Bill Maher blames gaming, beards and bad attire for "incels"

[Saiwania]

Incels almost never have any actual degree of introspection and instead just want to blame someone else and so invent a whole head cannon where its their appearance stopping them because they can't quite control that and therefore they can pretend they aren't at fault.

If they're consumed by real life's equivalent to the Dark Side of the Force, then it isn't so easy to drag such people out of the bad place they're in. Past traumas or current shortcomings probably build on top of eachother. Most changes they're capable of won't be anything major or can't work miracles.

[Ozzy]

If they're consumed by real life's equivalent to the Dark Side of the Force, then it isn't so easy to drag such people out of the bad place they're in. Past traumas or current shortcomings probably build on top of eachother. Most changes they're capable of won't be anything major or can't work miracles.

That's definitely a factor for some of them, but most of the time incels are neurotypicals that are just hateful about their situation to the point of self-destruction.

In other words, it's truly just a weird unhealthy perspective to look at the world from.

[Albrenia]

I can sympathise with how a lot of 'incels' start out - generally vaguely unattractive or weird folks who get bullied and mistreated in the school system.

I don't sympathise with how they respond to it by deciding the entire world is an oppressive feminist nightmare designed to the sole benefit of 'foids' and the few 'Chads' they choose to mate with. It's hateful nonsense, and ensures they will never know the acceptance they seek since who would stick around long enough to get to know them if they come to a relationship with so much outright hostility?

[Ozzy]

I can sympathise with how a lot of 'incels' start out - generally vaguely unattractive or weird folks who get bullied and mistreated in the school system.

I don't sympathise with how they respond to it by deciding the entire world is an oppressive feminist nightmare designed to the sole benefit of 'foids' and the few 'Chads' they choose to mate with. It's hateful nonsense, and ensures they will never know the acceptance they seek since who would stick around long enough to get to know them if they come to a relationship with so much outright hostility?

Precisely, the mindless aggression is ensuring that they're doomed to be socially isolated. The casual dehumanization of girls just exacerbates the issue and that's what a large portion of the blackpill community does.

You know, I never actually checked the scientific validity or extenuating circumstances behind the statistics they love to show in regards to a tiny percentage of men getting the majority of women while the majority of women settle for betabuxxers once they leave their prime. They're completely convinced they see the cold hard "truth" in love and sex.

[Cannot think of a name]

The main thrust of the class was about STDs, other information like that was a side detail. Wasn't a full class anyway, just a week-long unit dropped into the middle of a computer class.

And apart from that and a similarly-long unit from middle school that I remember even less of, that's my experience with sex ed from K-12.

Not gonna ascribe my anecdote to other people, but if something like that is a common experience, I'm not shocked many people have issues figuring out how it works if their main source of information is dubious sources on the Internet, especially factoring in social inexperience.

I learned more about sex from Dan Savage and Sue Johansen than I did in school. My school didn't even teach us that the clitoris exists.

Definetely learned that from popular culture.

It's been a looooooong time, but all I remember is: Childbirth would be extraordinarily difficult for girls before they were full grown adults, and once the dude has ejaculated the condom can be loose and if you keep going less effective.

Never reevaluated that last one. Since I've never managed to be in a sexual relationship where open talk about sex once we start having it was a thing, and I've played my part in that, it has led to probably more unsatisfying moments than I'd care to admit. At best I've managed to mumble something about the condom that probably sounded like an excuse for 'when I'm done, we're done', which was never my intent but certainly ended up that way a lot. Without the condom...I dunno, probably other problems.

I'm sure all this self reflection will fly out the window should I end up in a sexual relationship again.

[GuessTheAltAccount]

I dunno. I value the rehabilitation of criminals, and I think I'm pretty one-faced.

Yeah, well, you don't speak for 36 million people any more than I do.

When Canadians can convince their correctional officers to stop slamming prisoners head-first against the prison wall until they bleed all over the floor, you let me know.

It seemed fairly clear. And like I said, plenty of single parents get by just fine, go through post-secondary, have careers. Being told to pay child support isn't the end of your life.

And yet, often times people's first instinct is to say "shoulda coulda would never did no gooda" instead of "that's not gonna happen." Methinks the exemptions you allude to either are different in theory than in practice, or vary from town to town too.

If the child support bills weren't what dragged him into poverty, people's first instinct would be to just say that. Not to wait until someone refutes their other arguments to get around to that one.

What are you talking about? What is my side? Half the time I don't know what you're saying.

The side supporting the status quo on these laws.

I'm sure those people you just made up are real bad, but I wish we could stick to real life examples.

I'm referring to the net effect of the plurality of voters.

I dunno. Systems vary by province or state, and how many of them are really destroying people's lives? Got any statistics on the matter?

I don't need them. The pattern of being wrong, on the part of the people denying these systems are destroying lives, can be extrapolated from all the false assumptions they came to about my personal life or even what it was I was saying to all the other people they're probably wrong about too. I'm not about to expect them to be right about something for once in their lives.

Quite frankly, I'm not sure I'd trust the statistics they cited anyway. No walk of life is immune from incentives for dishonesty, whether their own or that of the people funding them. And when the public has enough of a blind spot on this issue to attempt to smear anyone trying to draw attention to it, it's plausible statisticians may be more scared of losing funding than they let on.

. . .

I can sympathise with how a lot of 'incels' start out - generally vaguely unattractive or weird folks who get bullied and mistreated in the school system.

I don't sympathise with how they respond to it by deciding the entire world is an oppressive feminist nightmare designed to the sole benefit of 'foids' and the few 'Chads' they choose to mate with. It's hateful nonsense, and ensures they will never know the acceptance they seek since who would stick around long enough to get to know them if they come to a relationship with so much outright hostility?

Precisely, the mindless aggression is ensuring that they're doomed to be socially isolated. The casual dehumanization of girls just exacerbates the issue and that's what a large portion of the blackpill community does.

You know, I never actually checked the scientific validity or extenuating circumstances behind the statistics they love to show in regards to a tiny percentage of men getting the majority of women while the majority of women settle for betabuxxers once they leave their prime. They're completely convinced they see the cold hard "truth" in love and sex.

I mean, in my preteen years a girl who bullied me was rumoured by classmates to have a crush on me. If they were telling the truth, does that not discredit those who attribute opinions like mine to supposed "incel" status? If they were lying to try to make me feel better, does that not reveal their opinion that boys more badly want to feel lusted after than to feel loved? And if they then turn around and say that girls more badly want to feel loved than to feel lusted after, does that not constitute an implicit psychological gender-difference, for all their virtue signaling about how supposedly "gender neutral" their worldviews were?

I don't claim to know who to believe about this sort of thing either (and frankly, I've no idea where to start looking for stats, let alone for which conflicts of interest are involved in gathering them) but it isn't looking good for the more "normal" assumptions about love and sex when some of the more "normal" assumptions about these people turned out to be wrong. Even marriage rates aren't necessarily a reliable metric, as they fail to prove adultery isn't happening, or that even when it isn't, fail to prove people are having sex with their spouses. If people speculate Tony Harris isn't getting any with his wife, or that Ostroeuropa isn't either (I forget which thread) then that constitutes an implicit admission that marriage doesn't prove anything and that anyone is fair game for such speculation.

Besides, if they believe whatever it is they believe, isn't it honourable of them to stand by whatever they believe in, even if it costs them a sex life? And if pretending not to share such assumptions improves one's sex lives, doesn't that cast doubt on the sincerity of those claiming to doubt those assumptions?

[Dystopian Florida]

I remember when a girl two years older than me, the pastor's daughter, followed me during a youth group function at night into the men's room, turned off the lights, and screamed "rape" at the top of her lungs. My view of women has never been the same since.

[Cannot think of a name]

I remember when a girl two years older than me, the pastor's daughter, followed me during a youth group function at night into the men's room, turned off the lights, and screamed "rape" at the top of her lungs. My view of women has never been the same since.

Four day old nation, no posts, provocative anecdote...


...checks out.

[Stellar Colonies]

I remember when a girl two years older than me, the pastor's daughter, followed me during a youth group function at night into the men's room, turned off the lights, and screamed "rape" at the top of her lungs. My view of women has never been the same since.

Four day old nation, no posts, provocative anecdote...


...checks out.

The signature too.

[Esternial]

Well, that's disappointing.

How about Thrungor Magnificul Distrugatorul Sufletelor? My wife is the granddaughter of an Orthodox archpriest; I could try and have a word with the Romanian patriarchate if you're worried that's an obstacle.

I feel like that's still going to cause some character limit issues. I don't want the kid to have problems getting a passport or some nonsense down the line. Even if the Romanians would allow it on a birth certificate, the kid won't be Romanian unless they naturalise since we're not permanent residents here. It would be the Canadian and USA governments they get to deal with for citizenship paperwork.

Also, I mean, what poor five year old is going to be sitting in school trying to spell Thrungor? I had enough trouble spelling my middle name and had to carry a coin around so I could spell check it until I was like seven.

Just don't use accents. I have an accent in my last name and whenever I have to enter it digitally on e.g. a government website and it doesn't support accents I become paranoid.

"Sir this account and its savings belong to Mr. Bélgium, you are Mr. Belgium..."

Or worse, it then translates it to Mr. BÃilgium or something.

[The Blaatschapen]

I feel like that's still going to cause some character limit issues. I don't want the kid to have problems getting a passport or some nonsense down the line. Even if the Romanians would allow it on a birth certificate, the kid won't be Romanian unless they naturalise since we're not permanent residents here. It would be the Canadian and USA governments they get to deal with for citizenship paperwork.

Also, I mean, what poor five year old is going to be sitting in school trying to spell Thrungor? I had enough trouble spelling my middle name and had to carry a coin around so I could spell check it until I was like seven.

Just don't use accents. I have an accent in my last name and whenever I have to enter it digitally on e.g. a government website and it doesn't support accents I become paranoid.

"Sir this account and its savings belong to Mr. Bélgium, you are Mr. Belgium..."

Or worse, it then translates it to Mr. BÃilgium or something.

You neatly sidestepped giving your identity away, Mr Ned Flanders.

[Aggicificicerous]

Yeah, well, you don't speak for 36 million people any more than I do.

When Canadians can convince their correctional officers to stop slamming prisoners head-first against the prison wall until they bleed all over the floor, you let me know.

What's going on? You're flitting from what's taught in schools, to polls (as if that's some indication of honest, also very strange), then to correctional officers as if it's all the same thing and we're all responsible for this. It's confounding. Are you saying that because prison guards may be abuse, people are hypocrites for wanting rehabilitation?

And yet, often times people's first instinct is to say "shoulda coulda would never did no gooda" instead of "that's not gonna happen." Methinks the exemptions you allude to either are different in theory than in practice, or vary from town to town too.
If the child support bills weren't what dragged him into poverty, people's first instinct would be to just say that. Not to wait until someone refutes their other arguments to get around to that one.

Again, people you just made up. I don't even know what you're talking about anymore, and I'm not sure you do either.

The side supporting the status quo on these laws.

What laws? The ones saying that parents are legally responsible for their children? Is that a 'side' now?

I'm referring to the net effect of the plurality of voters.

Who are these voters? What are their beliefs? How do they express themselves? How do you know they exist?

I don't need them. The pattern of being wrong, on the part of the people denying these systems are destroying lives, can be extrapolated from all the false assumptions they came to about my personal life or even what it was I was saying to all the other people they're probably wrong about too. I'm not about to expect them to be right about something for once in their lives.

Quite frankly, I'm not sure I'd trust the statistics they cited anyway. No walk of life is immune from incentives for dishonesty, whether their own or that of the people funding them. And when the public has enough of a blind spot on this issue to attempt to smear anyone trying to draw attention to it, it's plausible statisticians may be more scared of losing funding than they let on.

No, you do need statistics. You need evidence. You need something grounded in reality and not in conjecture or I'm done. All you've got is assertions on people who you imagine to exist. I want to know what group of people you think is responsible for this at the ballot box, because I think there probably are people out there who'd match your description. But do you understand who they are, or are you just drawing from a fevered dream?

[Dakini]

I feel like that's still going to cause some character limit issues. I don't want the kid to have problems getting a passport or some nonsense down the line. Even if the Romanians would allow it on a birth certificate, the kid won't be Romanian unless they naturalise since we're not permanent residents here. It would be the Canadian and USA governments they get to deal with for citizenship paperwork.

Also, I mean, what poor five year old is going to be sitting in school trying to spell Thrungor? I had enough trouble spelling my middle name and had to carry a coin around so I could spell check it until I was like seven.

Just don't use accents. I have an accent in my last name and whenever I have to enter it digitally on e.g. a government website and it doesn't support accents I become paranoid.

"Sir this account and its savings belong to Mr. Bélgium, you are Mr. Belgium..."

Or worse, it then translates it to Mr. BÃilgium or something.

Oh, I know. Our preferred girl's name can have umlauts which we're going to omit for official documents and use in the unofficial spelling if it turns out to be a girl. Life is hard enough without having accents in the legal version of your name.

Also, my partner worked with a woman who has a hyphenated first name, which is apparently also a nightmare to deal with (hyphenated surnames are fine, but nobody knows how to deal with a hyphenated given name).

[New Tryphalia]

I don’t care who replaces Trudeau, as long as it isn’t Trudeau.

[Dakini]

I don’t care who replaces Trudeau, as long as it isn’t Trudeau.

Sir, this is a Wendy's.

[New Tryphalia]

I don’t care who replaces Trudeau, as long as it isn’t Trudeau.

Sir, this is a Wendy's.

Weirdest response yet.

[Dakini]

Sir, this is a Wendy's.

Weirdest response yet.

Not nearly as weird as screaming about Trudeau in a thread about Bill Maher and incels.

[New Tryphalia]

Weirdest response yet.

Not nearly as weird as screaming about Trudeau in a thread about Bill Maher and incels.

Trudeau is extremely hostile to men’s rights and men in general. It’s quite relevant.

[Dakini]

Not nearly as weird as screaming about Trudeau in a thread about Bill Maher and incels.

Trudeau is extremely hostile to men’s rights and men in general. It’s quite relevant.

It's also telling that you associate incels with "men's rights".

[New Tryphalia]

Trudeau is extremely hostile to men’s rights and men in general. It’s quite relevant.

It's also telling that you associate incels with "men's rights".

He’s hostile to all men. Internalized misandrist.

[Dakini]

It's also telling that you associate incels with "men's rights".

He’s hostile to all men. Internalized misandrist.

Okay, whatever you say buddy.

[Galactic Transylvania]

"Should we address the real issues that men face? No. We should associate ourselves with antisocial losers who are upset women like men who occasionally get a shower."

-MRAs

[Ethel mermania]

It's also telling that you associate incels with "men's rights".

He’s hostile to all men. Internalized misandrist.

You see, women's bodies are beautiful. But men's bodies, I see them everywhere. Lockers rooms, cocks all over the place. ( shudder) --- Reg Dunlop

[Stellar Colonies]

"Should we address the real issues that men face? No. We should associate ourselves with antisocial losers who are upset women like men who occasionally get a shower."

-MRAs

"Not real MRAs"

[GuessTheAltAccount]

What's going on? You're flitting from what's taught in schools, to polls (as if that's some indication of honest, also very strange), then to correctional officers as if it's all the same thing and we're all responsible for this. It's confounding. Are you saying that because prison guards may be abuse, people are hypocrites for wanting rehabilitation?

In case it's not obvious yet, the recurring theme is to contrast' voters actions with their words.

Again, people you just made up. I don't even know what you're talking about anymore, and I'm not sure you do either.

Not made up, but pieced together from the words and actions of separate people, and taking an average thereof.

What laws? The ones saying that parents are legally responsible for their children? Is that a 'side' now?

The side saying that whether or not he used a condom, whether his sex with her was under the belief that she wouldn't keep the resulting baby even if the condom broke, whether or not she got pregnant off him on purpose to try to trap him with a baby, etc... are all completely irrelevant to how much of the child support should be paid by him and how much by the government, how much leniency or a grace period should be granted if he can't afford it yet, etc...

Who are these voters? What are their beliefs? How do they express themselves? How do you know they exist?

Because Canada would look very different if they believed differently than they do.

No, you do need statistics. You need evidence.

NSG, when making Ostroeuropa out to be not getting any with his wife, when making anyone expressing negative stereotypes about cheerleaders out to be an incel, when making anyone claiming girls 'prefer a macho man over some guy who's just like her female friends' out to be not as cool as other guys and therefore doing nothing but jerking off to anime and crying, and that's just counting the stuff they said about others here, before you get into the stuff said about myself:
"Evidence? We don't need no stinking evidence!"

NSG now:
"You do need statistics. You need evidence."

Fahran ought to sue you for plagiarism of her particular approach to virtue-signaling.

Where "reasoning" ends and "evidence" begins is a subjective matter, but where one side of this debate has been wrong about everything they presumed about myself, and now is hypocritical on top of that, yeah, I think I can extrapolate the pattern to this issue.

But if that's not enough, how about you answer this; so long as "dead-broke dads" are a thing, why should we trust that the system has adequate safeguards in place that any teenage father is safe from becoming one?

You need something grounded in reality and not in conjecture or I'm done.

It's more than "conjecture" to extrapolate one side's disproportionate pattern of hypocrisy, smears, and outright falsehoods about the people about whom they speculate.

Not that I think anyone on this site was ever sincere about caring about evidence in the first place, in light of all of the above.