Incels - A Symptom of Sick Social System

[CenotaphGirl]

He gotta be:
As swift as a coursing river
With all the force of a great typhoon
With all the strength of a raging fire
And as mysterious as the dark side of the Moon

Did you send us daughters… when we asked for sons! How can I make a man out of youuuuu

 

[TheRealCallie]

He gotta be:
As swift as a coursing river
With all the force of a great typhoon
With all the strength of a raging fire
And as mysterious as the dark side of the Moon

Hey, I just watched that the other day.

 

[user 190541]

Prior to the "women's movement" and all the idiotic laws and societal changes it brought, the "bad boys" were relegated to the lower rungs of women - unattractive girls and barroom types. Upstanding good providers (us honest, intelligent, hardworking, guys) were the ones who were sought after - as women needed us for a good life for them and their children.

The scenario you describe was artificially created. With EEOC/AA/hiring quota laws, no fault divorce, public assistance, etc...females don't need good providers anymore. So they are free to give into their base instincts and chase the bad boys. Civilized society loses.

I think it's more than that, actually. Middle and upper-class women back in the old days were refined, played the piano, could recite poetry by heart, were into crafts and generally the arts, had erudition. The same was true for men, although there was the slight difference that women would pursue the knowledges that were intellectualy and technically deemed appropriate for women, while men would do and pursue what was considered characteristic of the male. Back then, the ideal man for women was the affluent, handsome, educated, polite - yet manly - gentleman. No such woman would ever even consider having anything to do with the types described above - they would think such men are below them, and rightly so. The fact is that women themselves have degenerated in comparison to their female ancestors, and so did men.

I find it surprising that over the years there's been so much debate regarding inceldom and the contemporary difficulties of dating yet I 've never seen the notion that socialism could be a solution to these problems. The materialistic and hedonistic culture of our society and the material, capitalistic base it presupposes are what's behind these and many other societal ills. Any thinking that doesn't start from this premise or outright rejects it is wrong in its very principles. In more precise terms, what we're seeing is the repercussion in the superstructure of the decline of the capitalistic base, and that will only end when the capitalist base itself is overcome.

 

[TheSkaFish]

Prior to the "women's movement" and all the idiotic laws and societal changes it brought, the "bad boys" were relegated to the lower rungs of women - unattractive girls and barroom types. Upstanding good providers (us honest, intelligent, hardworking, guys) were the ones who were sought after - as women needed us for a good life for them and their children.

The scenario you describe was artificially created. With EEOC/AA/hiring quota laws, no fault divorce, public assistance, etc...females don't need good providers anymore. So they are free to give into their base instincts and chase the bad boys. Civilized society loses.

Actually I think it's the other way around - marriage, and "niceness" in general, was artificially created by civilization.

The chasing of bad boys, and I guess for that matter the chasing of hot women, is a return to base instinct, survival of the fittest. That's the natural way, but unlike a lot of people who believe that survival of the fittest is the natural rightful way things should be, I believe that it was just the starting point, and every time we moved away from it, quality of life increased.

I've mentioned this before but I guess you could describe me as somewhat "geeky" - though I have other interests now as well. I still like the same things I liked as a kid, things that would be considered childish and have no competitive or masculine value. I enjoy them because I enjoy them, the enjoyment is for its own sake. I also like things like, being able to go for a walk in peace and not be attacked. I feel like civilization makes all that possible. In a survival of the fittest, kill or be killed lifestyle, you couldn't sit around and play D&D, talk Star Wars, play video games or collect action figures. While you did that someone would bash your brains out and take whatever valuables you have, or just conquer and enslave you. You'd have to constantly think about killing or enslaving the other guy before he does the same to you, outmaneuvering him, trying to anticipate his every move, constantly readying either a defense or an attack. "Fun" would not exist as we know it, there would be no light-hearted interests, there would be no time or room for anything that doesn't have an immediate competitive warlike use. Life would be all survival, all the time.

There probably wouldn't be too many creature comforts either, as it takes time to invent those things and put them together, and if you constantly have to worry about killing or being killed, no one has time for that. Life would be like caveman times, or the Middle Ages at best. Might and/or cunning makes right, everyone else is d*mned to misery.

Honestly I think if we used our technology today to REDUCE scarcity and competition, make it so that people had more, that you had to compete LESS to have a good life, leaving competition only for people who really wanted it or felt a need to be that way, then it would give "nice" - or as I think of them "normal" guys - a chance. I think hyper-individualism is ruining normalcy.

The other half of that though, and old me would disagree strongly with this, is that they would have to give "normal" women a chance too, not just the super hot ones. It has to work both ways.

I came to realize, a lot of the "hot" girls, have "cold", aloof personalities. They think they're better than you just for existing, and I really don't like that kind of person at all, male or female, in any capacity. Most of them don't like the same stuff as me, so we don't have much to talk about. And that I don't like mean, arrogant people, regardless of what they look like. That's not someone I'd want to live with for the rest of my life, someone I could see myself having feelings for.

Anyway. Just my thoughts.

 

[TheSkaFish]

I find it surprising that over the years there's been so much debate regarding inceldom and the contemporary difficulties of dating yet I 've never seen the notion that socialism could be a solution to these problems. The materialistic and hedonistic culture of our society and the material, capitalistic base it presupposes are what's behind these and many other societal ills. Any thinking that doesn't start from this premise or outright rejects it is wrong in its very principles. In more precise terms, what we're seeing is the repercussion in the superstructure of the decline of the capitalistic base, and that will only end when the capitalist base itself is overcome.

I think it would help. Maybe not straight up communism, but at least a return to how things were in the 30 years after WW2 where modern middle class life came from and became what we know as "normal life". I think the way things were then, gave a lot of men more of a chance than they have today.

I think a return to worker/middle class friendly policies, would give a lot of "normal" people, men and women alike, "normal" lives. Getting rich was always an extra. But normalcy should be easier to attain, I think providing an easily reached quality of life for most is the mark of an advanced civilization.

 

[Unsigned]

Actually I think it's the other way around - marriage, and "niceness" in general, was artificially created by civilization.

Good point and I agree.
TBH, I was only considering the post WW2 era when I put my comment. So from 1946 to now.

 

[user 190541]

I think it would help. Maybe not straight up communism, but at least a return to how things were in the 30 years after WW2 where modern middle class life came from and became what we know as "normal life". I think the way things were then, gave a lot of men more of a chance than they have today.

I think a return to worker/middle class friendly policies, would give a lot of "normal" people, men and women alike, "normal" lives. Getting rich was always an extra. But normalcy should be easier to attain, I think providing an easily reached quality of life for most is the mark of an advanced civilization.

Class struggle in the USA tends to naturally lead to Bernie Sanders-type policies and agendas, but the powers that be are always finding ways to prevent them from ever attaining greater significance. If it happened, though, that would be a great a victory for all the peoples of the world.

Also, socialist American aesthetics because yes.

 

[Unsigned]

I think it's more than that, actually. Middle and upper-class women back in the old days were refined, played the piano, could recite poetry by heart, were into crafts and generally the arts, had erudition. The same was true for men, although there was the slight difference that women would pursue the knowledges that were intellectualy and technically deemed appropriate for women, while men would do and pursue what was considered characteristic of the male. Back then, the ideal man for women was the affluent, handsome, educated, polite - yet manly - gentleman. No such woman would ever even consider having anything to do with the types described above - they would think such men are below them, and rightly so. The fact is that women themselves have degenerated in comparison to their female ancestors, and so did men.

I find it surprising that over the years there's been so much debate regarding inceldom and the contemporary difficulties of dating yet I 've never seen the notion that socialism could be a solution to these problems. The materialistic and hedonistic culture of our society and the material, capitalistic base it presupposes are what's behind these and many other societal ills. Any thinking that doesn't start from this premise or outright rejects it is wrong in its very principles. In more precise terms, what we're seeing is the repercussion in the superstructure of the decline of the capitalistic base, and that will only end when the capitalist base itself is overcome.

I agree completely with your first paragraph.
I'll leave it at that.

 

[user 190541]

I would like to know your reasons for disagreeing with the second, but I accept your choice of not pursuing the matter.

 

[ardour]

I think it's more than that, actually. Middle and upper-class women back in the old days were refined, played the piano, could recite poetry by heart, were into crafts and generally the arts, had erudition. The same was true for men, although there was the slight difference that women would pursue the knowledges that were intellectualy and technically deemed appropriate for women, while men would do and pursue what was considered characteristic of the male. Back then, the ideal man for women was the affluent, handsome, educated, polite - yet manly - gentleman. No such woman would ever even consider having anything to do with the types described above - they would think such men are below them, and rightly so. The fact is that women themselves have degenerated in comparison to their female ancestors, and so did men.

I find it surprising that over the years there's been so much debate regarding inceldom and the contemporary difficulties of dating yet I 've never seen the notion that socialism could be a solution to these problems. The materialistic and hedonistic culture of our society and the material, capitalistic base it presupposes are what's behind these and many other societal ills. Any thinking that doesn't start from this premise or outright rejects it is wrong in its very principles. In more precise terms, what we're seeing is the repercussion in the superstructure of the decline of the capitalistic base, and that will only end when the capitalist base itself is overcome.

I think both you and Unsigned are coping here.

Passive, low energy men have never been attractive. In the absence of a masculine yet still empathetic man women will go for the nearest approximation to masculinity.

Face it, being a 'momma's boy' is likely a big part of the reason we've ended up like this.

 

[TheSkaFish]

I think both you and Unsigned are coping here.

Passive, low energy men have never been attractive. In the absence of a masculine yet still empathetic man women will go for the nearest approximation to masculinity.

Face it, being a 'momma's boys' is likely a big part of the reason we've ended up like this.

I think the real question is, WHY was a guy a "momma's boy" in the first place.
I think the WHY for that, is the real core of the issue.

I've been passive low energy because I don't have muscles, didn't come from money, always seemed to suck at everything I tried/had NOTHING where there seemed like any meaningful capacity to improve at it, therefore skilled/active interests weren't fun or interesting to me, but that's how you make money, that's how you entertain people, that's how you get confidence and pride/dignity and it's what people want. I basically felt like I was a victim of sh*t genetics.

It's hard to be confident and bet big when you feel like you have no cards. You can't really walk tall if you're not strong/good at anything - other people won't allow it, and you'll know to yourself that your confidence has no basis. I tried that for a while and it didn't work because my "say so" wasn't backed by anything, like worthless money. All I really felt I could do was NOT die, so I could enjoy my life later...when I became a professional...which I should have been able to do because I was good-ish at school...until I gave up on that because I thought Peak Oil was going to happen soon and the civilized world was going to end.

The not-dying-so-I-could-enjoy-my-life-later thing, I now see was the source of intense phobia about a certain illness during my late junior high through freshman year of college days.

I fell into just liking things, as my interest. As I've said, Star Wars in particular was more than my interest, it was my escape - from not being physically powerful, not being good at anything, not having money, not knowing the "cool" way to talk to people - cocky/"funny"/sarcastic/dominant. But the thing is, no one cares how much you like some fandom, because it's not a skill like playing basketball, skateboarding, or the guitar. No one is impressed that you like some fandom or some band or anything like that. But liking things was all I thought I could do. I learned too late the difference between "liking" and "doing" interests, and that the "doing" ones were the ones you wanted. But again, even had I known this I would have just said I probably don't have the genetic talent for it anyway.

Sometimes I really wish I'd been dealt a hand that made me feel like I could kick ***, instead. Something that made me feel like I could breathe fire.
I probably would have been a colder, meaner person. I wouldn't have known better not to be, and who knows, I might even have been the very same kind of jerk I've complained about on here so many times. But I would have been stronger and more successful, so I would have been happier.

Sorry if that was extra-negative. I've been thinking a LOT about this stuff lately, thinking intensely trying to get to the bottom of it before any more time passes if it even matters anymore. And if I repeat the phrase "genetics" or "talent" a lot, it's cause I realized that's it, that's the core issue for me. I felt like I didn't have the power to kick *** at anything, and the cure would be getting good at something and kicking ***, but I'm afraid it's not possible. A lot of people would say I'm just not disciplined, but it's hard to be disciplined at something you don't think you can do. Like, it would be hard to be disciplined at flapping your arms and flying, or punching a brick wall with your bare fist. You wouldn't want to practice that because it would seem impossible, ridiculous, embarrassing and painful.

For others it might be something else.

 

[user 190541]

I think both you and Unsigned are coping here.

Passive, low energy men have never been attractive. In the absence of a masculine yet still empathetic man women will go for the nearest approximation to masculinity.

Face it, being a 'momma's boys' is likely a big part of the reason we've ended up like this.

LMAO! Not even once a woman has told me I'm feminine or not masculine in any way. As a matter of fact, a girl I was seeing earlier this year caused me a great deal of trouble because I really liked her, yet she was into this guy who she thought was gay at first, and that, apparently, liked to wear makeup. The truth is that women are a lot more complicated than we men would like to think.

So, I'm pretty sure, no coping on my part. I was just describing how we went from something better to something worse as a society. Also, I believe I've said this in my first post, I've had the opportunity to be in a relationship several times in the past, all of which I missed due to my fault, and my fault only. Another thing I said was that, if it happens that women aren't that much interested in me in the first place, it's because I'm boring. I'm quite sure of that. Nothing to do with being masculine or feminine (in fact, I think "interesting" men are oftentimes feminine). So, believe me, no coping here. Just taking it for what it is.

 

[user 190541]

I fell into just liking things, as my interest. As I've said, Star Wars in particular was more than my interest, it was my escape - from not being physically powerful, not being good at anything, not having money, not knowing the "cool" way to talk to people - cocky/"funny"/sarcastic/dominant. But the thing is, no one cares how much you like some fandom, because it's not a skill like playing basketball, skateboarding, or the guitar. No one is impressed that you like some fandom or some band or anything like that. But liking things was all I thought I could do. I learned too late the difference between "liking" and "doing" interests, and that the "doing" ones were the ones you wanted. But again, even had I known this I would have just said I probably don't have the genetic talent for it anyway.

There's a big nerd community nowadays, you can definitely meet people who are also nerds and who are into the same things as you are, and that should be enough to create a real sense of belonging, no?

I've never watched Star Wars, but I'm a real fan of Star Trek.

 

[TheSkaFish]

There's a big nerd community nowadays, you can definitely meet people who are also nerds and who are into the same things as you are, and that should be enough to create a real sense of belonging, no?

I've never watched Star Wars, but I'm a real fan of Star Trek.

That is true, there's a big nerd community now, the stuff is more accepted than ever.
But, while it might be enough for acquaintanceship, or even friendship, that's probably all the further it will get you.
At least that's how it seems to me.

It seems to me that women like men that are skilled at things.
That's how it always was growing up - who were the guys successful with women?
The athletes, rock band guys, guys who worked on cars/motorcycles, skaters, etc. - the people that did a skill with their own lives.

And of course the guys who were just muscular, and/or rich. Those are like the free pass out of doing skills.

And briefly the guys that drink and do drugs first, but only for a short window when it's new to everyone and seen as "exciting" and "adventurous" to break the taboo -
after that it quickly gets sad/lame/boring, and women move on to the skilled guys. The guys that are like "dude I got so wasted bro", are only "cool" from junior high to like early 20s max. After that no one has time for those stories anymore, and by then you've heard them all anyway. Just liking stuff isn't a skill, and neither is getting drunk/stoned. I've noticed that after the partying age, people start really only wanting to talk about ideas, skills, and achievements - what you're actually DOING with your life.

And people in general, seem to find other people interesting who are skilled at things - not just people who are fans of something made by someone else. I used to think impressing people was only for jerks trying to pick up shallow women, but the more I think about it, no, impressing people seems to be how this whole thing works at all.

I don't mean to shoot down your suggestion. I'm just saying this is what I've observed myself.

 

[ardour]

Another thing I said was that, if it happens that women aren't that much interested in me in the first place, it's because I'm boring.

Yeah but that's a similar problem though isn't it. A masculine man knows when to push the boundaries (and when to back off). He has an unpredictable element to his personality. Women tend not to like predictability. So in a way you (we) are still lacking some of the essential elements of our gender.

 

[user 190541]

That is true, there's a big nerd community now, the stuff is more accepted than ever.
But, while it might be enough for acquaintanceship, or even friendship, that's probably all the further it will get you.
At least that's how it seems to me.

It seems to me that women like men that are skilled at things.
That's how it always was growing up - who were the guys successful with women?
The athletes, rock band guys, guys who worked on cars/motorcycles, skaters, etc. - the people that did a skill with their own lives.

And of course the guys who were just muscular, and/or rich. Those are like the free pass out of doing skills.

And briefly the guys that drink and do drugs first, but only for a short window when it's new to everyone and seen as "exciting" and "adventurous" to break the taboo -
after that it quickly gets sad/lame/boring, and women move on to the skilled guys. The guys that are like "dude I got so wasted bro", are only "cool" from junior high to like early 20s max. After that no one has time for those stories anymore. Just liking stuff isn't a skill, and neither is getting drunk/stoned. I've noticed that after the partying age, people start really only wanting to talk about ideas, skills, and achievements - what you're actually DOING with your life.

And people in general, seem to find other people interesting who are skilled at things - not just people who are fans of something made by someone else. I used to think impressing people was only for jerks trying to pick up shallow women, but the more I think about it, no, impressing people seems to be how this whole thing works at all.

I don't mean to shoot down your suggestion. I'm just saying this is what I've observed myself.

Yeah, you're right. Impressing people is how you get anywhere in life, and that doesn't change with the political or economic system.

Yeah but that's a similar problem though isn't it. A masculine man knows when the push the boundaries (and when to back off). He has an unpredictable element to his personality. Women tend not to like predictability. So in a way you (we) are still lacking some of the essential elements of our gender.

That's correct, unfortunately. I wouldn't call it an essential element of our gender, though. Stoic men, for example, are definitely masculine, and I don't think they're lacking any element of what constitutes masculinity. Yet, I doubt modern women would find them, or the real Stoics, for that matter, interesting. We shouldn't let women and their preferences define what is masculine and what is not. We know in our hearts what defines us, and we know how to differentiate that from what does not. The core idea, however, of what you stated is correct, I just wouldn't say, arguing as before, that it's necessarily related to masculinity. It is undoubtedly related, though, to what women find interesting, or rather "exciting".

 

[Unsigned]

Face it, being a 'momma's boys' is likely a big part of the reason we've ended up like this.

Honestly, I was never a momma's boy per se, but my mother absolutely helped to shape what I became.
The constant badgering, name calling, berating, nitpicking, etc..
She was a controlling, manipulative, narcissist.
Thought her world should revolve around her.
She resented the hell out of my father and was bitter and nasty because of it.
I don't consider myself a "momma's boy" as those guys deep down love their mothers and still want to be with them.
They talk to them and confide in them.
I, quite frankly, hated her. I never spoke to her about anything meaningful or told her anything about my life.
I left when I felt I had saved enough money from my first IT job (I had just turned 24) and I often went months without so much as calling my parents. 24 was too late though. I should have left much earlier, but my parents liked that I was under their thumb and did not train me to be the type that would leave home early. My father even once said to me "you would be lost without us". That made leaving home, with no notice mind you, and then not calling them for almost a year very, very sweet. They only found me because my sister tracked me down from my bank statements in California (from opening my mail and seeing my ATM withdrawals).
One of my biggest regrets in life was not telling my parents that I was relegated to b@nging hookers since 19.
That THAT is what they raised.
My 2nd biggest regret was not knowing that my mother and sister had cut me out of the will. NOT because of the money, but because I never got the opportunity scream "FU" in my mother's face at the top of my lungs, and have the satisfaction of seeing the look on her face when realizing that she would eventually die without ever seeing me again.

I think the real question is, WHY was a guy a "momma's boy" in the first place.

Totally agree. Explained my version of it above.
I am sure everyone has a different story. But that is mine.

 

[TheSkaFish]

Yeah, you're right. Impressing people is how you get anywhere in life, and that doesn't change with the political or economic system.

I agree. I wish I hadn't rejected it as a kid, and realized that I had to do it, like it or not, because it is simply how this game works, the rules of the game.

I thought playing the game of impressing people was kissing the preppies/rich kids' *** and acknowledging them as superior to me. I never wanted to do that. I didn't respect them because I felt like they were just lucky, "sore winners" in the genetic lottery. That's it.

But instead it's not that, it's more like, forget the people you don't like and focus on impressing the ones who matter. But you still do have to be impressive.

Anyway. This is why I think that even if things changed to socialism or less-extreme capitalism like we used to have, or just got rid of money altogether, attracting/impressing/getting women interested would still be hard.
A more equal system would help, but it wouldn't fix everything all the way.

 

[user 139760]

I think both you and Unsigned are coping here.

Passive, low energy men have never been attractive. In the absence of a masculine yet still empathetic man women will go for the nearest approximation to masculinity.

Face it, being a 'momma's boys' is likely a big part of the reason we've ended up like this.

Um, I'm a momma's boy...
Well, less so now (damn cell phones making me lazy with the calling lol).
My mother was rather the classic blonde stereotype. Very feminine, somewhat passive, sometimes not. Bit high strung at times. I used to call her every day.
It's NEVER had any impact on my dealings with women. Tossing aside any Freudian theories here too.
In many ways, my dad is her antithesis. Very masculine, a fireman. Short, shorter than me, I'm not quite 5'8. Some toxic traits, not too many, enough that they stood out. I have some as well, apple never falls far from the tree.

I don't think being a momma's boy does much. If anything, previous girlfriends oft commented on how they wished their relationship with their folks was as good. Or that they were as close to their mom's. One of them had more of a rivalry between them.

 

[Unsigned]

less-extreme capitalism like we used to have

That part I like.
Like in the 50s where a guy could support a family working as an assistant mgr in a retail store or something.