imprint of certain people who radically bigoted beliefs being dubbed pariahs, why shouldn’t they see any positive relationship with you merely as a given?

You showing kindness despite their bigotry wouldn’t be as strong a thing if there was no expectation that it’d be perfectly acceptable for you to be “mean”.

[Heartofice]

Isn’t it always just a little bit more complicated than that?

What if the ideology is Islam? Does the same comment apply?