Lately I’ve noticed far too many legacy-media articles which try to stereotype men who are involuntarily celibate (now branded “incels”) as budding terrorists. I won’t link to any of the many articles since they are generally overwrought woke propaganda employed to normalize sexual immorality while unduly shaming and pathologizing millions of good men who remain undefiled by women. They undeservedly vilify these virgin men, portraying them as a major problem plaguing our society, instead of recognizing that the promiscuous society that they have championed has been disregarding and disenfranchising these disadvantaged men, and that their own articles are bound to increase that malice towards these underdogs.
The legacy-media authors have scoured the whole globe to come up with a few cases of incels who committed multiple murders, in an effort to manufacture a defamatory stereotype to portray these innocent male virgins as likely terrorists.
Revelation 14:3 And they sang a new song before the throne, and before the four living creatures, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. 4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb wherever he goes. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. 5 And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.
These sexually undefiled men have statistically been more morally faultless than other men. As best I can piece the data together, in the last 20 years here in the USA incels have been blamed for the multiple-murder deaths of about 20 people. That averages to exactly one person per year. If you assume that around 5% of U.S. men are involuntarily celibate, then there would currently be 8.3 million male incels in the USA. That yields an annual male incel multiple-murder rate of 0.012 per 100,000. By comparison the annual Black male aged 16-64 murder rate is 95.5 per 100,000. While that is the rate for all the solved murders instead of just the solved multiple-murders, you can see that the one rate is around 8,000 times higher than the other. They’re not even in the same ballpark.
I don’t believe anybody is publishing statistics yet on individual murders by involuntary celibacy status. So, I can’t directly compare apples to apples yet. But if you’re looking to address the violence in the USA and you’re somehow focusing on incels, you’re manifesting an extreme prejudice against incels that is in no way based on factual data and is in fact contrary to the available crime data.
To be quite honest if incels were criminally violent they wouldn’t still be incels, they’d be rapists. The fact that incels have denied themselves their natural sexual urges for their whole lives proves them to be upright law-abiding citizens who have shown vastly better impulse-control than is typical of criminals, and their self-control clearly exceeds the median.
I’ve just provided overwhelming statistical evidence that incels as a group are far less violent than another group whom the media mouthpieces would naturally leap to defend. Any honest person possessing a commonsense knowledge of human nature would have already surmised that incels, as a group, are better stereotyped by social timidity and meekness than by violence and a will to dominate others.
No, incels clearly aren’t the violent bad boys whose unrestrained masculine dominance women are subconsciously attracted to. They are more often socially awkward, not possessing the silver tongue of those skilled at guile, they are more likely to try to attract women by outmoded gestures of chivalry. Incels generally are the downtrodden and unpopular men whom society scorns and tries to give the brush off.
Isaiah 53:2b-3 (CEV) He wasn’t some handsome king. Nothing about the way he looked made him attractive to us. He was hated and rejected; his life was filled with sorrow and terrible suffering. No one wanted to look at him. We despised him and said, “He is a nobody!”
So, why are the worldly mouthpieces of the legacy-media so intent on libeling and demonizing these poor disadvantaged gentlemen, when their primary unifying feature is merely that their natural sexual desires have gone entirely unmet, keeping them virgins. Doesn’t it seem strange that our Marxist media isn’t staging protests demanding that a ration of sex be reallocated from the “Haves” to the “Have Nots” to affirm and empower the disadvantaged and thereby helping to level the playing field?
Why are the legacy-media so unjustifiably prejudiced against these incel men and willing to construct untruthful stereotypes to denigrate them even further?
Share your answers and thoughts on this below.
The big lie is apparent to me. The so called INCELS are really not involuntarily celibate, they merely cannot find quality women and are better off without an albatross hanging around their neck so choose to do without. A typical example of an incel I know?
Six foot five, 210 pounds and not an ounce of fat on him. Intelligent and refuses to use alcohol, tobacco, drugs, fast food, etc and is strong in the physical, mental and spiritual existences. Can do anything and just happens to be a millionaire since 2016 with an added net worth extra of two million to boot.
Has not abused himself in any way, nor defiled himself. The real test is that the women of substance I am friends with of my generation and younger are impressed with him in every way and the most perceptive ones care about and cherish him. Am I jealous? Nope. It is a natural reaction of real women to a man of excellence.
He does not advertise his wealth and none would ever know it as he lives in a frugal manner and governed by the scriptures. One of his acquaintances decided to go to Russia to find a woman and did, learned Russian, married her, and is happily living there with his new wife. He is also well heeled. Another went to South America, came back with a wife. I like her. She is the way most women were at the time I was a boy.
You may or may not agree with my admiration of the fairer gender but those I cherish and especially one as a close friend of 24 years, as are the others, are intelligent and respectable and beautiful inside and out. I know they are all intelligent and I respect them highly. Some require help especially one in her older years and another with children abandoned by her husband.
I have been divorced for over a decade but am happy with occasional outings and interaction proper with seven of them. Lost one aged 94 who we did work for free, over decades, who suffered a stroke this past summer and deceased. (Sadie)
There are women settling for a far lesser quality of men than the VOLCELS I know. (VOLUNTARILY CELIBATE)
The VOLCELS are disciplined and decent in character. I will not remarry and tell Sharkly that I am happy focusing on my family and grandchildren but also going out with any who would call me to discuss serious issues in their current lives. No romantic relationships in my life is the rule. Happiness is attainable being a VOLCEL and the far deeper mind, soul and spiritual relationships with a woman/women fills any emotional need I have.
While one especially likes to hug the life out of me, understand I hate it but soldier along tolerating it to not hurt her tender feelings. (If you believe that have I got some bridges to sell you.) Seriously, that gal knows how to hug in a decent and appropriate manner. They are all fine women who like me, are alone.
Sharkly needs to and probably does focus on his boys and might find his X will have regrets in time. My X and I share the same interests of our children and grand children and she comes occasionally here to visit our son who lives with me.
Happiness is there for the taking, I have found it. Anyone can.
Edward,
You are quite a focused and consistent evangelist for your personal story. You write it almost every time. It seems really important to you. What are you hoping will happen on this blog by repeating yourself?
It seems you think your story is more important than anything the posts are about. Are you afraid for Sharkly, and feel called to convert him, and therefore share your story? Why aren’t you on other men’s blogs preaching your personal story?
I am sure you are sure you think your story is helpful. Do you think it helps your persuasiveness to keep repeating the same story regardless of whatever the topic is?
Well yes, perhaps they should ration out sex .
If only there was way…
Maybe I should write a post on it
My apologies, surfdumb.
You are right about edward kennedy’s comments. On the last post I removed and threw edward kennedy’s last comment into the spam folder. I had thought that would put him into moderation. Obviously, I’m not entirely versed on how to fully utilize all the features of WordPress’ blogging software. It was basically a lengthy repeat of his previous lengthy comment, but in different words, praising women as being equal to, or better than, men, with many worshipful statements of female-adoration thrown in.
Most of the rest of the internet would welcome that sort of simping woman-worship, but yet edward kennedy chose to come here to deposit it. And his repeated extolling of his many female pals’ supposedly unassailable virtues is “over the top” like it is intentional trolling, knowing that his message is contrary to what is being taught here.
He said, “You are falling into the radfem trap” when I teach that men were made superior to women, to rule over them in the image of God. He says of the sexes, “we are to cooperate in everything.”
However, I think wives were created to submit to their husbands in everything, most especially in her sexual/reproductive purpose, and husbands were made to rule over their families well. So, to me, when there is conflict and lack of submission on the part of the wife, then the husband can’t cooperate with that, he should correct that rebellion and not let it fester. The wife is to not just cooperate with, but to reverence and obey her husband and to seek to do things that are well pleasing unto him. The husband is the exalted head while the wife is the body that carries out the will of the head. The moment a wife rebels against God’s holy patriarchal system of rule it behooves her God-imaging husband to not cooperate with such sinful ungodliness, but to shepherd her back into submission to himself, which is the will of our loving Father, that she acts in complete unity with her husband through her reverent submission to him in everything. So, a godly husband’s “cooperation” with his wife is entirely dependent on her cooperation with his headship. Otherwise he is enabling and cooperating with rebellion against himself and against God who made him to be head over her.
Caveat: I’m not talking about the rare cases of a husband who is intentionally directing his wife to sin against God, his own head. A man’s authority is delegated authority, not supreme authority empowering him to even overrule God above him. The husband is to be the representative agent of God. Surely every man goes about as an image.
Sharkly, you have points that are appealing to me, but it’s that Ed doesn’t even engage with you to agree or argue was why I was probing for his perspective. I wonder if he thinks talking to a Stem person like you who makes logical points using the Bible and other sources will be won over by repeating a personal story centered around his experience and feelings?
I think the term “incel” is a generalization and a little understanding needs to be applied. Obviously, the men who consider themselves to be incels have certain standards and part of their celibacy is indeed voluntary. Here in the USA prostitution is legal and regulated in certain parts of the state of Nevada, although most of the prostitution that goes on in Nevada is actually illegal prostitution, according to Wikipedia. And in every large city you can probably buy sex from pricey escorts or even at shady massage parlors.
I presume for most folks “incel” would mean that no sex the man would actually consider participating in has been offered to them. And you can’t blame them for not wanting to purchase transactional sex from an unknown harlot, risking venereal disease and arrest and conviction. Furthermore, I reckon the fact that the other person is demanding something else of value, besides a possible relationship with you, before they will agree to have sex with you, guarantees that the sex has been preemptively stripped of much of its romance and intimacy.
That being said, I think the term differentiates incels from people who don’t feel that sex has been withheld from them, but who choose to stay celibate perhaps due to strong moral convictions, or due to abnormal psychology, or physical disability, or the unsuitability of having a sexual relationship considering their current situation.
The hatred of Incels is standard projection. Women reject decent men for reasons they don’t want to be honest about, which creates the need to impute poor character to them. Men play along because the deregulated sexual marketplace is the competitive sexual marketplace, and the easiest way to raise yourself is to lower the next guy. Bonus if happy wife, happy life.
Result? Everybody is miserable.
“Doesn’t it seem strange that our Marxist media isn’t staging protests demanding that a ration of sex be reallocated from the “Haves” to the “Have Nots” to affirm and empower the disadvantaged and thereby helping to level the playing field?”
Not while they’re also flooding our lands with foreign men. The common belief is that migrants are a paramilitary force because they’re mostly young men, but I think it’s a simpler scenario of skewing the gender ratios. Historically, a gender imbalance greater than 6:5 male:female is a reliable indicator of social collapse. All those Chinese coming in? They might be Xi-loyal but really, it’s just China trying to stabilize itself by exporting its surplus men.
“The hatred of Incels is standard projection. Women reject decent men for reasons they don’t want to be honest about, which creates the need to impute poor character to them. Men play along …”
That is a very good point.
The first axiom of “Universal Causation” is:
1) Nothing takes place without a cause.
One implication of Universal Causation is that if a phenomenon appears to occur without any observable external cause, the cause must be internal.
Elsewise the external cause must have gone unobserved or be unobservable.
Ephesians 6:12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.
I was primarily thinking of an invisible external cause, (“the accuser of our brethren” from Revelation 12:10) but an incorporeal spiritual force of wickedness could likely be applied to the denizens of our physical realm by conjuring an internal motivation like the one you just gave, to incite false charges against the innocent, here on earth as well.
Nor would a woman ever likely admit that her false accusations against those undefiled firstfruits, who are later to be shown favor by God, are because of her own propensity towards internal dishonesty. Nor would women be likely to admit that their evil wrongheaded accusations against the undefiled, is their way of being pleasing to the father of all dishonesty. So, in that way, the motivation behind this wickedness, is sure to always be kept obscured by the defilers. A woman would likely have to be fully demon-controlled before she might honestly concede that she incites hatred towards these men because God loves them so dearly, and her life is one of rebellion against God.
First, she is deceived, or deceives herself, before she defiles others. It has happened that way from the beginning. Don’t hearken unto a twisted defiler expecting her to be honest about why she taunts incels. She herself is deceived.
FWIW most of the articles demonizing incels were authored by women, but there were also some White Knighting simps, likely hoping to earn favor from their goddesses for throwing their fellow man under the bus.
And you can’t blame the [incels] for not wanting to purchase transactional sex from an unknown harlot, risking venereal disease and arrest and conviction. Furthermore, I reckon the fact that the other person is demanding something else of value, besides a possible relationship with you, before they will agree to have sex with you, guarantees that the sex has been preemptively stripped of much of its romance and intimacy.
This, especially the highlighted part, is an oft ignored part of the issue. It’s easy for society to dismiss incels as men who just want sex and nothing but sex, but if that’s ALL that these men wanted and no other aspect of female companionship, then they would yield to their irresistible biological urges and acquire the services of the nearest available prostitute, no matter what the risks.
No, what these men desire most is an intimate emotional relationship with a woman who wants them for who they are. Sex is but the ultimate culmination of that relationship. In other words, these men cannot separate sex from love. The sexual act without an emotional bond attached to it is at best empty and unsatisfying, at worst emotionally painful and grief-inducin g.
I know this because I am exactly such a man. As powerful as my biological urges are, I cannot have sex with a woman in whom I am not emotionally invested and willing to be joined with permanently. This is something that the world of the prince of all darkness and lies cannot comprehend, and thus refuses to recognize. As sex is an end unto itself within this evil kingdom, anything higher is anathema.
Off topic, but of interest to the blog: Ken Alexander’s latest attempt to give advice to men with contentious wives who read his wife’s blog. I couldn’t brimg myself to read the whole thing, but from what little I did read, God help the poor man who takes his advice.
https://thetransformedwife.com/counsel-when-married-to-a-difficult-wife/
Yes, Ken Alexander’s advice there seems like standard churchian advice to men, in a nutshell: To take all the blame for all their wife’s bad behavior and focus on denying themselves and being nicer.(more Beta)
At one point I also reached out to Ken & Lori for help with my marriage, (Like the guy mentioned in Ken’s post) and they were willing to counsel my wife and I, Lori even gave my ex-wife her phone number, but my wife refused to call her. Although they were consequently unable to help me, I did talk with ken on the phone a bunch and emailed with him a bunch. And so, I learned a good bit about him and his marital story.
Part of the problem is that Ken has seemingly drawn mainly wrong conclusions from his own marriage. I’ll tell Ken’s story in my own words:
Ken was a Beta. Ken was always nice. But Lori gradually grew to be a bitch. Over time their marriage got to the point where there was little friendship or closeness. Ken prayed and always tried to be as nice as he could be, but somehow things only ever slowly grew worse. Finally, one day Ken and Lori were out for a walk when Ken disgustedly blurted out that his 20-year marriage was bullshit and that he only hoped he could endure it till the end. Lori seemed to be caught completely off guard by ken’s sudden lack of niceness, she hadn’t realized that she wasn’t being a good wife. So, a few days later, Lori tells Ken that she has decided to change and to try to be a better more biblical wife, and she did, becoming the wonderful “Transformed Wife” that we all know and love.
But what does Ken conclude? He seems to think that his prayers and twenty years of enduring as a beta pussy finally paid off! And he is ashamed and sorry that he ever let his masculinity get so toxic to the point that he spoke those harsh words to his wife unnecessarily right before she finally transformed into such a great wife. You may think I’m joking, but that’s Ken’s story in a nutshell. He endured 20 years of worsening marriage without ever confronting his wife. And when he finally did, she completely transforms from that single confrontation, and the fool thinks that it was his twenty years of being a doormat that somehow finally worked.
I tried pointing out the obvious (Red-Pilled truth) to Ken, but it went in one ear and shot out the other. He’d still rather imagine that his prayers were finally answered, than to imagine that something good could have come from the solitary moment when he grew some balls and wasn’t Mr. Nice Guy.
And that is why he tells men to do what he did, the twenty years of praying and focusing on yourself part, and not the moment he manned up and confronted her and saw his whole marriage transform. He still regrets that one harsh comment. Because he apparently believes rebellious wives deserve to live lives free of any criticism from their husbands, ever. And Ken believes that if men are enough of a doormat and they lay their life down for her to trample on enough, one day she may just suddenly come to respect the man for it, because that’s exactly what happened to him, as Ken sees it. SMH
I have taken some liberties in telling the story as I remember it, and the Alexanders probably won’t agree with how I told it, but that’s the truth of it.
Not everybody’s wife is going to completely transform and become a crusader for wifely submission after a single critical comment. YMMV
I’ll tell Ken’s story in my own words:
I have no trouble believing your version of Ken’s story. The truly terrifying part of it is that he he gives men bad, Beta-perpetuating, divorce-generating advice FOR A LIVING.
When I was dealing with Ken a few years ago, he had a business in a different industry that he ran for his living. Counselling the men who contacted his wife, and going online to walk back and apologize for all of his wife’s bravest controversial stands was just his unpaid hobby. Like with his butt-kissing marriage counsel, Ken seems to think that if he apologizes and panders to the woke zealots who get enraged over the stuff his wife posts, that they’ll soon see just how nice and inoffensive he is, and they’ll want to join his religion of niceness. Ken doesn’t seem to grasp that Jesus Christ was intentionally a “rock of offense” who got killed over His message, openly calling on everyone to repent and turn from their evil ways.
Something odd I just noticed in EK’s first post – he specifies the number of years he has known an amazing women, 24 years, yet refers to his divorce as a couple of decades ago.
His language is just so weird, “the fairer gender.”
I think it’s fair to ask folks who disagree with you about manly preeminence is what tools do they have or use to identify women worship? Does one have to have a statue of Diana before we help destroy strongholds or provide correction?
surfdumb,
You’ve given me the idea for another post. I had thought before about a post where I take people back to what the word “worship” or “worth-ship” really meant back when it was used in the earliest English Bible translations. If people better knew what “giving worthship” meant it might be easier to show them how men are habitually doing it to women, especially their wives, at the command and encouragement of their churches. And how women expect it, and wives demand it. Then the idolatry becomes more apparent, and then we can more easily see how the creature is given more of it than the Creator.
And unto Adam He said: for as much as thou hast obeyed the voice of thy wife/ and hast eaten of the tree of which I commanded thee saying: see thou eat not thereof: cursed be the earth for thy sake.
Exodus 34:14 For thou shalt worship no other god: For the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:
Exodus 34:14 For thou shalt worship no strange god: For the Lord is called Jealous, because He is a jealous God:
Speaking of strange gods/goddesses …
Children say(Women do) the darndest things!I’m not sure that your definition of Incels is the correct definition of Incels. Have you looked at the online communities? If Incels are telling a suicidal man to “not be selfish and go and shoot up an elementary school”, these are not good people. https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-44053828
Welcome Jake,
I haven’t spent too much time on sites that cater solely to incels, because I’m not an incel. I was married for many years and currently have two teenage sons. Nor do I feel socially awkward or have any difficulty that would prevent me from finding female sex partners if I wanted them.
The BBC article that you linked to is exactly the sort of article I was referring to in the post above. It was short on facts and statistics and long on telling people how they should feel about incels – to view them as threats to society.
The article starts out by mentioning Jake Davison who killed people in the UK and then refers to “two previous mass killings, both in the United States” but then they detail Elliot Rodger’s killing spree from almost a decade ago, and a mass killing by Alek Minassian in Toronto Canada. They quote unnamed incel sources who claim to be nonproductive members of society who spend their days hating themselves and others and thinking bad thoughts. I doubt they are accurately portraying how their supposed interviewees represented themselves. They’re intentionally portraying them poorly.
As for the money-quote that they give to smear incels: “DON’T be selfish. Go to an elementary school and kill some children before you commit suicide. Please!?!”
I am far more likely to believe that a troll or a “fed” made that comment, or that it has been taken out of context. But even if one incel once wrote that, and meant it, I really don’t care to try to unjustly demonize people or have people’s rights stripped away because of a few uncouth online comments. The woke nuts on the political Left spew comments equally evil all day every day. I’ve even had some folks visiting here, wish me a horrible death. LOL That’s what the “FEMINISTS TRIGGERED” counter on the sidebar is for. If they want to vent their spleens and their unresolved penis-envy against a paragon of “toxic” masculinity, where else could they find a finer specimen? My promotion of God’s holy patriarchy is directly toxic to their fundamentally gynocratic new world order.
Sorry if I’m rambling now. But in answer to your question: I think incels are most generally fine men, though downtrodden, and I’d far rather enjoy spending time with fascinatingly eccentric incels than with the insufferable woke destroyers of uprightness in society.
I think incels are most generally fine people
This might seem nitpicky, but I would have used the word “men” instead of “people” here. This for the simple reason that I think it’s important to point out that there is no such thing as a female incel, despite what many women today claim. Any woman who feels deprived of sex is a volcel. It’s not that she can’t get any sex at all, it’s that she just can’t get it from the top ten percenter men she wants it from and from whom she thinks she’s entitled to sex.
feeriker,
You’re right. I’ve fixed the wording in my comment accordingly.
If women aren’t able to breed today, it is most likely for the same reason that commercially raised domesticated turkeys are now assisted through artificial insemination. Because they’ve become too fat to fly or even mate properly. ????
“what does Ken conclude? He seems to think that his prayers and twenty years of enduring as a beta pussy finally paid off! And he is ashamed and sorry that he ever let his masculinity get so toxic to the point that he spoke those harsh words to his wife unnecessarily right before she finally transformed into such a great wife”
I shouldn’t be too surprised to see something like this. Had I not had a red pill shoved up my ass in March 2011, I would probably have concluded the same thing when I told my wife “I’m sick of your bullshit and if you don’t change, now, I’m seeing a lawyer the next business day”. This is how Christian men have been conditioned: If you have a bad marriage, it’s because you’re not being nice enough and you’re not praying enough and you’re not “servant-leading” enough. It’s your fault your wife’s a raging bitch. If you were reading your bible more and going to church more, she’d be nicer.
No.
No, the problem is that these wives are women of poor character who were permitted to live that way because no one ever held them accountable for their treatment of others. No man ever told them “no you don’t get to treat me this way”. No man ever held them accountable because they never had to or it wasn’t worth it.
It often isn’t until a woman is faced with the loss of everything a man has given her, loss of her lifestyle, loss of status among other women, loss of the man’s money and the easy life gravy train he’s provided, that she reaches down deep and finds a mustard seed of character. Some women can do that. Lori Alexander did. Mrs. deti did (somehow). Most women don’t. I’m lucky. Mrs. deti showed some character. The ex Mrs. Feeriker didn’t. The ex Mrs. Sharkly didn’t. I could just as easily have ended up like Fee and Shark, but for Mrs. deti’s character.
The so-called “Christian Red Pill” works only on women who have some character, some mental fortitude, some ability to perform some introspection and insight. If she won’t take an honest look at herself, it won’t work. If she values herself more than her marriage or faith, it won’t work. This is why we see Christian marriages failing – because women won’t adhere to Christian morality, or any kind of sexual morality. Women won’t be held to any standards and won’t accept correction because no one’s ever imposed any standards on them before or corrected them.
Fine.
Women, it’s your show now. You won’t accept correction or standards? Then you’re on your own. You do it. You pay for it. And you take all the consequences. Meanwhile, the men who were married to you/would have married you will be somewhere else on their own, with their subsistence wage jobs, apartments, 13 year old cars they work on themselves, Playstations, and internet pr0n. They don’t need anything else.
“…had a red pill shoved in my rear…”
There seems to be such a large divide in the church between the men who’ve had such a medical procedure and those who haven’t. I remember being a new Christian and realizing that other Christians were completely helpless and ignorant to deal with my stories about an alcoholic family member.
As a group, they responded, churches now have counselors and help groups for such a problem.
Response to the Red Pill has been much poorer, which is probably explained by Sharkly’s worship post.
Isn’t it remarkable that the church has so adapted and responded to many cultural problems impacting women, but still throws a millstone around husbands?
J Vernon McGee died 20 years ago and I’ve heard sermons of his that look at the proverbs about bad wives. Never heard it from any modern preacher, my preacher, or the guys at church.
They write about the war on masculinity, granted, Aaron Renn has a career with evangelicals about it, but they address it from a feminized point of view, which is very different than Deti’s perspective, which is a masculine way of looking at it.
I go lightly when assessing men I know and their stunning ignorance on topics common to us. I do so because we know parts of the body have different purposes. Some are created by God to be ignorant in some manner because they wouldn’t be effective at hospitality or being a gateway to the body of Christ.
There’d be a lot less Christians I assume if there weren’t Christians who are so like the world that the unbelievers feel welcomed. If everyone gave a diatribe about our wimpy, weak, and wokeness, or how I think movies and sports are no longer wise and are ungodly distractions, then most folks would probably be running from the church.
Yes, all parts of the body should be growing in truth and wisdom, so ideally, a greeter knowledgeable about movies, weather, chit-chat, could still know a biblical view of women, and a grump like myself still should be able to know how and when to make a stranger comfortable.
Incels receive scorn and hatred from women and the like……thats expected. What was more shocking was the hatred Incels (and Vocels) get from the “manosphere”
“They just need to learn Game / find Jesus / join a church / shower / work really, really hard / just go up and talk to women, they dont bite and women love confidence, they dont care if you are short, bald at 20….”
It was once called “love shy” coined by a quack in the 1980’s. He was way off on a few things, but he was correct in his assesment and he was correct that the problem would become catsophrophic in the decades to come. Dr. G Martin I believe.
I remember in 1989 that Frenchman who “lost it” and went on a rampage at his respected French university. That I believe was the first documented case of so called “incel rage”
If you are a Frenchman and cant get a gf or sex, or dates….you might as well kill yourself right?
All cases of documented so-called “incel rage” well, the victims are mostly MEN. Not women. Not the women who “rejected them”
I have a crazy theory about that, but what do I know? I’m an Incel and according to the ‘sphere “I dont know what Im talking about”
What is your theory, Lastmod?
Honestly, I have easy compared to many Incels. I cant relate to many of them. How do you tell a man born 5’2″ not classically handsome in any shape of it “oh, there’s someone out there, just move to Ukraine where women dont care about your height, they just want a caring man. Easy. Just get a job, learn the language and you’ll be okay. What’s that? You cant do that? Ah….you just like being miserable and are a cuck / simp / bluepilled”
Or had an accident at work or in a car and now you are paralyzed, or worse. Brain trauma. Born learning disabled with other comlications…..it goes on.
The spiraling cycle gains momentum, now you’re 25 and you never even had a date or a “group date” your social skills are stunted, and even at that age….it is a huge mountain to climb to get over that. So you discover the man-o-sphere.
The last grasp at a place where men will understand you, or at least recognize your plight right? Wrong. 10,000 times wrong.
The betrayal and ignorance and failure with women was a given.
From fellow men? Even worse. Hence the rage from waaayyyy back to PUA by Incels. Hence the hatred of “game” which is a game setup by better men to cater to what women want. Game worked for a few. Any man under the looks scale of 5, it made them worse…..and creepy.
They were shamed by fellow men for being lazy, not following Roosh, Rollo and the gazillion others “the right way”
Shunned by men, unable to even foster proper male friendships….hence the targets in this “incel rage” were……and are mostly men.
I am expecting to be told I have no idea what I am talking about. I cant help Incels, and many are in pain.
Jason, you have no idea what you are talking about.
Just kidding. I’m sorry if that might be presumptive of me to assume that familiarity with you.
Anyhoo, I am glad to see you commenting again.
I agree with your manosphere comment to the small extent I know of it (maybe 6 blogs). What’s helped me to deal with my disappointment was to realize that it’s not a place of fellowship, but is best looked at as an advice group, like a reddit car repair or house repair blogs. You get similar responses whether you say my ceiling is dripping, or my wife drives me batty like a constant dripping.
Why was I able to get some perspective? Because I wasn’t in a more difficult or lonely situation. Your example of a incel is easy to understand how difficult of a letdown that would be. “Wait, you guys see the pain and suffering, but can only tell me to PSALM, and if that doesn’t work, then shut-up?”
It ignores a person’s heart and goes straight to fix-it steps.
But, I found folks to be more gracious via emails then from blog comments.
Aaron Renn comes under fire, and has from you, but he always responded to my emails, and I wouldn’t be surprised to find out he prays for me.
Jason, my wife is extremely contentious, but do I hear anything different than you? No, it’s been a combination of “do these steps or shut up because you deserve it because you didn’t either lay down the law or divorce her.”
I have an elder at church who listens and says to call when I need to unload. That’s rare, but what a relief just one understanding man can make.
I’ll add one other thing, it’s good to have a place of solid advice. The church doesn’t even offer that, so if a person is in the right spot, then the manosphere can provide tangible help. At least that’s my opinion. I’m not trying to present an argument.
Actually an insightful reply Surf. I dislike Renn not for his takes on the Christian faith…..though if I were still practicing, I would probably level a few shovelfulls on him. That is not the topic of this thread. I really dislike Aaron for his “urbanisn” and “smart cities” stuff. His book, and views were adopted by Fresno (a city which I called home for 12 years. I actaully had some very strong civic pride for that city while living there, and when people in LA ask me where I am from, I say “Fresno”).
A masterpiece in mid-century architecture and design was bulldozed in the name of his “urbanism” and his “correct” views on city planning. The Fulton Mall, one of the original pedestrian malls in the USA, and it was designed by an actual master of urban design. Garett Eckbo, his work has been protected and restored all over the world. Fresno, according to people like Renn dont deserve to have nice things if they dont have it in their city, so it must be destroyed in the name of “new urbanism”. If this pedestrain mall was in his beloved NYC or his hometown in Indiana, he would be the first demanding it be protected and restored…..nuff said. His plans that Fresno adopted by the way have failed. Will he be held to account? Nope. He’s “smart” you see. He’s beyond reproach!
Church is the one place where all are supposed to be welcomed to confront their sins, repent, have “new life” and yes, community. I suppose it is in a sense, but church offers little or nothing to the Incel. He will be told “but there is no marriage in heaven, and Paul wasnt married!”
While the sermons, and the “real men” in the church will talk about sex nonstop and how marriage is so important to God, and families are the most important thing…but throwing a scrap verse to “the rest of these…” and then shaming them for not being masculine enough, not being provider enough, not being like Daniel enough, or David enough. Its a place of “no!” and “dont!” and “How dare you come in here and try to learn, and discover your gift and then actually put the rest of us to shame by actually using it, dont you know “we” the real men here decide what you can say or do here!”
Hence why the church will have fewer and fewer men. Heaven forbid a man with no friends, or life comes to church to perhaps learn, and improve himself. The church needs men who figured everything out at five! The church needs *hot* men with means who will marry all the saintly single moms here!
And Sharkly….I will not be posting on other topics here on your blog. I saw “Incel” and figured that is something I live and know.
Lori Alexander posted a pretty solid post today, and somehow, she used quotes from Matt Walsh and Eric Conn to make it. Apparently, she picked some of their stronger quips, and not their frequent White Knighting and praise of women for merely existing.
https://thetransformedwife.com/when-women-are-in-power/
Hopefully Ken Alexander won’t feel the need to try to walk it back for sharing the truth too plainly without pages of excuse-making and apologizing for explaining a woman’s place in simple language. It’s sad that those men don’t feel that they can be as bold as Lori in denouncing Feminism and those uppity women and emasculated men who espouse it.
Lori Alexander posted a pretty solid post today, and somehow, she used quotes from Matt Walsh and Eric Conn to make it.
I just read that. Although she doesn’t elaborate on it, I’m 100 percent certain that all of the women who pushed back on her were self-identified “Christians.”
I’m not a fan of Matt Walsh – he’s the “men you need to do your duty and save Western Civ” guy. He and His Voxness. And Derek.
I don’t agree with the “you need to get married and make babies and if your wife divorces you and leaves your life and your children’s lives a smoldering ruin, oh well, no biggie, you need to praise God in it” mindset.
Four days ago Cill said:
Feminists have turned marriage into the first stage of divorce, and have done everything in their power to destroy fathers. … Conservatives who berate men for not putting their heads in the noose are a part of the attack on fatherhood.
I believe that those who try to pressure or religiously manipulate men into risking getting ground up in the current Feminist man grinder, instead of working to destroy that Satanic Feminist man grinder, are functionally Judas goats and the helpers of Satan, employing a religious ruse, to use a man’s desire to follow God, to lead them like a lamb to the slaughter. And I repent of the fact that I was once like them, in encouraging men to take that leap of faith in a woman.
I’m not against marriage, but what this nation now offers is not Biblical marriage, and the deck is stacked against men. Your marriage will never be one hair more biblical than you wife chooses it to be. You are currently allowed zero power to overrule her, your only option is to divorce her before things get any worse, or to stay and potentially allow her to offer you up as a sacrifice to Satan. Those who would now try to encourage most young men to marry under our current circumstances are either wicked or naïve.
The apostle Paul said:
1 Corinthians 7:28 But if you do get married, you have not sinned. If a virgin gets married, she has not sinned. However, these people will have trouble, and I would like to spare them from that.
Those who still pressure people into such obvious trouble, as there is today, to serve some ends for their own political party or earthly religious fiefdom, are not demonstrating the same love for others that the apostle Paul demonstrated, but are instead running their mouths contrary to Paul’s godly advice, looking to potentially plunge people into great trouble just to suit their own worldly ends. Although they may spin marriage as something God would want, like the craftiest of spiritual spinmeisters would, yet the Apostle’s clear and godly advice was the exact opposite of theirs.