The Incel Sex-terrorists

.

I could write a mountain of text about this phenomenon, but I don't know where to start.  AMA.

In short though - take narcissism, add extreme capitalism, throw in about 7 decades of eugenics being official state policy, and stir violently.  You get some incel drippings out of the batter of utter shit.

A good number of these people are diagnosed with ASD, but it is not the explanation (I could write another mountain of text about the a-word but doing so would make me very angry and want to smash something, so I'd rather not write about that unless I can do so briefly.)

.

Well, you start a sexual revolution that beigins with people saying that "everyone must have sex" or "everyone needs sex", and those who aren't having sex are deemed losers, weirdos, potential pedos, and everything that is detestable by our hypersexual society. Not any surprise that this is what you get! Kids bullied by the overall evil sexual world, and they will end up in this horrendous hate-group trying to make people pay in revenge. People make fun of those who don't have sex all the time. I guess it's to make their petty little selves feel better about themselves. However, they don't ever seem to get past to the point of why no one ever looks to help these guys get past this sexual world to tell them that sex isn't necessary. We should be saying that. Again, this movement is just another indictment of how our sexual world is just horribly evil.

.

@tygersongbird   You took the words right out of my mouth. In a bit of a sense, I was like these incels except I'm female, and I wanted a non-sexual romantic relationship with a guy due to peer pressure, the media, and society. During my pre-teen years, I was devastated that I didn't have a boyfriend, and it didn't help that I was picked on a lot because I wasn't a beauty queen. I always thought it would be great to have a boyfriend who liked me for my inner beauty and probably protect me from my bullies. That never happened, but now about 20 years later, it's not a big deal to me that I never dated, and I hope one day these incels realize that there's more to life than having a sexual and/or romantic relationship.

@x Skull Child x  I never really thought of it that way, and you're probably right. Your statement made me think about why this antisexual forum exists. It's even more controversial to be sex-negative because many sexuals assume that we're repressed, immature, or some other ridiculous label. This forum allows us to discuss the problems of sex without derision or judgment.

tygersongbird wrote:Well, you start a sexual revolution that beigins with people saying that "everyone must have sex" or "everyone needs sex", and those who aren't having sex are deemed losers, weirdos, potential pedos, and everything that is detestable by our hypersexual society. Not any surprise that this is what you get! Kids bullied by the overall evil sexual world, and they will end up in this horrendous hate-group trying to make people pay in revenge. People make fun of those who don't have sex all the time. I guess it's to make their petty little selves feel better about themselves. However, they don't ever seem to get past to the point of why no one ever looks to help these guys get past this sexual world to tell them that sex isn't necessary. We should be saying that. Again, this movement is just another indictment of how our sexual world is just horribly evil.

The "sexual revolution" wasn't even a revolution in any sense of the word. It was a combination of natural technological and social progress rendering old norms inoperative, and an imposition from the very top of society to forcibly change peoples' perceptions and daily behavior. Simply put, most men were becoming obsolete, and there was increasing pressure to control both population in numbers and the behavior of each individual person (moreso for those in the middle class and the technicians who make our present society possible; you have quite a bit of freedom if you're of the dregs of society like myself, but the moment I cross into the domain of having actual influence, I would be knocked down ruthlessly if I spoke too plainly about what is going on). If this were purely the result of technological and social progression, the likely outcome would be the gradual desexualization of much of the population, since there would no longer be a pressing need to fulfill biological urges and we can all see them for what they are. But, because sexualism is a potent psychological lever, if a good number of men and women abandon sexualism and the ideologies that spring forth from it, it would present long-term challenges to the structure of hierarchical society as a whole, and present challenges to the present stewardship of social institutions by those who have no real claim to legitimacy - the actors behind the scene of modern liberal, democratic societies who are very much un-democratic and not even particularly competent rulers. Therefore, it is necessary to feed the masses an ideology pressuring sexual pursuits and a ridiculous emphasis on the sexual process as an end unto itself, even though the vast majority of biological energy is spent on preserving the form of organisms rather than mass consumption and reproduction of such. There's something here to be said about capitalism but I don't think this is purely a matter of political economy, the reasons behind the establishment of modern totalitarian states aren't just because of blind market forces on top of a morally neutral humanity.

Way back when, a little more than a decade ago, the first incel forums were not markedly political, and the predominant incel forum was ruled over by people who were more or less orthodox liberals or orthodox conservatives. There was a backlash against this, which led to splinter forums that were markedly reactionary, and they formed an echo chamber where weak men would act as a pressure cooker, reinforcing each others' mal-adaptive and stupid belief systems. Even in this environment, once in a while someone would write something interesting about the "involuntarily celibate" condition, and there were a few rare women in these conservative splinters.

Enter the neo-reactionary movement, people like Roosh V and the standard alt-right milieu, who saw a goldmine of suckers who had already prepared themselves to swallow any propaganda (using techniques originally pioneered to control the public like right-wing talk radio, so this shit literally is coming from regime think tanks). It became expedient for these right-wing forces to assume control of the incel forums, steer the narrative appropriately, and purge the communities of any liberals or leftists that managed to stick around. From what I understand, the narrative on these incel forums is crafted and shaped repeatedly and steered to make sure the incels stay on the hamster wheel so to speak, and the leadership is thoroughly in the pockets of political operatives. If there are exceptions, I haven't seen them, though I tend to stay away from these spaces today since I no longer give a shit.

I was gone from incel spaces long before "roastie" and the usual lingo became the norm. There was some of this on sluthate and the like, but even at my worst I didn't think much of that kind of thinking.

It's funny because a lot of these incels could probably see women have a pretty shit hand in this society if they stepped outside of the echo chamber for a while and read from actual women who have legitimate grievances with the system, and that would dispel the notion that every woman everywhere is swimming in a sea of dick. But, that would disrupt the echo chamber that becomes a sort of home for these incels, who get sucked into a neoreactionary death cult.

I probably feel the worst about pissant ironybros like the Chapo people who feed into this shit because they, themselves, are incapable of offering a meaningful criticism of modern capitalist society and the mating rituals involved. It's funny those supposed "socialists" (who are an embarassment to actual socialists) are so quick to deny criticism, and I refuse to believe the vast majority of adult men and women can't see what is going on to some degree and uncrtiically accept the narrative we are presented with today in the mainstream.

Anyway this rant is getting a bit disconnected and I don't know what my final point was supposed to be, so I guess I'll give it a rest and answer any other questions people have about the history of incel spaces.

While you lost me in the later paragraphs (I don't think it's worth much to compare ourselves to whatever that group is thinking, or even necessarily legitimizng them as a group.) I liked your first paragraph. You seem to do a lot of thinking, although I'm not a communist.

I guess I'll ad a bit.
I think you're 3rd to last paragraph fell a little too far in the trap of typifying certain genders. However, I think you touched on that incels may think that all women are promiscous?
It's hard to take that seriously. But I see what's going on. I mean, you can't really prove that wrong as sex is hidden, and thus if you find people with no faith and tell them that. It's an excellent way to troll them. An excellent way to isolate them.

So I guess my last question is a rhetorical one. Is there any way WE could weaponize incels? Theoretically speaking, as we don't have much influence over them.

The echo chamber in the incel forums definitely plays on the notion that all people are naturally promiscuous except them, that sexualism is the primary force of nature. I do think that this particular article of belief is part of the wider "sexual revolution" that reduces men to walking penises and women to sex organs to be penetrated (really men too, a common saying in incel circles is that "any hole is the goal" - the act of penetration becomes all-important, moreso than any useful consequence of that penetration). I believe this reduction of humankind to its basest characteristics is ideologically necessary for the neo-reactionaries and neo-fascists, and that there is no form of fascism that couldn't be hypersexualist.
I wouldn't be surprised if that particular "tenet" of inceldom weren't deliberately pushed, but it did rise naturally once the men entered their particular echo-chambers. I do know there were plenty of straight-up fascists in the OG incel boards that were pushing their ideology. Back before I had any really firm convictions they tried to get me on their side, even.

I don't know if there's a really good way to go into incel spaces and disrupt the narrative their moderators have created for them. At this point there is a shit-ton of money and organization behind the fascist push, and they do build files on people and actively destroy potential rivals that would disrupt the wank. I know I've certainly had shitheads on reddit compile a file on some of my usernames there and portray me as le evil Cultural Marxist meme. I think anything sufficient to break the programming has to go through a lengthy explanation, whereas the fascists offer simple solutions that are supported by the ruling milieu of liberal and fascoid ideology. That tends to be the problem with critical theory, unfortunately; not so much that it's too difficult to understand, because the criticisms are easy, but that it's just so much easier for people to shout at each other about stupid shit and that people feel stronger when they're in a group that reinforces the cult-like narrative.

I think in the near future there is going to be a growth of antisexual spaces out of necessity, and from what I gather there are more people coming to this realization and building small spaces here and there. So far, they don't have a lot of reach, but there is a genuine opposition forming. There was a bit of a genuine opposition in the old incel forums but it got quashed by people who wanted to build social clubs and later the echo chambers you see today. I think a lot of the ruling ideology we see today - both the fascist variant, and the more mainstream liberal variant - is the death throes of an ideology which is failing, of a system which is not working and has to undergo serious changes in the future. I don't know if those changes are going to be for the better - probably not - but I imagine the long-standing paradigm of what official dogma considered "normal sexual behavior" is going to change, when it is obvious that about 1/3 of men just don't mate and most people can't bring themselves to raise children in a shit-tastic world.

I don't necessarily mean that you have to disrupt their narrative, but play into the narrative to get them to do something.

The idea came off an idea I've been toying with recently. The idea was to stop viewing other groups as rivals, and start viewing them as tools.

It was just a thought experiment I've been toying with.

.