Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 feeder wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 feeder wrote:
Incel is just one of many on the long list of this guy's problems. He briefly joined and then was kicked out of the Canadian military. We have guys in the military who get winded just opening the door to Tim Horton's.

I was deployed with one of your F-18 squadrons this winter. While most of them were outstanding chaps... yes, your characterization of some of them is not wrong.

CF-18, tyvm, the C stands for 'cool'

I'm guessing this guy was a abit of a loon to be kicked out and not even used for a support or sat typing in a office.

 feeder wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 feeder wrote:
Incel is just one of many on the long list of this guy's problems. He briefly joined and then was kicked out of the Canadian military. We have guys in the military who get winded just opening the door to Tim Horton's.

I was deployed with one of your F-18 squadrons this winter. While most of them were outstanding chaps... yes, your characterization of some of them is not wrong.

CF-18, tyvm, the C stands for 'cool'

I'll one up the pedantry; they're actually CF-188.

And yeah, we have a bit of a...health problem in the CF.

As for the topic, the guy was in for two weeks, and then left. The release process takes a while, so on record it shows something like 2 months in service. There are two stories, where either he was asked/forced to quit, or did so on his own when he realized he didn't fit in/no one liked him/he couldn't hack it.

My friend literally lives near the corner. Really a tragedy.

 Blacksails wrote:

 feeder wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 feeder wrote:
Incel is just one of many on the long list of this guy's problems. He briefly joined and then was kicked out of the Canadian military. We have guys in the military who get winded just opening the door to Tim Horton's.

I was deployed with one of your F-18 squadrons this winter. While most of them were outstanding chaps... yes, your characterization of some of them is not wrong.

CF-18, tyvm, the C stands for 'cool'

I'll one up the pedantry; they're actually CF-188.

Ooof, hoisted by my own petard!

As for the topic, the guy was in for two weeks, and then left. The release process takes a while, so on record it shows something like 2 months in service. There are two stories, where either he was asked/forced to quit, or did so on his own when he realized he didn't fit in/no one liked him/he couldn't hack it.

I wonder if he blamed the other guys for that one, too?

 feeder wrote:


Ooof, hoisted by my own petard!

I live to serve.

I wonder if he blamed the other guys for that one, too?

I don't think someone of his...leanings is the kind to have any sort of introspection and realize most of his problems are of his own doing.

In Cel

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-43881931

I never knew this was a thing, but now I know I am saddened that I am not really that surprised.

 Mr. Burning wrote:
In Cel

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-43881931

I never knew this was a thing, but now I know I am saddened that I am not really that surprised.

Wow, this bit:

The attitudes of men who visit the boards vary widely, but online they frequently vent anger against sexually prolific men ("Chads") and women ("Stacys"). More generally, incel forums often include rants aimed at feminism and women.

is about the nicest thing someone could possibly write about what is basically a misogynistic, racist and psychopathic hellhole of a community.

So FB confirmed that was his post, well then time for an incel watchlist.

Honestly, if you ever read what incels write about it was sort of just a matter of time 'till something happened about this. Can't wait for the MGTOW mass murders.

It's a damn shame that mental health treatment is reactive.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Nah man - look at some data on dating sites. Men really are at a huge disadvantage in the game. There is no question that it does and will drive some men crazy.

When there is an equal number of men and women on the planet, and each relationship includes a man and a woman, it is a mathematical impossibility for men to be at a disadvantage compared to women.

What we see instead is observer bias. Consider a population of 10 men and 10 women, where the custom is for the men to approach the women. There's five women that all the guys want, and every guy contacts each of those girls. Those girls take the five most desirable men. On a simple level there's 5 men who have been rejected, which makes it look tougher for the men than the women. But note there's also 5 women who were never contacted at all, they were also rejected, just not actively.

 sebster wrote:

What we see instead is observer bias. Consider a population of 10 men and 10 women, where the custom is for the men to approach the women. There's five women that all the guys want, and every guy contacts each of those girls. Those girls take the five most desirable men. On a simple level there's 5 men who have been rejected, which makes it look tougher for the men than the women. But note there's also 5 women who were never contacted at all, they were also rejected, just not actively.

One time a guy told me that he had a friend who, in college, would literally go up to every woman he met and would ask them outright if they wanted to have sex with him. So the story goes, the friend actually wound up getting laid more than anyone else the dude knew. His conclusion was that quantity overcame quality, and just being confident and upfront enough counts for a lot too. This guy was a total stranger who was at a ren faire, dressed up vaguely as a jester. He imparted this wisdom to me apropos of nothing, and then just kind of walked off after I, surprised, kind of just stammered back a vague agreement that it sounded possible that it could have happened. It was probably in the top ten of strangest things that's ever happened to me.

Obviously I have no idea if his story is true, but that conversation certainly did happen, and that guy certainly was bizarre.

If his thesis is true, then the solution would be for each of the men to, in order of preference, approach each of the women, not just the upper half. Obviously there's economic considerations (time and money and probably some others), race conditions (because you want to beat the other guys to the most likely women to be amicable), and more than a couple risk factors all a part of why that's not done, and the guys would probably run into difficulty at least midway through the exercise as the odds that the women would notice the men talking to other women would scale as each event occurred. You could probably build quite the model of the most efficient way to do this. I think doing so was briefly a funny bit in A Beautiful Mind. I'm not sure if optimizing that would have moral implications.

I think it's really just about finding the subset of your type that also has you within the subset of their type. That's kind of stupidly obvious, but this is apparently enough of an issue that some people somewhere are having severe problems with it. Personally, I suspect that this is because in order for that to actually be successful, you'd have to know not only what your type is (which, speaking with other guys appears much harder for them to figure out than you'd think) and you'd also have to know yourself enough as well as the other person to know if you'd turn out to be a good fit for them. While that's not something you could possibly know when you walk up to a woman at the kinds of places where you do that sort of thing, I think that's the part that a lot of people don't get even somewhat into the relationship. I also think a world where it's not considered uncouth for anyone to just go up to anyone else and speak plainly about their intentions would be a real nice one to live in, but I'm sure that's one of those statements that would get me a "no gak" response.

Also a lot of people are dirty basement trolls. I firmly suspect that no one likes a dirty basement troll. But that is, at least in theory, a condition that is curable.

 sebster wrote:
When there is an equal number of men and women on the planet, and each relationship includes a man and a woman, it is a mathematical impossibility for men to be at a disadvantage compared to women.

What we see instead is observer bias. Consider a population of 10 men and 10 women, where the custom is for the men to approach the women. There's five women that all the guys want, and every guy contacts each of those girls. Those girls take the five most desirable men. On a simple level there's 5 men who have been rejected, which makes it look tougher for the men than the women. But note there's also 5 women who were never contacted at all, they were also rejected, just not actively.

You're not thinking like an incel/anti-feminist here.

First of all, the 5 women who were never contacted all are not women, they're some kind of monstrous beasts who are probably fat and therefore have a sexual market value of zero. Even four of the five women who got partners are probably low in value and just going to cheat with Chad, but it's better than nothing. Only the single hottest woman out of the group counts, so what we really see here is 90% of men being rejected by an entitled slut who thinks she has the right to condemn decent men to eternal virginity. If you aren't getting the hottest women then why bother living?

Second, all ten of the women are sleeping with the single most desirable man in the group (even if they use some pathetic cuck for their paycheck while cheating on the side), violating your assumption that there could possibly be five women who don't get contacted. Chad gets all of the women, 9/10 men get rejected and/or cucked.

In conclusion, dating is biased against men and if you aren't a billionaire with a huge you will die alone. feminism for denying good men the love they deserve.

One man directly interacting with only one women at a time means that in a given encounter, for each man that there's a boolean outcome. Either she accepts them or not. I wonder what the outcome would be if the woman was approached by two men simultaneously, creating a comparative situation where the possibilities were A, B, or null. Like, obviously, the odds of A and B individually are reduced by the presence of the other, but I wonder if the chances of success of A + B would be greater than the chance of the null outcome.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

First of all, the 5 women who were never contacted all are not women, they're some kind of monstrous beasts who are probably fat and therefore have a sexual market value of zero. Even four of the five women who got partners are probably low in value and just going to cheat with Chad, but it's better than nothing. Only the single hottest woman out of the group counts, so what we really see here is 90% of men being rejected by an entitled slut who thinks she has the right to condemn decent men to eternal virginity. If you aren't getting the hottest women then why bother living?

Second, all ten of the women are sleeping with the single most desirable man in the group (even if they use some pathetic cuck for their paycheck while cheating on the side), violating your assumption that there could possibly be five women who don't get contacted. Chad gets all of the women, 9/10 men get rejected and/or cucked.

In conclusion, dating is biased against men and if you aren't a billionaire with a huge you will die alone. feminism for denying good men the love they deserve.

Ugh. Sounds like dirty basement trolls then. And some utterly dysfunctional sense of insecurities.

 daedalus wrote:
Ugh. Sounds like dirty basement trolls then. And some utterly dysfunctional sense of insecurities.

The terrifying thing is that's the toned-down version of it, because I'd feel too dirty writing a more realistic version. But there's a previous post in the thread with screencaps of actual incel posts.

 daedalus wrote:
One time a guy told me that he had a friend who, in college, would literally go up to every woman he met and would ask them outright if they wanted to have sex with him. So the story goes, the friend actually wound up getting laid more than anyone else the dude knew. His conclusion was that quantity overcame quality, and just being confident and upfront enough counts for a lot too. This guy was a total stranger who was at a ren faire, dressed up vaguely as a jester. He imparted this wisdom to me apropos of nothing, and then just kind of walked off after I, surprised, kind of just stammered back a vague agreement that it sounded possible that it could have happened. It was probably in the top ten of strangest things that's ever happened to me.

Obviously I have no idea if his story is true, but that conversation certainly did happen, and that guy certainly was bizarre.

If his thesis is true, then the solution would be for each of the men to, in order of preference, approach each of the women, not just the upper half. Obviously there's economic considerations (time and money and probably some others), race conditions (because you want to beat the other guys to the most likely women to be amicable), and more than a couple risk factors all a part of why that's not done, and the guys would probably run into difficulty at least midway through the exercise as the odds that the women would notice the men talking to other women would scale as each event occurred. You could probably build quite the model of the most efficient way to do this. I think doing so was briefly a funny bit in A Beautiful Mind. I'm not sure if optimizing that would have moral implications.

There is definitely something to it. Thing is, women are people too. They have their own unique preferences, and their own day to day issues, so on any given day there's every chance that if you proposition enough girls you'll stumble upon one who just really wants a fling and who thinks you're attractive enough.

I'm not for one second saying anyone should look at the Pick Up Artist thing, it's some really nasty crap that's a gateway drug to the InCel stuff this murderous donkey-cave was in to. However... one thing the PUA community does is train men to actually just ask, over and over again, if a girl is interested. By teaching a bunch of made up psychological nonsense, they turn asking a girl out in to more of a process than a personal act, when you get rejected the first 20 times it isn't a soul crushing rejection but just part of the process. As a result, it gets men to just keep asking, which by the simple process of shots on goal means they will meet with some success, even though all the individual psychological tricks are gibberish that only hurt their chances.

I think it's really just about finding the subset of your type that also has you within the subset of their type. That's kind of stupidly obvious, but this is apparently enough of an issue that some people somewhere are having severe problems with it. Personally, I suspect that this is because in order for that to actually be successful, you'd have to know not only what your type is (which, speaking with other guys appears much harder for them to figure out than you'd think) and you'd also have to know yourself enough as well as the other person to know if you'd turn out to be a good fit for them.

I like that, finding your type of subset that matches with their subset. There's another part though, because as well as having all these varied subsets, there is also something of a hierarchy. There are girls that almost every guy will go for, so you have to have some really good features to be in with a chance. A lot of guys will get pissy that some girls won't look at a guy just because he's a bit overweight and don't dress that well. But those guys never look at the girls who are a bit overweight and don't dress that well. It isn't a strict hierarchy, our preferences are all a little different from each other, so there's that element of matching subsets you mentioned.

So it's a combination of the two things, knowing what you actually want and what you are and who that appeals to, and being realistic about who is likely to date you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
You're not thinking like an incel/anti-feminist here.

That's possibly the nicest thing anyone's said about me

First of all, the 5 women who were never contacted all are not women, they're some kind of monstrous beasts who are probably fat and therefore have a sexual market value of zero. Even four of the five women who got partners are probably low in value and just going to cheat with Chad, but it's better than nothing. Only the single hottest woman out of the group counts, so what we really see here is 90% of men being rejected by an entitled slut who thinks she has the right to condemn decent men to eternal virginity. If you aren't getting the hottest women then why bother living?

The really sad thing is that so many guys are chasing the hottest girl not just out of personal attraction, but for the ego boost of being the guy with the hottest girl.

There was a great Infinite Monkey cage episode about love, relationships and sex from a few years ago; one of the panellists pointed out that mathematically most people end up with less than their best match, because our insecurities mean we undersell ourselves and miss out on better partners because they’re too attractive/too intelligent/wouldn’t be interested, etc.

Seb’s and Daedalus’ examples are actually the statistically correct way to find a mate; start at the top and ask everybody. Of course that takes balls of steel and a willingness to be rejected, a lot, but technically correct is the best form of correct?

As far as the Incel thing, wow. I knew humanity has a pretty nasty side, but I never imagined that level of entitlement and bigotry was a thing. And in Canada, of all places! Well, you learn something everyday, as they say. Sometimes wish you didn’t, but hey ho...

If you ever want to make your eyes bleed, reddit has a group called Inceltears. There people basically collect the most outrageous and demented things said on incel forums. It gives a pretty accurate view of how vile the incel community actually gets. These aren't 'rants' as the BBC calls it, its an ideology, a worldview, a subculture formed thanks to the internet.

The ironic thing is, if they really didn't want to be virgins they could pay for it. But it really isn't about virginity, its about some wacked out red pill "women should be throwing themselves at me" levels of delusion. They don't even say women honestly, they have all kinds of terms to devalue them like "femoids".

 Jadenim wrote:
There was a great Infinite Monkey cage episode about love, relationships and sex from a few years ago; one of the panellists pointed out that mathematically most people end up with less than their best match, because our insecurities mean we undersell ourselves and miss out on better partners because they’re too attractive/too intelligent/wouldn’t be interested, etc.

But what if your partner is also insecure and underselling themselves?

Maybe it's more that there are people who undersell themselves and people who oversell themselves, and the undersellers will all be in relationships, while the oversellers will only be in a relationship if they happen to stumble on to someone who undersells themselves at least as much as the overseller is overselling himself.

I swear that sentence makes sense.

Seb’s and Daedalus’ examples are actually the statistically correct way to find a mate; start at the top and ask everybody.

That wasn't quite what I was getting at, but it's way more concise and probably a lot more practical than the stuff I was talking about, so I'm just going to pretend its what I was saying


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
The ironic thing is, if they really didn't want to be virgins they could pay for it. But it really isn't about virginity, its about some wacked out red pill "women should be throwing themselves at me" levels of delusion. They don't even say women honestly, they have all kinds of terms to devalue them like "femoids".

Excellent point, it isn't about sex, its about status. More precisely, its about status as defined by a particularly toxic masculine culture.

I've seen that they refer to intimacy as "interaction with holes". I mean for real, this is the sort of thing fascist regimes do to language to dehumanize those they want to other.

fething depressing gak. I hope this subculture dies out ASAP. I can remember being a lonely and insecure young fella and I can definitely remember feeling like I was never going to in a relationship with anyone. But I didn't have someone basically telling me "Yeah, you're right, but did you also know this is basically a giant conspiracy against you?". Who knows, if I had, maybe I'd be on one of these fething fora now. Gah.

 sebster wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
The ironic thing is, if they really didn't want to be virgins they could pay for it. But it really isn't about virginity, its about some wacked out red pill "women should be throwing themselves at me" levels of delusion. They don't even say women honestly, they have all kinds of terms to devalue them like "femoids".

Excellent point, it isn't about sex, its about status. More precisely, its about status as defined by a particularly toxic masculine culture.

Yes, beyond toxic masculinity it even crosses into racial and eugenic territory. They think of themselves as the best men that the world just doesn't want to accept. Its a massive victim complex for people with equally massive ego's: Incels can do no wrong, incels are the best, anything an incel does is the fault of society forcing them to do it. This is a community that actually celebrates a man that killed 6 women and now a man that killed 10 people and they are dying to find out how many of those were young women.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:
I've seen that they refer to intimacy as "interaction with holes". I mean for real, this is the sort of thing fascist regimes do to language to dehumanize those they want to other.

fething depressing gak. I hope this subculture dies out ASAP. I can remember being a lonely and insecure young fella and I can definitely remember feeling like I was never going to in a relationship with anyone. But I didn't have someone basically telling me "Yeah, you're right, but did you also know this is basically a giant conspiracy against you?". Who knows, if I had, maybe I'd be on one of these fething fora now. Gah.

That's because they don't consider women to be human, women can never be incels. Incels think of other people like we think of say chimpanzees. Funny that you mention fascism, because it basically has traits of it such as a diehard belief that they are the (genetically) superior men.

I don't think its going to die out soon. Its an up and coming thing like the red pill people. There will always be the dissaffectionate or delusional to prey on. As they self impose this on themselves and actively work against ending their 'incel' life. The internet has just given them a larger reach and with things like this in the news it will likely only attract more.

And being a lonely and insecure young person is something almost everyone goes through at some point I think. Relationships never get easier. The difference is the mentality towards it. A few years ago Dakka had a thread about dating/sex, you saw others who had it difficult but by the end they managed to get into relationships or lose their virginity. You just have to get lucky meeting the right person/people.

Sure, and in my case, moving out of my gak hole village and to university meant suddenly I met a lot of people who I could talk to more freely and so on, and that lead to romantic interactions.

It's a damn good point you make about them not considering women to be human beings. Worse than that is how they see women that they don't find attractive- as in, they may as well not exist at all in their world view.

I've been dredging the sewers of the internet since this attack, reading some of the garbage they spew. But a lot of them, when they divulge information about themselves, are around 18-20 years old. That gives me hope that they might grow out of it and change their ways, but then there are these insanely misanthropic 30+ year olds essentially grooming and radicalizing them. It's fething scary, and these guys are very manipulative.

Yes, their attitude towards 'less pretty' women, while hilariously ironic considering how they themselves often look (there was this one incel who never showered as a middle finger to society ), is a symptom of their massive ego. Why should the best settle for less? That guy who killed six people referred to himself as the closest person to a god on earth.

About growing out of it, I have my doubts. While they might lose the incel status, I have a hard time believing people who willingly got involved with such an utterly toxic worldview can just go back to normal. Those who get out seem like prime targets for the red pill movement.

Some do move past, I have one friend on Discord who used to be an incel, but I will agree a lot keep those thoughts and worldview.

You know, it explains a lot about people that this sort of thing exists. Both the Incel thing and the mass murder because of it thing.

 Peregrine wrote:

 daedalus wrote:
Ugh. Sounds like dirty basement trolls then. And some utterly dysfunctional sense of insecurities.

The terrifying thing is that's the toned-down version of it, because I'd feel too dirty writing a more realistic version. But there's a previous post in the thread with screencaps of actual incel posts.

I had deliberately avoided it because I tend to already fixate too much on how much of a horrible idea the internet was. But I'll stare into the abyss again.

Gonna wrap my notes in a spoiler because no one needs to read that stuff. If they click the button it's their fault.


feth. Yeah. I've kind of been sitting here a while, still trying to figure out what the hell I just read. I want to say that these people are just the male version of "tumblrettes", but so then I guess there's crazy and angry and ranting, and then there's whatever the hell this is. And apparently they have consolidated communities?

Is there any chance this is just one psycho that hurt people caused by an elaborate 4chan fake-community-thing? Yeah, I'm sure I know the answer.

:(


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Some do move past, I have one friend on Discord who used to be an incel, but I will agree a lot keep those thoughts and worldview.

What caused him to change? How do you change someone like that?

 daedalus wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Some do move past, I have one friend on Discord who used to be an incel, but I will agree a lot keep those thoughts and worldview.

What caused him to change? How do you change someone like that?

For him it was as simple as actually engaging in social situations we pushed him into. And with that the slow realization that not everyone is competing for sex. Took a while but he sort of came to an Epiphany. A lot of the reasons that people fall into this stuff is the same reasons a lot of people who didn't learn racism got pushed towards neo-nazism, they feel left out and marginalized, and this gives them something to blame. I am willing to bet that none of these guys have any female friends, they don't seem to realize that men and women are effectively the same.

Got some more gems here for those of you who want to keep staring into the abyss.



The incel movement is weirdly split between young naive autistic men who can't figure sex/relationships out, and the equivalent men ten years older who never did and consequently blame women for it. The younger ones seem to post depressive stuff (which is fair enough) because they feel crappy about the 'Chads' at school/college getting laid whilst they don't. Meanwhile, the older ones have usually latched onto some sort of warped pickup artist methodology and sit there Emperor Palpatine King Nerd style whispering misogynistic crap in the younger ones ears; on account of the fact that it lets them feel validated about themselves and their own failures.

'Yes, yes. Let the hate flow through you. It's not your fault you were born inadequate, it's natural to want a relationship. It's those women, their whiteknights and their cucks. They're the ones stopping from getting what you want, what you need...'

etcetc

Awww, the incel wants to be treated like a terrorist. This should be arranged.

That last one is utterly chilling.

Seems like a bunch of sad little edgelords trying to one-up each other in their virtual circlejerk.

What a world.