Wealth inequality is the cause of almost every single economic and social issue in existence.
If young men had the money to have agency in their lives they would be living life instead of living with their parents to save money while seeking validation through internet fascists.
If school wasn’t desigend to be a day care service for Capitalists our children would be properly socialized with the different sexes/genders before getting the chance to grow up into incels.
Ah, that’s why there are no rich incels!
/s
I call it economic infantilization.
Back in 1960 US minimum wage was $1.00/hour and the average US home was $11,000.00 A brand new car was around $2,500.00 A teenager could move out of the house and be self supporting and grade school kid could work hard and pay for a car on their 18th birthday.
It’s hard to feel like an independent adult when you can’t afford anything.
I cry bullshit. Incels aren’t that way because of money. Generation X ate out of dumpsters and did what they could to survive. Not saying younger generations have it easy, but you can be broke and not be a misogynist. From what I understand, sex offenders created the incel movement to normalize their bullshit. Trump and all of those rapists want a world where they can be evil with no consequences. They are working hard towards that end. They need an army of like minded degenerate perverts to achieve this. The algorithms promote this sort of insecure male content on YouTube and other media. Most of those influenders make money trafficking women for sex. This is a new thing. 30 years ago, people were moving away from sexism, and racism. Now, everyone is a protégé of the sociopath billionaires and misogynist tech bro oligarchs. People need to realize this isn’t a natural movement, it’s a synthetic one. Fuck incels! Not literally, of course.
I’m sure they expect others to take care of them though. Like giant house pets.
US version of Japan’s Hikikomori?
Lmao
Aren’t these guys misusing blackpilled? I thought it was specifically for suicide not just going NEET? Which like we should talk about but not through this corporate productivity-washed drivel.
If you also didn’t know
“Not in Education, Employment or Training”, its an acronym for people that don’t go to school, don’t work and are mot looking for work.
Also it’s a backronym from the similar Japanese term which refers to a growing number of people there who have abandoned society and hole themselves up in their room literally never going outside.
Wictionary says it went the other way from NEET to ニート(nīto): https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/ニート
You’re probably thinking of 引きこもり(hikikomori): https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/引きこもり#Japanese
I always found “hikikomori” very amusing, because if it was slightly different, and written “hikikomero”, it would literally mean “sweat closet” in Finnish (hiki = sweat, komero =closet) , which is a very apt concept for how lots of hikikomori live.
Sounds like another name for a sauna to me 😅
That is true as well.
But having like a few pc’s and a microgrow going in a small dark room isn’t too far from a sauna
Fuck these losers. Just discard them from society.
As always nothing will be done on a public level.
What a terrible article. NEETS and lie flat movement has almost no overlap with incels.
Ostensibly the whole world has been online for enough time now. Yet everyone continues to demonstrate a remarkable lack of ability to grasp internet cultures.
It makes no sense. Like trying to explain technology to my elderly grandma. Except she knows she’s very old and out of touch. What’s everyone elses excuse. It’s made even worse because everyone else thinks they are digitial culture savvy.
It’s intentional to cause infighting and and to help build the association between neets and incels.
Ars Technica is owned by Conde Nast media conglomerate, which is owned by Advanced Publications, which is owned and controlled by the billionaire Newhouse Family.
That’s why Steve Newhouse wants these types of articles to be written, because it obfuscates truth and pushes division.
Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives
They overlap because they are all rejects and failures with no prospects.
…I’m honestly not sure if this is sarcasm or not - if you’re pointing out a problematic point of view or if you’re attacking the people the article is talking about.
Since we’ve past growth now there are precious few winners in a zero sum game. Why even try, if you’re not cut to be a liar and a thief?
What a shit headline. Yes we should care about people saying fuck it. But not this colored pill horseshit.
Reading these comments makes understanding why the world is in its current state, extremely easy
Keep preaching and applying that brand of empathy guys, it will surely pay off eventually
The simple fact is no one really cares about the plight of men, and this is obvious when you look at social service funding and especially homeless shelters.
We are in a ‘bare branch’ crisis, and back when this happened in medieval China, whole gangs of angry unmarriable men would form raider bands and just pillage and rape until they were put down by the military. It happened so often that warring states would purposely stage useless battles with massive losses on both sides to keep down the ‘bare branch’ population so they didn’t get to rioting levels.
Maybe the fact that warfare is no longer culling the most desperate, lonely, and impressionable men has let to such a large population of unfocused, angry, lonely, and fundamentally unlikeable males.
It’s mainly because biologically we evolved to have kids and die on a hunt, our evolution pressures just aren’t capable of handling a male population without a certain degree of unnatural casualty.
While we’re making shit up, did you know the sky is purple? 1 + 1 = 3. Since we don’t need sources, up is down, and you are correct. You are also not an incel, and it’s 25 o clock.
I’m actually impressed at how ridiculous this is. But I’ll bite:
What’s the plight of men?
Is it sexual frustration?
Is the solution ensuring that young men have access to sex, regardless of the means or impact on women?
If that isn’t feasible, are we simply supposed to engage in war to cull off these sex-starved, victimized men who seemingly are incapable of contributing to society in any other way then impregnating women and waging violence?
If so, what is the benefit of living in such a world?
I’m not the guy you’re responding to but here’s my thoughts on it based off my experience.
Is it sexual frustration?
I’d wager that that’s a big part of the problem for a lot of them. I know it was for me when I was younger. Seeing your peers entering into relationships while you can’t seem to get even a second glance from a woman does a number on you. Especially when you can’t figure out what the problem is. I was fortunate that things turned around for me pretty quickly once I got out of the toxic high school environment and moved onto a different social circle in college that helped me get out of my shell. A lot of dudes aren’t that lucky and just get stuck in that bad mindset where they feel like it’s hopeless which then takes them on to all kinds of nasty places as time goes on.
Is the solution ensuring that young men have access to sex, regardless of the means or impact on women?
No, in my opinion the solution is making mental health services available to help teach them how to deal with whatever it is that’s making it hard for them to find a partner or to cope with it if it’s something that can’t be resolved. Also just having more social opportunities in general to get people offline and meeting and interacting with each other more would be nice. Women certainly aren’t responsible for making sure men are all getting laid as often as they want but sexual frustration/loneliness is a problem a lot of men struggle with coming to terms with and it does fuck up their lives sometimes.
I think that’s a very sanitary answer. My opinion? It’s not some mysterious sociological quandary to unravel why men are sexually frustrated and lonely. These young men have few prospects, a bleak future, and have been raised with exploitative social media that’s slowly eroded their critical thinking skills and empathy towards others. Their failure to achieve a life they’ve been told they’re entitled to all their lives breeds resentment and is being manipulated against women and minorities as a function of social engineering through social media algorithms.
Sounds like Bullshit, got an sources for that?
Based comment. In our society, men still believe in working 50+ hours a week for peanuts, so we won’t see any of these gangs forming any time soon. Maybe a few active clubs though lol
Seems like a huge part of the problem is equating “self-worth” to “getting laid”.
Putting your dick in a woman doesn’t make you any more of a man / successful / worth more than anyone else.
Societal expectations need to be rejected. Oh, success is measured by your ability to get married, have a house, and raise your 2.5 children? For a vast majority, NONE OF THAT IS CURRENTLY SUSTAINABLE AND/OR OBTAINABLE. So why bother? Right?
I get it. It ain’t right, but I get it.
Putting your dick in a woman doesn’t make you any more of a man
Yeah, puting a man’s dick in you makes you more of a man.
thank you for your service
It’s simple math, really.
Yeah instant double the amount of man… wanna become a 3x man? Just lmk
Yeah i have sad it before. Many young men belive that to be a good person they must me the manlyest man to have manned in the history of manhood. Anything else and they a moral failure.
And you believe that men are fuck machines, fuck beasts, that to be a man is to fuck. Well thrn a man that is not having sex is failure of a man.
Changing their. Minda is not just a changing some view it is changing their whole world view. It is the sane as convincing the pope to convert to Buddhism. It is way more then facts or some conversations ot converting a whole generation.
It’s literally the most natural thing in the world to equate reproductive effectiveness to worth. All life is “worth” their reproductive effectiveness. So not having sex is very relevant to our entire existence as a species.
As such, our mental faculties put a heavy punishment in the form of mental pain, i.e. “self-worth attached to getting laid”, on this whole thing.
This has very little to do with societal expectations. It’s simple biology. Not getting laid is supposed to be one of the worst things for an organism.
You’re rationally right with what you say, but it’s simply not very relevant. Rationality does not help with our most deeply rooted biological desires. The only thing that helps is getting them fulfilled, i.e. having sex.
Everything you wrote is nonsense. Pointing at a process that often occurs - evolution - and then working backwards to claim that organisms must feel pain when they don’t reproduce is completely antilogical. Evolution may be caused by feelings of pain or suffering when otganisms don’t reproduce, or it could be something completely different. You are putting the effect before the cause.
Trying to do evolutionary psychoanalysis on something as cognitively complex as a human is practically guaranteed to give you wrong conclusions. What’s more, this sort of bullshit is part and parcel of a lot of bioessentialist rhetoric, so if I were you I would definitely consider revaluating a few things.
In this case the logic is sound. Evolution doesn’t often occur, it always occurs. And we’re not talking about secondary or tertiary reproductive fitness (ie: humans are efficient at running so they must run, men are physically strong so they must defend), we’re talking about actual reproductive encounters.
Its the entire goal of the of all life on earth. There’s a carrot for anything getting you closer to reproducing and sticks for anything that moves you the wrong direction. Despair and discomfort can be caused by plenty of things, but you don’t have to disentangle the entire human experience to draw the line from a lack of healthy sexual experience to an ideology based on extreme sexual frustration.
Edit: again, down votes with no counter argument. For some reason people agree that abstinence in sex ed is a bad policy but turn around and say sex isn’t part of normal human function. Which is it?
None of my argument is about regressive bioessentialism. There’s no inherent violent masculinity or genetic fitness or any stance about what relationships are “supposed” to look like. Men are just having less sex than women.
24% of men aged 22-34 did not had sex in 2022-2023 vs 13% of women. That’s a much larger cohort to propagate that frustration. You can argue that there are other social factors that make it manifest in this specific toxic ideology (as opposed depression, anxiety and body image issues) but the root cause is the same.
More sex means less frustration about lack of sex, less sex means more. Why jump through hoops to make it about personal failing or some other indirect cause?
It’s not a ‘goal’ there is no purpose or goal to evolution or life…it’s a property of life that it propagates itself but that’s not the goal, reproduction is a function or a property of life. You could also argue the ‘goal’ is survival and there are sticks and carrots poking at making an organism survive, but again it just sounds like you’re misunderstanding how those words are used in academia, you’re doing the same thing with fitness. Fitness in evolution isn’t about running or being strong it’s how well an organism functions in its environment and what makes an organism fit varies from organism to organism and environment to environment.
One of us is misunderstanding for sure.
Fitness is a quantitative representation of individual reproductive success.
You’re conflating metaphysical goals with the literal biological goals of propogation. It has nothing to do with survival, plenty of animals sacrifice themselves after reproducing, either as a food source or lack of evolutionary pressure to stay alive. The human exceptionalism that our awareness puts us above these natural processes is part of the problem.
It’s not though. I’m not working backwards. I’m just not writing a dissertation. It’s possible to observe lack of sex leading to psychological pain in all the different societies throughout all of history we have as humans. It’s incredibly more likely to be caused by our biology than by artificially created societal expectations.
I agree with you because it’s my anecdotal life experience. I’m quite successful in terms of my career and finances. I’m pretty good looking and outgoing. I’m also a single dad and I’m in a nearly year-long dry spell. My self esteem is awful. Not having sex is torture for me and it has nothing to do with societal norms. It’s just biological misery.
There’s always more to it as well. That’s maybe what people don’t get. Yeah, not having sex is terrible, but if it’s the only thing unpleasant it’s bearable. But if other shit starts piling on top, then it becomes misery. Then people might say “oh it’s only society”.
Hope you’ll feel better friend. Seems you’ve got the masturbation going nicely already, so that helps 🤣
Yeah sure, but it’s also one of the most natural things in the world to bite people
Of course it is, if you have rabies
Rabies is natural ;3
I’m asexual. Can’t relate, I guess.
EDIT: Wait, that’s even shittier!! People unable or have difficulty reproducing are worth less to society?? I may be a bit naïve, but I don’t believe that’s a majority of society believes something like that. That’s disgusting.
The comment was about self worth not societal worth. Being asexual shouldn’t matter with that argument because you wouldn’t feel the same sexual drive; your self worth isn’t impacted.
Self-worth can be a result of societal expectations. Your parents badgering you about how you should “go get married and have a family” to show how “successful” you are as a person is very much a thing. It can greatly impact a person.
The only reason a person would feel bad is because society is pushing the narrative that they should feel bad if they aren’t having sex with someone.
Self-worth can be a result of societal expectations.
Sure true, but you can’t ignore that humans have millions of years of evolution that have honed our physiological and social behavior to act a certain way. Just because it’s not rational doesn’t mean you can flip a switch and shrug it off.
For example, peer pressure in teens is more than a normal learned behavior. The need to conform to an in-group that (historically) will be your lifelong community is immense. The pain of exclusion and embarrassment is amplified, closer to actual physical pain, compared to what an adult/child might feel in the same situation.
The only reason a person would feel bad is because
society is pushing the narrative…is because reproduction is a core part of animal evolution. An asexual person saying that core discomfort is invalid is like a person who can’t feel physical pain rolling their eyes at touching a hot stove.
I’m not saying it’s invalid, I’m just saying that I personally don’t believe that it’s the true core of the issue!
It’s way more than just “Men mad because monke brain want sex mad because no sex”.
What is the core of the issue? “Society bad”? There are a lot of comorbid social ills but you can’t reduce everything to your favorites.
Economic frustration will likely manifest as anti immigrant sentiment. Extremist groups provide inclusion as a cure for social isolation. Degrading healthcare systems are fertile ground for anti-vax and pseudo-medicine. Digital echo chambers give a space to amplify every toxic narrative.
Occam’s razor says the guys preaching the fatalistic misogyny gospel are probably experiencing some strong sexual frustration. If they didn’t have that problem they could find something else to be mad about.
No toxic ideology precludes the others, but a racist with a stable marriage isn’t going to be blackpilled. He already knows minorities are the real problem.
Dunno what to tell you, but your second sentence is just wrong. It is mainly “men mad because monke brain want sex”.
You only think it’s not because like you said, you can’t relate to most people since you’re asexual.
Pro tip: getting laid creates more problems than it solves.
Oh, I’m well aware. I’m one of those problems. 😎
Pro tip: don’t say “getting laid”, ever, unless you want to sound misogynistic.
How can we help them make more friends? How can we get them involved in real-world activities that will diminish their time spent online?
By locking them into suburban houses with no places to go without being driven by their parents, until they’re old enough to drive. 🇺🇸🇨🇦
And then making cars impossibly expensive, teenage boys uninsurable as drivers, wages hilariously low, and reliable transportation a prerequisite for employment.
Those profits aren’t going to make themselves!
It was never gonna work out forever. Capitalism is really young and has never really been sustainable.
I used to go to school by bike with friends, nowadays there is car traffic congestion to drop off kids at school
In the 2000s my elementary-school step-son wasn’t allowed to walk, bike or skate to school. Also, they didn’t get to keep a locker. Fuck teaching personal responsibility! 6-yo children, bent double with giant backpacks. All they needed were coolie hats to complete the slave motiff. All in all just a nother brick in the wall.
Howany cases of scoliosis did that make. No really that nearly happned to my brothers when he wasin school. I was lucky and had lockers.
The middle school I went to in the 90’s had bike racks. They were old and corroded, most were kinda shoved to the side. I never once saw a bike locked to them, and I got the feeling that you’d get in trouble if you did.
That school was about 60 years old, and was once the town high school, it was in amongst the residential side of town. They opened a new middle school out on commercial land back behind the Best Buy out on the stroad that’s only known by its US route number. They installed no bike racks there.
Yeah. Not to mention how much time, effort and money it takes for parents to shuttle kids around to create some semblance of social life. The more difficult it is, the fewer people do it. Growing up in commie blocks, it was impossible to go out the entrance and not bump into some kids playing. You’d go on the balcony and get yelled to come down by some kids outside. We walked alone to school since kindergarten. There were multitudes of small local stores to buy yourself a treat and share it with the other kids. Even the least attentive parents had their kids get socially functional by society. This sort of thing is possible in some places in North America but I think it’s the exception rather than the norm.
I lived on the street next to a high school.
The primary entrance to both the high school and the rest of the neighborhood was appropriately named Funnel.
Getting out of the neighborhood was sometimes the longest part of my journey, and that was driving from the suburbs into downtown on a notoriously traffic ridden (and always under construction) freeway - they liked to close exits with little to no notice sometimes requiring massive rerouting. Was late a couple times because of that, but the traffic right at the start of the commute was the worst.
A combination of high schoolers who can’t drive, and half asleep parents who need more caffeine or less kids - probably both - as well as pedestrians and kids on bikes. I don’t know about your area, but cyclists in that area did not abide by traffic laws and no one stopped them, so they kept doing it. More than a few people died at that crossing in the ~5 years I lived there.
Thankfully, I usually only saw it bad on my way home in the morning (medical IT, I worked nights).
Covering some other shifts though? Whew, I had to leave at least 30 minutes earlier than I would for a night shift.
Raising kids these days must be a real minefield with all this toxic culture being so accessible.
Fundamentalist religion is at the top of the toxic culture, and it has been around since before the incel term.
Anyone offering easy answers to complex questions should be suspect. And that does largely incriminate all religious groups around the world. They often espouse seemingly decent and benign ideologies. But unfortunately the mindset that latches on to those things, idealogues; are the danger. Even if the ideology themselves aren’t necessarily.
We had an easy answer - a decent paying job that offered a decent lifestyle and a hope for a better future but the rich took it away.
They often espouse seemingly decent and benign ideologies.
Sometimes they are so conditioned that they don’t even think of their bigotry as bigotry.
I think organized religion fills their heads with problematic ideas about gender roles.
Heh, while religion isn’t required for that. It’s impossible to argue that it doesn’t help with it. Putting faith in anything and turning off critical thinking is always a recipe for disaster.
Pretty sure the old testament gives wives more authority in the community and in the household than what our current government is aiming for.
Fucking hell there are instructions for abortifactants in the OT
Don’t pin this on religion, this is purely the bias of petty men coloring their interpretations.
Usually, it’s just another term for the same thing, I would say.
If I choose to have children, they’ll be home-schooled, and their internet use will be entirely supervised until they’re older. None of this, hand-a-toddler-a-tablet nonsense.
I don’t think that raising kids was ever easy.
I think the point is that parents have less influence than ever when kids are getting their values from online communities.
And most parents are too lazy or too tired to police their children
The kids are also at school half the day or more, we’re trying to teach and reinforce critical thinking as much as possible with our son. And I’m trying to show him that there are lots of ways to solve problems when examples arise.
But I’m also a dad that both fixes the cars and cooks the dinners and solders the electronics and sows on the buttons. He’s a smart kid, and a contrarian like his folks, so I hope he’s gonna be ok.
lol no one raises kids these days, they leave that to youtube
Sooooo… when are we gonna admit that men’s mental health is unfortunaly heavily tied to their career prospects?
No, not yet?
Okay I’ll keep waiting.
sigh
…
It’s capitalism.
Men’s well being wouldn’t be tied to career prospects if it weren’t for the rat race we are all brainwashed into since birth that is capitalism.
You have worth as a human beyond your capacity to produce profit.
Yeah and the reason young men are finding it hard to have real life friends and end up on uncle forums is because we lost most of our “third spaces” thanks to them not making money and shutting down or being underfunded or closed if they were publicly owned.
Ontop of this the constant algorithms that push specific topics to people over and over due to it keeping them on the platform and therefore generates income.
It does feel like 75% of this problem could be fixed by stopping corporate greed and fixing our local communities as whole.
I went to a Humans vs. Zombies Nerf war at a university campus a few weeks ago. A couple hundred people, real strong mix of men, women, and others. A healthy mingling of people who were clearly gun hobby adjacent and a lot of openly queer folk, which I think is really quite encouraging to see. Everyone had a good time, no issues the whole day. Good vibes all around.
At the end of the event, the student organizers tearfully announced that the school administration had decided to ban all blaster events on campus going forward. Fuck us all for trying to have a healthy good time, right?
we lost most of our “third spaces” thanks to them not making money and shutting down or being underfunded or closed if they were publicly owned.
And also shut down by female supremacist activists.
A gym started up last decade in my town, as a men’s only gym. A place for guys to come and exercise without distraction.
It got sued within the year by a woman who tried to join. It went to court. Company ran out of money before the court case closed, went bankrupt and had to close.
The case proceeded to completion, the woman won, and all the women’s groups in the area crowed about their phyrric “victory” over misogyny.
There are three women’s-only gyms in town, six in the greater geographical region. None of these have ever had men demanding to become members, because those men would be nailed to the wall for being misogynists.
This happens eventually to all “men’s spaces” that exist long enough: they are forced to no longer be “men’s spaces”, because being a “man’s space” is misogynistic.
Women’s spaces? Totally fine. Not misandric in the least.
See how “equality” works?
Edit:
Pick any third space where women’s only spaces exist, and you will also find men’s-only spaces that were sued either into nonexistence or into opening their doors for women, which caused it to no longer be a “men’s space”. From boxing clubs to smoking clubs to the f**king Boy Scouts of America, men’s spaces everywhere are being eliminated in the drive to “combat misogyny”.
Meanwhile, the president of the Girl Scouts privately admitted (can’t recall exactly when, but it was either during or shortly after the Boy Scout’s trial) that she would rather shut down the entire org than allow a single boy to join. And she was lauded for that position.
“Rules for thee, but not for me.”
That isn’t “equality” in the least. That’s blatant gender bigotry. And that is what the “black pill” is built upon - actual real-world evidence.
You want the black pill to stop existing? QUIT SHOVELLING THEM COPIOUS AMOUNTS OF AMMUNITION, FFS.
The irony of this reply about this subject…
The lack of awareness is what really gets me on this one. It’s almost unbelievable
He just try to justify female supremacy as a thing. Can’t take him seriously
These third spaces don’t have to be exclusively young men lol. In fact it might be better if they aren’t given the specific topic of people we are talking about in this thread. In general an increase in community locations is a good thing, but it seemed especially so for people in the intel rabbit hole. Somewhere casual they can come out of their shells and meet people in the real world!
I honestly don’t think third spaces on their own are the answer. After all, suppose a city makes a nice park across the street from an incel’s apartment. Maybe they’ll leave their house and go there… but do you really think this socially awkward weirdo is gonna start striking up conversations with other people there? Do you think they are going to engage with others who say hello to them, if others interact with them at all? Yes, a lack of third spaces is a problem, but I don’t think it is the lynchpin. We are also less likely to visit third places when they do exist these days due to digital distractions. People seem to be more insular, less likely to introduce themselves to strangers and less likely to be open to strangers introducing themselves. And significant social anxiety and lack of social skills is seldom overcome simply by having a neutral environment.
What we really need is grassroots social movements dedicated to being friendly to strangers, reducing digital distractions, reaching out to men who feel left behind, and informing parents about the importance of proactively ensuring that their children have healthy social and emotional lives.
Honestly, it’s whether you treat each human life as important or you don’t. I don’t think those people need to be changed, they just need to look at real life instead of running away from it. But I’ll say, working as a clerk in McDonalds doesn’t sound like the greatest achievement of all time.
I honestly don’t think third spaces on their own are the answer.
And I would agree. Men in a group setting of only men will typically behave entirely differently than if you drop even a single woman into their midst. A man who is only among men will open up and behave and accept constructive criticism in ways that he will never do with even a single woman present. The change in behaviour a man exhibits in the presence of a woman is instinctual and unconscious, and is unable to be controlled or even moderated by the vast majority of men out there.
Having male-only spaces is absolutely essential to allowing men to behave as they would without the unconscious/instinctual pressure they would be subject to with a woman present.
Too bad these kinds of places are “misogynistic” in ways that women-only spaces are “not misandric”. The gender bigotry and hypocrisy in this dichotomy is blindingly overwhelming.
I’m not saying you are categorically wrong about the benefits of male-only spaces. But I will say that the attitude and language with which you are approaching the issue is not doing you any favors.
Men don’t need men-only spaces. That only deepens the rift between sexes. It’s absolutely not needed. You can completely respect the difference in sexes and that difference is welcomed, all other matters are bullshit from society. What humanity needs is respectful spaces for all sexes, not division.
These third spaces don’t have to be exclusively young men
Average age of the membership was 46. That doesn’t sound “young” to me.
Some men are just eager to have a communal workout environment that doesn’t have gym thots preening their thirst trap poses all over the place
I feel like that’s more a problem of whatever specific gyms you are going to. Ones I go to have usually have signs up saying no cameras allowing people to just focus on their own workout. Regardless, the point is that if you want to help people overcome their “the world is against me, no woman wants me” mind set of an incel, there should be more spaces that let people interact with others outside of online algorithm controlled or bot account flooded social media platforms. Places to meet and converse with real people of any gender. All of a sudden they will probably realise that most people are actually nice. Most people don’t generally go around trying to make people feel shit or uncomfortable.
LOLOLOLOLOL!!!
Imagine not wanting any hot women around.
Classic MGTOW vibes here
LOLOLOLOLOL!!!
Imagine not wanting any hot women around.
Classic MGTOW vibes here
Imagine being the guy whose primary excuse to go to the gym is to “ogle hot women”.
Yeah, you’re a real progressive guy.
The sign of a man with experience is when he’s become sick of women’s shit.
The woman I am married to - which BTW, makes me wholly ineligible for MGTOW status - is one of the few women out there I actually want to spend time with beyond social niceties. I have zero interest in the vast majority of women out there - regardless of “hotness” - because I have come to know how women in general act and react; what their motivations are and how they approach life in general. And that just makes me wholly uninterested in them.
Don’t get me wrong, I will absolutely be polite and civil to women. I have absolutely no problem socializing with them and making them feel appreciated and valued as I would any human being, regardless of gender (or fractional thereof). I just have no interest in them as women.
lol I would like a male version of curves, I get anxiety and think ppl think im looking at them when I zone out, its never been an issue, like they usually just smile at me and I realize it looks like im staring at them looking away, still dont like having anxiety over it. Why is it insane to think men could be more comfortable in a mens only gym like women are at womens only. The gym in my hometown before they added cardio machines was peak.
I think the whole gym influencer stuff thing becoming popular made it worse forsure, wasnt as axious til those vids of woman recording men walking past and posting them online and my gym became a maze of tripods with everyone taking 10 hours to do their sets and check their footage. (The men are the issue here too)
But also gyms have nothing to do with third spaces, ppl use them like that but I think its out of neccesity.
How is wanting to be equal supremacist?
If you want to run a public business, the social contract has always been that you serve the public.
Claiming that men/boys need to be separated because “they can’t control themselves” only enables the incel type behaviors. As well as belittling men. Because as a cis man, I certainly have no issue respecting a woman. Or any issue focusing on other things when they’re around. If men and boys were more familiar with interacting with women, they likely wouldn’t be bitter incels. Unable to understand why no woman wants to be around them. Like, literally.
Holy shit, do you have negative awareness?
Holy shit, do you have negative awareness?
No, I am facts-based.
And if you had any intellectual integrity, you would provide your argument on how my example wasn’t a stellar example of societal anti-male gender bigotry.
But you can’t.
Well, the world isn’t supposed to be fair. Some random person’s actions don’t change the existence of incels. So, why would it matter? Women’s only spaces are out there because society determined so and that’s all there is to it. It isn’t anyone’s fault. Whether you want to do something about it, do it the intelligent way.
Ah, so yes, you do have negative awareness. Thanks for confirming.
Ah, so yes, you do have negative awareness. Thanks for confirming.
At least I’m not demonstrating the seething levels of gender bigotry that you are, so at least I’m one better than you.
FOUND ONE!!!
FOUND ONE!!!
Ah, a classic strategy of the intellectually bankrupt - an ad hominem. attacking the man instead of the argument.
Some of us tend to be obsessed with facts and evidence, and are not easily affected by the public shaming that arises from an intellectually bankrupt thought-terminating response. Try your strategy on someone else.
Facts and evidence are not on your side no matter how much you scream that they are… based on your singular anecdote, no less Classic brainwashed fascist incel vibes there.
Facts and evidence are not on your side
- Boxing clubs and some martial arts clubs that have existed for many decades
- Smoking clubs that have existed for centuries
- The f**king Boy Scouts of America
The evidence is out there for anyone not blinded by fact-free ideology. You just have to look.
You have worth as a human beyond your capacity to produce profit.
This is only true in a vague, wishy-washy metaphysical sense. Fine, whatever, you have intrinsic value. If that warms your cockles, more power to you.
But the extent to which other people value you is entirely dependent on what you can provide to them. This has nothing to do with capitalism. Do you think that in a socialist society, a person who refused to do any work at all - not because they couldn’t, but just because they didn’t feel like it - would be shown general love and acceptance and kindness? No! They would, at best, be tolerated and given the bare necessities to survive - but they wouldnt be celebrated. Do you think primitive tribes love and support the lazy asshole who never contributes and just expects food to be brought to them every day? No, of course not! They kick that motherfucker out when they are dead weight.
And what you “provide” for other people doesn’t have to make money. But it does need to provide some kind of value. Do you have a beautiful smile that brightens peoples’ day? Are you tall enough to reach things on the top shelf, and willing to reach them for short people? Can you make hilarious dolphin sounds at parties? Are you a supportive friend who listens to others’ struggles when they are down? No? You just sit your ass on the couch all day and watch TV and interact with basically no one? Then why the fuck would you expect anyone to value you, when you provide no value to them? This is not a capitalism problem. This is a human solution. Dead weight gets dropped. Period. Always has, always will.
…But old people can retire. As long as they dont fuck up the government
Yes? What’s your point?
I figured it was obvious
I agree. People need to learn to get away from far-fetched fantasy if that doesn’t translate to real value. I know it’s harsh, but everyone needs to deal with reality.
Because a man’s prospects weren’t important in feudal, classical, and ancient societies?
No, they weren’t. Class was much more important. There was no class climbing prospect. You either were born into a having family or you weren’t. Even amongst peasants, men weren’t suppose to “have a career” or a prospect. You inherited whatever your family had.
There was expectations of performance, of course. There was internal competition, but no peasant would ever realistically transform into nobility via merit or otherwise.
Those ignorant of history forget that our current worldviews and values weren’t always universal. The notion of a linear career, of having prospects, to be successful, to grow from a low place and climb the social and financial rings, accumulating wealth enough to retire early then leave a lofty inheritance to children and grandchildren. All that is modern construction that is not present before the 19th century. Furthermore, the expectations that all the other poor people are lazy scumbags, but my poverty is merely a circumstantial setback is a very American exceptialism view.
Capitalism probably doesn’t help, but I don’t think male alienation is really unique to this time or culture. Any time you have social hierarchy the lowest tier ends up eating a lot of shit. Our social hierarchy is very capitalist but you’d easily find the same kind of thing even in hunter gatherer societies. Socialism has plenty of hierarchy baked in as well. Anarchists are about the only ones who actively attempt to “flatten” society.
“Career prospects” in this case means that men want to feel like they’re of use to society. The issue is only tied to capitalism in the sense that the current capitalist environment doesn’t offer many of them meaningful work. I’m not sure what alternative to capitalism you imagine would solve that problem - without also giving men those same career prospects they’re currently lacking. Taking care of and providing for the tribe is what we’re hardcoded to get meaning from.
I’ve seen so many men just suck at doing adult stuff in my life and career. It’s not a problem of men not having the opportunity to show value, it’s more that they expect to have value without providing anything. So if you feel useless, it’s more of a you problem that current media allows you to blame other people for.
Capitalism is causing some of these issues. The core issue is men expecting the world to hand them a sense of value.
Sounds like bootstrap talk to me.
In an ideal world, yes, men and women would be handed a sense of value from society.
Sometimes it helps to remember that a lot of people are actually hopelessly stupid. And this isn’t like some elitist ivory tower commentary - there is a good percentage of the population which struggles with basic problem solving, knowledge synthesis, critical thought, etc.
“Advanced capitalism” is sometimes literally called a “knowledge economy” and this has really properly fucked people who could have previously earned a fine living doing mindless physical work. And again, this isn’t like some normative statement - for most of human history this equation has been inverted, and intellectual opportunities were scarce. Honestly, part of the problem is probably very specifically that we have hit that inflection point, which is cultivating a new form of alienation for those who are on that lower cognitive tail, who both lack opportunities and are also made to feel inferior for it.
You don’t need someone to create jobs for you, people just need to do useful stuff and it will get attention. As long as work is organized, it doesn’t make sense someone would “create” a job for you. It’s all about History. These neo-aristocrats have a hold on capital, so they decide what to do.
I’m not saying that people shouldn’t care about work with this, just that no jobs are “created”.
deleted by creator
There are many men in progressive political spaces. What?
Buddy I know a ton of men well placed in their careers and lifestyles that eat themselves up everynight out of loneliness.
How bout instead of waiting you arm up and help overthrow the EXTREMELY VIOLENT capitalist system? Go hunt a hedgefunder or private equity broker
Leftist incel vibes
No, freedom-endorsing patriot vibes
deleted by creator
SOOOOOOOO……we can all admit now that socioeconomics is real. Cuz I’d hate to think anyone would think this is a new concept and would affect only one group recently and they still sit there and think they are unique to this ’phenomenon’ whilst it’s been an effect for generations already and has gone ignored for about as long. And they’ve had to just ‘deal with it’.
Cuz I’m real sick of seeing this argument like it’s not been around and affecting whole swaths of groups of people for centuries.
You can admit there’s been slaves and it’s affected their families poorly? Let’s start with that. And it’s still happening. And it’s still being brushed under the carpet and there’s still flagrant racism targeting entire communities to ignore their prospects.
For generations.
Cuz that all happened way before incels in the burbs came about.
Who is pretending socioeconomic inequality isn’t real? I agree with what you say, but I’m not sure who here you’re directing your comment at.
Violence is the answer
So how would you imagine it would work out for a POC to open fire like a typical Incel does?
Depends on how good his aim is and choice of venue. Also, honkeys can help out
The only reason Luigi is still alive is he’s white.
“It’s important to remember that it’s not zero-sum. We can care about the well-being of women and girls and also acknowledge that young men are struggling, too. Those don’t have to be at odds.”
Yes, I hate the way that people in media thought they could empower women by creating absolutely moronic and attractive male characters that they could sexually harass. Like, what!? That’s not the way! I think people in general need more support because we’ve sort of nullified the way support networks used to exist.
I think you need to be on a subdued position by society to be considered as “struggling”. Incels accept their condition completely and are not in a vulnerable position when related to society. Unless you call being called out for “mental health” problems as submission.
Being weak doesn’t mean you’re subdued, I bet incel’s existence is profitable to someone. All in all, I don’t wish you a time trying to “care” for these people, I don’t think they would care for you. Unless you call “care” throwing them into some mental institution for something’s sake.
