The Warped World of Incel Extremists

[dzheremi]

it is kind of sad though, that there's no way to approach a woman without it being creepy/weird. In the old days, our parents met their partners cold turkey.

Maybe some did. My dad met my mom in the late 60s/early 70s because they were both in local rock bands and my dad signed on as my mom's band's manager and then just so happened to steal her away from the "total dweeb" she had been dating (my dad's words). Not exactly a cold opener, and pretty sneaky and underhanded if ya ask me. But hey, I'm for anything that keeps me from being the son of a nerd.

My dad approached my mom, a total stranger, on the beach. Today, you'd get the brush off or there's an automatic creepy vibe the moment you approach them. So men don't approach.

There are certainly women out there who think that the only reason any man ever talks to them is because they want something out of it...I'm assuming because for these women, it seems like the only time a man ever talks to them is because they want something out of it.

But is it like that with every woman you meet? Cos if it were like that around here, I'd start to ask myself if it's me. But most women are just out, doing whatever it is they do every day, so I have a hard time imagining that most daily interactions of random strangers are all that fraught with peril. Maybe I'm out of touch, though, or maybe it makes a difference that most of our interactions in society are mediated commercially (especially for, e.g., service industry personnel like waitresses, who in essence have to play nice with lots of creeps they don't like, which often causes problems of this kind). I don't know. I just have a hard time imagining that the creepy vibe is really all that automatic.

I guess it's all about when is the right time to approach.

Indeed. I would suggest finding some total dweeb to beat up at the beach. That always worked for the bullies in the old cartoons, assuming their dweeby prey didn't have the guts to risk a whole stamp on a free, life-changing book from the one and only epitome of manliness, Charles Atlas.

 

[bèlla]

Head in the sand, why bother with reality when you can blame your problems on your scapegoat? I think it's primitive barbarism but it worked well for the Aztecs, to a point.

Are you suggesting society's responsible for a bunch of men who want to kill others because they're sexless?

 

[TheWhat?]

Are you suggesting society's responsible for a bunch of men who want to kill others because they're sexless?

"Am I my brother's keeper?" I'm saying the world is wicked, and this sick charade is a sad example of how "christianity" has given in to the love of the world and its ways -- you could say I'm religious about it.

 

[bèlla]

Not exactly a cold opener, and pretty sneaky and underhanded if ya ask me. But hey, I'm for anything that keeps me from being the son of a nerd.

Genes are a factor. I'm the product of two outgoing extroverts. They're 3 for 3 on the kiddie end. My daughter's father is a musician (hobbyist) who loves Asian culture. Guess who followed suit? She started writing lyrics at 7 and explored the culture on her own.

I don't know. I just have a hard time imagining that the creepy vibe is really all that automatic.

I don't think that way and my neighborhood is full of bars and young professionals. I have an opportunity to observe this. They're not squeamish. She's not attracted to him. He's probably misreading her reaction. It's most likely indifference or disgust depending on the person and who's asking.

 

[bèlla]

"Am I my brother's keeper?" I'm saying the world is wicked, and this sick charade is a sad example of how "christianity" has given in to the love of the world and its ways -- you could say I'm religious about it.

Are you suggesting Christians should mate with no concern for attraction?

 

[TheWhat?]

Are you suggesting Christians should mate with no concern for attraction?

Not at all, I'm neither an idealist nor a perfectionist. But America, christianity included, is certainly headed in a bad direction -- it has been for some time. We let ideals, desires and ignorance rule, expecting everything to work out in the end if we're not entirely apathetic about it and who we have to step on to maintain our media-driven fantasies.

 

[Larniavc]

Head in the sand, why bother with reality when you can blame your problems on your scapegoat? I think it's primitive barbarism but it worked well for the Aztecs, to a point.

I rather don’t get the point that you are making.

 

[RDKirk]

Are you suggesting Christians should mate with no concern for attraction?

Christians did that for most of Christian history, to be honest. Everything Jesus and the apostles had to say about marriage was within the framework of couples having been arranged without concern for attraction.

 

[TheWhat?]

I rather don’t get the point that you are making.

Exactly.

 

[bèlla]

We let ideals, desires and ignorance rule, expecting everything to work out in the end if we're not entirely apathetic about it and who we have to step on to maintain our media-driven fantasies.

If you meet someone you’re attracted to and she reciprocates, have you stepped on someone? Are you obligated to entertain the desires of those you’re not attracted to?

 

[bèlla]

Christians did that for most of Christian history, to be honest. Everything Jesus and the apostles had to say about marriage was within the framework of couples having been arranged without concern for attraction.

We’re in a different period now. In spite of the complaints, I think you’re seeing the truth. If she didn’t have to choose him to secure her life or sustenance, would she have him? The answer is no. I wouldn’t want someone who’s only with me because of my provision or breeding potential.

 

[TheWhat?]

If you meet someone you’re attracted to and she reciprocates, have you stepped on someone? Are you obligated to entertain the desires of those you’re not attracted to?

It is a sad day when the very basics of being kind toward one's neighbor has to be explained to a christian.

 

[RDKirk]

We’re in a different period now. In spite of the complaints, I think you’re seeing the truth. If she didn’t have to choose him to secure her life or sustenance, would she have him? The answer is no. I wouldn’t want someone who’s only with me because of my provision or breeding potential.

I don't think "attraction" is working any better as the reason for marriage. "Attraction" is far too fleeting.

 

[bèlla]

It is a sad day when the very basics of being kind toward one's neighbor has to be explained to a christian.

Kindness doesn’t necessitate marriage. What do you want them to do?

 

[bèlla]

I don't think "attraction" is working any better as the reason for marriage. "Attraction" is far too fleeting.

Compatibility is probably a better descriptor and you’d still have arguments.

 

[RDKirk]

Compatibility is probably a better descriptor and you’d still have arguments.

Human beings always change over time. No matter how compatible two people may initially appear, human beings always change over time. In five years, or seven, or ten, they will look their spouses and realize, "That's not the person I married."

When that moment arrives, they will be in exactly the same position as an arranged marriage.

If they had been wise--wiser than most--they would have ensured from the start that as they changed (and change is inevitable), they took deliberate steps to change in the same direction.

 

[Jamdoc]

I'm happy to elaborate.

Single people have specific behaviors that differ from a married person or someone living with another. The number one thing you have on your side is time. That doesn't mean you aren't busy. The responsibilities aren't the same.

If you're a single man living alone looking for companionship you have no one to answer to. An online only scenario implies your unwillingness to move beyond this realm with the opposite sex. You limit your interactions to a computer. Why would you do that if you wanted a partner? That's very limiting.

Men are visual. Someone unwilling to speak on the phone or get on Skype should raise alarms. Men usually want to verify they're talking to a woman. For personal reasons and catfishing.

Single people have more flexibility. If they only converse during certain periods—you don't hear from them otherwise. Or they're content exchanging messages and never mention more, you should have some questions. Where is this going?

When a person tries to keep a connection digital, it's usually for a few reasons. Most of them are bad.

• Married or living with someone
• "It's complicated" i.e., I'm with someone
  
• Don't resemble the image they've shared—i.e. fake
  
• No longer resemble the image—older; gained weight
• Created a false personality or lifestyle
  
• Have challenges that minimize their options they're hiding or downplaying
• Playing the emotional card to compel you to ignore red flags
  
• You're conversing with the same sex
• They have no intention of making it real

A lot of people have been burned and learned from it. Due diligence is a must. Everyone who says they're looking for a partner isn't seeking your idea of companionship. When a person finds what they want to try to secure it. They're not sitting on their hands.

Oh I more meant the "open + honest" one but on the online only one I think that well, being "catfished" as they call it is just as likely as it is someone cheating.
It's deceptive, but sometimes an ugly person is just desperate for some sort of connection or relationship, even if it's just to talk to someone, but because they're ugly and feel like they have no way of changing that (or the things they'd need to change are like, way too much money in cosmetic surgery or dentistry to fix), they're afraid to take it beyond that, feeling that the moment you actually see them you'll want nothing to do with them, but think if they never see them, they'll at least be willing to talk.
I've seen that one from both sexes actually. I used to play World of Warcraft and a situation like that happened, female player, started an online relationship with a male player, they'd spend a lot of time together in the game, and they were both part of the guild raid and so on, I guess they'd also been emailing and calling each other, and lived somewhat close together and she'd sent him "pictures" of "her" but she was strict about keeping it online. Then one day she was feeling bad about something, so he decided to go show up at her parent's house with flowers to cheer her up. I mean it was kind of sweet of him, considering his motivations, but also, uninvited, a doomed idea. Anyway, she of course had used a fake picture and was nothing like that in person and it was really awkward and embarrassing and it resulted in both of them quitting the game over the scene it caused.

Was it a bad thing to do? Yes, it is still lying.
But at the same time.. you can kind of feel some sympathy for why she did it.
Some people are just desperate to somehow feel something for someone and have it be reciprocated, even if it's based on a lie.

 

[Jamdoc]

I think it's a combination of non attraction and social awkwardness. The latter may give off the same but they aren't. They don't know how to present themselves in a manner that's appealing and acceptable.



Harassment begins once disinterest is conveyed. When I've said no thank you and wished you well that's it. I don't want to revisit it. If he persists, I'll reiterate my stance. Most reasonable people know that's a wrap. She's not interested.

I've had men take that statement and convince themselves I'm wrong, in denial, or God wills it and continue their pursuit. I can't wrap my mind around it. I would never have him. If he can't respect my boundaries, why would I marry him?

I agree, it's the persistence that makes it harassment, but sometimes it seems that even on a first approach, if he's ugly, it's considered harassment even if he just asked her to go to coffee one time. Something that is rather innocent and innocuous, a "want to get to know you" attempt. This is usually a thing that happens at a school setting or work, and in the workplace it's a bad idea to begin with, but I've heard of male university students losing scholarships over something like that because it was considered sexual harassment.
so that fear prevented me from approaching girls in university myself. I had to make myself wait until she showed some form of interest first, if she sat next to me and started talking to me, considering I would go and sit by myself, then at least she wasn't repulsed by the idea of being around me so I had a chance to get to know them I guess. But me going and making the first move? Wasn't going to happen after a couple of times where I did make the first move, and it resulted in social backlash. I don't mean "she said no" I mean like...
well. high school I didn't have a girlfriend, a cheerleader in one of my classes asked me about that and then suggested I should call her cheerleader friend and ask her out. I deflected saying I didn't know her number, so her friend gave it to me, I was young forgive me for not knowing this was going to be a bad idea from the getgo okay? I figured she must have secretly told her friend there was interest so I called.. and she reacted really badly to it, and the next day it was all over school. and it was rumored I was stalking her and such, because she hadn't given me her number herself. She could have just said no and left at at that, I'd have never called again anyway, or really talked to her since I didn't really talk to her outside of class anyway.
another time was me approaching a girl at a bar, offering to buy her a drink, she said no, I thought that was that, but then a group of friends of hers found me and confronted me saying to leave her alone and the male friends were threatening to assault me over it.
like I asked once, she said no, that was it for me!
Why spread rumors, why get people to threaten to physically attack me over it when I was already well aware that I was rejected and was not going to press it any further?

So even almost a decade before I just plain gave up, I had already said "okay, she has to make the first move"

 

[Jamdoc]

It could be that that is what he meant. Thanks for the clarification (on his behalf). I'm so used to getting jabbed and dismissed around here half the time that it's not always easy to tell if someone is criticizing me or just adding an additional, useful thought to all that has thus far been said.

So, thanks!

Yeah. I was single and [extremely] lonely too at one point in my life, but I never thought of myself, or of my outlook on life, as one that fit an 'incel' pattern. In that respect, I fully understand that one can be 'involuntarily celibate' and not an incel. My apologies if I came across earlier as seemingly expressing that those who are 'involuntaryly single' are somehow prone to being incels.....or some other such tripe. That wasn't my intention.

it did seem a little like that which was why I wanted to explain that it was not necessarily the case. In the church community it can be a little bit judgy like that, people just kind of assume everyone is married or on their way to being married and if they're still single by their mid 20's they must be voluntarily choosing that.
People don't always grasp but no, God didn't create an Eve for everyone.

 

[bèlla]

Human beings always change over time. No matter how compatible two people may initially appear, human beings always change over time. In five years, or seven, or ten, they will look their spouses and realize, "That's not the person I married."

Human beings get older but not everyone grows. Some remain stagnant and others diminish. I'm an overachiever and surround myself with the same. We're determined to accomplish our dreams no matter what.

You must be able to gallop to hang with me. I won't slow down. That takes a certain drive, personality, and work ethic. We haven't outgrown one another because we're running in the same direction. Someone who requires a different cadence wouldn't enjoy it.