Where do we go from here?
Cool! A new wiki to “improve” 
I’m not seeing a debate but I bet we can get to the Pit pretty quickly.
Good luck.
…Wow. They really put a lot of research/effort into it.
But, like the other thread, these incels/MRAs aren’t ***scientifically ***wrong. It’s just a matter of whether they can win society over, and so far they have a tough uphill slog.
The Dude has some appropriate words for this situation:
Of course, these clowns aren’t right, either, but whatevs.
On a related note: 2+2 now equals 5. Where do we go from here?
You made me feel dirty clicking that link, but that’s largely my fault for not looking at it first.
The chances of them being right about everything is roughly equal to the chance that I’ll suddenly sprout wings and be able to fly.
Excuse me while I run every virus scanner I own.
Science says nothing of the sort. Incel-ism is not a scientific system of thought, and the scientific claims it makes are mostly false.
We? There’s no “we”. “I” am going to laugh my ass off. “You” should get some professional mental help.
Hold on, lemme check the register… Hmmm… says here you now get to eat a whole bag of dicks. Hey, don’t look at me pal, I don’t make the rules. Shall I fetch you a bag, then ; or did you bring your own ?
Now, be reasonable. They’re right about a few things.
Men exist
Women exist
Sometimes women and men have sex
Just not with THEM
[/thread]
We all go to the optometrist to get all of our eyes de-rolled.
I was unfamiliar with the whole Black Pill thing, so I went to wikipedia;
*The “black pill” is a set of beliefs that are commonly held amongst members of incel communities, such as biological determinism, fatalism, and defeatism for unattractive people. Someone who believes in the black pill is referred to as “blackpilled”. The black pill has been described by Vox correspondent Zack Beauchamp as "a profoundly sexist ideology that … amounts to a fundamental rejection of women’s sexual emancipation, labeling women shallow, cruel creatures who will choose only the most attractive men if given the choice."
*
Sounds like an extremely unhealthy attitude to have about life and other humans. Besides being laughably incorrect.
TheFuture is looking rather dim.
There are actually women name Stacy, and there actually used to be at least a couple of men named Chad.
Well, at the very least, we know they’re not procreating.
The sources themselves are perfectly solid.
Sources that were cited:
**
University of Richmond
Pew Social Trends
National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI)
SAGE Journal
Research Gate
National Bureau of Economic Research
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Research Direct
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
BBC
University of Chicago
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Stanford University
**
If we weren’t discussing incel-dom, but rather, some other psychological topic such as adolescent education or drug addiction, most Dopers would accept such sources without a second thought. IOW, the reason the sources are being rejected is not because of the sources themselves, but because of the incels citing them.
It’s often amazing how some men will insist that they’re not getting laid because they’re not physically attractive, yet at the same time, make zero attempt to get laid with women who are not physically attractive, because somehow, those women aren’t good enough.
If you take the attitude of “I can’t get model/playmate quality women to sleep with me, then the problem lies in those women, not me, and no woman wants me” is pretty goddamned stupid.
So the incels made a wiki to justify their ‘need’ for 12 year old virgins to fuck and discard.
Thinking…no.