This is a really weird distinction you’re making. Are you saying that if you’re merely physically attracted to someone based on their smile, eyes, or laugh, that you don’t want to have sex with them? Do you have to see tits before you can feel true sexual attraction?
This seems odd to me. There are lots of people, both male and female, that I find attractive based on their smile, eyes, or laugh, but that doesn’t mean that I want to have sex with them.
OK, but that seems like a difference between acknowledging that someone is attractive, and being attracted to them, the latter of which is the phrasing Mijin was using. Are you attracted to both men and women?
You can also be attracted to someone in the sense that you like looking at them without wanting to have sex with them. They could be beautiful like a painting and I don’t want to have sex with paintings. However, I would agree that people usually use this to mean sexual attraction.
I’m out of this thread, I think it’s gotten very silly.
If anyone has any further questions, please PM me.
I’m not really seeing the distinction here. There are people that I like to be around more than others, and it’s not solely based on their story telling skills. I like to say funny things in certain circumstances around certain people just because I enjoy some people’s smiles.
Just because I find someone’s physical appearance to be pleasing does not mean that I want to have sex with them.
Sure, though I’m only really sexually interested in women, for the most part.
But would you really phrase it that way? “I’m quite attracted to Joe; he’s got an amazing jawline. What? No, I’m straight, why?” As opposed to, “Yeah, I’m not surprised Joe’s dating again already; he’s an attractive guy.”
No, but that’s just awkward and contrived.
How about, “I love when Joe laughs, his smile lights up the room. He’s half the reason I come to these dinner parties.”
So now you’re not using any variation of attracted/attractive at all. I agree that what I wrote is awkward; that’s the point. If I, as a straight woman, said I was really attracted to Joe because he has an amazing jawline, that would not be awkward, but people could be forgiven for thinking I might want to sleep with him.
I guess one can technically be “incel” without developing the hate and misogyny and blaming others or identifying with that group, and that would make one a “good incel.”
However, I do believe that “good incels” are at high risk of being radicalized by how they are treated - often unprovoked. And this sort of insult is one of the few that are pretty much acceptable these days. If you have an opinion that someone doesn’t like, being called an incel or saying you need to get laid or your opinion doesn’t matter because you don’t fuck is a standard comeback that is often met with applause.
People want to belong and mostly not be alone, and being judged by society that you aren’t worthy of companionship or even human touch and then basically that you are “genetically inferior” (In what other context is that really acceptable?) for procreation sucks. I disagree with a lot of “blackpill incel” logic and conclusions, but the reality is that you could not have any of the traits listed in the OP and basically be an average or decent looking person with intelligence, hobbies, health, hygiene, and so on and pretty much find yourself locked out of the “sexual marketplace.” If you show any sympathy or any attempts to understand that group of people, you may find yourself shamed or attacked. I find it bizarre, personally.
Yeah, the “street use” of the term has gotten extremely toxic in just the way you describe. It is not good.
Oh come on, for decades at least sexists have been jeering at feminists as “unfuckable” and even “unrapeable”, “fat hairy-legged” monsters who only object to sexism and misogyny because they’re angry and bitter that they can’t get a man. That sort of insult is still considered very acceptable by many sexists.
AFAICT nobody is shaming or attacking anybody for trying to be sympathetic or understanding towards people who feel unloved or lonely in general.
But “blackpill logic” isn’t just about feeling unloved or lonely. It’s a particular form of delusional misogynist rationalization of one’s alone status that denounces women as evil, subhuman, unworthy of respect, and somehow at the same time controlling the world for their own benefit.
If your reaction to conclusions like that is merely that you “disagree” with them, but your priority is still showing “sympathy” and “attempts to understand” towards people who promote them, then that is some pretty lukewarm allyship towards the actual victims of this phenomenon.
The “toxicity” of the term “incel” at this point is entirely self-inflicted. The people who explicitly self-identify as “incels” have voluntarily associated themselves with a hate movement. If they want sympathy and understanding for their feelings of aloneness and insecurity, then they need to stop calling themselves “incels”.
The phrase “good incel” is fundamentally a contradiction in terms, like the phrase “good white nationalist”. Of course there’s nothing intrinsically immoral about being white, or about caring about one’s nation, just like there’s nothing intrinsically immoral about being celibate and wishing not to be. But at this point the identity “white nationalist” is so closely tied to toxic racial antagonism and bigotry that there’s no meaningful way for good people to claim that identity. And the same holds true for the identity “incel”.
That is totally true and at the same time not a good counterargument to what actualliberalnotoneofthose just said. (Or at least not as posed). Being treated like that certainly radicalized some of the women whose embrace of feminism didn’t start off radical or particularly polarized. “I promoted the view that women are people and equal, and for that I was called an unrapeable fat hairly-legged monster and called bitter and angry… men are so pathetic with their fragile egos and now that I see what they’re like I have no use for them, really!” You don’t think hostile treatment could have a similar polarizing effect on males making reciprocal complaints about the male situations?
Once it starts getting hurled as an all purpose slur, no it’s not. Incel is thrown at men who make no claim to be one. I’ve had it done to myself. So something I never took up in the first place is thrown back at me. That’s not self inflicted.
I don’t doubt you, but IME it’s not common. I’ve never heard it used in any context myself.
No, I didn’t claim that all the uses of the toxic term “incel” are cases of “self-inflicted” damage. What I’m saying is that the toxicity of the term itself—the fact that is almost universally considered an insult instead of a neutral descriptor—is a result of the deliberate shittiness of people who explicitly self-identify as “incel”. That’s the “self-inflicted” part.
Not everybody who gets called an incel deserves that insult, of course. But the fact that the specific term “incel” is an insult in the first place is the fault of the self-identified “incels” who deliberately chose to associate that term with their misogynist “redpill” and similar rhetoric.
Similarly, not everyone who gets called a “white nationalist” in an angry argument is actually a white nationalist or a racist. But the fact that the term “white nationalist” is generally perceived as an insult implying racist bigotry is the fault of self-identified “white nationalists” themselves. They’re the ones who’ve been deliberately peddling their racist bigotry under that label.
I think you’ve got it backward.
You are fortunate to not have to visit toxic environments.
I haven’t heard the term in the wild in over a decade, but back when I worked food service and other such jobs, it was used as an insult that went beyond just calling someone a loser who couldn’t get laid. It wasn’t frequent, but it certainly was out there.
So, as to the OP, I can see where they are coming from in the belief that there are “good incels” in that there are people who are called incels that are not bad toxic people, just socially awkward or otherwise unable to as said, “get laid.”
I was going to say, “form and maintain healthy relationships”, but most of the people in that environment, even though they were having sex, were not in healthy relationships at all.
And I can see how that environment can toxicity and radicalize people. You are already in an position where a significant amount of society looks down on you for your job, and the other people in that position are looking down on you as well for your lack of love life. The guy bragging about pulling a “hat trick” last night is certainly objectifying women as much or more than a potential or even full blown incel, and he’s probably lying about it as well.
There is only a certain amount of self loathing that most people will accept before they start looking for others to blame, and when someone in this position finds an online community of people in similar circumstance, it gets toxic quickly.
I do think that most even self identified incels can be de-radicalized rather quickly if they find themselves in healthier environments, they aren’t bad people, they just have internalized some bad ideas.
By all means elaborate. I don’t understand what you’re driving at.
Sorry, actually I think I got it backward. I read it too quickly and got a bit twisted. What you said is fine.