Posted on 12/18/2022 4:33:06 PM PST by DallasBiff
Incel believers are members of an online subculture who define themselves as unable to find a romantic or sexual partner despite desiring one.
(Excerpt) Read more at the-sun.com ...
Thanks for your "walk down Memory Lane," but this isn't 1946 and "The Best Years of Our Lives" anymore.
Dateable women routinely list "height = 6 ft or above" as one of their basic requirements for a "match."
I know that, in reality, this requirement isn't actually that "hard and fast" - it's more like a whim - but then, they feel so entitled that they believe that they can list a series of parameters (height, income, age, etc.) that successively reduce the pool of eligible men from 100% to 10% to 1% to 0.1%. (They are the mathematical equivalent of illiterate - namely: innumerate - and so don't grasp that fact.)
Rollo Tomasi, Kevin Samuels (R.I.P.), Joker ("Better Bachelor,") etc. have convincingly pointed out (and provided the necessary statistical evidence to back up the claim) that modern women in the dating market don't understand the consequences of eliminating 99%+ of the pool of available candidates. They think that they're simply so "awesome" ("Disney princesses," "queens") that they "deserve" what they want and would be doing themselves a disservice if they "settled for less."
They don't understand or simply can't grasp (psychologically) that they are competing with virtually all other women on the dating market for this extremely rarified group of "Alphas" or "High-Value Men."
The typical woman doesn't even see men who don't conform to their (unrealistic) ideals. Nor do they see the droves of fellow women with whom they are competing - so they can't comprehend the mathematical unlikelihood of the task they have set for themselves.
As Tomasi et al. also point out: Many such women do succeed in occasionally attracting the (short-term) attention of a "High-Value Man" (who, in reality, has no other intention than to "pump and dump" them - NOT become involved in a Long-Term Relationship). This only reinforces the fallacious belief (of 80% of all dating women) that they are on a par with the top 10% of all dating men. "But I had plenty of High-Value men 'hook up' for me for a wild weekend! That proves that I'm a High-Value Woman!"
These women - some of whom are at best 3s or 4s on the 1-10 scale - thus deceive themselves into thinking that they must be 7s or 8s.
You will also routinely hear from such women, when they hit their 30s, that they have become only more valuable to men (i.e., that their Sexual Market Value has increased) because they are now "more mature," "more thoughtful," have better finances, or higher educational degrees (as though HVM are actually looking for that!).
In short, society at large (incl. feminism, Disneyism, etc.) has done all it can to convince these women that they have a SMV far higher than it actually is - and that that SMV is constantly rising as they age - instead of the reverse.
At the same time, our sick society is trying to persuade men to believe that they must "lack self-confidence" or be "weak men" if they are not willing and eager to come to the rescue of these women (many of whom are, by then, single mothers with multiple "baby-daddies") haunting the dating market well past their "best-used-by" date.
Regards,
Untrue! Even only "average"-looking girls can, for a brief time (between 18 and, say, 25) get by on their youth and perkiness - without having to make any significant investment. If they misuse this "window of opportunity," of course, they will pay for it - later.
But then, they can become feminists, stop decrying the "male gaze" and instead lament that they have become "invisible," and school their younger sisters to despise men and "tear down the Patriarchy."
Regards,
See post 97 on women confusing the map with the territory.
Your descriptions are accurate in general—but that is not “actionable intelligence” in military terms.
Women need to be led—and any man can lead them.
Women are falling into the bad patterns you describe because many men have not been trained on leadership—so most women drift into the default mode you described.
You are grossly underestimating the effort required to deprogram young, impressionable women (no other demographic group is so easy to program, so loathe to "swim against the current" and adopt an unpopular standpoint).
Are you seriously claiming that 25-year-olds have the intellectual wherewithal and social competence to fight practically ALL OF SOCIETY?
Regards,
This is the terminology of Holy Mother Church.
So-called InCels, probably nearly all of whom are engaging in habitual self-abuse to the extent of near-addiction or addiction, are destroying both their souls AND their minds.
A sinful lifestyle darkens the intellect just as surely as night follows day.
Once again—hard and fast Church doctrine, arrived at and solidified over the course of two millenia.
That’s all One Guy is getting at.
“25-year-olds have the intellectual wherewithal and social competence”
They were brainwashed—they can be un-brainwashed one at a time.
In addition some are more brainwashed than others.
There are many subtleties to this game—winners break the rules and find niches that work for them.
The "actionable intelligence" (i.e., concrete advice) comes later - much later. First, the young men have to be themselves "deprogrammed" ("Red-Pilled").
They have to be made to understand that, in today's dating market, saying, e.g., "That's a lovely dress you're wearing, Mrs. Cleaver," will mark you - not as thoughtful, considerate, polite - but as hopelessly behind the times.
Deprogramming a young "Blue-Pilled" man will require just as much time and effort as deprogramming an adherent of Jim Jones. It simply isn't enough to advise them to "radiate self-confidence!"
It is a long and complicated philosophical journey.
Regards,
I sincerely believe that one would have more luck plopping someone from the present down in 1938 Germany, and expecting him to "stem the tide" by holding "earnest conversations" with individual Germans.
You are talking like it's possible to isolate a single young woman and "work on her" and "turn her around" - independent of the lifetime of indoctrination she has been subjected to and apart from the sea of opposite impulses she is being constantly fed by her equally warped peers.
Regards,
I gave a long list of what young men need to do.
“Self confidence” is just one of many needed attributes which fit under the umbrella of “leadership”.
Leadership is the skill to persuade a person (male or female) who is marching in one direction to follow you and go in a different direction.
Any man can learn it.
One other comment on leadership—if you work for a good company (with strong leadership) you can see how young people with mediocre work ethic can be transformed into highly productive employees.
It is the same concept—totally doable—and the “tips and tricks” of leadership are very well documented.
Most people want to be led—but in many cases they have not exposed to people who know how to do it.
To be a manager you have to be able to manage. You need people skills to be a manager whether it is of a McDonalds kitchen or the boardroom at GM, he lacked those skills. His sneering tirade was instantly disqualifying whatever piece of paper he may have possessed. This is particularly true if you are dealing with a business that doesn’t pay much (which I had mentioned), so no entertainment business type extravagant budgets as an inducement to keep people on board.
One other comment on your 1938 Germany point—I am not talking about raising an army to overthrow a government.
The goal should be to persuade one person at a time to participate in a little journey.
A young man does not need to seduce every woman on the planet—that is why “statistics” and “big picture analysis” are easily overcome by one on one contact on the ground.
Surely you have led someone somewhere at some point in your life.....
But even people like I had girlfriends in high school. It was more expected back then that you asked a girl to go to the high school dance with you and if you were especially shy, the other girls would just find somebody for you, even if it ended up being an equally socially awkward girl named Molly with librarian glasses, straight greasy hair and a floral pantsuit with chunky shoes.
How they would do it is something like this, they'd tell the mousy girl that this "boy" has a crush on her but he is too shy to ask her out himself. Then they'd go to the boy and say how this girl really really likes him and that she would love to go to the dance with him. Then they'd finagle getting the two of them together, like at a lunchroom cafeteria table, where the boy would eventually struggle to get out the words that would get him a date for the dance after all.
Yes, the more popular kids would giggle among themselves at the trainwreck couplings they would engineer for these school functions among the "loser" set but the upshot is that everybody ended up with a date, even the ugly ducklings of the class. Sometimes it even worked out and those kids grew up to get married to each other.
Another big difference with dating back then was that it was always up to the boy to ask for the date and then to figure out where to go and what to do during the date. The girl was always just along for the ride. The boy paid for everything and at the end of the night, it was up to the boy to read the body language and determine whether or not to try and kiss the girl. A date that did not end in a kiss was always a clear signal that a second date was not in the offing. Even the most socially awkward boy understood that so if he liked the girl, he had to try to find a way to kiss her without getting completely ashamed and embarrassed. Even if he was on her doorstep to drop her off and was pretty sure that her parents were looking out the window at them, he had to find a way to get that kiss. If she simply said good night and slipped through the door to safety, he knew that he had blown it and would put his hands in his pockets and casually walk back down her driveway, doing his best to outwardly hide his disgrace but on the inside, he'd be a broken young man. At least until the next date where he would have a chance once again.
Dating was high pressure in those days. But we forced ourselves through them and nobody ever called themselves "incel". There were some boys that ended up becoming priests however. One wonders if they would have gone to the seminary had they been more successfully dating girls.
Then you read a different Heartiste than I did. A number of his posts referred to things like “Make America White Again” and complaints about racial diversity, and one had a picture of a noose in reference to race relations. Supremacist? Maybe not. Racist? Definitely, IMO.
But it was also a good red pill site for men.
Just be a damned gentleman.
Good idea, but YMMV if she's a modern feminist.
I can’t resist—another post on leadership.
For those who have not thought about it, leadership is not what you say.
It is what you do.
Bad leaders talk a good game but are hypocrites.
Good leaders inspire with their determination to reach clearly identified and identifiable goals, hard work, positive attitude, listening skills, sense of humor and humanity (really caring about people) and ability to change course as needed. They make the journey (whether it is a date or a work-day) both challenging and fun.
That is the environment where outside (disruptive) forces become irrelevant.
Thanks for that stroll down "Memory Lane!" On our next episode of "Leave it to Beaver," the fun begins when Wally...
Dating was high pressure in those days. But we forced ourselves through them and nobody ever called themselves "incel".
The term "incel" does not generally refer to nerdy high school sophomores or the president of the high school chess club, who couldn't get a date to save themselves. It refers to frikkin' grown men who, after years of disappointment, rejection, etc., have come to the realization that the cards are stacked against them and/or that the dating scene is "toxic" and that it is hopeless to continue.
Regards,
Speaking for myself, dating was mostly a humiliating experience in high school. But it was necessary for me to enter adulthood with those experiences as I know knew what to do and what not to do with the opposite sex with regard to dating.
Would you be interested in a position open at my company? We write the captions for inspirational posters!
You were the one talking about the need for "actionable intelligence."
But this sounds more like "feel-good" platitudes.
The subject at hand is "incels," and the (zero) dating prospects of same. In that context, your observations are about as useful and actionable as the anodyne patriotic speeches a that Oliver Douglas (played Eddie Albert) used to give on "Green Acres."
Regards,
But it's a hopeless cause when it isn't merely the "outside environment." When, rather, the sick culture has permeated every niche and cranny of the thinking of the average member of our society.
Most young women are so thoroughly indoctrinated (and I repeat: Young women are the demographic most susceptible to "group think" and least willing to "swim against the current" of public opinion) and saturated with the fallacious thinking imparted to them by pop culture (Disney, etc.) that they are incapable of being "saved" from themselves. They have drunk this propaganda with their mother's milk.
And indeed: In the short term, it is completely in their own interest to reject any suggestion not in line with pop culture.
They won't have to "pay the piper" until they "hit the Wall" in their 30s.
But then, it's too late! Since the nerdy hard-workers they rejected during their "party years" are unwilling to "bail them out."
Regards,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.