5 ms·

You are wrong. You are demonstrably wrong, in that you can just observe that almost every "disadvantage" that incels talk about (as I understand it), also exist

by edanm 6y ago

You are wrong. You are demonstrably wrong, in that you can just observe that almost every "disadvantage" that incels talk about (as I understand it), also exists in 40-50 year olds who are happily married. E.g. being short is certainly a disadvantage when dating, that's obviously true - but it's just as obviously true that being short does not mean you will be an incel for life - how can you possibly think that it does, given the myriad short people who are doing just fine. Can they date literally any partner they want? No, no one can. But can they date someone, can they be non-celibate? Yes, demonstrably so. It's certainly true that everyone is a mix of more desirable attributes and of less desirable attributes, and some people get a bigger mix than others. Some are mutable, some are immutable. The big problem with the incel worldview (as I understand it) is that it's completely binary - you are either capable of finding a sexual partner, or not, and some traits (that they believe they have) mean that they are on the wrong side. But that's just utterly unfounded, again, because take any trait that is supposedly disqualifying, and you'll find someone (plenty of someones) with those traits that are in sexual relationships.

privacy_bodger 6y ago
That refutes "a single bad card in your hand means you will inevitably lose". It doesn't refute "At some point your hand is so bad you're basically [not] fucked from the start". Which I think might be a fairer statement of incel beliefs.
- krapp 6y ago
  >It doesn't refute "At some point your hand is so bad you're basically [not] fucked from the start". Which I think might be a fairer statement of incel beliefs. Serial killers get marriage proposals from behind bars. Ugly men, including men with physical deformities, find partners. Men without working penises still have sexual relationships. Even if there were such a thing as "basically [not] fucked from the start," the vast majority of incels would be nowhere near that extreme. I mean, look at the patron saint of incels (canonized as such by the incel community itself) Elliot Rodger. Did life deal him such a terrible hand that dating was impossible, or was the only thing standing in his way himself and his own twisted, hateful and false view of women and the world around him?
  - privacy_bodger 6y ago
    The fact serial killers get marriage proposals does not mean that people who are not serial killers necessarily get marriage proposals. I suspect if somebody is hideously deformed and does not have a working penis, they're going to have a lot of difficulty finding a romantic partner. Presumably there are large numbers of people who have those and similar issues. I think they should be allowed to talk about that, and not have people respond by comparing them to Elliot Rodger. That these things didn't (Ok I don't know about the penis thing) apply to Elliot Rodger doesn't mean they don't apply to anybody.
    - krapp 6y ago
      > The fact serial killers get marriage proposals does not mean that people who are not serial killers necessarily get marriage proposals. Yes, you are correct that the fact serial killers get marriage proposals does not mean that people who are not serial killers necessarily get marriage proposals, however that was not the argument that I was making. Serial killers have extremely undesirable personality traits which, typically, one would assume should exclude them from the dating pool. Despite these traits, however serial killers manage to be attractive to people. The conclusion to be reached here is that there is a wide range of personality traits, including negative and antisocial traits, which women can find attractive. >I suspect if somebody is hideously deformed and does not have a working penis, they're going to have a lot of difficulty finding a romantic partner. Again, yes, you are correct. But I was not arguing that it was common, rather, I was arguing that there is a wide range of physical attributes which women find attractive, and including deformity implicitly includes the entire range range of attributes one would consider non-traditionally attractive as well, and again (refer to the previous argument) most incels likely do not fall outside of this range in terms of their physical appearance. Therefore, the argument that every incel is somehow undateable due to immutable and innate characteristics is demonstrated to be false when the variety of physical, psychological and social traits of the entire population which is dating is considered. Edanm's comment above is correct - there are very few, if any, incels for whom a person with practically the same physical and psychological circumstances couldn't be found, but with a partner. >Presumably there are large numbers of people who have those and similar issues. I think they should be allowed to talk about that, and not have people respond by comparing them to Elliot Rodger. If they don't want to be associated with people like him, they shouldn't self-identify with a community that considers him a hero and a martyr for their beliefs.
- edanm 6y ago
  I'm not that aware of incel beliefs, I've only visited the forum a few times out of curiosity (partially borne of my own history with relationships). But to be clear, I agree that there is a point at which you're basically unable to find sexual relationships - clearly there is such a point. But I'm willing to bet that no one, not one person on the incel Reddit, is unable to find a sexual relationship, at least not because of the so-called "immutable characteristics". There is no one there who is so physically unattractive (or who has whatever other traits are talked about) that they can't find a relationship. I say this with having known many people who in their late teeanager/adult years, were unattractive, "undateable", etc, who believed that they wouldn't ever find a relationship, and who grew up to be in great relationships. It's like those old commercials for closeted homosexual teenagers - "it gets better". That's a message that is really the same - it does get better, and it's super easy to confirm, because so many older people in happy relationships were once young incels.
  - gridlockd 6y ago
    So, you accept that there must be a set of individuals that are unable to find sexual partners, but at the same time you are willing to bet that somehow none of these individuals are also active on some incel subreddit. Can I take the other side of that bet?
    - edanm 6y ago
      I was being somewhat metaphorical, as I can't imagine how we could possibly test such a hypothesis. But were we able to test it (and feel free to suggest something), I would take that bet, yes. My position being roughly that anyone capable of posting to an incel forum, is capable enough to make the kinds of changes in their life that would "overcome" whatever other physical characteristics they have, and therefore be able to find a sexual partner. Although not necessarily quickly - it might only be later in their adulthood. (And ok, to be more realistic, I'd only bet on 99.5% of people on incel forums - not 100%. Though I'd probably take the bet at 100% anyway.) > [...] you are willing to bet that somehow none of these individuals are also active on some incel subreddit. Yes. I believe the base rate of people who never find a sexual relationship in their entire lives (assuming they want it) is miniscule. Some quick searching puts it at around 0.5% by age 40. I believe that those are mostly unfortunate extreme cases. I believe that even some of these people could conceivably still make changes that would lead to them having a sexual relationship. The odds of someone on an incel forum being one of the probably-less-than-0.5% of people who by age 40 have not had a sexual relationship is pretty small.
gridlockd 6y ago
It's poor reasoning to conclude that because some (for example) short men find a mate than all short men can find a mate if only they lower their standards. If there are more short men than women that are willing to date short men, some short men will still be able to find partners, but not all of them. More generally speaking, some men have so many unfavorable traits that no female would accept them, because females almost always have more and better options. Those unfortunate individuals are discarded from the gene pool. I'm not saying that every self-described incel is actually in that set of unfortunate individuals, but this is how sexual selection works in lots of species, including our own.
- edanm 6y ago
  > It's poor reasoning to conclude that because some (for example) short men find a mate than all short men can find a mate if only they lower their standards. Firstly, I didn't say they have to lower their standards. > It's poor reasoning to conclude that because some (for example) short men find a mate than all short men can find a mate [...] I agree that that would be faulty reasoning. I was combatting the opposite reasoning, which is that some traits or combinations of traits (like being short) are disqualifying. E.g. your parent comment in which you wrote: "If you are very short, your attire can not make up for it." I could totally be misunderstanding your meaning or the incel worldview, but as I said, it comes off to me as very binary - there is some "threshold" of attractiveness/traits, which if you are under, you are therefore unable to find a sexual partner. My contention is that almost every one of these traits or combinatios-of-traits can be found in someone who is in a sexual relationship, and therefore that can't be true. > More generally speaking, some men have so many unfavorable traits that no female would accept them, because females almost always have more and better options. Those unfortunate individuals are discarded from the gene pool. This is in incorrect view of the world (barring extreme examples like severe physical deformities or mental issues). People aren't ranked in some kind of linear way from "more attractive" to "less attractive", lined up, and then can only find partners who agree with their level. There are many reasons: - People are varied and have different preferences - some women like short men, etc. - The same person has different preferences at different times. - Most people will have more than one sexual partner. All of these combine to make it so that effectively, almost everyone can find a sexual partner. And this is not just a theroetical idea either - as I posted in another comment, according to some random studies I just Googled, <0.5% of people have never had a sexual experience by age 40. Moreover, I can tell you that almost everyone I know, including some fairly odd, nerdy, shy, introverted people who had had no dates by the time they were 25, still ended up in happy relationships. (And I say almost mostly because I lost touch with some people and don't know how their story turned out). -- Let me just close by saying that if you truly believe you (or some/most people posting on incel forums) are incapable of ever having a sexual relationship, I empathize with you - it must be very unhappy to believe you will never have something that you want and see so many other people enjoying. But based on my own life experience, and where the people around me are at at age 35, I can tell you that I absolutely believe that almost everyone (>99.5% of people) posting on HN is able to find a sexual partner.

by edanm 6y ago

privacy_bodger 6y ago

That refutes "a single bad card in your hand means you will inevitably lose". It doesn't refute "At some point your hand is so bad you're basically [not] fucked from the start". Which I think might be a fairer statement of incel beliefs.

krapp 6y ago
>It doesn't refute "At some point your hand is so bad you're basically [not] fucked from the start". Which I think might be a fairer statement of incel beliefs. Serial killers get marriage proposals from behind bars. Ugly men, including men with physical deformities, find partners. Men without working penises still have sexual relationships. Even if there were such a thing as "basically [not] fucked from the start," the vast majority of incels would be nowhere near that extreme. I mean, look at the patron saint of incels (canonized as such by the incel community itself) Elliot Rodger. Did life deal him such a terrible hand that dating was impossible, or was the only thing standing in his way himself and his own twisted, hateful and false view of women and the world around him?
- privacy_bodger 6y ago
  The fact serial killers get marriage proposals does not mean that people who are not serial killers necessarily get marriage proposals. I suspect if somebody is hideously deformed and does not have a working penis, they're going to have a lot of difficulty finding a romantic partner. Presumably there are large numbers of people who have those and similar issues. I think they should be allowed to talk about that, and not have people respond by comparing them to Elliot Rodger. That these things didn't (Ok I don't know about the penis thing) apply to Elliot Rodger doesn't mean they don't apply to anybody.
  - krapp 6y ago
    > The fact serial killers get marriage proposals does not mean that people who are not serial killers necessarily get marriage proposals. Yes, you are correct that the fact serial killers get marriage proposals does not mean that people who are not serial killers necessarily get marriage proposals, however that was not the argument that I was making. Serial killers have extremely undesirable personality traits which, typically, one would assume should exclude them from the dating pool. Despite these traits, however serial killers manage to be attractive to people. The conclusion to be reached here is that there is a wide range of personality traits, including negative and antisocial traits, which women can find attractive. >I suspect if somebody is hideously deformed and does not have a working penis, they're going to have a lot of difficulty finding a romantic partner. Again, yes, you are correct. But I was not arguing that it was common, rather, I was arguing that there is a wide range of physical attributes which women find attractive, and including deformity implicitly includes the entire range range of attributes one would consider non-traditionally attractive as well, and again (refer to the previous argument) most incels likely do not fall outside of this range in terms of their physical appearance. Therefore, the argument that every incel is somehow undateable due to immutable and innate characteristics is demonstrated to be false when the variety of physical, psychological and social traits of the entire population which is dating is considered. Edanm's comment above is correct - there are very few, if any, incels for whom a person with practically the same physical and psychological circumstances couldn't be found, but with a partner. >Presumably there are large numbers of people who have those and similar issues. I think they should be allowed to talk about that, and not have people respond by comparing them to Elliot Rodger. If they don't want to be associated with people like him, they shouldn't self-identify with a community that considers him a hero and a martyr for their beliefs.
edanm 6y ago
I'm not that aware of incel beliefs, I've only visited the forum a few times out of curiosity (partially borne of my own history with relationships). But to be clear, I agree that there is a point at which you're basically unable to find sexual relationships - clearly there is such a point. But I'm willing to bet that no one, not one person on the incel Reddit, is unable to find a sexual relationship, at least not because of the so-called "immutable characteristics". There is no one there who is so physically unattractive (or who has whatever other traits are talked about) that they can't find a relationship. I say this with having known many people who in their late teeanager/adult years, were unattractive, "undateable", etc, who believed that they wouldn't ever find a relationship, and who grew up to be in great relationships. It's like those old commercials for closeted homosexual teenagers - "it gets better". That's a message that is really the same - it does get better, and it's super easy to confirm, because so many older people in happy relationships were once young incels.
- gridlockd 6y ago
  So, you accept that there must be a set of individuals that are unable to find sexual partners, but at the same time you are willing to bet that somehow none of these individuals are also active on some incel subreddit. Can I take the other side of that bet?
  - edanm 6y ago
    I was being somewhat metaphorical, as I can't imagine how we could possibly test such a hypothesis. But were we able to test it (and feel free to suggest something), I would take that bet, yes. My position being roughly that anyone capable of posting to an incel forum, is capable enough to make the kinds of changes in their life that would "overcome" whatever other physical characteristics they have, and therefore be able to find a sexual partner. Although not necessarily quickly - it might only be later in their adulthood. (And ok, to be more realistic, I'd only bet on 99.5% of people on incel forums - not 100%. Though I'd probably take the bet at 100% anyway.) > [...] you are willing to bet that somehow none of these individuals are also active on some incel subreddit. Yes. I believe the base rate of people who never find a sexual relationship in their entire lives (assuming they want it) is miniscule. Some quick searching puts it at around 0.5% by age 40. I believe that those are mostly unfortunate extreme cases. I believe that even some of these people could conceivably still make changes that would lead to them having a sexual relationship. The odds of someone on an incel forum being one of the probably-less-than-0.5% of people who by age 40 have not had a sexual relationship is pretty small.

gridlockd 6y ago

It's poor reasoning to conclude that because some (for example) short men find a mate than all short men can find a mate if only they lower their standards. If there are more short men than women that are willing to date short men, some short men will still be able to find partners, but not all of them. More generally speaking, some men have so many unfavorable traits that no female would accept them, because females almost always have more and better options. Those unfortunate individuals are discarded from the gene pool. I'm not saying that every self-described incel is actually in that set of unfortunate individuals, but this is how sexual selection works in lots of species, including our own.

edanm 6y ago
> It's poor reasoning to conclude that because some (for example) short men find a mate than all short men can find a mate if only they lower their standards. Firstly, I didn't say they have to lower their standards. > It's poor reasoning to conclude that because some (for example) short men find a mate than all short men can find a mate [...] I agree that that would be faulty reasoning. I was combatting the opposite reasoning, which is that some traits or combinations of traits (like being short) are disqualifying. E.g. your parent comment in which you wrote: "If you are very short, your attire can not make up for it." I could totally be misunderstanding your meaning or the incel worldview, but as I said, it comes off to me as very binary - there is some "threshold" of attractiveness/traits, which if you are under, you are therefore unable to find a sexual partner. My contention is that almost every one of these traits or combinatios-of-traits can be found in someone who is in a sexual relationship, and therefore that can't be true. > More generally speaking, some men have so many unfavorable traits that no female would accept them, because females almost always have more and better options. Those unfortunate individuals are discarded from the gene pool. This is in incorrect view of the world (barring extreme examples like severe physical deformities or mental issues). People aren't ranked in some kind of linear way from "more attractive" to "less attractive", lined up, and then can only find partners who agree with their level. There are many reasons: - People are varied and have different preferences - some women like short men, etc. - The same person has different preferences at different times. - Most people will have more than one sexual partner. All of these combine to make it so that effectively, almost everyone can find a sexual partner. And this is not just a theroetical idea either - as I posted in another comment, according to some random studies I just Googled, <0.5% of people have never had a sexual experience by age 40. Moreover, I can tell you that almost everyone I know, including some fairly odd, nerdy, shy, introverted people who had had no dates by the time they were 25, still ended up in happy relationships. (And I say almost mostly because I lost touch with some people and don't know how their story turned out). -- Let me just close by saying that if you truly believe you (or some/most people posting on incel forums) are incapable of ever having a sexual relationship, I empathize with you - it must be very unhappy to believe you will never have something that you want and see so many other people enjoying. But based on my own life experience, and where the people around me are at at age 35, I can tell you that I absolutely believe that almost everyone (>99.5% of people) posting on HN is able to find a sexual partner.