Male Centrism at the Dope

[Shodan]

@Kimstu

Um, how about, for example:

• In what ways does our culture treat women as somehow responsible for the emotional status and self-esteem of these “angry losers”?

• To what extent are these “angry losers” given a pass on a lot of their misogynistic rhetoric due to entrenched sexist attitudes in society?

• Why do we tend, as LHoD noted, to refer to these men dismissively as mere “angry losers” who “suck” rather than as “terrorists”?

I am assuming you posted these in the incel thread. If not, what prevented you? If you did, what prevented anyone from discussing them with you?

To LHoD - OK, fine, you can add that incels are as bad as al-Queda. What does that have to do with “what do folks look like before they join”?

Regards,
Shodan

[treis]

@Kimstu

I think the point is that the thread was clearly supposed to be about the self-identified openly misogynistic “incel movement”, and various jackasses kept trying to focus it instead on their preferred interpretation of “incel” as “awkward but basically decent guy who can’t get a date, poor guy, isn’t that a pity, shouldn’t something be done about that”.

I don’t think it’s fair to say that thread was clearly supposed to be about anything in particular. The OP was nothing more than “what the hell is this?”. If there truly was a specific desired discussion it was communicated rather poorly. Admittedly I only read the first couple pages so perhaps it went off the rails at some point, but I didn’t really see a hijack.

Besides, I’m not sure how that proves this threads point. monstro and Brookstick both had a lot of posts in the first few pages and they are women. Even if that thread was hijacked it wasn’t due to a lack of participation by women.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Shodan

To LHoD - OK, fine, you can add that incels are as bad as al-Queda. What does that have to do with “what do folks look like before they join”?

It has to do with how we respond.

Dudes that spend all day in their parents’ basement smoking pot and playing Call of Duty IV are angry losers. Folks that commit terroristic mass murder maybe shouldn’t be characterized in the same way.

If we’re not clear on the terroristic mass murder aspect, it’s gonna be hard for folks to be serious about the need for comprehensive, effective diversion programs.

[Modesty_Blaise]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

This is a great question, and I got thoughts, but am not sure if this is the place for it. Would it be worth either bumping that thread, or starting a new one with parameters in the OP excluding thoughts about how to divert folks from incel terrorism?

I would like that, but I don’t want to be responsible for starting it. I have a chronic migraine condition that keeps me down for large swaths of time and I’m afraid I might be neglectful of the thread. I feel like a jackass for basically saying, “Gee, I’d like to discuss this, but someone else should start the discussion.” Ugh, sorry.

[k9bfriender]

@Kimstu

Sure. But if the people stroking their chins over the vulnerability of potential al-Qaeda recruits keep deliberately ignoring these recruits’ enthusiastic embrace of its rhetoric along the lines of “ALLAH WANTS ALL THE HATED INFIDELS TO DIE”, then ISTM they are shutting their eyes to a pretty crucial point of the discussion.

At the same time, it is worth noting that in an area of severe impoverishment, the offer of food, clothing, shelter, and even a purpose can get many people to agree with even the most heinous of ideals.

[Kimstu]

@Modesty Blaise

Also, there are many, many women who are socially awkward, who don’t date, but somehow THEY don’t espouse hatred and want to kill because of it. So why do so many men turn this into hatred and terrorism?

Millennia of cultural conditioning, possibly with significant help from brain chemistry. If women were constantly told for thousands of years that they were innately entitled to demand and select men’s sexual services (“You are the image of the Goddess! Your satisfaction is what keeps life flowing through the world! It is your right and your duty to choose the men who are worthy to fulfill your needs, and their desires are petty and trivial compared to yours!” yadda yadda yadda), and men were constantly told for thousands of years that their human worth was fundamentally dependent on attracting and sexually satisfying women, I suspect that women as a group would be just, or nearly, as predatory and aggressive as men as a group have become.

However, I guess this thread isn’t the place for a re-launch of the incels discussion, so never mind for now!

[begbert2]

@Kimstu

However, I guess this thread isn’t the place for a re-launch of the incels discussion, so never mind for now!

Yeah, stop taunting me with this!

[Kimstu]

@begbert2

Yeah, stop taunting me with this!

Yup yup I am resolutely shutting up!

[Shodan]

You’ve been marginalized. Sorry about that.

Yours in solidarity,
Shodan

[John_Mace]

@Kimstu

Millennia of cultural conditioning, possibly with significant help from brain chemistry. If women were constantly told for thousands of years that they were innately entitled to demand and select men’s sexual services (“You are the image of the Goddess! Your satisfaction is what keeps life flowing through the world! It is your right and your duty to choose the men who are worthy to fulfill your needs, and their desires are petty and trivial compared to yours!” yadda yadda yadda), and men were constantly told for thousands of years that their human worth was fundamentally dependent on attracting and sexually satisfying women, I suspect that women as a group would be just, or nearly, as predatory and aggressive as men as a group have become.

However, I guess this thread isn’t the place for a re-launch of the incels discussion, so never mind for now!

Unlikely give the sexual dimorphism in our species. As for the terrorism issue, men are overly represented in terrorist/violent acts pretty much across the board. That seems to be a primate thing, and I doubt we’re outliers in that mammalian order.

[begbert2]

@John_Mace

Unlikely give the sexual dimorphism in our species. As for the terrorism issue, men are overly represented in terrorist/violent acts pretty much across the board. That seems to be a primate thing, and I doubt we’re outliers in that mammalian order.

I for one wish to throw my support to the women out there - they should be entirely free to be crazy murderers if they want, just like men do.

Well, free until we catch them anyway. But you get what I mean.

[Lamoral]

@John_Mace

Unlikely give the sexual dimorphism in our species.

Yes, unbelievably unlikely which is why that scenario never arose anywhere in the world as far as I know, despite how diverse different human cultures are. Everything ultimately comes down to physical strength. And I do mean that literally. And not just a human being’s physical strength either. We have rules in this world and if those rules are violated, what happens? A tow truck might come haul your car away. A forklift will take your inventory away. People may actually come take YOU away. That’s just what it boils down to. Until robots with the ability to do EVERYTHING for us are as commonplace today as automobiles are, the only thing really holding back society from the Hobbesian caveman existence is all the infrastructure and civilization that has been built up over the centuries…and how was it done? With the application of physical energy.

[Ludovic]

Not really relevant IMO when it comes to analyzing social relations. The most powerful type of power is soft power. You can’t rule more than a hundred or so people without people skills. Even the people with the worst personal death tolls under their belts don’t amount to more than a couple 10,000, above that you need to be a ruler ordering people to kill. You of course also usually need to be the type of person they are used to taking orders from unless you are especially charismatic.

[Sunny_Daze]

It sounds like someone should restart the Incel thread. Shodan, John, begbert2? I think it’s absolutely valid to include a discussion of why some people split into terrorism versus not, but you need to set up the boundaries for that part, or even put it into a different thread.

This ties back to a recurrent theme we’ve hit on - setting up better guidelines in the OP for what the OP wants to discuss, which is a better practice for everyone.

[Lamoral]

@Ludovic

Not really relevant IMO when it comes to analyzing social relations. The most powerful type of power is soft power. You can’t rule more than a hundred or so people without people skills. Even the people with the worst personal death tolls under their belts don’t amount to more than a couple 10,000, above that you need to be a ruler ordering people to kill. You of course also usually need to be the type of person they are used to taking orders from unless you are especially charismatic.

That’s a good point, and you’re not entirely wrong - and there’s the issue of the power that women can exert over men through their sexuality…I think there was a Greek play about this. The spiritual beliefs of the people in question also factor into it.

[begbert2]

@Sunny_Daze

It sounds like someone should restart the Incel thread. Shodan, John, begbert2? I think it’s absolutely valid to include a discussion of why some people split into terrorism versus not, but you need to set up the boundaries for that part, or even put it into a different thread.

I haven’t started a thread in five years, and I’m not breaking that streak now. I’d happily participate though.

@Jacquernagy

That’s a good point, and you’re not entirely wrong - and there’s the issue of the power that women can exert over men through their sexuality…I think there was a Greek play about this. The spiritual beliefs of the people in question also factor into it.

And the woman can just have leadership skills. Shocking idea, I know.

[AHunter3]

@Modesty_Blaise

Thank you Sunny Daze for this thread…

A few weeks ago ThemlaLou posted a pit thread about incels. I was all set to read what intelligent people had to say on this issue. The thread quickly became about awkward, lonely guys who get virgin-shamed. Ugh. …

I have nothing against awkward guys who have a difficult time with dating, but they should have started another thread. That thread was not about them.

@Kimstu

I think the point is that the thread was clearly supposed to be about the self-identified openly misogynistic “incel movement”, and various jackasses kept trying to focus it instead on their preferred interpretation of “incel” as “awkward but basically decent guy who can’t get a date, poor guy, isn’t that a pity, shouldn’t something be done about that”.

** raises hand **

I was one of the jackasses. I hadn’t read enough about the “incels” to get an accurate read on where there head was at (umm, perhaps not the best metaphorical expression to use here). Meanwhile, considerably more familiarity with the “nice guys” phenomenon and I collapsed them into my head as more or less the same thing.

[HelenTroy]

@Modesty_Blaise

Thank you Sunny Daze for this thread.

I’m a lurker and I’m female. I have hardly ever posted, but I’ve been reading here for years. I enjoy it very much. But I have left many times in disgust.

Most recent example:

A few weeks ago ThemlaLou posted a pit thread about incels. I was all set to read what intelligent people had to say on this issue. The thread quickly became about awkward, lonely guys who get virgin-shamed. Ugh. There couldn’t be a better example of WHAT ABOUT THE MENZ??? :smack:

A few posters kept coming in pointing out that the thread was about incels who hate women and “status” men because women won’t have sex with them. But on and on it went about how no one thinks about the poor men who can’t get dates.

I left in utter disgust. I’m someone who won’t bother to post because I see that otherwise well respected, long time posters get ignored and disrespected. That thread was bullshit.

I have nothing against awkward guys who have a difficult time with dating, but they should have started another thread. That thread was not about them.

So you can count me as someone the OP is referring to who will just choose to go away instead of deal with this.

There are countless examples. It’s not about a few bad posters or a few bad threads - it’s a pervasive, general attitude.

I apologize for getting here late, but like I said, I left for a while and had to catch up on this thread. And I admit to skimming the last few pages.

This could’ve been written by me, word for word. I tried to post some truth about incels only to have my information ignored or played off as nothing before the focus returned to the true victims - men. It’s exhausting and dismissive. I feel like I have a lot to offer, especially for a board that skews tragically unhip in a sad way. But I don’t have the energy.

[Tee]

@Sunny_Daze

It sounds like someone should restart the Incel thread. Shodan, John, begbert2? I think it’s absolutely valid to include a discussion of why some people split into terrorism versus not, but you need to set up the boundaries for that part, or even put it into a different thread.

This ties back to a recurrent theme we’ve hit on - setting up better guidelines in the OP for what the OP wants to discuss, which is a better practice for everyone.

When I last saw the thread, it had 666 replies and I didn’t want to mess with that. I vote for a new one.

[Lamoral]

@begbert2

I haven’t started a thread in five years, and I’m not breaking that streak now. I’d happily participate though.

And the woman can just have leadership skills. Shocking idea, I know.

No, not shocking to me, I mean, Queen Victoria was no shit. People forget that the height of the British Empire’s power was under a Queen, not a King.