Whenever people are like oh we need to empathize w/ incels, care about their feelings blah blah, I just think about what Lundy Bancroft said about abusers.
They need to learn empathy, and this excessive focus on their feelings is a barrier to them learning empathy.
🐦🔗: https://twitter.com/iHateCogsci/status/1610409758120361984
https://sb-ex6e14yir4.b-cdn.net/media_attachments/files/109/628/430/505/308/353/original/db370a81de5f1eee.png
But this is step 1 of "offering an alternative": recognizing that it takes different skillsets/social conditions to get them well-adjusted, because for whatever reason they're starting from a different psychological basis.
I agree that to some extent the whole idea of focusing on these guys is counterproductive. But focusing on them is not the same as making sure that our movement is equipped to deal with them effectively, without having to relive this generational moment over and over again.
They feel alienated from society because it feels unlivably complex, and they happen to fit enough heuristics of the power group that they feel entitled to deal with that complexity by violently maximizing their adherence to power.
The right takes advantage of this by a) being in power already, b) being the same kind of people, and c) happy to use these guys to further their own interests. So they offer the easy, accessible, lowest-common-denominator solution of just catering to that entitlement.
Of course "Be a good person" doesn't effectively compete. But that doesn't have to be the only narrative the left offers. We need the next step, a narrative that starts with "Be a good person" and builds it into a competitively epic cognitive reward mechanism.
The best way to teach people empathy is to tell them their feelings don't matter and then ridicule them about a problem that causes them deep emotional pain
Don't forget comparing them to abusers!
Some decent ideas in there, but damn, what a :fidel-wut: at the start
Honestly just think this is a problem created by the internet drastically changing our society.
To completely oversimplify, for the unlucky less attractive people dating has always been a sort of numbers thing, the more people they meet the more chances of clicking with someone on an emotional level.
The problem is that the internet has drastically changed all the "natural" ways people used to meet and we've never really resolved the fact that massive amounts of socialisation online has had the effect of removing socialisation in person where meeting people and making up these numbers would happen.
The best way to stop incels, is for them to stop being incels by meeting people and making those connections that ultimately leads to the celibate part stopping. The problem is that they do not, and that the internet has given them the power to meet as few people as possible and then to complain about it. Then they fester in their hateful spaces only making themselves more and more unattractive and hating the world.
I don't have a solution though, they need to meet more people, a lot more people, until they click with one. And the internet has moved a lot of people online instead of offline. I know pua types say that shit too but w/e I'm not advocating for the scum shit I'm just saying meeting more people definitely helps.
What were incels before the internet? Hermits?
I don’t have a solution though, they need to meet more people, a lot more people, until they click with one.
I think the whole obsession with "finding the right one" is part of the problem. What they need is more flexibility to enter, move through, and leave communities without the goal of extracting a person from them into their patriarchal household. It's crystalizing into a specific mold/role (or failing to) that causes them to get stuck where they end up with no way out, hung up on their failures. Which is why we see them come up with all these stereotypes like Chad, Stacey, the Woke, Groomers, etc. People having a healthy relationship with a community don't assign themselves into these strict stereotypical groups that they have to define themselves by. They just exist as themselves.
What were incels before the internet? Hermits?
Abusive husbands, hermits, cannon fodder, "bachelors"/brothel-goers
I don't disagree, but there's still a desire for an emotional connection and the "celibate" part here is still a typically 1 to 1 interaction though not always. As are the relationships that lead to that.
I think the "patriarchal household" is actually much further down the line than the hanky panky and fooling around that would fix these people if they could simply meet the right people to get it.
I think the “patriarchal household” is actually much further down the line than the hanky panky and fooling around that would fix these people if they could simply meet the right people to get it.
god, I would kill to get some hanky panky and fooling around. alas, I am in the same position of being unable to ever get it, despite not being a misogynistic shithead like actual incels.
I don’t have a solution though, they need to meet more people, a lot more people, until they click with one. And the internet has moved a lot of people online instead of offline. I know pua types say that shit too but w/e I’m not advocating for the scum shit I’m just saying meeting more people definitely helps.
Well like, I'm probably the most obstinate poster on here about this issue coming from the direction of being, well admittedly incel-adjacent; in that I have basically all the exact same fucking problems that they do (well, mostly I'm pretty sure), and that I'm not willing to accept the proposition that the particular Social Model that we presently have vis-a-vis the fundamental nature of interpersonal relationships (1) is actually necessarily the best one.
The most useful thing that I think that I could have, is if there was some kind of organization that I could go to that would take an active & specific interest in my integration into some kind of definite community. As far as I know that's not a thing that exists in any way right now; y'know that's not what any "Leftist Org" that I'm aware of exists to do, or is really in any way set up to accomplish, and even if it were I'm pretty sure COVID has completely torpedoed that potential regardless. The only exception that I can think of is maybe Evangelical Church Groups, and organizations like the Mormons here in the US; which may go some way to explaining their outsized social & political influence beyond just the Oil Money (though to be fair they have a hell of a lot of that I'm sure).
Now, granted; the fact that the only real organizations that I could point to that might be willing to actually serve that function are reactions is a legitimate cause for caution, I'd imagine. If set-up poorly, you absolutely can create a situation in which people who absolutely do not want to, or otherwise should not be around each other, end up getting essentially socially coerced into carrying on relationships; and that's something to be wary of. But honestly, I don't see how you grow "The Left", or really I should say a mass base of politically aware, active & committed Socialists without also trying to build a specific & definite community around that concept. And if you're doing one I don't see why you wouldn't also want to do the other.
- That they are at their base essentially Open Contracts between ostensibly Free & Equal agents, not at all unlike an employment contract really. And really if there's a through-line that exists between the old functioning of Patriarchy as being a system of the direct ownership of women & girls by male heads of households to today, I think that describing the current situation as something closer to an employment contract is not necessarily the worst metaphor. Either way, almost no-one is either of these things (neither being free from material constraints of life, the constraints of social expectation, or being materially equal to each other in any given capacity), but that doesn't come up in the question of whether or not this is a good model to base things on.
You might have the cart before the horse. First you have tightly knit communities that value each other as people then they develop political identities that reject atomization and placing thee individual above all else.
First you have tightly knit communities that value each other as people then they develop political identities that reject atomization and placing thee individual above all else.
The problem is precisely that we don't have those; and also the people thrown off the land, out of their homes in the countryside & into the cities in the late-1700's, and mid-1800's also didn't have them when the first round of industrial revolutions happened. They built social clubs (which would then develop into tight-knit communities) around their identities as, yes aggrieved workers after the fact, and then leveraged that into political goals.
What I'm saying specifically is that I think we should attempt to follow that trajectory.
The most useful thing that I think that I could have, is if there was some kind of organization that I could go to that would take an active & specific interest in my integration into some kind of definite community.
Sounds like a sort of adult scouts organisation? Not necessarily focused on scout activities but yeah.
I'm wondering if this would naturally be resolved if kids had more of this. Like the Young Pioneers in the ussr. I have a feeling fewer people would fall into inceldom if they had social organisations focused on teaching kids socialisation in the modern day.
Maybe that's what's missing? A modernised variant of orgs that used to provide this kind of easy and widespread socialisation.
I think the point is moreso that incels need to learn empathy. Classic example on the fediverse right now is reactionaries being vocally against blocking instances based on politics. They can only perceive their shrinking access to content and consider that the greatest affront in the entire debacle. But they don't care at all that leaving bad instances unblocked leads to people being emotionally abused by strangers. And when you try to explain this to them, they weigh their own access to content above that of the safety of others, thinking that those groups just need to get a thicker skin. In this case, the people arguing against other users protecting themselves don't have empathy for those less privileged than themselves.
Please post your 12 Rules for Life Below this Line:
=====================================
- Cats outside
- Ass smeared with shid
- Don’t touch grass, grass is killing the earth
- Do not cum :volcel-kamala:
1 touch grass
2 get a hobby
3 wear clothes that fit
4 learn juuuuust enough about astrology/tarot/wicca to have low-stakes conversations about them
5 learn to love "the game" without needing to "win" to feel accomplished
6 buy experiences, not things
4
bro is completely fucking ran through lmfao
what is 5? Is "the game" referring to the trash idea of "the game" of picking up girls?
I apply 5 to everything. You're not going to learn piano by forcing yourself to practice over and over, feeling miserable until you get good results - but if you learn to like the act of practice, then you'll end up doing it a lot more and thinking about it when you're not doing it and before you know it you'll have a year of playing behind you and you'll be really good.
You can apply that to talking to people and dating too. PUA types are all about getting their number as high as possible, but that's loser shit - if you instead just like talking to people and flirting and keep it casual and cool, you're far more likely to hook up or get a date or whatever your relationship goals are.
Nice. I would (somewhat ruefully) add "your country's most popular professional sport" to the list in #4.
4 learn juuuuust enough about astrology/tarot/wicca to have low-stakes conversations about them
lol. why?
well, that still seems oddly specific. I've never even met a new-age/hippie woman.
guess I'd do it if I met them though
Maybe it'd be worth rewriting to a more general version about keeping an open mind about stuff and putting some effort into learning about and taking seriously things other people like even if you don't "get it". I wrote it that way because I was thinking about the thread on the lack of lefty dating advice so I was thinking about things I would specifically say to a teen/young adult cis het man.
-
Go to college and do unpaid internships in DC.
-
:vote:
-
Give money to dems when they email you
-
Volunteer to knock on doors for moderate candidates
-
Block toxic bernie bros online
-
Don’t let your hormones make you susceptible to bros and their leftist misogynist ideas - listen to Gloria Steinem
-
Pay for your subscriptions, don’t freeload with archive.is
-
Pay your debt
-
Tip your landlxrd, the good karma will come back
-
Listen to NPR and crooked media
-
Mix liqour and prescription drugs for best results
-
Don’t under any circumstances join a union
-
Okay I'll try give a serious one:
- Avoid addiction and addictive substances/things
- Communicate honestly and openly with those you love, be it friends, family, or your partner.
- Don't engage in discrimination or bigotry towards others.
- Don't engage in society's objectification and dehumanization of fellow people, as far as possible.
- Drink lots of water
- Make your bed/clean your room (yes, I know :jordan-eboy-peterson: )
- Exercise, focus on improving the weak points of your body (in terms of function, not aesthetics) and keeping the strong parts strong.
- Avoid giving your time to those who don't value it appropriately, as far as possible (we have to work after all).
- Go outside, get that vitamin D.
- Greet others and be polite, don't skip over the "Hello, how are yous" (considered very rude to skip this where I live).
- Be optimistic in your heart, but always prepare for worst case scenarios to avoid being burnt.
- Appreciate what you have when you have it, you never know when it's going to go.
-
Your lungs are the bellows to the fire of your body. When you are uncertain, overwhelmed, nervous, breath slowly and deeply.
-
Communication is fundamental to being a person, but not does not come easy. What people say does not always correspond well to what they mean. Be generous in your interpretations, assume the best, and query politely.
-
You are not pre-programmed by instinct or DNA or brain wiring. Habits, behaviors, and expectations are learned. You can always learn something new, if you want to.
-
But focusing on them is not the same as making sure that our movement is equipped to deal with them effectively
equipped, you say? :maduro-gift:
Katana of empathy does 2x damage against beings with the misogyny attribute.
The right takes advantage of this by a) being in power already, b) being the same kind of people, and c) happy to use these guys to further their own interests. So they offer the easy, accessible, lowest-common-denominator solution of just catering to that entitlement.
There are lots of left wing incels, as the saying goes, right wing sexists view women as private property, left wing sexists as public property. There are many "left" wing figures online that appeal to incels. Your vaush type guys for instance. I think a study even showed that incels were split fairly equally among right/left views. So I reject the idea that it's a right/left thing. There are plenty of left wing misogynists, it just presents differently to the mask off right wing stuff.
38.85% of the incel participants were right-leaning, 44.70% were left-leaning, and 17.47% were centrist.
A smaller proportion than would be expected by chance identified as white (63.58%), with 36.42% identifying as BIPOC.
17% of incels in the study were not in school, working, or in training, compared to only 9% of non-incels.
36% of incels had a high school level education or lower, compared to 20% of non-incels.
50% of incels reported living with their parents or a caregiver, compared to 27% of non-incels.
75% of incels in the study were clinically diagnosable with severe or moderate depression, and 45% with severe anxiety.
So if you take the study at face value, incels need to leave the nest (or leave their parents influence if they still live with them) and start building their own life, as well as getting therapy. Is this possible under capitalism for most young people? No. So they fall back on the misogyny present throughout their upbringing and society to self validate their "black pill" views.
Do incels need to lean empathy? I don't know, they clearly have empathy for themselves and fellow incels or men they perceive as victims, they need to apply that empathy to others though. But incels don't believe others are worthy of their empathy, because they're living the good life or are priveleged according to the incel worldview. This especially applies to attractive women according to incels worldview.
It's a survey, so I guess they mean more liberal or socially progressive than left wing. It's still revealing that your average incel isn't some stereotypical chud.
I would too, but many on the left don't believe or practice that, even if they say it.
Look at how Marx and Einstein treated their wives, look at all the leftists in the past that were massive "womanizers", hell even today there are lots of "left wing" men that engage in poor behaviour towards women, it's an ongoing issue and to say "well those aren't real leftists, because obviously if you're left wing you would consider women your equal", avoids addressing the issue.
I think right-wing incel culture goes beyond just people who can't form relationships and includes the "guy who hates his wife." Yes, people who can't form relationships exist among liberals and communists, but they aren't as often being drawn into the black hole of patriarchal terrorism, they're often just sex pests.
Like a lot of Jan 6 people, Proud Boys, and I'd bet the power grid terrorists are married or in long term relationships, but they share culture with incels who feed their toxic views on femininity, bipoc, and lgbt people. The true incels stoke the engine and the faux incel collaborators widen the scope of the culture and make it mainstream.
I would say that those people in your last paragraph are not incels, they are men who hold "redpill"/bigoted beliefs. If you call them an incel they'll laugh in your face, because they are not involuntary celibates, and their entire social circle shares the same bigoted beliefs as them. Using the word incel used to describe these men who hate women in all contexts is a bit misleading. Many men in relationships hold this traditional redpill mindset, saying that it's just incels minimises the issue of how prevelant toxic mindsets are.
That's fair on a technical level, but I think on a practical level they both are so intertwined that to understand one side you have to understand the other. Redpilled guys feed the toxic mindsets of incels and often grift them, and incels create a lot of the online content that redpill guys consume. If you got rid of incels but left the redpills behind, they would create more incels. If you get rid of the redpills, the incels would eventually draw more of them back into 4chan-esque sites. It's kind of in the same vein as the aphorism that under patriarchy, the greatest abusers of men are other men.
