orgotude

Trump winning or not has no effect on my personal life. Considering this forum is packed with ableists and sometimes extreme bigots on matters involving sex and romance they aren't much better than Trump vis-a-vis disability and basic human decency. Many online forums in the USA, both major parties, and most US localities have truly disturbed views about basic human needs. I truly believe that. One of the only good things about Biden's term was the nomination of Merrick Garland for Attorney General. Bu that was more the Senate than anything. The DOJ under Garland's purview has done fantastic things like going after police and cities for arresting the involuntary homeless and also going after psychiatric practices for illegal involuntary treatment. The DOJ correctly has the attitude that even if a homeless person can technically squat or take in Section 8 in another state, their situation is indeed involuntary. Most Americans I've talked to don't agree with the DOJ on this about homelessness and its why some people protest the homeless nowadays instead of just helping them. Many if not most Americans are very sick individuals. If homelessness for some reason quadrupled, or if another Great Depression happened, all current signs show the US would simply not be able to socially handle it, from the perspective of the law, debate, or any attempt to solve the problem. It can't even handle a 20% increase from the last few years. I'll likely vote third party as a throwaway presidential vote and then Dems for Congress. I vote in all the local and national primaries and few I prefer ends up winning those. On the presidential level, the Dems have a whole slate of superdelegates to vote out anyone to the left of a neoliberal Catholic conservative.

The "ForeverAloneWomen" forum was once made private due to men constantly propositioning them. Same with the original, exclusively female self-identified incel forums. Although people in the "r/incels subculture" would disavow ImplicitDemands as a "standardcel", I am personally willing to accept standards as a weak claim for involuntary celibacy so as to include women and discourage edge case baiting. So was the "original queer female" who came up with the word incel. She listed standards as a potential reason and you can read about it in the webarchives of her 1997 website. So who is really hijacking what? The people who claim incel self-identification is irrational tend to hijack definitions as much as the "r/incels subculture" and the associated 1-2 forums. Involuntariness exists across a spectrum and having also read parts of ImplicitDemands text I would put him at a low end of incel but not exclude him entirely for having standards. Even the prison incel has standards, eg not being raped by the guards to count as "not incel". A self-identified involuntary homeless person would also have standards of what type of home he would want to live in, and this led dozens today to argue in forums that true involuntary homelessness does not exist in the presence of housing standards, but well, it does.

At this point you are just saying words without attempting to convince anyone. His posts are partially about his perception that he cannot have sex by choice and/or will. Whether or not that is true, that is why he calls himself incel, that perception of himself. Muddying the waters of the definition might be amusing to people here to discourage discussion but it's kind of gross to be honest.

Having an agreement upon the definitions of the main topic are not my own rules, but generally accepted rules anywhere anyone wants to have a serious discussion. The participants here are incapable of having a consistent, intelligible, and mututally accepted definition for the basic subjects of the thread. Despite the fact that it was made clear by the OP and those who self-identify elsewhere on the internet: involuntary celibacy, not a Reddit subculture. The posts are malicious and to an irrational degree despite the OPs issues. Those who abide by PSL or r/incels culture can be demarcated verbally by saying "r/incels culture" or "PSL culture" culture or similar terms. And those tiny online subcultures do not speak for everyone who is unable to have sex. And again to imply otherwise is bigoted and ableist.

When was the last time you actually said anything in this thread? The image of you in my head is just a little 4chan troll running around.

you probably think you are funny, but you aren't unfortunately. If the moderators are not in agreeement on the definition and neither are the pariticipants, this discussion cannot go in a serious direction. I urge the OP @ImplicitDemands, as this is sort of his thread, if he wants to continue, to nail the few participating to a single cohesive and intelligible definition or set of definitions. It doesn't even have to be a favored set, just any consistent and intelligible set, as they do not currently exist. Otherwise the thread will go nowhere in a rational or mature direction.

ok great, I understand your position. It is not the position of the moderator considering I made it a point to ask him if he thought incel meant involuntary celibacy and he said yes. He can change his mind or hedge to muddy the waters, but that would be proof he does not want a serious discussion. Again without a clear consensus on definitions from the few participating, this discussion cannot go anywhere in a rational direction.

The admin here already stated that incel means involuntary celibacy. So that is not going to work here extremely well. Of course you can differ from the admin, or he can change his mind. But it's just a pointless exercise in the long run considering how much of a little fiefdom these forums end up being in the long run. Anyway without a clear consensus on definitions from the few participating, this discussion cannot go anywhere in a rational direction.

Ok, let me assume your decree is correct despite the existence of people who disprove that. That everyone who calls themself incel aligns with Lamarcus Sm*lls and/or Diego Galant*s and/or Marjan Sickl*c's and/or PSL subculture. Let's also assume you are correct forever. What term would you use for people who cannot have sex. If it is "involuntarily celibate", the moderator here acknowledges that is used to attach the term to a subculture. I am arguing that stop, the attachment. If it cannot stop worldwide, what word should be used?

The most Google-indexed definitions are not even intelligible. For example, the WIkipedia definition "incel is defined by being associated with a subculture" literally does not mean anything. It doesn't say *what* it is. It's really just an attempt to malign involuntary celibates, as the people who wrote that article *first* wanted to do so at the page name of "involuntary celibacy". Myself and a few others successfully stopped them from doing that on Wikipedia years ago, because two common English words in succession that encompasses millions who don't self-identify, engage in activism, participate in forums, use PSL lingo, argue for incels etc is not a subculture. That was obvious to even the most critical people on Wikipedia thankfully. They had some mature and attentive people there who saw that disguised ableism tactic and stopped it. Regardless, the people who wanted to define the r/incels subculture at the Wikipedia page name "involuntary celibacy" were furious, they spent days complaining that they could not define involuntary celibacy as a subculture on Wikipedia under the page name involuntary celibacy. Now the WIkipedia article looks like what it is now, a mess of unintelligibility at the page name "incel", echoed into quite a few digital journalism outlets. If they simply defined it at the page name of "r/incels culture" or something, their article would make more sense.

So I'll ask you, what is your definition of incel. You've posted quite a bit in this thread. And if you want to "be heard" you should define your terms first because "words mean whatever I want" is not a starting point for any serious discussion, more or less the 8th page. They can mean whatever you want, but they need an anchor for any serious discussion.

If it's done such a way to irrationally stigmatize a large demographic of people, on the order of millions, who do not have any public defenders, I will continue to try to make that behavior stop, if it's not possible here, than other forums. I don't care if that makes me entitled or whatever. Seeming entitled is not a subculture, and is often necessary to argue for entitlements. The irrational thing people do is lazily reading a Wikipedia definition, and then broadbrushing every involuntary celibate with a Reddit subculture characterized by a very large amount of horrible things that not every involuntarily sexless person subscribes to. I will be very forceful in discussion, as much as I am legally able to, to make anyone who implies that everyone who cannot have sex are part of a Reddit subculture, to stop.

The subculture is that of the forum lineage, first with the PSL forums. PSL forums -> r/truecels -> r/incels -> [redacted] -> [redacted] is where the subculture came from and how researchers determine how it is evolving, by looking at a specific forum lineage For the purposes of clarity, I call this "PSL subculture" or "r/incels subculture", to distinguish it in discussions from the situation of involuntary celibacy You've acknowledged that some people attach a subculture to these two common English words used in succession: involuntary celibacy, shortened to incel. For the purposes of this discussion I need people, INCLUDING YOURSELF, to settle on either the literal meaning of the term or the subculture. Because it if it both then the latter is always opportunistically used to shut down arguments about the former.

I have a question for you, do you think incel means involuntary celibacy, or the subculture of a particular forum lineage, used in gender studies and criminology articles, further used in digital journalism. I am not going to assume things before you change your mind. I you have no clear answer I'm not participating in gaslighting bullshit from you and will continue to ignore the more substantive posts you make, along with 2-3 other people.

I don't agree with everything OP says but I noticed he's used as a proxy to argue against something most outside that forum would not want to associate with: the blackpill, male supremacist, right-wing, hyper-traditionalist people specifically. If I had to bet money, I would bet he is not part of the 400 people posting on Lamarcus Sm*lls forum simply due to mathematical chance, but also because that forum is extremely right-wing and the OP started out with some radical left-wing theory, drawing my attention to sign up here to post in this thread. Stigmatized demographics are unfairly judged by the actions of the worst among them. It's pretty much the definition of stigma. But honestly there's nothing more I can do to disavow the forum subculture that people keep bringing up apart from literally performing a citizens arrest of the blackpill incel crime encouragement forum owner that gender studies articles use to broadbrush involuntary celibates. And that guy is not OP or myself. But that is outside of my interest or legal authority and there's already a public and activist movement to have him arrested anyway, mostly led by mom's of dead children of a sister suicide site he started. Hell, 7 members of Congress have asked the DOJ to prosecute the owner of that forum. I can't do more than the DOJ can. And if he truly commited no crimes then there's nothing else to do about that subculture or him. People have already called his forum and prior ones in that lineage deviant, misogynistic, male supremacist, hybrid masculine, whatever whatever 9000 billion times. I don't care about that forum, related ones, or the subcultures that partially define it anymore. I want to just talk about the literal meaning of the term.

I have interacted with the Anglosphere gender-obsessed or crime-obsessed types that write these articles. 99% are only interested in the forum succession I laid out. There is someone asking about the first 16 years of self-identified incel forum history instead of the last 7 on Reddit, but it's honestly too little too late. I'm just choosing to ignore the obsession and focus instead on the literal meaning of the term. If the word incel is too stigmatized I am open to alteranative words but I have a feeling they'd be co-opted and stigmatized just the same. But please keep in mind when i am saying "incel", I am not saying "Lamarcus Sm*lls forum or related subculture". And again I assume the same is true of OP considering how small that forum is and how large the internet outside that is.

Because the Anglosphere gender studies articles which I find your talking points in exlusively focus on 3 sets of people. The people who were apart of Bharg9's Reddit forum, then the people who were apart of that ban evasion in r/incels, then the people who were apart of that ban evasion in 2-3 Xenforo forums.

Ok I do not care about this reddit thing, go somewhere else about it. neither the OP or myself are apart of Lamarcus Sm*lls forum. Or at least I assume he isn't given there's only like 400 people posting there compared to the millions who'd be ready to self-identify as involuntarily celibate or whatever shortened variation. Can you imagine being so narrowly focused? It'd be like me claiming every single person who self-identifies as incel subscribes to "vaginocapitalism theory" just because the originator of that theory leads the self-identified incels in Russia.

These are not new arguments born from masculinities or failure to accept whatever recent version of feminism. The arguments about guaranteeing sexual matters in some way while comparing them to phenomena such as homelessness. Arguing for incels, and arguing against petite-bougie sexual behaviour among women in market economies has a long history in human left-wing thought, not just some Reddit right-wing or misogynistic subculture from 2016.

If that makes you upset, try reading Charles Fourier, you'll disavow the beginning of nominal socialism and feminism if you read him.

nah the first page of this thread is universally negative, people were ready to complain about some reddit subculture he doesn't belong to or something he isn't entitled to anyone but there probably is someone for him out there

I can't speak for him but I know for sure there I had never met a single person willing to date me from 2005-2018 that was female and not monogamously married. And I tried. Things changed after that. I didn't change, but at some point I started vlogging out of frustration, resulting in 8-9 females willing to date me, some of whom did, and I appreciate them. But I can sympathize with incels because I know incel is real. There might be someone for everyone, but people sometimes cannot find that someone. One of my favorite hobbies is helping to pair up people rather than rag on people who want to be paired.

This whole "anti-self-identified-incel" sentiment reminds me of the "yay science is great" human memes in r/SanFrancisco cheering that right-wing conservative supreme court justices might make arresting the homeless slightly more legal soon in Grants Pass vs. Johnson. Their position, and the position of the supreme court would be that "involuntariness" can always be argued as "voluntary", including in matters outside of homelessness. And furthermore that "cruelty against the self-professed involuntary is not actually cruelty because they can voluntarily escape their sitaution". They keep arguing that in r/SanFrancisco about the homeless in their city and natonwide. The opinion about involuntariness vs voluntariness in all human spheres was also a preliminary Supreme Court opinion by a right-wing supreme court justice in Grants Pass vs. Johnson. That argument of course has nothing to do with science and probably more to do with the political opinions of those human memes. Peel back the cover of the extreme center posing as the left and, much like the right, you'll find punching down and also engaging in pointless human cruelty, because the center can't explain why it exists or even identify what is going on around itself. Or even that the cause of political issues involving personal responsibility on a societal scale might be itself. "My recurring fantasy, through this period, was to have been born a woman, or a gay man, or best of all, completely asexual, so that I could simply devote my life to math, like my hero Paul Erdös did. Anything, really, other than the curse of having been born a heterosexual male, which for me, meant being consumed by desires that one couldn’t act on or even admit without running the risk of becoming an objectifier or a stalker or a harasser or some other creature of the darkness." "All this time, I faced constant reminders that the males who didn’t spend months reading and reflecting about feminism and their own shortcomings—even the ones who went to the opposite extreme, who engaged in what you called “good old-fashioned ass-grabbery”—actually had success that way. The same girls who I was terrified would pepper-spray me and call the police if I looked in their direction, often responded to the crudest advances of the most Neanderthal of men by accepting those advances. Yet it was I, the nerd, and not the Neanderthals, who needed to check his privilege and examine his hidden entitlement!" "Is there any relevant difference between the two cases beyond: “undesirability” of the disabled, fat, and trans should be critically examined and interrogated, because those people are objects of progressive sympathy; whereas “undesirability” of nerdy white and Asian males should be taken as a brute fact or even celebrated, because those people are objects of progressive contempt?" People of conscience will need to be extremely vigilant against motte-and-bailey tactics—wherein opinion-makers will express their desire for all “incels” to be silenced or fired or removed from the gene pool or whatever, obviously having in mind all romantically frustrated male nerds (all of whom they despise), and will fall back when challenged (and only when challenged) on the defense that they only meant the violence-loving misogynists." --Scott Aaronson, award-winning American professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Aaronson https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=3766 Incels are the victims of patriarchy, monogamy, and selfish attitudes. This will be fixed in Feminism 5.0, which involves a new legion of tomboy females. If the incels' demands are not met by the tomboy legion there will be more diplomatic talks with the various parties involved.

To be fair to ImplicitDemands I think the world has more problems than him/her No I don't think drugs will solve heterosexual incel. I'm just tying the policies to my previous discussion of those who suffer incel most obviously ie those in institutions. So for those incel due to involuntary psych measures, I feel they'd be better off without psychiatry, and for other reasons as well. And legalizing all psych drugs OTC for those above x age (and with heavy punishment for marketing to children and the unemplyed) is just the easiest way I can think to accomplish that for that demographic. As far as families setting up people to choose voluntarily, yes that can work, but I'd avoid calling it arranged marriage as that is close to forced marriage in most people's minds. Also, how would you propose to legislate familial warm meetings? I'm just curious, I'm not trying to be hostile to you.

Back to the subject, if you're poverty income you would want to vote for those who propose expanding public housing. If you are incel due to health issues, you'd likely want to favor a politician looking to destroy chronic illness in the USA, which is becoming a much more popular campaign promise. If you are autistic or otherwise low in social skills, you might favor government or social intervention in facilitating warm meetings between people. (not arranged marriages, which are impractical at best). I'm not aware of any politician in the USA proposing such things, but there are experiments with this in a few Asian countries. If you are incel due to institutions, you'd likely benefit from those institutions being eliminated. But that is not very practical in the case of prisons. A lot of lefties argue for prison abolition, but it doesn't make much sense to me. Psychiatric abolition on the other hand, seems completely reasonable to me, coupled with making psych drugs OTC for those above x age, with harsh punishments for marketing to minors or the unemployed. Then there's also the option of simply paying women, which if made legal would help many different kinds of incels. Brought this up in a prior post and so did another poster. One could come up with a lot of different policies that could help incel, as the causes are so diverse, but no one is really campaigning for president on much more than positions on abortion and immigration. I try to vote for local politicians who have incel friendly policies though, as best I understand it.