8 ms·

incels commit almost no violence against women compared to men in relationships

by ryan93 4y ago

throwaway0a5e 4y ago
A large supply of men who DGAF and don't have much holding them down is how you get really serious social instability. They might not be beating their wives but let it roll unchecked for 20yr and it gets bad.
- BlargMcLarg 4y ago
  Men who DGAF aren't the same as "incels". You and GP aren't at odds with one another. And yes, it is somewhat ironic society is making the exact same mistakes it has before: forgetting how destructive a large population of uninterested young men is towards society, without ever having to be violent.
  - meken 4y ago
    Could you say more about this? What historical events are you referring to? I consider myself a disaffected male, and am curious to understand my situation from a historical perspective.
    - Multicomp 4y ago
      I'm not GP and can only guess, and not even a particularly educated guess, but I will try, because I too am curious, and everyone knows the best way to get an answer on the web is to post a confident-sounding answer so someone can 'correct me' therefore giving me the actual information I'm hopeful to receive. I remember (and therefore don't have a source for) users on the web claiming the rise of fascism was enabled partly by strongman leaders engaging all of the disaffected men en masse to serve said strongman's agenda by offering them the things they wanted (respect, status, stability). If my tripping of Godwin's Law is on the right track, then the GP may be referring to Weimar Germany where Hitler was able to take control over a very quick timeframe, starting with disaffected men and eventually spreading the message to the general populace, taking over the country's government sans violence (though there was certainly violence and intimidation near the end of the Weimar government and probably before then that I am unaware of). Or, much more likely, the GP meant something else entirely, and I am Wrong On The Internet!
    - theropost 4y ago
      Good question. I wonder if this type of societal situation has lead to wars of conquest in the past. Is there research or studies on events like this? It seems like something that may be difficult to study historically, but who knows.
    - BlargMcLarg 4y ago
      Look up the societal collapse of Rome in particular. It's one of the most named and covered anecdotes. A few other societies follow similar patterns, internally collapsing and being taken apart piece by piece rather than aggressively overtaken. Wikipedia[0] names several societies (I don't keep sources at hand to my own discredit). It all has to do with incentives and the role of men in societies which to some degree still apply today. Stop giving men incentives to have families or any other reason to care about younger generations, and they stop having a reason to care for the future. Don't give them an incentive to care about the now (wives, partners, comrades), and they stop having a reason to care about the now. Not having people care for the future is a great way to make them live their lives as short-sighted and hedonistic* as possible, which further affects their reason to care about the now beyond themselves. Not having people care for the now is a great way to incentivize inner conflict and have a party rise to fill the gap. *: Hedonism on its own has a whole slew of other problems I'd rather not get into detail with, but for the sake of comparison, online dating apps' meat market approach hasn't exactly helped younger people obtain more satisfying relationships. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse#Examples_of_civilizations_and_societies_that_have_collapsed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse#Examples_of_...
      - Multicomp 4y ago
        Thanks for posting this. Societal collapse is probably something most people desire to avoid, and if the large numbers of disaffected men are the 'canary in the coal mine' and symptomatic of a weakened society, then we as a society also want to come up with solutions to ameliorate that particular suffering as a part of strengthening society as a whole
        Workaccount2 4y ago
        Society becomes a more dangerous and unforgiving place, and suddenly men have value as protectors and providers again. To quote Bill Burr "There are no feminists in a house fire"
      - selimthegrim 4y ago
        Surely importing a bunch of Goths and foederati that turned into bagaudae had something to do with it.
- noasaservice 4y ago
  It's not about "dont give a fuck". This is about intergenerational poverty, and the costs that we all will have to pay because the elites decided to destroy social mobility for the poverty-stricken classes. When you are born and live in poverty, hold jobs that amount to minimum wage or tiny bits above it, have no way to *see* a future of any sort of success; happiness, alcohol, drugs, and sex are the primary forms of feeling good or not feeling pain.... Yeah, you're going to have massive problems at a societal scale. The elites of this country, along with governments bribed, gerrymandered, and installed by said elites made the volitional changes to social programs that keep people down in poverty. And we're living with those changes since Reagan went off about that "black welfare fraud woman". That was the start of poverty-austerity movement: the idea that cutting off most/all funding would get them to not be lazy. The credit system instituted in the late 80's only has further cemented the idea that "if you were poor now, you'll still be poor and we wont help you". And housing has gone stratospheric, as have all other bills. And insert homeless numbers talk here - homeless are used as a tool of the elites to show what happens if you don't play along monetarily. I'm honestly surprised that the political elites haven't instituted ST:DS9's "Sanctuary Districts" (https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Sanctuary_District https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Sanctuary_District) . Out of sight, out of mind.
  - hhjinks 4y ago
    That's an entirely separate, perhaps even more dire, problem. And it undoubtedly compounds for those men intersecting both categories. But the passive men phenomenon is not directly caused by intergenerational poverty. That is evident by how men in all socioeconomic classes are "affected."
  - etherael 4y ago
    Do the elites really get to choose the degree of social mobility in their societies? Do you have any comparative figures to back this up or further data? All I have is anecdote having grown up in poverty in what would likely be considered a relatively left wing first world economic environment, and to the best of my knowledge, none of the kids I grew up with except me ever escaped poverty. Maybe it's wrong and I'd love to know if that's the case but from personal experience the only way I've seen out of poverty is interest in an in demand field leading to the building and maintenance of marketable skills that allow you to earn a living sufficient to attain economic escape velocity. That seems to me to be a whole lot do with luck at the ground floor. And fiscal and social policy can be as much of a burden as it is a boon all the way along the pipeline. That said, that escape velocity was directly mediated by both the tax burden of the jurisdiction coupled with the economic opportunities of the jurisdiction and at the end of the day it meant the correct choice was to leave for greener pastures, both lowering the necessary target for escape velocity as well as reducing economic drag getting there. In the meantime all those kids I knew back in the old neighbourhood are still there, mostly on subsistence handouts, firmly in poverty, and show no signs of that changing.
bombcar 4y ago
Everyone enjoys identifying why “bad people” are not “like me” and then put them in a group that is the “other”. This causes unintentional and eventually intentional coverups when presented with someone “in your group” doing something obviously wrong.
Aunche 4y ago
IMO outrage about incels is just a socially acceptable way to bully. It's a way to find an excuse to express their superiority over others while masquerading it with concern over women's safety. You're never going to see someone mock a successful man who beats his wife.
- e2le 4y ago
  It's confusing to me that it's socially acceptable these days to bully those who lack a sexual partner.
  - ratww 4y ago
    Hm, wasn't that always acceptable and common? The only difference today is that there's a shorthand to mock those people.
    - fartcannon 4y ago
      It's really gross. You can almost hear them spit when they say the word they've assigned this maligned group.
  - Applejinx 4y ago
    Not that confusing, really. I've spent decades unable to find a sexual partner. I'd also make a concerted effort not to fall into the conclusions and habits of thought found in those getting bullied as 'incels', and in fact hooked up on Reddit of all places and am in the home of my lady friend now, working with her on various stuff and steadily building lovemaking skills (we're on the older side and there's a lot going on so opportunity isn't always there). I would lovingly and determinedly bully those who are so weak that they can't face the reality of bad conditions and their own inadequacies, those who show an emotional need to behave like they (just as they are) merit a sexual partner, and this not happening means women are evil scheming monsters who conspire to ruin the world and must be stopped and/or reduced to Gorean slavery for their own good as they're not really people. I'd bully those incels all day long. They are harming themselves by their own stubbornly held rationalizations and need to cut it out. Properly having a sexual relationship means having a relationship, very likely with an opposite-sex partner if we're talking hetero incels, and it's not easy. I'm with a woman who is observably smarter than me and I'm a techie nerd. There are things we have in common, but there are also ways that we just don't operate the same. There's strengths I have that she doesn't (not physical, either), there's strengths she has (and sometimes expects out of me) that I don't, and won't. The male/female thing is compelling and interesting, but it's impossible to reduce to 'we are actually the same' 'cos we ain't :) When you get anybody concluding 'therefore the enemy sex, being incomprehensible, is simply evil and must be destroyed rather than reasoned with', you gotta bully those people or they will ruin it for us all. They are being intellectually lazy and wrong, and causing damage and making it harder for everyone, and we can't afford that kind of wrong.
secondcoming 4y ago
How does violence in hetero relationships compare to those of same-sex relationships?
- benmmurphy 4y ago
  I think in lesbian relationships it is higher than in heterosexual relationships. Don't have any good links off the top of my head. But here is a BBC article which claims it is higher in same sex relationships: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29994648 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29994648 Male violence is quite high stakes so I could see if you have two people who carry out lower stakes violence then you could end up with higher rates of violence.

incels commit almost no violence against women compared to men in relationships

by ryan93 4y ago

incels commit almost no violence against women compared to men in relationships

A large supply of men who DGAF and don't have much holding them down is how you get really serious social instability. They might not be beating their wives but let it roll unchecked for 20yr and it gets bad.

BlargMcLarg 4y ago
Men who DGAF aren't the same as "incels". You and GP aren't at odds with one another. And yes, it is somewhat ironic society is making the exact same mistakes it has before: forgetting how destructive a large population of uninterested young men is towards society, without ever having to be violent.
- meken 4y ago
  Could you say more about this? What historical events are you referring to? I consider myself a disaffected male, and am curious to understand my situation from a historical perspective.
  - Multicomp 4y ago
    I'm not GP and can only guess, and not even a particularly educated guess, but I will try, because I too am curious, and everyone knows the best way to get an answer on the web is to post a confident-sounding answer so someone can 'correct me' therefore giving me the actual information I'm hopeful to receive. I remember (and therefore don't have a source for) users on the web claiming the rise of fascism was enabled partly by strongman leaders engaging all of the disaffected men en masse to serve said strongman's agenda by offering them the things they wanted (respect, status, stability). If my tripping of Godwin's Law is on the right track, then the GP may be referring to Weimar Germany where Hitler was able to take control over a very quick timeframe, starting with disaffected men and eventually spreading the message to the general populace, taking over the country's government sans violence (though there was certainly violence and intimidation near the end of the Weimar government and probably before then that I am unaware of). Or, much more likely, the GP meant something else entirely, and I am Wrong On The Internet!
  - theropost 4y ago
    Good question. I wonder if this type of societal situation has lead to wars of conquest in the past. Is there research or studies on events like this? It seems like something that may be difficult to study historically, but who knows.
  - BlargMcLarg 4y ago
    Look up the societal collapse of Rome in particular. It's one of the most named and covered anecdotes. A few other societies follow similar patterns, internally collapsing and being taken apart piece by piece rather than aggressively overtaken. Wikipedia[0] names several societies (I don't keep sources at hand to my own discredit). It all has to do with incentives and the role of men in societies which to some degree still apply today. Stop giving men incentives to have families or any other reason to care about younger generations, and they stop having a reason to care for the future. Don't give them an incentive to care about the now (wives, partners, comrades), and they stop having a reason to care about the now. Not having people care for the future is a great way to make them live their lives as short-sighted and hedonistic* as possible, which further affects their reason to care about the now beyond themselves. Not having people care for the now is a great way to incentivize inner conflict and have a party rise to fill the gap. *: Hedonism on its own has a whole slew of other problems I'd rather not get into detail with, but for the sake of comparison, online dating apps' meat market approach hasn't exactly helped younger people obtain more satisfying relationships. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse#Examples_of_civilizations_and_societies_that_have_collapsed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse#Examples_of_...
    - Multicomp 4y ago
      Thanks for posting this. Societal collapse is probably something most people desire to avoid, and if the large numbers of disaffected men are the 'canary in the coal mine' and symptomatic of a weakened society, then we as a society also want to come up with solutions to ameliorate that particular suffering as a part of strengthening society as a whole
      - Workaccount2 4y ago
        Society becomes a more dangerous and unforgiving place, and suddenly men have value as protectors and providers again. To quote Bill Burr "There are no feminists in a house fire"
    - selimthegrim 4y ago
      Surely importing a bunch of Goths and foederati that turned into bagaudae had something to do with it.
noasaservice 4y ago
It's not about "dont give a fuck". This is about intergenerational poverty, and the costs that we all will have to pay because the elites decided to destroy social mobility for the poverty-stricken classes. When you are born and live in poverty, hold jobs that amount to minimum wage or tiny bits above it, have no way to *see* a future of any sort of success; happiness, alcohol, drugs, and sex are the primary forms of feeling good or not feeling pain.... Yeah, you're going to have massive problems at a societal scale. The elites of this country, along with governments bribed, gerrymandered, and installed by said elites made the volitional changes to social programs that keep people down in poverty. And we're living with those changes since Reagan went off about that "black welfare fraud woman". That was the start of poverty-austerity movement: the idea that cutting off most/all funding would get them to not be lazy. The credit system instituted in the late 80's only has further cemented the idea that "if you were poor now, you'll still be poor and we wont help you". And housing has gone stratospheric, as have all other bills. And insert homeless numbers talk here - homeless are used as a tool of the elites to show what happens if you don't play along monetarily. I'm honestly surprised that the political elites haven't instituted ST:DS9's "Sanctuary Districts" (https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Sanctuary_District https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Sanctuary_District) . Out of sight, out of mind.
- hhjinks 4y ago
  That's an entirely separate, perhaps even more dire, problem. And it undoubtedly compounds for those men intersecting both categories. But the passive men phenomenon is not directly caused by intergenerational poverty. That is evident by how men in all socioeconomic classes are "affected."
- etherael 4y ago
  Do the elites really get to choose the degree of social mobility in their societies? Do you have any comparative figures to back this up or further data? All I have is anecdote having grown up in poverty in what would likely be considered a relatively left wing first world economic environment, and to the best of my knowledge, none of the kids I grew up with except me ever escaped poverty. Maybe it's wrong and I'd love to know if that's the case but from personal experience the only way I've seen out of poverty is interest in an in demand field leading to the building and maintenance of marketable skills that allow you to earn a living sufficient to attain economic escape velocity. That seems to me to be a whole lot do with luck at the ground floor. And fiscal and social policy can be as much of a burden as it is a boon all the way along the pipeline. That said, that escape velocity was directly mediated by both the tax burden of the jurisdiction coupled with the economic opportunities of the jurisdiction and at the end of the day it meant the correct choice was to leave for greener pastures, both lowering the necessary target for escape velocity as well as reducing economic drag getting there. In the meantime all those kids I knew back in the old neighbourhood are still there, mostly on subsistence handouts, firmly in poverty, and show no signs of that changing.

bombcar 4y ago

Everyone enjoys identifying why “bad people” are not “like me” and then put them in a group that is the “other”. This causes unintentional and eventually intentional coverups when presented with someone “in your group” doing something obviously wrong.

Aunche 4y ago

IMO outrage about incels is just a socially acceptable way to bully. It's a way to find an excuse to express their superiority over others while masquerading it with concern over women's safety. You're never going to see someone mock a successful man who beats his wife.

e2le 4y ago
It's confusing to me that it's socially acceptable these days to bully those who lack a sexual partner.
- ratww 4y ago
  Hm, wasn't that always acceptable and common? The only difference today is that there's a shorthand to mock those people.
  - fartcannon 4y ago
    It's really gross. You can almost hear them spit when they say the word they've assigned this maligned group.
- Applejinx 4y ago
  Not that confusing, really. I've spent decades unable to find a sexual partner. I'd also make a concerted effort not to fall into the conclusions and habits of thought found in those getting bullied as 'incels', and in fact hooked up on Reddit of all places and am in the home of my lady friend now, working with her on various stuff and steadily building lovemaking skills (we're on the older side and there's a lot going on so opportunity isn't always there). I would lovingly and determinedly bully those who are so weak that they can't face the reality of bad conditions and their own inadequacies, those who show an emotional need to behave like they (just as they are) merit a sexual partner, and this not happening means women are evil scheming monsters who conspire to ruin the world and must be stopped and/or reduced to Gorean slavery for their own good as they're not really people. I'd bully those incels all day long. They are harming themselves by their own stubbornly held rationalizations and need to cut it out. Properly having a sexual relationship means having a relationship, very likely with an opposite-sex partner if we're talking hetero incels, and it's not easy. I'm with a woman who is observably smarter than me and I'm a techie nerd. There are things we have in common, but there are also ways that we just don't operate the same. There's strengths I have that she doesn't (not physical, either), there's strengths she has (and sometimes expects out of me) that I don't, and won't. The male/female thing is compelling and interesting, but it's impossible to reduce to 'we are actually the same' 'cos we ain't :) When you get anybody concluding 'therefore the enemy sex, being incomprehensible, is simply evil and must be destroyed rather than reasoned with', you gotta bully those people or they will ruin it for us all. They are being intellectually lazy and wrong, and causing damage and making it harder for everyone, and we can't afford that kind of wrong.

secondcoming 4y ago

How does violence in hetero relationships compare to those of same-sex relationships?

benmmurphy 4y ago
I think in lesbian relationships it is higher than in heterosexual relationships. Don't have any good links off the top of my head. But here is a BBC article which claims it is higher in same sex relationships: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29994648 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29994648 Male violence is quite high stakes so I could see if you have two people who carry out lower stakes violence then you could end up with higher rates of violence.