"It has been one of the tactical successes of feminism to define 'male violence against women' as fundamentally different from and far more worthy of condemnation than other type of violence." Exactly! It's disturbing that neither news agencies nor the academy--with the exception of Dr. Fiamengo--have challenged this fundamentally bigoted paradigm. If fact, they've been complicit in advancing it. Feminist ideology is riddled with hypocrisies that no other hate group has been allowed to advance with impunity. I suppose we shouldn't be surprised that feminists who purport to find these men who--in their view--believe that "women owe them sex" don't hesitate to castigate men for failing to provide affection and intimacy when women demand it of them. Men who don't immediately come forth to satisfy women's needs are berated and belittled by feminists for failing to embrace the roles that feminism wants to assign them and rejecting--how dare they?--feminism's firmly held belief that it should have sole dominion over defining masculine desire and proclaiming how it should manifest itself in our culture.
I can think of one way that male violence is different from other forms of violence - that is the statistical rarity of men committing violence against women, compared to the numbers of men who attack other men.
Indeed - the conclusion from which could be drawn that men are more inclined to misandry than misogyny!
It is of course a myth that Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is overwhelmingly a male perpetrator / female victim issue. The 2013 Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project (PASK13) reported that in straight couples experiencing IPV, in 58% of couples the IPV was bi-directional - sometimes the man initiated the violence, sometimes the woman. In the remaining 42% the IPV was uni-directional, where it was slightly more than twice as likely that the woman was the perpetrator, rather than the man. And it's long been known that women are much more likely to be abused by a female partner than a male partner.
Thanks, Mike. Women are not taught from childhood to refrain from violence or to control negatives emotions like anger or impatience; it is wrongly assumed that female tendencies are never malicious or dangerous. I have seen incredible outbursts by mothers against their children in public: shaking the child, screaming, berating him/her, shaming, grabbing the child's arm roughly, etc. I could only imagine what she did to the child in private. Very rare to see that kind of outburst from a father.
Mothers are morely likely to be violent towards their children than fathers. Women who get charged with killing their children often get sympathy as they get described as having mental health issues. On the other hand men in the same position are described as absolute monsters.
LOL. I worked with a Lesbian, and she told me EVERY girl she had a relationship with beat the shit out of her! 3 marriages and 3 girlfriends in the 7 years that I knew her and they ALL beat the shit out of her! I also think she was the sub in the realtionships and was attracted to dominant partners.
The majority of the victims of violence committed by males are boys and men AND the majority of the victims of violence committed by females are also boys and men. Everybody's favourite target for violence is also everybody's favourite scapegoat.
They like it even better when it says "End male violence against women." Never "End mothers' violence against children." Imagine the outrage if there were even one such campaign.
Many of the formerly "women and children" agendas among global agencies and nation states are changing to "women and girls" meaning boys are explicitly excluded from consideration. I've started questioning agencies about what they mean by "children" regardless of context. At some point the boys will graduate from the category of "children" but none of these agencies will tell you when.
Janice, thanks for another stellar piece. I'd just like to pick up on your final words:
"Feminists have long wanted an excuse to outlaw all criticism of feminism and women. With the incel terrorism designation, they’ve advanced a step closer to that goal."
Spot on! I was reminded of a substantial blog piece we published four weeks ago on a matter in Scotland, titled, "The Scottish government’s CONsultation on reforming the criminal law to address misogyny":
An extract from the report of the Scottish government’s Working Group on Misogyny, along with our comments (in square brackets):
“... often this stirring up of hatred presents as being hatred of a particular type of woman – a noisy woman, a successful woman, an opinionated woman. But the crime is about female identity. It is no defence to say “I only hate certain kinds of woman – feminists, fat women or unfeminine women…” [J4MB: This is priceless, and of course most feminists are fat and unfeminine too. But since when was it a crime to hate people of different political persuasions to yourself? I’m reminded of the quotation usually wrongly attributed to Voltaire, “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”]
“Freedom of expression must be considered in determining whether the behaviour or communication was reasonable e.g. arguing against feminism, but no-one should enjoy freedom to stir up hatred towards women.”
The crime is heresy. If one believes feminism is a religion one need look no further.
Cities in Canada now give first priority housing to sex workers who allege that they were trafficked. No wonder Canadian public housing is stereotyped as being rife with crime. Those sex workers always run back to their pimps and even let them do crimes at their new public housing homes. Those sex workers harbour and encourage crime.
Law abiding men wait decades for affordable housing.
Hypergamy (combined with feminist ideals of sexual freedom) means that women will fuck just about anyone who has more status than them. Hypogamy (which is not really a thing) means that desirable men are not so opposed to fucking not so desirable women. This is a recipe for disaster.
The continual demonisation of the male gender for acts committed by an individual is par for the course. After all, Feminists need men to be the enemy as a rationalisation for their hostility towards the male gender.
Continual fear-mongering is an effective tool used for manipulation and extrapolation, taking the act of an individual and applying it to a group is totally dishonest.
It should be noted that almost 2 decades ago in Canada there was a proposal by Feminists that men's groups on the internet should be monitored.
Thank you, Janice. The F B I has flagged "incels" AND MGTOWs under the banner of "involuntary celibate violent extremists", while they ignore Antifa and BLM, of course. Congress is trying to impeach Garland and Wray. Let's hope they succeed.
It's disgusting how the FBI creates overblown claims of dangers of one type of people (not even a group - incel is not something one chooses to align with , it's something that happens to the person), while ignoring groups that act violently and financially support violent actors.
The House not only is digging into FBI/DOJ corruption, but they also have the power of the purse, and could just not fund those agencies that are not named in our Constitution.
Excellent point Trish, and after the way Comey & Mueller treated President Trump, it has become apparent the FBI are pussy whipped COWARDS who do the will of the wo-MEN they're dinging.
Don't hold your breath. Garland and Wray are in the club, along with the Bidens. Presently they appear to have a stranglehold on federal law enforcement.
The young lady who was murdered at the spa was actually a sex worker. The massage parlor had problems with the locals because it was located right near a residential area. The massage parlor hired mainly strippers and neighbors complained that it was noisy and lots of weird stuff going on late at night.
When I read the Google reviews, the major complaints were that the clientele were scammed, robbed or overcharged and that the majority of attendants had attitudes.
I'm guessing that this particular spa had problems and it was targeted because of many factors.
One of the most disgusting things feminists have done in recent decades is to create the fiction of an entirely ethical, kind and warm image for prostitution and strip clubs. There's a reason that massage parlors were traditionally lumped in with seedy businesses. I've even seen this kind of ideological massaging of the "sex work industry" on the History Channel, which portrayed Wild West brothels as upstanding businesses protecting both the girls and the customers. If that had been the case that there was a viable non-problematic version of prostitution, why would such businesses turn seedy in the 20th century? (this "upgrade" of prostitution was going on in parallel with "awareness" campaigns to make marriage appear terrifying)/
Why have we all silent agreed to adopt the woke term "sex worker?" Everyone does it. Janice does it in her OP. Commenters do it. Even explicitly anti-woke people do it.
Here’s my problem: Feminists constantly say that men must express their emotions in the same way that women do. Yet when they do feminists are eager to define those emotions as inherently evil, and to support the position that expressing them is terrorism.
It seems to me that when individual men, who may or may not define themselves as incels, engage in acts of violence against women feminists are eager to define such acts as evidence that there is a movement of involuntarily celibate men engaged in a war on women. This is the purest, most malodorous, bullshit (or perhaps “cowshit” since no true feminist would want to be associated with a male animal).
A comparable attack by a woman on a man on men will be excused as justifiable, and undeserving of punishment. But that’s not the point. Feminism as a movement appears to be aiming at defining all forms of maleness as criminal. When agencies of state support this the result is devastating for men, which appears to be an objective of the feminist movement.
Such hatred must be stigmatized, and there needs to be real emotional support, and empathy given to isolated young men. What do to bet that a not a single feminist will support this, and most will oppose it. Doubly so when the men in question belong to already marginalized groups. This is inhuman, and, frankly, evils
While it may not be obvious or in the headlines of the legacy media, there are plenty of female incels, too. Women who have 'hit the wall' are often lonely and rejected just like younger men. Any man over the age of 40 who has used an online dating service is acutely aware that most women in that age group are literally desperate to find their prince charming, but they've missed the bus.
It's different in that many of them could easily find a partner if they lowered their standards (which are largely arbitrary, anyway) but they won't because they've been taught that they deserve someone better than themselves. Men, meanwhile, have been taught that they don't deserve a woman at all.
The demonization of incels comes from feminists to a large degree, but I also think men are often highly motivated to do the same. Not just in their typical gynocentric support for women's interests no matter what, but also as an act of self-preservation. Two things. Competitive advantage in the mating game suggests men will want to increase the pool of losers and the more men can be cast out of the game as incels the better one's chances are. This is quite literally how extreme Mormon sects like in Bountiful, BC. structure their communities. The 'incel' men, the losers, are forced to leave so that the others can have their choice of multiple wives.
Following on that, the dire stigma of being thought or labeled 'incel' is an incentive to disabuse anyone of the idea by using the label oneself, preemptively. At this point, the term has become a slur or a smear so that men are falsely being called incels when they are not, for such crimes as pushing back against feminist ideology, or caring at all about men's rights, or just willy nilly.
So I think we not only have to examine the feminist narrative, but also more fundamental biological drivers that serve to further marginalize an already vulnerable group.
As ever, the problem is not "inceldom", or any other "stand alone condition/state of mind." Whether it's feminism, wokism, anti-capitalism, inceldom. .
It hardly matters. These are symptomatic expressions of deeper problems. They are NOT primarily ideological commitments.
Distorted minds latch onto ideologies. No matter what kind, doesn't matter. As long as the ideology gives them an excuse to be a victim.
The problem, at base, is terrible parenting. Outright normalized child abuse and neglect.
The outcome is some mix of complicated PTSD, Cluster B personality disorders (Borderline, Narcissistic, Anti-Social).
Normal range people (meaning those without severe child abuse or neglect in their backgrounds) do not do these things. Even if they subscribe to inceldom, feminism, or [name your favorite].
We cannot "stop this problem" by "stopping incels."
We can't stop it at all. I don't believe we're capable of accepting how bad our parenting really is. We will not get at the root cause. And a big reason we won't get there is that it would require women---not just feminists, but women broadly---to accept that they are humans capable of very bad mistakes. That have lifelong consequences for their children.
Thank you for writing this article- the demonizing of men had become a cottage industry and it needs to stop! I'm always a little surprised at the outrage some feminists feel about men invading their spaces (trans issue) - they don't seem to recognize that they did the same thing to men, women ensured men could have no space for just men. I'm not ok with men in women's spaces at all, I just find the outrage a little hypocritical.
BRILLIANT as always Janice! THANK YOU for your outgoing & unselfish kindness! It is also 'noteworthy' that the term 'incel' WAS COINED BY A GIRL named Alana, for lonely people of BOTH genders and to describe HER OWN experience of not having sex & not being in a relationship. Also 'noteworthy' Is that the fEMINISTS themselves are the ones who metastasized the word onto MEN. The original term incel was coined by a GIRL to describe HER OWN experience!
Not long after the NYC Twin Towers imploded on September 11, 2001, passports of the alleged terrorist pilots were said to be found lying in pristine condition on the street. Why, golly-gee-willakers, we sure found out real quick who those bad terrorists were. Eventual consequence: the U.S. Patriot Act. Enter: surveillance. Subjects: U.S. citizens.
Decades of government funding to feminism, the social influencer, and various manner of social aberration develops over time. In essence: men bad, women good. Even the gullible amongst the males buy into it. So much so that the venomously contemptuous label describing assumed losers - (male) incel - becomes easily accepted into the social and linguistic lexicon. Then, the ready made model of despised and developing male youth as terrorist conveniently slithers into the public realm creating even more derision and suspicion among portions of everyday citizens. Unfettered feminism births yet another inroad to social implosion using smoke (emotion) and mirrors (projection). Thank you unwitting dupes of the social engineers for this. You were easy.
Current feminism is nothing more than a power grab by the elites and a way to create a boogeyman to instill fear into the population. Incels are the new Taliban, bin Laden Saddam, Putin, etc.
Feminists and bitter man-haters must be hugging themselves. At last, they have their own four-letter word. True, it has five but that’s close enough. There is a plenitude of nasty words that can be used to insult a woman. Tart, slapper, whore, slut, thot (new to me!) and so on but now they have “incel” a slur on men because they fail to attract a woman for a sufficient period for her to lay down. Even drunk or with a slut. Hence, they are failures and pointless. Of course, there always was “wanker” but nearly everyone is, or was, as they squirmed through their early teens – including women. Not an easy time for me and my friends and seeing the women’s hundred yards dash would send the hormones pillaging amongst my brain and nervous system. Only one thing for it. Staying on for the semi-finals and finals was exhausting. Watching women’s pole vaulting now, I am glad that I am well past it. As an actor said, being free of a libido is like being unchanged from a lunatic. But back to “incel,” so much is nested in that word, ugly, unattractive, isolated, unlovable, unsuccessful or without the other accoutrements which women find attractive such as status, property, money, ear and nose hair (just kidding) your own sadomasochist torture chamber or a glider. A penniless incel, by the way, is called a “pencil”.
My fear is that “incel” will become a formal charge or psychopathy or at least “evidence against the accused”. “Innocent until proven incel” or worse “Guilty until proven that you are not”. And proof that you are incel? You haven’t had a shag in two years, you have some girly magazines and you’ve been to some, what some might say, questionable websites. The investigators will know that one because your computer is bursting with viruses. Where I used to live, the porn channel on TV showed catwalk models strutting their stuff. It’s all some people need and that’s ok.
Where I live now, we are often surrounded by monkeys and not cuddly ones. The big fellah would have your face off but one day he will be battered by a younger, fitter pretender to the throne and he will be cast out. He will limp off and die alone. Incel.
In the UK, old people dying and remaining undiscovered is common enough. In my adopted country, there is a growing number of dislocated young men suffering the same fate. I wonder if any grudge feminist, would find pleasure in that, incel or not.
Yes, there are isolated young women but their cats keep them alive.
I'm sure you're right that 'incel' will soon be a recognized psychopathology, evidence of a tendency to aggression, hatred of women, distorted worldview. I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear of incels being fired from their jobs by nervous employers, etc.
Canadian police departments are trained to treat every unwanted conversation from a man as criminal harassment. But if a man avoids women in the workplace, he's viewed as not being a team player. Damn if you do, damned if you don't.
My Japanese friend was partnered with an American girl in Seattle. One day she gave him a beating and the police took him into custody. It's policy to arrest the man, so I'm told.
It's referred to as the Duluth model. Once police are dispatched to a domestic dispute in an emergency call, it's mainly the man who is considered the suspect. I once read that a pensioner using a walker was charged with criminal harassment because he argued with a female neighbour and she sic'd the cops on him.
Thanks, Janice. Amid my fumbling attempt to be light this is the serious side of things. That and the fact that we are all incels at various times in our ordinary lives and cannot avoid the supposed implications of it if it coincides with some unfortunate event. I am reminded of the time that onanism was reckoned to be the cause of mental illness rather than a symptom of it and that this fundamental attribution error might be repeated when looking at incel behaviour. Whilst in incel periods of time, I myself have made many unrewarded or even unwelcome blandishments but when else can you make them and how else do you know if you don't try? I have been rejected by many beautiful women and been depressed after but I "made the grade" sometimes, escaping the incel prison cell and on the run, without being described as mentally ill. Not for that reason, anyway.
"It has been one of the tactical successes of feminism to define 'male violence against women' as fundamentally different from and far more worthy of condemnation than other type of violence." Exactly! It's disturbing that neither news agencies nor the academy--with the exception of Dr. Fiamengo--have challenged this fundamentally bigoted paradigm. If fact, they've been complicit in advancing it. Feminist ideology is riddled with hypocrisies that no other hate group has been allowed to advance with impunity. I suppose we shouldn't be surprised that feminists who purport to find these men who--in their view--believe that "women owe them sex" don't hesitate to castigate men for failing to provide affection and intimacy when women demand it of them. Men who don't immediately come forth to satisfy women's needs are berated and belittled by feminists for failing to embrace the roles that feminism wants to assign them and rejecting--how dare they?--feminism's firmly held belief that it should have sole dominion over defining masculine desire and proclaiming how it should manifest itself in our culture.
You fucking NAILED it, dude!
I can think of one way that male violence is different from other forms of violence - that is the statistical rarity of men committing violence against women, compared to the numbers of men who attack other men.
Indeed - the conclusion from which could be drawn that men are more inclined to misandry than misogyny!
It is of course a myth that Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is overwhelmingly a male perpetrator / female victim issue. The 2013 Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project (PASK13) reported that in straight couples experiencing IPV, in 58% of couples the IPV was bi-directional - sometimes the man initiated the violence, sometimes the woman. In the remaining 42% the IPV was uni-directional, where it was slightly more than twice as likely that the woman was the perpetrator, rather than the man. And it's long been known that women are much more likely to be abused by a female partner than a male partner.
Thanks, Mike. Women are not taught from childhood to refrain from violence or to control negatives emotions like anger or impatience; it is wrongly assumed that female tendencies are never malicious or dangerous. I have seen incredible outbursts by mothers against their children in public: shaking the child, screaming, berating him/her, shaming, grabbing the child's arm roughly, etc. I could only imagine what she did to the child in private. Very rare to see that kind of outburst from a father.
Mothers are morely likely to be violent towards their children than fathers. Women who get charged with killing their children often get sympathy as they get described as having mental health issues. On the other hand men in the same position are described as absolute monsters.
Mike, in a Harvard study that was censored it was discovered that wo-MEN initiate 70% of DV. Like Amber Heard & Johnny Depp.
LOL. I worked with a Lesbian, and she told me EVERY girl she had a relationship with beat the shit out of her! 3 marriages and 3 girlfriends in the 7 years that I knew her and they ALL beat the shit out of her! I also think she was the sub in the realtionships and was attracted to dominant partners.
The majority of the victims of violence committed by males are boys and men AND the majority of the victims of violence committed by females are also boys and men. Everybody's favourite target for violence is also everybody's favourite scapegoat.
The placards say, "End violence to women". Never "End violence to children" or just "End Violence".
They like it even better when it says "End male violence against women." Never "End mothers' violence against children." Imagine the outrage if there were even one such campaign.
Indeed, Janice - or "End women's violence against women".
Ask Mike about UK male victims of sexual or domestic abuse being classed as "victims of violence against women and girls".
Many of the formerly "women and children" agendas among global agencies and nation states are changing to "women and girls" meaning boys are explicitly excluded from consideration. I've started questioning agencies about what they mean by "children" regardless of context. At some point the boys will graduate from the category of "children" but none of these agencies will tell you when.
That is true!
Janice, thanks for another stellar piece. I'd just like to pick up on your final words:
"Feminists have long wanted an excuse to outlaw all criticism of feminism and women. With the incel terrorism designation, they’ve advanced a step closer to that goal."
Spot on! I was reminded of a substantial blog piece we published four weeks ago on a matter in Scotland, titled, "The Scottish government’s CONsultation on reforming the criminal law to address misogyny":
https://j4mb.org.uk/2023/05/28/the-scottish-governments-consultation-on-reforming-the-criminal-law-to-address-misogyny/
An extract from the report of the Scottish government’s Working Group on Misogyny, along with our comments (in square brackets):
“... often this stirring up of hatred presents as being hatred of a particular type of woman – a noisy woman, a successful woman, an opinionated woman. But the crime is about female identity. It is no defence to say “I only hate certain kinds of woman – feminists, fat women or unfeminine women…” [J4MB: This is priceless, and of course most feminists are fat and unfeminine too. But since when was it a crime to hate people of different political persuasions to yourself? I’m reminded of the quotation usually wrongly attributed to Voltaire, “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”]
Mike Buchanan
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
http://j4mb.org.uk
“Freedom of expression must be considered in determining whether the behaviour or communication was reasonable e.g. arguing against feminism, but no-one should enjoy freedom to stir up hatred towards women.”
The crime is heresy. If one believes feminism is a religion one need look no further.
Incels are the byproduct of hypergamy and the concentration of wealth by the top 1%.
It’s only gonna get worse in Canada because the bottom 80% of men have little to no supports.
While 80% of female Canadians have some form of government support.
Cities in Canada now give first priority housing to sex workers who allege that they were trafficked. No wonder Canadian public housing is stereotyped as being rife with crime. Those sex workers always run back to their pimps and even let them do crimes at their new public housing homes. Those sex workers harbour and encourage crime.
Law abiding men wait decades for affordable housing.
Hypergamy (combined with feminist ideals of sexual freedom) means that women will fuck just about anyone who has more status than them. Hypogamy (which is not really a thing) means that desirable men are not so opposed to fucking not so desirable women. This is a recipe for disaster.
Canadian men tell me that many women date the same wealthy jocks on campus. Like harems.
Precisely.
The continual demonisation of the male gender for acts committed by an individual is par for the course. After all, Feminists need men to be the enemy as a rationalisation for their hostility towards the male gender.
Continual fear-mongering is an effective tool used for manipulation and extrapolation, taking the act of an individual and applying it to a group is totally dishonest.
It should be noted that almost 2 decades ago in Canada there was a proposal by Feminists that men's groups on the internet should be monitored.
Thank you, Janice. The F B I has flagged "incels" AND MGTOWs under the banner of "involuntary celibate violent extremists", while they ignore Antifa and BLM, of course. Congress is trying to impeach Garland and Wray. Let's hope they succeed.
It's disgusting how the FBI creates overblown claims of dangers of one type of people (not even a group - incel is not something one chooses to align with , it's something that happens to the person), while ignoring groups that act violently and financially support violent actors.
The House not only is digging into FBI/DOJ corruption, but they also have the power of the purse, and could just not fund those agencies that are not named in our Constitution.
Excellent point Trish, and after the way Comey & Mueller treated President Trump, it has become apparent the FBI are pussy whipped COWARDS who do the will of the wo-MEN they're dinging.
The FBI are WORTHLESS COWARDS.
Don't hold your breath. Garland and Wray are in the club, along with the Bidens. Presently they appear to have a stranglehold on federal law enforcement.
"It's a club and you ain't in it" George Carling RIP
The young lady who was murdered at the spa was actually a sex worker. The massage parlor had problems with the locals because it was located right near a residential area. The massage parlor hired mainly strippers and neighbors complained that it was noisy and lots of weird stuff going on late at night.
When I read the Google reviews, the major complaints were that the clientele were scammed, robbed or overcharged and that the majority of attendants had attitudes.
I'm guessing that this particular spa had problems and it was targeted because of many factors.
One of the most disgusting things feminists have done in recent decades is to create the fiction of an entirely ethical, kind and warm image for prostitution and strip clubs. There's a reason that massage parlors were traditionally lumped in with seedy businesses. I've even seen this kind of ideological massaging of the "sex work industry" on the History Channel, which portrayed Wild West brothels as upstanding businesses protecting both the girls and the customers. If that had been the case that there was a viable non-problematic version of prostitution, why would such businesses turn seedy in the 20th century? (this "upgrade" of prostitution was going on in parallel with "awareness" campaigns to make marriage appear terrifying)/
Exactly. Strip clubs and whorehouses exist to exploit men, not women. Follow the money.
Why have we all silent agreed to adopt the woke term "sex worker?" Everyone does it. Janice does it in her OP. Commenters do it. Even explicitly anti-woke people do it.
The word is *prostitute*.
Or the good old British 'tart'.
Here’s my problem: Feminists constantly say that men must express their emotions in the same way that women do. Yet when they do feminists are eager to define those emotions as inherently evil, and to support the position that expressing them is terrorism.
It seems to me that when individual men, who may or may not define themselves as incels, engage in acts of violence against women feminists are eager to define such acts as evidence that there is a movement of involuntarily celibate men engaged in a war on women. This is the purest, most malodorous, bullshit (or perhaps “cowshit” since no true feminist would want to be associated with a male animal).
A comparable attack by a woman on a man on men will be excused as justifiable, and undeserving of punishment. But that’s not the point. Feminism as a movement appears to be aiming at defining all forms of maleness as criminal. When agencies of state support this the result is devastating for men, which appears to be an objective of the feminist movement.
Such hatred must be stigmatized, and there needs to be real emotional support, and empathy given to isolated young men. What do to bet that a not a single feminist will support this, and most will oppose it. Doubly so when the men in question belong to already marginalized groups. This is inhuman, and, frankly, evils
Feminists command men to be soft emotionally, but on a subconscious level, their deeply buried femininity finds weak men disgusting.
While it may not be obvious or in the headlines of the legacy media, there are plenty of female incels, too. Women who have 'hit the wall' are often lonely and rejected just like younger men. Any man over the age of 40 who has used an online dating service is acutely aware that most women in that age group are literally desperate to find their prince charming, but they've missed the bus.
It's different in that many of them could easily find a partner if they lowered their standards (which are largely arbitrary, anyway) but they won't because they've been taught that they deserve someone better than themselves. Men, meanwhile, have been taught that they don't deserve a woman at all.
The demonization of incels comes from feminists to a large degree, but I also think men are often highly motivated to do the same. Not just in their typical gynocentric support for women's interests no matter what, but also as an act of self-preservation. Two things. Competitive advantage in the mating game suggests men will want to increase the pool of losers and the more men can be cast out of the game as incels the better one's chances are. This is quite literally how extreme Mormon sects like in Bountiful, BC. structure their communities. The 'incel' men, the losers, are forced to leave so that the others can have their choice of multiple wives.
Following on that, the dire stigma of being thought or labeled 'incel' is an incentive to disabuse anyone of the idea by using the label oneself, preemptively. At this point, the term has become a slur or a smear so that men are falsely being called incels when they are not, for such crimes as pushing back against feminist ideology, or caring at all about men's rights, or just willy nilly.
So I think we not only have to examine the feminist narrative, but also more fundamental biological drivers that serve to further marginalize an already vulnerable group.
As ever, the problem is not "inceldom", or any other "stand alone condition/state of mind." Whether it's feminism, wokism, anti-capitalism, inceldom. .
It hardly matters. These are symptomatic expressions of deeper problems. They are NOT primarily ideological commitments.
Distorted minds latch onto ideologies. No matter what kind, doesn't matter. As long as the ideology gives them an excuse to be a victim.
The problem, at base, is terrible parenting. Outright normalized child abuse and neglect.
The outcome is some mix of complicated PTSD, Cluster B personality disorders (Borderline, Narcissistic, Anti-Social).
Normal range people (meaning those without severe child abuse or neglect in their backgrounds) do not do these things. Even if they subscribe to inceldom, feminism, or [name your favorite].
We cannot "stop this problem" by "stopping incels."
We can't stop it at all. I don't believe we're capable of accepting how bad our parenting really is. We will not get at the root cause. And a big reason we won't get there is that it would require women---not just feminists, but women broadly---to accept that they are humans capable of very bad mistakes. That have lifelong consequences for their children.
That will never happen.
Thank you for writing this article- the demonizing of men had become a cottage industry and it needs to stop! I'm always a little surprised at the outrage some feminists feel about men invading their spaces (trans issue) - they don't seem to recognize that they did the same thing to men, women ensured men could have no space for just men. I'm not ok with men in women's spaces at all, I just find the outrage a little hypocritical.
Me too. The hypocrisy is off the charts!
BRILLIANT as always Janice! THANK YOU for your outgoing & unselfish kindness! It is also 'noteworthy' that the term 'incel' WAS COINED BY A GIRL named Alana, for lonely people of BOTH genders and to describe HER OWN experience of not having sex & not being in a relationship. Also 'noteworthy' Is that the fEMINISTS themselves are the ones who metastasized the word onto MEN. The original term incel was coined by a GIRL to describe HER OWN experience!
Not long after the NYC Twin Towers imploded on September 11, 2001, passports of the alleged terrorist pilots were said to be found lying in pristine condition on the street. Why, golly-gee-willakers, we sure found out real quick who those bad terrorists were. Eventual consequence: the U.S. Patriot Act. Enter: surveillance. Subjects: U.S. citizens.
Decades of government funding to feminism, the social influencer, and various manner of social aberration develops over time. In essence: men bad, women good. Even the gullible amongst the males buy into it. So much so that the venomously contemptuous label describing assumed losers - (male) incel - becomes easily accepted into the social and linguistic lexicon. Then, the ready made model of despised and developing male youth as terrorist conveniently slithers into the public realm creating even more derision and suspicion among portions of everyday citizens. Unfettered feminism births yet another inroad to social implosion using smoke (emotion) and mirrors (projection). Thank you unwitting dupes of the social engineers for this. You were easy.
Current feminism is nothing more than a power grab by the elites and a way to create a boogeyman to instill fear into the population. Incels are the new Taliban, bin Laden Saddam, Putin, etc.
"Thot" came from rap music; the music that feminists and empowered women dance to while the rapper boasts about beaches and pimping garden shovels.
The connection to rap is obvious, now that you mention it, but I hadn't made the connection. Thanks for this!
Thot = That hoe over there
Exactly. Not really incel lingo. It's more of modern pop music. Incels get blamed for everything.
Feminists and bitter man-haters must be hugging themselves. At last, they have their own four-letter word. True, it has five but that’s close enough. There is a plenitude of nasty words that can be used to insult a woman. Tart, slapper, whore, slut, thot (new to me!) and so on but now they have “incel” a slur on men because they fail to attract a woman for a sufficient period for her to lay down. Even drunk or with a slut. Hence, they are failures and pointless. Of course, there always was “wanker” but nearly everyone is, or was, as they squirmed through their early teens – including women. Not an easy time for me and my friends and seeing the women’s hundred yards dash would send the hormones pillaging amongst my brain and nervous system. Only one thing for it. Staying on for the semi-finals and finals was exhausting. Watching women’s pole vaulting now, I am glad that I am well past it. As an actor said, being free of a libido is like being unchanged from a lunatic. But back to “incel,” so much is nested in that word, ugly, unattractive, isolated, unlovable, unsuccessful or without the other accoutrements which women find attractive such as status, property, money, ear and nose hair (just kidding) your own sadomasochist torture chamber or a glider. A penniless incel, by the way, is called a “pencil”.
My fear is that “incel” will become a formal charge or psychopathy or at least “evidence against the accused”. “Innocent until proven incel” or worse “Guilty until proven that you are not”. And proof that you are incel? You haven’t had a shag in two years, you have some girly magazines and you’ve been to some, what some might say, questionable websites. The investigators will know that one because your computer is bursting with viruses. Where I used to live, the porn channel on TV showed catwalk models strutting their stuff. It’s all some people need and that’s ok.
Where I live now, we are often surrounded by monkeys and not cuddly ones. The big fellah would have your face off but one day he will be battered by a younger, fitter pretender to the throne and he will be cast out. He will limp off and die alone. Incel.
In the UK, old people dying and remaining undiscovered is common enough. In my adopted country, there is a growing number of dislocated young men suffering the same fate. I wonder if any grudge feminist, would find pleasure in that, incel or not.
Yes, there are isolated young women but their cats keep them alive.
I'm sure you're right that 'incel' will soon be a recognized psychopathology, evidence of a tendency to aggression, hatred of women, distorted worldview. I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear of incels being fired from their jobs by nervous employers, etc.
Canadian police departments are trained to treat every unwanted conversation from a man as criminal harassment. But if a man avoids women in the workplace, he's viewed as not being a team player. Damn if you do, damned if you don't.
My Japanese friend was partnered with an American girl in Seattle. One day she gave him a beating and the police took him into custody. It's policy to arrest the man, so I'm told.
It gave her time to clear out his things.
It's referred to as the Duluth model. Once police are dispatched to a domestic dispute in an emergency call, it's mainly the man who is considered the suspect. I once read that a pensioner using a walker was charged with criminal harassment because he argued with a female neighbour and she sic'd the cops on him.
The former CEO of Reddit, Ellen Pao, once tweeted "CEOs of big tech companies: You almost certainly have incels as employees. What are you going to do about it?" https://www.newsweek.com/incel-ellen-pao-reddit-silicon-valley-involuntary-celibate-tech-gender-910107
Oh WOW. Incredible. Thank you for this.
Thanks, Janice. Amid my fumbling attempt to be light this is the serious side of things. That and the fact that we are all incels at various times in our ordinary lives and cannot avoid the supposed implications of it if it coincides with some unfortunate event. I am reminded of the time that onanism was reckoned to be the cause of mental illness rather than a symptom of it and that this fundamental attribution error might be repeated when looking at incel behaviour. Whilst in incel periods of time, I myself have made many unrewarded or even unwelcome blandishments but when else can you make them and how else do you know if you don't try? I have been rejected by many beautiful women and been depressed after but I "made the grade" sometimes, escaping the incel prison cell and on the run, without being described as mentally ill. Not for that reason, anyway.