The rise of Incels

[DrZoidberg]

I hear talk about how male sexlessness is rising.

It makes me suspicious. If male sexlessness is rising then so should female sexlessness. The top 20% of men have always had all the sex they want. So they're hardly having more sex than before. So that can't explain how male sexlessness is going up while female sexlessness isn't.

I wonder if it's more a question of undesirable men stopping with lying about how much sex they're getting. Being more open about their situation and finding likeminded people online.

Do you think that the number of Incels really is rising?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The rise is the volume, interconnectivity among "incels" online, and the normalization of their feelings about women.

 

[bigfield]

I hear talk about how male sexlessness is rising.

It makes me suspicious. If male sexlessness is rising then so should female sexlessness. The top 20% of men have always had all the sex they want. So they're hardly having more sex than before. So that can't explain how male sexlessness is going up while female sexlessness isn't.

I wonder if it's more a question of undesirable men stopping with lying about how much sex they're getting. Being more open about their situation and finding likeminded people online.

Do you think that the number of Incels really is rising?

I think you're right in that they're just finding each other online and getting noticed. We're probably seeing the same thing happening with other marginal types of people, too, such as conspiracy nuts and people with extreme political ideologies.

I suspect that once these people find each other, they end up fuelling each other's sense of resentment and entitlement. So the number of young men with really extreme incel attitudes has probably gone up a lot thanks to internet discussion boards.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I think Incels spend a fuckton of time telling each other lies about how 20% of the men are sleeping with 80% of the women, and the women that cannot get an Alpha Male are sleeping with dogs, or other women, or women that have transitioned to men.
They also see a study on how a dating site's records show X-many women members are contacting Y-many men and figure those ratios are universal, But it's all posing and tiny sample sizes and out-of-context accusations.
And noise.
LOTS of noise for the sake of noise.

 

[Wiploc]

When the internet was new, I predicted that it would cause a Cambrian explosion of micro cultures.

 

[Swammerdami]

I think a large number of young women still have no trouble getting sex; some might be with older or married men. And ... is lesbianism on the rise?

When I was young there were a lot of us men who weren't getting as much sex as we liked. Some tried to encourage each other or offer tips. Very different from today when some "incels" say that, since families with children may get taxpayer-funded food and care. the incels should get taxpayer-funded sex robots!

 

[Bronzeage]

Incels are made, not born. Incels can't reproduce, so they must recruit.

There are a few realities of the situation to recognize. If a man wants a sexual partner, whether for the moment or longer term, he needs contact with a woman. The more the better. This is why high school and college are so nice. A man comes in contact with a great number of women, through no effort of his own. They're everywhere, for the time being, and the key words are "effort of his own." Once a man enters the working world, he won't be herded into large rooms filled with women his own age. He has to put forth some effort. This transforms something which once looked difficult into something impossible.

So what does that get us? It puts the blame for being involuntarily celibate on the incel. Creating the right conditions for a relationship, even if it's expected to last only 20 minutes, takes effort. With any effort, there is a possibility of failure. That's just reality.

I was probably around age 14 when someone explained the 1 to 10 scale to me. While the 10 scale is demeaning to women, it's real lesson for men is, don't try to punch above your own weight. All important lessons for men are expressed as sports metaphors. Any man who ever assessed a woman's position on a scale, did it only to determine his position, relative to her. A 6guy could have a shot at a 7woman, maybe an 8, but he knows the 9s and 10s are out of reach. There is an inherent problem in filling an arbitrary scale with subjective data.

The incel wants a woman above his number, which is all the 2s and up, but he's not willing to pursue a 2 or a 3. He wants a 6 or higher. There are plenty of 2 men who seek a 6woman, or higher, and succeed. This is mainly because they don't worry about the middle school game called the 10scale. That's just reality.

It's pointless to explain any of this to an incel. Perception is reality so his world is very real to him, even if we know it's an illusion of his making.

 

[Angry Floof]

I hear talk about how male sexlessness is rising.

It makes me suspicious. If male sexlessness is rising then so should female sexlessness. The top 20% of men have always had all the sex they want. So they're hardly having more sex than before. So that can't explain how male sexlessness is going up while female sexlessness isn't.

I wonder if it's more a question of undesirable men stopping with lying about how much sex they're getting. Being more open about their situation and finding likeminded people online.

Do you think that the number of Incels really is rising?

Yes, definitely. Young, white males (yes, other males, but overwhelmingly white) are bombarded with ideological attempts to hijack their ignorance and animal brain aggression.

Fewer men are getting higher education these days. This absolutely does factor in to the number of young, white men being swayed by incel ideology and recruitment. More and more kids are gaming, too, which is also a factor because recruiters can easily access the attention of thousands or millions of young, white males. Another factor (in the US, at least) is the cultural attitude that white males are automatically good people who don't really need a lot of training in humility or ethics or personal responsibility, so those recruiters have a huge void to fill.

 

[J842P]

I hear talk about how male sexlessness is rising.

It makes me suspicious. If male sexlessness is rising then so should female sexlessness. The top 20% of men have always had all the sex they want. So they're hardly having more sex than before. So that can't explain how male sexlessness is going up while female sexlessness isn't.

I wonder if it's more a question of undesirable men stopping with lying about how much sex they're getting. Being more open about their situation and finding likeminded people online.

Do you think that the number of Incels really is rising?

Mm. No. I think it's very possible. At least among my male friends who are not married, it's basically 0 sex (unless they go to a prostitute) or sex on demand (using tinder, although now in my age group it's other dating apps).

 

[Angra Mainyu]

I hear talk about how male sexlessness is rising.

It makes me suspicious. If male sexlessness is rising then so should female sexlessness. The top 20% of men have always had all the sex they want. So they're hardly having more sex than before. So that can't explain how male sexlessness is going up while female sexlessness isn't.

I wonder if it's more a question of undesirable men stopping with lying about how much sex they're getting. Being more open about their situation and finding likeminded people online.

Do you think that the number of Incels really is rising?

I don't have any numbers and I do not know whether the percentage is increasing, but with regard to the argument above, even if the top 20% aren't getting any more sex, the top 50% could be getting more sex and the bottom 50% less sex - including larger percentages getting no sex at all -, or a number of other combinations.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think it's a real phenomenon.

The basic issue is that women are choosier about sex than men. A woman may find herself in a position where there's no men available that she wants, but it's pretty hard to find a situation where there are no men willing to fuck her. There are a substantial number of men, however, that consider a low quality woman better than no woman.

It's quite possible for a substantial mismatch between sexless men and sexless women to exist because "sex" is not a yes/no. Consider a situation where half the men are getting sex on average twice a week and half are getting no sex at all, while the women are getting sex on average once a week.

The internet has made the problem much worse.

First, internet dating. It greatly enlarges the dating pools, thus setting up a situation where a fairly small group of good-looking men are being chased by a large pool of average women. The good looking guys get matches, the rest of them get little and the ones at the low end of the looks scale probably never get anything but scammers.

Second, it's brought the incels together and echo chambers amplify positions.

There are a few realities of the situation to recognize. If a man wants a sexual partner, whether for the moment or longer term, he needs contact with a woman. The more the better. This is why high school and college are so nice. A man comes in contact with a great number of women, through no effort of his own. They're everywhere, for the time being, and the key words are "effort of his own." Once a man enters the working world, he won't be herded into large rooms filled with women his own age. He has to put forth some effort. This transforms something which once looked difficult into something impossible.

You're assuming balanced classes. Most of the classes I took were 90%+ male.

I was probably around age 14 when someone explained the 1 to 10 scale to me. While the 10 scale is demeaning to women, it's real lesson for men is, don't try to punch above your own weight. All important lessons for men are expressed as sports metaphors. Any man who ever assessed a woman's position on a scale, did it only to determine his position, relative to her. A 6guy could have a shot at a 7woman, maybe an 8, but he knows the 9s and 10s are out of reach. There is an inherent problem in filling an arbitrary scale with subjective data.

The incel wants a woman above his number, which is all the 2s and up, but he's not willing to pursue a 2 or a 3. He wants a 6 or higher. There are plenty of 2 men who seek a 6woman, or higher, and succeed. This is mainly because they don't worry about the middle school game called the 10scale. That's just reality.

It's pointless to explain any of this to an incel. Perception is reality so his world is very real to him, even if we know it's an illusion of his making.

This would work if the women also followed it. It falls apart in the reality that women are able to in the short run punch above their weight. They're unlikely to marry someone above their level but they can get sex above it.

There's also the problem of some of the women at the top end of the scale being drawn off by the guys who bring money rather than looks to the table.

Some get lucky where attraction develops between people who already are around each other, but as more and more relationships get started on the internet the problem is only going to become worse.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think Incels spend a fuckton of time telling each other lies about how 20% of the men are sleeping with 80% of the women, and the women that cannot get an Alpha Male are sleeping with dogs, or other women, or women that have transitioned to men.
They also see a study on how a dating site's records show X-many women members are contacting Y-many men and figure those ratios are universal, But it's all posing and tiny sample sizes and out-of-context accusations.
And noise.
LOTS of noise for the sake of noise.

I can recommend the book Dataclysm. It's based on the biggest and best dataset ever produced. OKcupids. It's pretty eye opening. It has all kind of dating data that shows pretty clearly what is going on. Both from which profiles people keep going to, as well as which they actually send messages to, and then how the outcomes are.

Women typically see the men at the lower end of the top 20% of men as average looking/attractiveness. While women do care less about looks than men. The truth is that they care about looks as well as other stuff. They want a hot guy who also has status, intelligence, humor, has similar values and a good penis. Men are much less picky.

I absolutely believe that 80% of men struggle to get laid, while the top 20% have as much sex as their appetite allows. When women whine about their struggles in finding a good man, that is the problem. They typically have unrealistic expectations and an extremely warped sense of what a normal man is.

When women complain that they're suffering to live up to the demands of men. What they're complaining about is living up to the demands of the top 20%. And that's a completely different story.

While almost all men prefer women who are 21-23 years old. We still are more democratic and less picky with out women.

Most people have sex with people on the "the best I can do" principle. Few people, men or women, have sex with the people they'd like. I have no trouble believing that a man at the lower end of the desirability spectrum will be completely locked out of the dating scene. But that's always been the case. That's not a new development. That's what I am skeptical about.

While less desirable women have similar problems. Women are only in very extreme situations ever completely locked out of the dating scene. A woman who is willing can almost always get laid. Which is not true for women in the same situation.

I also don't see it as a problem. This is a market place. If you want to get laid, then put in the effort. Nobody owes anybody sex. Yeah, it sucks for all those people with various problems making it hard. But that's most people. That's just life.

I'm just sceptical about the idea that Incels is a new thing or increasing.

 

[Swammerdami]

Some of the change is due to the social revolution which began several decades ago. Women started getting good jobs and became less dependent on marriage. Some single women, who might have been actively seeking a husband in older times, found sex not to be a priority. In the 1970's there was a joke-meme: "A woman needs a man the way a fish needs a bicycle."

But more recently, smartphones and social media have transformed society dramatically in several ways. Scary!

Incels are made, not born. Incels can't reproduce, so they must recruit. ...

...

Yes, definitely. Young, white males (yes, other males, but overwhelmingly white) are bombarded with ideological attempts to hijack their ignorance and animal brain aggression.

Fewer men are getting higher education these days. This absolutely does factor in to the number of young, white men being swayed by incel ideology and recruitment. More and more kids are gaming, too, which is also a factor because recruiters can easily access the attention of thousands or millions of young, white males. Another factor (in the US, at least) is the cultural attitude that white males are automatically good people who don't really need a lot of training in humility or ethics or personal responsibility, so those recruiters have a huge void to fill.

What's all this about "recruitment"? Men saddened by their "involuntary celibacy" would be happy to chat with others like them. So they "recruit"? Or is there more deliberate and insidious recruitment involved?

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think it's a real phenomenon.

The basic issue is that women are choosier about sex than men. A woman may find herself in a position where there's no men available that she wants, but it's pretty hard to find a situation where there are no men willing to fuck her. There are a substantial number of men, however, that consider a low quality woman better than no woman.

It's quite possible for a substantial mismatch between sexless men and sexless women to exist because "sex" is not a yes/no. Consider a situation where half the men are getting sex on average twice a week and half are getting no sex at all, while the women are getting sex on average once a week.

The internet has made the problem much worse.

First, internet dating. It greatly enlarges the dating pools, thus setting up a situation where a fairly small group of good-looking men are being chased by a large pool of average women. The good looking guys get matches, the rest of them get little and the ones at the low end of the looks scale probably never get anything but scammers.

Second, it's brought the incels together and echo chambers amplify positions.

I don't think the maths add up. I've seen different numbers. But for the Incel story to work the high status males would have to have sex with something like two new women a day. That's obviously not true.

I have a friend who told me that he was 30 and a virgin. He was a good looking guy with a high status job. The fact that he was a virgin made him too shy to proposition women for sex, which led to a negative spiral and prevented him from getting laid. Just coming out to me as unfucked was a huge step for him.

I think these guys have always existed. If anything Internet only helps these guys. I can't see how the expanded dating pool can be anything but positive for the long term virgin development

 

[Angry Floof]

Some of the change is due to the social revolution which began several decades ago. Women started getting good jobs and became less dependent on marriage. Some single women, who might have been actively seeking a husband in older times, found sex not to be a priority. In the 1970's there was a joke-meme: "A woman needs a man the way a fish needs a bicycle."

But more recently, smartphones and social media have transformed society dramatically in several ways. Scary!

Incels are made, not born. Incels can't reproduce, so they must recruit. ...

...

Yes, definitely. Young, white males (yes, other males, but overwhelmingly white) are bombarded with ideological attempts to hijack their ignorance and animal brain aggression.

Fewer men are getting higher education these days. This absolutely does factor in to the number of young, white men being swayed by incel ideology and recruitment. More and more kids are gaming, too, which is also a factor because recruiters can easily access the attention of thousands or millions of young, white males. Another factor (in the US, at least) is the cultural attitude that white males are automatically good people who don't really need a lot of training in humility or ethics or personal responsibility, so those recruiters have a huge void to fill.

What's all this about "recruitment"? Men saddened by their "involuntary celibacy" would be happy to chat with others like them. So they "recruit"? Or is there more deliberate and insidious recruitment involved?

They may not have set out to recruit per se, but that's what it is. The most animal brained ideological movements always involve increasing numbers and social dominance.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Most people have sex with people on the "the best I can do" principle. Few people, men or women, have sex with the people they'd like. I have no trouble believing that a man at the lower end of the desirability spectrum will be completely locked out of the dating scene. But that's always been the case. That's not a new development. That's what I am skeptical about.

I think what's changed is that the internet has widened the pool of men to chase. In the past a woman who wasn't finding any more prospects at their desired level would get more realistic. Now the pool in reasonably dense areas is effectively infinite, they'll never run out of prospects to chase.

I also don't see it as a problem. This is a market place. If you want to get laid, then put in the effort. Nobody owes anybody sex. Yeah, it sucks for all those people with various problems making it hard. But that's most people. That's just life.

I'm just sceptical about the idea that Incels is a new thing or increasing.

You correctly identified that men on the low end are basically locked out but then your solution is "put in the effort"--which you've already admitted isn't going to work.

And it is a social issue because large number of men with no prospects of a relationship become a social problem.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think it's a real phenomenon.

The basic issue is that women are choosier about sex than men. A woman may find herself in a position where there's no men available that she wants, but it's pretty hard to find a situation where there are no men willing to fuck her. There are a substantial number of men, however, that consider a low quality woman better than no woman.

It's quite possible for a substantial mismatch between sexless men and sexless women to exist because "sex" is not a yes/no. Consider a situation where half the men are getting sex on average twice a week and half are getting no sex at all, while the women are getting sex on average once a week.

The internet has made the problem much worse.

First, internet dating. It greatly enlarges the dating pools, thus setting up a situation where a fairly small group of good-looking men are being chased by a large pool of average women. The good looking guys get matches, the rest of them get little and the ones at the low end of the looks scale probably never get anything but scammers.

Second, it's brought the incels together and echo chambers amplify positions.

I don't think the maths add up. I've seen different numbers. But for the Incel story to work the high status males would have to have sex with something like two new women a day. That's obviously not true.

I have a friend who told me that he was 30 and a virgin. He was a good looking guy with a high status job. The fact that he was a virgin made him too shy to proposition women for sex, which led to a negative spiral and prevented him from getting laid. Just coming out to me as unfucked was a huge step for him.

I think these guys have always existed. If anything Internet only helps these guys. I can't see how the expanded dating pool can be anything but positive for the long term virgin development

There are certainly people like your example but I don't think that's the majority of the incels.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Some of the change is due to the social revolution which began several decades ago. Women started getting good jobs and became less dependent on marriage. Some single women, who might have been actively seeking a husband in older times, found sex not to be a priority. In the 1970's there was a joke-meme: "A woman needs a man the way a fish needs a bicycle."

But more recently, smartphones and social media have transformed society dramatically in several ways. Scary!





What's all this about "recruitment"? Men saddened by their "involuntary celibacy" would be happy to chat with others like them. So they "recruit"? Or is there more deliberate and insidious recruitment involved?

They may not have set out to recruit per se, but that's what it is. The most animal brained ideological movements always involve increasing numbers and social dominance.

You are not presenting any evidence of recruitment.

Simply by existing they attract others already in the same boat, it's not a status anyone desires so recruitment would be impossible.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Most people have sex with people on the "the best I can do" principle. Few people, men or women, have sex with the people they'd like. I have no trouble believing that a man at the lower end of the desirability spectrum will be completely locked out of the dating scene. But that's always been the case. That's not a new development. That's what I am skeptical about.

I think what's changed is that the internet has widened the pool of men to chase. In the past a woman who wasn't finding any more prospects at their desired level would get more realistic. Now the pool in reasonably dense areas is effectively infinite, they'll never run out of prospects to chase.

I also don't see it as a problem. This is a market place. If you want to get laid, then put in the effort. Nobody owes anybody sex. Yeah, it sucks for all those people with various problems making it hard. But that's most people. That's just life.

I'm just sceptical about the idea that Incels is a new thing or increasing.

You correctly identified that men on the low end are basically locked out but then your solution is "put in the effort"--which you've already admitted isn't going to work.

And it is a social issue because large number of men with no prospects of a relationship become a social problem.

But whose fault is that? Whose responsibility is it to fix it?

 

[skepticalbip]

I think what's changed is that the internet has widened the pool of men to chase. In the past a woman who wasn't finding any more prospects at their desired level would get more realistic. Now the pool in reasonably dense areas is effectively infinite, they'll never run out of prospects to chase.



You correctly identified that men on the low end are basically locked out but then your solution is "put in the effort"--which you've already admitted isn't going to work.

And it is a social issue because large number of men with no prospects of a relationship become a social problem.

But whose fault is that? Whose responsibility is it to fix it?

All social problems are not subject to fixes. As a Buddhist would say, life is suffering. A "fix" would require women to defy their nature of not wanting to have sexual relationships with undesirable men.