[worry]

I think about this too much. Maybe I should take a day off.

[Macros]

That post was quite confusing to me, I think you lost me at the ten commandments

[worry]

Hmm, let's see if this makes it clearer. What I am saying is that some fringe groups, as ridiculous as they may seem individually, have symbiotic relationships with the toxic mainstream views that birthed them. An environment where "maybe humans aren't the main contributors to climate change" and "maybe the universe is 6000 years old" are legitimized, allows for a pocket where "maybe the Earth is flat" can thrive. Or "the moon landing was faked". And they all reinforce each other, even if the latter two never themselves become mainstream. Someone who believes those mainstream things benefits from the existence of those fringe things, even if they don't acknowledge them. They can score their points on Tucker Carlson's show or in their megachurch sermon by saying, "Obviously I don't believe the Earth is flat, but they do make a good point about how elites use science to manipulate us. They cherry pick information to push a secular agenda, and it's corrosive to the Judeo-Christian fabric of our nation." It really doesn't matter that flat earthers are wrong by even their standards, or that some flat earthers might consider themselves secularists; the point is that the scientists can't be trusted. It's especially effective if you can conflate science with the government.

Likewise, Incel culture is a fringe that benefits from and contributes to feedback loops with toxic mainstream views regarding sex-inequality (e.g. patriarchy, religious gender role prescriptions, entitlement to women's bodies) as well as lateral loops with other fringe-ish subcultures (e.g. gamergaters, channers, MRAs). Doesn't matter if incels are ridiculous. If a NYT columnist can say "their violence is wrong, but we might need to think about sex redistribution as a solution to a legitimate concern", then he's moderated himself by distancing himself from the extreme actions of the fringe group and legitimized the concerns of the fringe group at the same -- and reinforced the mainstream view that women are not men's equals, which the point of all of it. It's especially effective if you can conflate the breakdown of gender roles with the government.

[Macros]

Oh god yes I agree that media has also massively contributed to this idea about sex being the be all and end all. As well as the horrid perceptions of what is 'hot' and what is 'not'. Although mainstreams and social medias insidious shaping of the collective views of what is attractive is possibly another topic altogether it does somewhat tie into this a bit. More than ever people are idolising the vapid and vain, people are saying Kim Kardashian is a role model because she's a woman who has created a multi million dollar brand. Fair play to her but let's not forget she got it by the expedient route of a sex tape and flashing her ample bum at every opportunity, this is the message that is being sent out, want to get ahead girls? Show some skin, see the incredible amount of people that now label themselves as 'instagram models' etc. I'm going off track again, I could rant about that shit all day long

Anyway, I totally get what you mean now and agree that this incel movement (for lack of a better word) is an offshoot of patriarchal history. Look at 99% of our histories and historical myths (which basically feed the main storylines (in some shape or form) of a lot of our films etc) it's a man's world where a woman's role is invariably in the kitchen or bedroom. This notion of man's place at the top is ingrained so deeply in our culture's we have phrases like 'unladylike behaviour' for when a woman does something that is considered to fall in the male purview (wrong word?)
All that bullshit feeds into the one horrid tree on some level;. Incel, arranged marriages, friend zone, alpha male bullshit, you can't date my sister, one way polygamy, etc.
This Incel group think is not a result of the problems of patriarchal bullshit, it's part of the overall problem of patriarchal bullshit. I should think every single one of them that says shit about Barbie's or whatever it is they say should be asked if they would say it about their mother and see if it gives them some perspective on how much of a bunch of tools they are

[D'rek]

 Luv2B_Sassy, on 06 May 2018 - 02:56 AM, said:

I'm not sure if I can word this eloquently enough, but I'll try. Everyone might wind up disagreeing with me anyway, but that's okay . I'll put it this way:

I don't disagree that there have always been losers of the incel variety, who have been essentially locked out of the romantic pool, and lived out lonely bitter lives as a result. It's not a new phenomenon. What I am saying is that the various factions of the alt-right all coagulate around a regressive set of principles that uphold gender and racial hierarchies, which not coincidentally match the status quo in this country: white male hegemony. "Mainstream" establishment conservatives on the other hand traditionally seek white male financial elite hegemony. There was tension between the right and the alt-right during the primaries, hence DJT beating out his GOP fellows. The issue was white male non-elites feeling left out in the cold, too far down the pecking order, even though they meet all the standards that matter (whiteness, maleness). The entire alt-right movement, from extremely online neo-Nazis to men's rights activists to incels, are branches on the same tree.

I'm not saying that individually these various groups and subcultures are huge or powerful in and of themselves. But I do believe that the establishment right is perfectly willing to cater to them -- has catered to them already, in fact -- and doesn't mind throwing them bones on their pet issues. It's the Southern Strategy re-purposed to the alt-right. There's nothing they won't do, ultimately, in order to remain the establishment.

What do abortion restrictions have to do with incels? Well what does Mike Pence have to do with Donald Trump? The desire to seize and assert power and dominance ruthlessly. Republicans got their tax cuts. What's the end of DACA, or temporary protected status for half a million people, or Roe v. Wade, or protections for LGBTQ and disabled people, compared to that?

Notes:
I recognize that even though white male hegemony is the status quo, there are women, gay people, POCs who identify with the right and the alt-right anyway, so it's fine to imagine a "mostly" before all the times I mention that stuff. Also I hope it's clear from my post history that I don't think Dems are blameless in this, or don't maneuver for power, etc.

I'm being fairly moderate in my language because, to be honest, I think the "right" (and tbh not just the right) largely agrees with "alt-right" principles -- that non-white people, non-male people, disabled people, gay people, poor people, etc. aren't really 100% people -- and differ only in degree. So making these concessions isn't particularly difficult.

Lastly, I don't want to sound like I think just because this is what's happening imo that it's going to always be successful, or that it won't be nipped in the bud or otherwise battled by forces of opposition. Like, I don't think all this regression is inevitable (though, on the other hand, some of it is already happening). But that's kinda why I posted the response to Douthat in the first place. The push-back is a positive thing.

Sure, in the U.S. political sphere myriad population subsets are going to get grouped together with "the right" or "the left" political ideologies because the U.S. has a two-party system. I don't feel that the American political duality is reflective of people's ideologies or social beliefs outside of that political context, though. Just because incels, anti-vaxxers, and libertarians all tend to vote republican in the U.S. doesn't mean that they each believe each other's things, or even that they would get along. Sure, for American politicians they are going to talk to all these tiny little groups that collectively make up their voting base and try to tie them all together into one big thing because that's how they get re-elected... but I think it's a mistake for journalists or anyone else to do the same.

[worry]

I get what you mean, and it's definitely food for thought. I'm a little torn. They're definitely junior league even among the various chauvinist movements under the alt-right umbrella. And if you think about them as a minor monster content to stay in its cave, then it requires expending your energy seeking them out to even be bothered by them. So the NYT published an article sympathetic to them -- let it drop like a lead balloon into the abyss, cuz every counterargument just gives the incels more space in everyone's heads, and that's more than they deserve. I get that argument, and I think it makes sense in a vacuum. I just don't know that it makes sense in the world we've got. Where sympathizers (or grifters who'll use sympathy to get their vote) already have power, and even the minor monsters are sticking their heads outside the cave and smelling red meat.

[Macros]

I think when they start driving vans into crowds they suddenly gain promotion out of the junior league.

This I clearly a toxic subculture, and one day these noxious little fuckwits will be noxious little men, in god knows what jobs/positions etc

[Nicodimas]

 Macros, on 07 May 2018 - 03:38 AM, said:

I think when they start driving vans into crowds they suddenly gain promotion out of the junior league.

This I clearly a toxic subculture, and one day these noxious little fuckwits will be noxious little men, in god knows what jobs/positions etc

I have stated this story here before, but one of these types of people works at my friends company.

The upper level manager kept persuing this women who kept resisting his advances at work. He did stop that part after some time , however my bud dated the said girl. Said manager found a way to get my buddy demoted 2 fing levels. My buddy transfered to different part of the company and out of that office. Said manager still works at the company and is basically know for this stuff. Totally messed up, but what you said definitely rings a bell on that type of culture.

My bud was awesome at that job, but found success recently, but it set his career back for sure.

This post has been edited by Nicodimas: 07 May 2018 - 06:35 AM

[Primateus]

 Luv2B_Sassy, on 07 May 2018 - 01:56 AM, said:

Hmm, let's see if this makes it clearer. What I am saying is that some fringe groups, as ridiculous as they may seem individually, have symbiotic relationships with the toxic mainstream views that birthed them. An environment where "maybe humans aren't the main contributors to climate change" and "maybe the universe is 6000 years old" are legitimized, allows for a pocket where "maybe the Earth is flat" can thrive. Or "the moon landing was faked". And they all reinforce each other, even if the latter two never themselves become mainstream. Someone who believes those mainstream things benefits from the existence of those fringe things, even if they don't acknowledge them. They can score their points on Tucker Carlson's show or in their megachurch sermon by saying, "Obviously I don't believe the Earth is flat, but they do make a good point about how elites use science to manipulate us. They cherry pick information to push a secular agenda, and it's corrosive to the Judeo-Christian fabric of our nation." It really doesn't matter that flat earthers are wrong by even their standards, or that some flat earthers might consider themselves secularists; the point is that the scientists can't be trusted. It's especially effective if you can conflate science with the government.

Likewise, Incel culture is a fringe that benefits from and contributes to feedback loops with toxic mainstream views regarding sex-inequality (e.g. patriarchy, religious gender role prescriptions, entitlement to women's bodies) as well as lateral loops with other fringe-ish subcultures (e.g. gamergaters, channers, MRAs). Doesn't matter if incels are ridiculous. If a NYT columnist can say "their violence is wrong, but we might need to think about sex redistribution as a solution to a legitimate concern", then he's moderated himself by distancing himself from the extreme actions of the fringe group and legitimized the concerns of the fringe group at the same -- and reinforced the mainstream view that women are not men's equals, which the point of all of it. It's especially effective if you can conflate the breakdown of gender roles with the government.

Y'know, however ironic it might seem, I think PUAs help reinforce incel/mra/etc culture as well. They may belong to the incel community itself, but their view of women certainly seem to at least smell the same as incel. Which is, women are basically objects there for the pleasure of men.

[Abyss]

 Macros, on 07 May 2018 - 03:38 AM, said:

I think when they start driving vans into crowds they suddenly gain promotion out of the junior league.
...

This didn't upgrade the incels into the next Intifada.
It seems likely the Toronto van driver's incel thing is an aside to mental health issues that prompted him to drive the van into the crowd. He could have as likely been anti-jew, anti-black, or anti-gay to the extent that he obsessively blamed 'someone' for whatever sucked in his life.
Taking out a random selection of passerby on a random street isn't exactly striking a great blow against the Chad Thundercock hegemony and its Stacy dominatrixslaves.

[LinearPhilosopher]

 Abyss, on 07 May 2018 - 01:40 PM, said:

 Macros, on 07 May 2018 - 03:38 AM, said:

I think when they start driving vans into crowds they suddenly gain promotion out of the junior league.
...

This didn't upgrade the incels into the next Intifada.
It seems likely the Toronto van driver's incel thing is an aside to mental health issues that prompted him to drive the van into the crowd. He could have as likely been anti-jew, anti-black, or anti-gay to the extent that he obsessively blamed 'someone' for whatever sucked in his life.
Taking out a random selection of passerby on a random street isn't exactly striking a great blow against the Chad Thundercock hegemony and its Stacy dominatrixslaves.

at the end of the day, is there any real difference between someone who blows themselves up shouting alluha akbhar and our van driver? Both are clearly troubled people who latched onto a toxic ideology and commit atrocities. If not incels, didn't that norwegian guy, hans breivik, blame it on the marxists?

This post has been edited by LinearPhilosopher: 07 May 2018 - 03:01 PM

[worry]

I would just say, while "mentally ill" people -- an amorphous fairly catchall term -- can be attracted to toxic cultures and subculture groups, mental illness isn't a prerequisite for any of these things, including acts of violence. The subcultures change the people who participate in them, and a lot of people are already primed for that change through mainstream cultures. I guess the word I'm looking for is radicalization. In general that means the adoption or reinforcement of a toxic world view, but for some (and again, not necessarily people who are the 'most' mentally ill) that will mean violence.

[Morgoth]

 LinearPhilosopher, on 07 May 2018 - 03:01 PM, said:

 Abyss, on 07 May 2018 - 01:40 PM, said:

 Macros, on 07 May 2018 - 03:38 AM, said:

I think when they start driving vans into crowds they suddenly gain promotion out of the junior league.
...

This didn't upgrade the incels into the next Intifada.
It seems likely the Toronto van driver's incel thing is an aside to mental health issues that prompted him to drive the van into the crowd. He could have as likely been anti-jew, anti-black, or anti-gay to the extent that he obsessively blamed 'someone' for whatever sucked in his life.
Taking out a random selection of passerby on a random street isn't exactly striking a great blow against the Chad Thundercock hegemony and its Stacy dominatrixslaves.

at the end of the day, is there any real difference between someone who blows themselves up shouting alluha akbhar and our van driver? Both are clearly troubled people who latched onto a toxic ideology and commit atrocities. If not incels, didn't that norwegian guy, hans breivik, blame it on the marxists?

Cultural Marxists, or postmodernism as Jordan Peterson and others of that part of the far right call it these days. I guess they're trying to distance themselves a little from Breivik maybe, though the rhetoric is much the same.

At the end of the day though, any person willing to murder a number of people in the name of a conspiracy or another is more than a little insane I think. If Breivik, for instance, had murdered 70 kids because he thought they were shapeshifting lizards I doubt there'd been much doubt that he was a complete crazy person.

[Slow Ben]

Sounds like something a guy says to a girl who's trying to get her to sleep with him.

[Tiste Simeon]

US Senator John McCain dies aged 81 - http://www.bbc.co.uk...canada-45312217

[worry]

 Tiste Simeon, on 26 August 2018 - 04:13 AM, said:

US Senator John McCain dies aged 81 - http://www.bbc.co.uk...canada-45312217

Mods can we make sure this post is NEVER moved to the right thread?

[Tsundoku]

 Luv2B_Sassy, on 26 August 2018 - 04:32 AM, said:

 Tiste Simeon, on 26 August 2018 - 04:13 AM, said:

US Senator John McCain dies aged 81 - http://www.bbc.co.uk...canada-45312217

Mods can we make sure this post is NEVER moved to the right thread?

Agreed. It's like a rude but funny wake-up call.



Speaking of rude but funny: BK did you do something recently you may have reason to regret? More than usual, I mean.

Or are you 'asking for a friend'?

This post has been edited by Tsundoku: 26 August 2018 - 04:39 AM

[Tsundoku]

If you're worried about something medical, can I suggest you see a sexual health professional? In your shoes I'd rather feel a bit socially awkward (which is admittedly my default state) and have a checkup than keep it to myself and stress over it.

But if it's more social/psychological - ie you shouldn't have gone there - sorry but I can't help you with that. It's a case of 'do the crime, do the time', but learn from it and don't repeat it.

Damn that sexy voice of yours. You're a regular Barry White. Except small 'w' white. And alive. I was also going to say 'and a southerner', but a quick Google reveals ole Bazza was born in Galveston!

[Tiste Simeon]

 Luv2B_Sassy, on 26 August 2018 - 04:32 AM, said:

 Tiste Simeon, on 26 August 2018 - 04:13 AM, said:

US Senator John McCain dies aged 81 - http://www.bbc.co.uk...canada-45312217

Mods can we make sure this post is NEVER moved to the right thread?

Haha whoops 🙄

[Cause]

 PARADISE is here bitches, on 26 August 2018 - 01:13 AM, said:

Question for the Empire Dr’s: I’ve heard that it’s not as easy for a guy to contract whatever a woman has then that it’s easier for a woman to contract whatever a guy has without protection. Is this true or completely bullshit?

Generally this is true and a matter of a biology. I wouldn't rely on it as a man to say safe.