E
I decided to make a list of many myths people believe about romantically/sexually inexperienced people. Many people believe in these myths and I am here to debunk them all.
Myth 1: There are zero virgins left after a certain age (e.g. 18 or 21 or 25 or something)
Many people believe this myth. Nope. There are still virgins after 18 or 21, etc. Most people think almost everyone (95%) loses their virginity by the age of 18 and that 100% of people have by the age of 21 or so. Many people think there couldn't be any virgins at 25 or 30. If you're that age and you tell people you're a virgin they won't even believe you sometimes.
Unfortunately, the CDC didn't make any new surveys figuring out how many people are a virgin as of 2022 (recent years). According to the CDC data from 2006-2008, of men ages 25-29, 3.8% have never had any sexual contact with the opposite sex, and 3.1% of men ages 30-34 haven't. 1.3% of men ages 35-39 and 1.2% of men in their early 40s haven't. This is compared to 3.4% of women ages 25-29 being virgins, 1.9% of women in ages 30-34 being virgins, and 0.4% of women in their early 40s being virgins. Prevalence varies, with some studies showing that 5% of men at 25 and 3% of women that age are virgins. In fact, in the UK, they found 12.5% of 26 year olds are now virgins and that virginity was more common in recent years, but almost 80% lost it by age 19. According to CDC in 2006-2008, 12% of women and 14% of men age 20-24 were virgins, so this is like prevalence of left-handedness. These percents might be higher because many virgins don't admit they're virgins.
Guess what? Less than 3% of YOUNG people (they're more likely to admit it and most are pro-gay) identify as gay or lesbian, which remained stable in the past few decades while the percent admitting to being bisexual skyrocketed. In 2022, only 2.5% of Generation Z reported being gay and 2% were lesbians. 15% were bisexual, while other generations were way less likely to admit to being bi. Just 2.1% said they're trans. In May 2022, on pew research polls, 2% of young adults said they're trans and 3% said they're non-binary.
So, the odds of meeting an adult virgins in their mid-20s or older are like the odds of being a gay person or trans person. Admittedly these percentages for gay or trans people could be higher because they won't admit it but the same could be true for virgins. Also, these people who admit it could be ones who are out of the closet, so it could be maybe like the odds of meeting an openly gay or trans person (although many closet ones might admit it in anonymous surveys too). Nonetheless, most gays and lesbians are out of the closet, unlike bisexuals. Maybe that's why the percentage of young people identifying as gay didn't skyrocket much in recent decades unlike the percentage of young people identifying as bi. 75% of gays/lesbians said all or most people important to them in real life know their sexual orientation, compared to only19% of bisexuals. Only 23% of bisexuals said SOME knew. Only 11% of gay people came out to a few or none of them, compared to 57% of bisexuals. So it could be most gay people are honestly about admitting they're gay in polls unless they're a gay elder.
Myth 2: If a man is a virgin or never could find a girlfriend, it means his standards arec too high or he only goes after supermodels or women "out of his league".
Quite the opposite actually. In fact, MANY people like to assume this about virgin men, but just because many people say this is true about them, doesn't mean it's true (why do you think the word "myth" exists?). Any anecdote "proving" this is common isn't valid evidence (contrary to what many people think, anecdotes aren't valid evidence and are often unverifiable). Even if you have met virgin guys who only want supermodels, you probably met MANY MORE who didn't. You probably don't remember them because they aren't as noteworthy or because they never even told you they're inexperienced.
This study shows it's a myth. Link to study here.
110 volunteers with 47 male and 63 female (mean age=22.36 years, SD=3.64) (the vast majority of them were heterosexual) participated in this study.
Next paragraph right below but read this: according to the methodology, they wanted to use average-looking people because it's the best way to measure how high a person's standards can be (because many people get attracted to conventionally attractive people but not many like ugly people. Apparently, women are more conventionally attractive than men on average:
In the study, inexperienced men had more romantic/sexual interest in a woman with medium physical attractiveness. Oxytocin made inexperienced men more selective. Inexperienced men were more romantically interested in medium attractiveness women than experienced men. In other words, they were less selective than experienced men. With oxytocin, inexperienced men were only slightly less interested romantically in medium attractiveness women than experienced men (in other words: only slightly more selective). When it came to romantic interest, oxytocin made both experienced and inexperienced men more selective, especially inexperienced men. It reduced romantic interest for both types of men, especially inexperienced men. Inexperienced men had more sexual interest in medium attractiveness women than experienced men, but less sexual interest in medium attractiveness women than experienced men when the men all were taking oxytocin. Oxytocin reduced sexual interest in inexperienced men but did not affect sexual interest in experienced men. In short, inexperienced men are less selective than experienced men, but are slightly more selective and officially more selective than experienced men when it comes to oxytocin. Inexperienced men have their romantic/sexual interest reduced with oxytocin.
On the other hand, inexperienced women were slightly less romantically interested in medium-attractiveness men than experienced women, therefore slightly more picky than experienced women. Under oxytocin, however, they were officially more romantically interested in medium attractiveness men than experienced women (AKA less selective than experienced women). Oxytocin increased romantic interest in inexperienced women but decreased romantic interest in experienced women. When it came to sexual interest, they were a little less sexually interested in medium attractiveness men than experienced women (AKA a little pickier than experienced women), but officially more sexually interested in medium attractiveness men than experienced women when both were under oxytocin (AKA less picky than experienced women). Oxytocin reduced sexual interest in experienced women but slightly increased sexual interest in inexperienced women. In short, inexperienced women are a little pickier than experienced women romantically/sexually but less picky than experienced women romantically/sexually when it comes oxytocin. Oxytocin increased interest levels in inexperienced women but reduced interest levels in experienced women.
Men had more romantic interest in average looking women than women did in average looking men (although inexperienced women but notexperienced women had just as much romantic interest as men in average-looking people of the opposite sex). When it came to sexual interest, both experienced men and inexperienced men were both more sexually interested in the opposite sex's average looking women than women (both experienced and inexperienced) were sexually interested in average-looking men regardless of oxytocin.
Are there virgin men who struggle to find a girlfriend who only want supermodels? Sure, but it's rare. And men who chase after supermodels might not necessarily be inexperienced with relationships or sex. It could be there were times where they did find an average-looking girlfriend because they personally found her very attractive or maybe they found a conventionally attractive woman as a girlfriend and had luck.
Myth 3: Virgins are clingy
Many people believe this about virgins, and no, it isn't often true. In fact, it's really patronizing when people say "I won't date a virgin because it's a huge responsibility taking someone's virginity and they might be clingy". This type of attitude towards virgins is quite common. It's like they think they can dictate what you emotionally can or cannot handle or what your behavior should be like just because of your mere level of experience.
No, virgins aren't particularly clingy, and this stereotype is especially ascribed to virgin women. But it isn't true for virgin women nor virgin men for that matter.
In multiple studies, they measured the love styles of inexperienced people, sexually experienced people and sexually coercive people. They looked at both men and women.
Study 1
173 university men at a private Midwestern university were recruited and the average age was 20.94 (SD=3.48). 46 of the men were inexperienced (26.6%), 62 of them (35.8%) were sexually experienced but no coercive and 63 of them (36.4%) were sexually coercive because they have engaged in sexual coercion or violence at least once.
One can measure clinginess perhaps by looking at love styles, which is a person's idea of what a relationship should be like. They were asked to describe their love styles, and these are the results:
Virgin men scored highest on agape and sexually coercive men scored lowest (but still scored quite high), which emphasizes unconditional love and caring for a person. Ludus was a manipulative form of love style focusing on deception, low commitment, and playful teasing. They might womanize too. Sexually inexperienced scored higher on it than experienced men but not nearly as high as coercive men, so this doesn't signal manipulative or womanizing behavior from virgin men. Virgin men scored lowest on Eros while experienced, non-coercive men scored highest, but all scored quite high. Eros was particularly clingy and emphasized extremely passionate love focusing on deepening the relationship.
Study 2
In a sample of 185 college women (mean age=21.02, SD=5.21) at a private midwestern university, they classified them into three groups: virgin (27%), sexually experienced but not coercive (54%), and sexually coercive (18.2%). Measuring their love style attachments, they found this:
Admittedly, they scored higher on Mania than experienced women but not as high as coercive women, and that gap could've been bigger anyways. but they scored lower than the other 2 groups on Eros. They don't appear to be particularly clingy then.
Study 3
123 college men (mean age=19.6, SD=1.33) were in a study. Two-thirds were freshmen or sophomores. 20% were virgins, 34% were coercive, and 46% were experienced but non-coercive. Here are the results when looking at their ideas of what relationships should be like:
Eros and Mania are clingy lovestyles, especially mania. They admittedly scored higher on mania, but that gap could've been way bigger, but scored lowest on Eros and lowest on Ludus (so they clearly aren't predatory).
They scored highest on "when my lover gets too dependent on me, I want to back off a little.", which shows they aren't clingy. They didn't score that high on predatory statements, sometimes really low.
They scored lowest on secure attachment style but that could be due to relationship inexperience and thus fearing what the first relationship would be like. They scored high on avoidant attachment style which is anti-clingy. They scored lowest, however, on anxious/ambivalent, so they aren't needy.
They scored lowest on trust in what their idea of relationships and/or their actual experiences in relationships are like, but this could be due to inexperience with relationships and thus anxiety over experiencing it the first time. They scored higher on fear of closeness which is anti-clingy. They scored lowest on jealousy. They admittedly scored higher on obsessive preoccupation but the gap could've been bigger.
So they don't appear to be particularly clingy, at least not too much. But remember, studies on this could vary.
In fact, while we all hear about virgins who cling, we got to realize that virgins who don't cling aren't anything remarkable of a good gossip story so we don't hear stories about virgins who don't cling. Anecdotes, however, aren't valid evidence and anecdotes can vary and won't necessarily represent what is typically true.
It could be that many virgins cling, but it could be age that causes it, not virginity per se. According to this article, which explains it perfectly:
A person you take the virginity of isn't going to think of you the rest of your life or their life because you took their virginity. Do you think all day about your first partner? Probably not, so this shouldn't be different.
In fact, studies show that those who lose their virginity late (after age 19) tend to report MUCH better relationships in young adulthood. They had MUCH more satisfactory relationships. Sounds like virgins aren't necessarily clingy and can be good significant others.
So, this idea of virgins being clingy or taking their virginity will be dangerous is stupid and patronizing, and it infantilizes them by portraying them as "manchildren" or "womanchildren" who cannot distinguish love from sex. People portray virgins as still mentally children and unable to distinguish the two. You are acting like you can dictate what they can or cannot handle or be ready for or what their behavior or sexuality is like based off their mere level of experience. This is not only bullshit but it is patronizing and subtle virgin shaming. Are there virgins over 18 who cling? Sure, but is it more common among them than among experienced people? No. Besides, there could be experienced people who are clingy anyways.
Myth 4: People who lack relationship experience will be bad with relationships.
Actually, the study two paragraphs above shows that those who lose their virginity late (after age 19) report MUCH better relationships in young adulthood with much more satisfaction. These people had less romantic partners than people who started as a teen and about 60% of them never dated as a teenager. Relationships are about communication, and as long as you're good with communication, you're good with relationships, regardless of "experience". There are some subjects in life that you get better with through experience depending on the characteristics of the subject and how it works, like karate or singing, but relationships aren't one of them.
Myth 5: If a man is a virgin, he was a reject who no woman wanted but if a woman is a virgin, she is simply waiting until marriage.
This is why virgin women are labeled a tease or a prude or why virgin men are labeled losers. I think this assumption exists because men pursue, women get pursued. Men are expected to be the initiators and thus are expected to do everything they can to find a sexual partner. Women were the pursued, and are expected to be the gatekeepers. Although virgin women are stigmatized too now and women who have premarital sex are now seen as normal, historically, women were expected to wait until marriage but not men (men thus would get with hookers). People think if a woman is a virgin, she must've been pursued by many men already and is saving herself for someone special and is old-fashioned. Men were always expected to pursue or be initiators of sex, so people assume he tried to find a partner and no woman wanted him. The idea of a man waiting until marriage is implausible to many people because men were expected to do whatever they can to have sex. Women who wait until marriage are seen as old-school because nowadays, everyone is expected to have premarital sex. Long ago, only women were expected to wait until marriage. Men weren't except maybe in some religious families if anything.
Admittedly, it is uncommon for virgin women to be involuntary virgins (virgins who simply never had the opportunity) and it is quite common for virgin men to be involuntary virgins. Nonetheless, it's just as common for virgin men to be voluntary virgins and there are a minority of virgin women who simply never had the opportunity. In the study "Virgins at Age 26: Who Are They?", they found that among virgins at age 26 in Switzerland, 47.2% of virgin men said they had not had the occasion compared to just 15.5% of virgin women. Most virgin women were virgins by choice. 45.9% never found the right person, 10.3% were virgins for religious/morla reasons, 19% are waiting until marriage, 5.9% were not emotionally ready and 0.6% wanted to wait until they're older. Many men were virgins by choice though. 18.6% did not find the right person, 10.9% are abstaining from sex for religious/moral reasons, 12.8% are waiting until marriage, and 3.2% are not emotionally ready. Some men are virgins by choice and some not by choice, it's half-and-half. Involuntary virgin women were relatively uncommon. Nonetheless, both exist, but voluntary virgin men are way more common than involuntary virgin women.
Myth 6: Virgin men are more misogynistic (or misogynistic men are often virgins bitter they don't have sex).
Quite the opposite actually. It's really rare for misogynistic men to be virgins, and the vast majority of virgin men, including the involuntary ones, aren't misogynists.
In a study of 2,703 teenagers in Spain ages 14 to 20 (M=15.89; SD=1.29), including 1,350 teenage boys (M = 15.95; SD = 1.30) and 1,353 teenage girls (M = 15.83; SD = 1.28), researchers found a very strong correlation between sexism and sexual and romantic success. The study revealed that sexually active teenage boys have more benevolent sexism, more hostile sexism, and more ambivalent sexism than non-sexually active teenage boys. Additionally, benevolently sexist men had their first sex at an earlier age and hostile sexist men had a lower proportion of condom use. The study also revealed that women are attracted to benevolently sexist men. The study revealed that teenage boys without sexual experience had the least amount of hostile sexism, benevolent sexism and ambivalent sexism. Boys with non-penetrative sexual experience had more of the three types of sexism, and boys with penetrative sexual experience had the most amount of the three types of sexism.
Another study took 555 men ages 18 to 25 (mean age=20.6, standard deviation=2.1) and had them fill out surveys testing them on how misogynistic they are, how much they adhere to traditional masculine stereotypes, and other characteristics. They had discovered that misogynistic men (N=44) had more one-night stands, significantly more sex partners, watched more pornography, committed more sexual assault and intimate partner violence, were more likely to pay for sexual services (43% of misogynistic men have paid for sexual services before), and often were involved in fraternities (58%), sports teams (86%), and intramural sports (84%). Misogynistic were compared and contrasted with normative men, normative men involved in male activities or groups, and sex focused men (men who engaged in an exceptionally large amount of sexual activity but are not necessarily misogynistic).
The researchers state:
Rapists tend to be highly sexually experienced men.
Rapists often were found to have misogynistic or hostile attitudes towards women, and misogynistic men were far more likely to commit sexual assault. Rapists DO have consensual sex. In fact, studies have consistently shown that rapists typically have far more consensual sex partners than other men, more dating partners, more one night stands, lose their virginity earlier than other men and begin dating at an earlier age than other men. Men with unrestricted sociosexuality (positive attitudes and behaviors endorsing promiscuity or casual sex, etc.) were found to be more sexually active, have more frequent sex, lose their virginity early and had far more sex partners, and they were found to have adversarial sexual beliefs, conservative attitudes about women, high rape myth acceptance, and past sexual aggression.
In the book Rape Investigation Handbook by John O. Savino and Brent E. Turvey, they showed studies showing how many rapists attract women and are sexually active with many women. "Groth (1979, p. 5) dispels the myth of the predominance of 'loner' and socially outcast rapists by explaining that 'one third of the offenders that we worked with were married and sexually active with their wives at the time of their assaults. . . . Of those offenders who were not married (that is, single, seperated, or divorced), the majority were actively involved in a variety of consenting sexual relationships with other persons at the time of their offenses." Also, "furthermore, Groth and Hobson (1983, p. 161), who studied 1,000 offenders over a 16-year period, found the following: "All of the offenders we have seen were sexually active males involved in consensual relationships at the time of their offense. No one raped because he had no other outlet for his sexual needs."
No link between male virginity and misogyny or violence.
Studies have found no link between male virginity and misogyny.
In a survey of 2,972 college men from a nationwide, quasi-random sample of college classes from 32 universities, of all the men who admitted to committing acts that met the definition of rape (84% of the men who admitted to rape believed they were not a rapist at all), just 12% were virgins, with the average age of the rapists at the time of the rape being 18.5. This is a low percentage and at 18, virginity is not as unusual compared to later on in life. Admittedly, 33% of men who attempted rape were virgins. Nonetheless, these were college men and these men were in a time period of life where virginity is less rare compared to later in life. Besides, it could be because virgin men often don't know how to have sex or the anatomy of the vulva and thus it could become an attempted instead of completed rape. Nonetheless, a majority of attempted rapists (67%) were not virgins.
In a sample of 304 male college students ages 19 to 46 with an average age of 21.3 (SD = 2.87), of all the college men who admitted to committing sexual aggression, only 1 was a virgin and virgin men comprised 46.3% of the non-violent group of men. The non-violent men scored lower than the sexually violent men in terms of hostility toward women, acceptance of interpersonal violence, and rape proclivity, and the virgin men in the non-violent group did not differ in any variables (not even hostility toward women, acceptance of interpersonal violence, and rape proclivity) from the sexually experienced men who were also non-violent. This means virgin men were no more likely than other men to be misogynistic, accepting of interpersonal violence or prone to rape.
In a sample of 136 men ages 17 to 36 (Mean age = 20.5, SD = 2.6), they found that while sexually coercive men had more sexual experiences and higher self-perceived mating success, they found that sexually inexperienced men had a low likelihood to commit sexual violence, less preference for casual sex and partner variety, and less antisocial tendencies.
In a study of 191 college men (mean age = 19.1) including 23 virgin men (12% of the sample), virgin men scored lower than sexually experienced men and sexually aggressive men on willingness or acceptance toward using exploitation or force on a woman sexually. Virgin men also scored lower on being aroused by the idea of raping or committing sexual coercion against a woman and getting away with it, including scoring lower on the hate, sex, or power aspects of raping or committing sexual coercion against women.
In a sample of college students, it was found that virgin men scored lower than non-virgin men on the Sexual Narcissism Scale, including exploitation (e.g.: “I could easily convince an unwilling partner to have sex with me”), entitlement (e.g.: “I should be permitted to have sex whenever I want it”, and skill (e.g.: “I really know how to please a partner sexually”). Among women, virgin women scored higher on exploitation but scored slightly lower on entitlement and much lower on skill compared to non-virgin women. Nonetheless, both virgin and non-virgin men scored higher than virgin and non-virgin women on exploitation and entitlement, so this does not suggest virgin women are high on sexual narcissism. Additionally, despite virgin men scoring lower than non-virgin men on the overall Sexual Narcissism Scale and virgin women scoring higher than non-virgin women, both virgin men and virgin women scored higher than non-virgin men and women on low empathy (e.g.: “The feelings of my sexual partners don’t usually concern me”). This could be, however, due to lack their sexual experience making them not know about communication during sex rather than lack of morals or hostility toward the opposite sex. Although sexual narcissism was significantly associated with sexual aggression and coercion among non-virgins, it was not significantly associated with sexual aggression and coercion among virgins.
Admittedly, in one sample of 65 men with a mean age of 19.9 years (SD = 1.3), of the 15 virgin men, the virgin men reported more attraction to sexual aggression (M = 12.40) than the experienced men (M = 7.98). Nonetheless, the sample size of virgin men was small and aforementioned studies showed results indicating the opposite finding.
Admittedly, these studies typically sample men who are often around 18 to 21 years old, which is not a later-in-life virgin, but these findings are still noteworthy and still study young adults rather than teenage minors (it is much more common for teenage minors to be virgins). Additionally, many Incels.is users are often between the ages of 18 and 25, with many being 18 to 21, identical to this age group. Furthermore, people who are virgins or who have a low number of sexual partners by young adulthood engage in less antisocial behaviors as adolescents (Contrary to popular belief, antisocial doesn't mean socially withdrawn or introverted. That's being asocial. Antisocial means lacking empathy and violating the rights of others, being characteristic of antisocial personality disorder.).
Misogynistic men aren't usually virgins. The Internet and social media likes to emphasize ones who are (e.g.: incels who believe in the blackpill philosophy and men with "nice guy syndrome"). Nonetheless, these men are rare. Social media likes to emphasize them so much that it makes them seem more common than they really are. For example, most people probably didn't know what "nice guy syndrome" was until the Internet told them about it. In fact, "nice guy syndrome" is just some overly nice, excessively attentive guy who gets frustrated from consistent rejections and then concludes that women didn't want him because he's nice and only want jerks after seeing himself fail to find a girlfriend and watching violent men or domestic abusers have girlfriends. It isn't just any guy, no matter how nice he claims to be or no matter how successful at dating he is, who is simply being nice to get sex as a reward. In fact, most overly nice, excessively attentive men probably don't have nice guy syndrome. Also, before the Internet had an obsession with nice guy syndrome, the definition of a nice guy was simply an overly nice, unassertive guy who got bullied and taken advantage of by people because he's too nice and women found him unattractive because they consider him a pushover. It wasn't until the 2010s when the Internet changed the definition because of these guys they detected who really only exist on the Internet. In fact, 90% of the time when i hear about nice guy syndrome online, it's just the Internet complaining about them rather than me actually seeing one. And r/niceguys is a karmawhore subreddit. Those text message conversations on there show the same fuckin thing each time and sometimes really satirical conversations. I won't be shocked if at least half those conversations were fake and just some friend they hired to feign nice guy syndrome for karma points. Same could be true for r/creepyPMs. In fact, many of those guys featured on r/niceguys might not have nice guy syndrome. They might say "why are you ignoring me? I'm just being nice" in the text message conversation when she ignores them or shows disinterest, but that doesn't signal nice guy syndrome. He could be taking her disinterest personally and could be saying that to disarm her because he thinks disinterest means she hates him or something. Maybe that's why they called themselves nice. The idea of being a nice guy and women going after jerks doesn't necessarily enter these guys' heads. There's a lot of ambiguity. If these guys said: "how dare you ignore me! You probably only like jerks instead of nice guys like me who will treat you right", then yeah, that's nice guy syndrome. In fact, we don't know the backgrounds of any guys on r/niceguys screenshots who send those messages. They could be very romantically/sexually experienced regardless of whether they get rejected or get mad because of rejection (which doesn't mean they are inexperienced). All we see is a mere unverifiable text message conversation that could be fake for karma points. The earliest mention of nice guys who conclude women only like jerks goes back to 2002 with a blog post condemning them by Heartless Bitches International. Even back then, the Internet rarely spoke about these guys (this changed in the 2010s thanks to subreddits like r/niceguys).
So yeah, 90% or more of us wouldn't even know what nice guy syndrome is if it wasn't for the Internet always complaining about them, and virtually ever time I hear about them online, it's just people online complaining about nice guys than me actually seeing one. The Internet has an odd obsession with them and I think it's because the Internet needs a group of people they can ridicule for kicks and because nice guys purportedly lack romantic/sexual success and men who struggle to attract women are heavily stigmatized and because these guys criticize women and because men who criticize women are hated by society, nice guys are an easy target for ridicule. I think that's why the Internet has an obsession with them. And neckbeards and fedora hats? I'm sure most nice guys don't look like that (they probably look like ordinary guys). Hardly anybody wears fedora hats nowadays (this isn't the 1950s) and neckbeards are unusual (most guys have stubble beards not neckbeards now, and mustaches are coming back in style).
As for incels on this forum? Well, incel means involuntary celibacy. I guess we could call blackpilled incels "blincels" (blackpill+incels). For the sake of this thread, we'll call them blincels. Blincels aren't just any misogynistic virgin. Not all misogynistic virgins will necessarily know about the blackpill or even the word "incel" itself. Notice how people on blincel forums tend to believe in the blackpill? I wouldn't call Elliot Rodger the same as people on this forum. He was practically REDPILLED. He believed dressing in certain clothes, making lots of money at the lottery, etc. would help him attract women. He isn't blackpilled. He would've been hated on here for saying that Asians and Indians have it easy getting white girlfriends. He would've been banned for bragging about his looks (which he did a lot) and for racebaiting or expressing redpilled beliefs about moneymaxxing or clothesmaxxing. He's a proto-blincel given that people on this forum often talk about him (although contrary to what the media says, not everyone here likes him, and many don't like him). If he joined here, even people who like him would've hated him.
Blincels are involuntarily celibate men who believe in the blackpill, and they hate women and even just humans in general. In fact, people here hate literally men too. Average men are normies. Attractive men are chads. Men who marry are betabuxxers. Men who disagree with us are cucks. Virgin men who disagree with us (most virgin men would hate us) are incels in denial. Anyone here who isn't short and ugly and ethnic is a fakecel (so we hate our own fellow members of the forum). People here only approve of men who are involuntarily celibate AND who hate women and humans in general and who also believe in the blackpill AND who also are short and ugly. Only 0.1% of men at most will fulfill all those expectations, so almost every man on Earth is hated by people on here.
We only have like 10,000 members, most of who are banned forever or inactive (most people here within 1 or 2 years get permabanned or just leave the forum). We have 150 users a day, often the same people each time, and the 1,000 visitors a day are often IncelTear members or curious observants who don't necessarily agree with us. IncelTear has way more members and active users than us.
So yeah, you can't know what misogynistic men are like (or what romantically/sexually inexperienced men are like for that matter) just by what you see online. Rare people are more common online. What you see online doesn't debunk statistical and empirical evidence. For example, in real life, death metal fans are rare to meet, but online, they're more common.
Misogynistic men aren't usually virgins. It just seems that way because social media and the news often emphasize the rare ones while ignoring the usual ones who are promiscuous, hypermasculine womanizers? Why? Because virgin men are an easy target for ridicule. Chads and sexually active men are not.
Myth 7: Blincels are a threat to society and are potential violent criminals.
No they are not, contrary to what IncelTear (aka IT) will tell you. In fact, most threads here are non-violent. IT just screenshot the most controversial or intense threads, which is cherrypicking.
Although a few massacres have been committed by self-identified incels, these are only a few massacres, comprising a minuscule percentage of massacres. In fact, Alek Minassian (the man whose massacre gave the word "incel" headlines on the news) later told an investigator that he is not an incel and only made that up for media attention, claiming anxiety over his job was his motive. Additionally, Elliot Rodger appeared to possibly have traits of narcissistic personality disorder. In fact, the media’s attention to incels and potential killers hearing about these killers in the media might encourage these mass shootings, given that this is a common motive among mass shooters. It is probable that many incel shooters had other traits that predisposed them to violence to begin with, and, without the incel community, would have still committed crime but with another motive. They do not appear to necessarily use or be influenced by forums.
In fact, it appears that self-identified incels are more likely to hurt themselves than hurt others. For example, there are more posts on the forums about suicide than homicide. Many use the word “rope” to describe suicide in general. Many believed the forum was helpful for them and they felt welcomed on the forum, expressing gratitude for it in their posts. Some even feared how heartbroken their families would be, which deterred them from resorting to suicide, and they were more likely to mention this as a deterrent than suicidal men in the general population. According to polls on the main forum Incels.is, most users reported seriously considering suicide. In fact, according to polls, alongside most users being suicidal, most users reported being frequently depressed or suffering extreme anxiety or stress. Although many users on the forum make misogynistic statements about women, some users are secretly not that misogynistic. For example, in polls, only about half of the users rated themselves as a 4 or 5 on a scale of 1 to 5 when asked how misogynistic or hateful toward women they were. A fifth rated themselves a 3, and about a quarter rated themselves a 1 or 2. In one poll created by a user instead of an administrator, about half of the incels said they do not hate women. This means they might pretend to hate women to blend in, resulting in a spiral of silence. In fact, the users were slightly more likely to be misanthropic (i.e.: hateful towards humans) and slightly more likely to be non-misogynists than non-misanthropes. This is obvious due to the fact that the users on there also denigrate other men as “chads” or “normies” or stereotype men who do not fit in with the forum as “cucks”, “betabuxxers” or “fakecels”. The forum also uses the phrase “clown world” to condemn society. Some incels tried talking to therapists, but it usually did not work, and some lacked access to mental health services. In fact, many adult virgins in general lack access to professionals, said they were afraid of talking to professionals because they worry professionals wouldn't understand their inexperience problems or would ridicule them, or even had negative experiences with professionals. This is why "seek a therapist" is easier said than done. Many self-identified incels said they do not have any friends, which also prevents them from having confidants. While most report being suicidal, the vast majority said they do not plan on carrying out an act of violence due to involuntary celibacy. In fact, on a scale of 1 to 5 of how dangerous they perceive themselves to be due to being incel, most did not consider themselves dangerous and only a minuscule percentage considered themselves that dangerous. It is unknown if the low minority who said they will commit violence would actually commit violence and if it is going to be murder or rape or just merely a crime like physical assault.
Incels.is, the most popular self-identified incel forum, tends to have much more self-loathing than loathing others. People on the forum tend to post more about self-loathing than loathing others. It is common to see people on the forum condone suicide more than violence against others. Although 38% of the forum said they entertain thoughts of violence against others, the vast majority do not plan to become violent. When asked if they would rape a woman if they could get away with it (a hypothetical scenario), 79.4% said no, and 76.8 to 82% did not admire killers like Elliot Rodger, Alek Minassian or Christopher Harper Mercer. Alexander Ash, the creator of the forum who eventually left, said that incels typically join the forum because they cannot find a place to talk about their issues given that most people cannot understand or empathize with their romantic or sexual inexperience. They typically are lonely and join the forum because they have nowhere else to go. After joining these forums, the forums influenced them, and many of the most extremist users mentioned becoming more extremist as they used the forum more. People on the forum do not just crave sex, but also love, affection and relationships. It is possible that if society did not stigmatize romantically or sexually inexperienced people, act like they do not exist in adulthood or lack empathy towards what they go through, these forums would never have flourished. In other words, society caused these forums to exist. Misogyny and sexual entitlement appears to be a symptom of the forum instead of a cause. Misogyny might be a secondary factor for these forums’ existence whereas stigmatization by society and mental health problems is a primary factor.
Given that women might also be subjected to intimate partner violence or even intimate partner rape, this means that men who harm women are rarely virgins or romantically inexperienced. Men who harm women often are romantically or sexually experienced. Due to how self-identified incel forums grow like what was mentioned earlier and due to statistics about what misogynistic men and men who attack women really are like, the self-identified incels should not be viewed through a criminal perspective but should be viewed through a stigmatization and mental health perspective. To prevent these forums from attracting members, society needs to change its attitudes towards romantically or sexually inexperienced people. It is important to reduce society’s tendency toward virgin shaming and society’s lack of empathy or understanding toward what involuntarily celibate people go through in order to reduce the number of people resorting to misogynistic, misanthropic incel forums. This could prevent people from resorting to these forums. Additionally, the subreddit r/IncelTears, a subreddit that takes screenshots of incel threads and mocks and insults them, has been shown to further alienate incel forum users or damage their mental health even more, sometimes to the point where they make self-identified incels feel suicidal. Subreddits like r/IncelTears could be interpreted as cyberbullying subreddits.
Incel violence is rare (the media just overemphasizes it), and most of the people on here eventually get permabanned or just simply leave the forum. They usually just go through a phase. Hardly any are a threat to others, and they need to be helped and have a confidant. This could've made us less likely to have resorted to these forums.
This appears to be one of the few forums where we can speak about our problems without gaslighting cunts who tell us "relationships and sex are nothing important". Even on r/ForeverAlone or r/virgin, there are visitors coming occasionally who do that shit to people on those subreddits. People on this forum needed to find a place of belongingness, and just got influenced by these forums, but where else can we go anyways?
I wish society was more understanding and helpful towards sexually/romantically inexperienced people. When sexually active people talk about their lack of satisfaction because their partner is bad at sex or they have erectile dysfunction or they aren't having sex frequently or orgasming enough we have ads, news articles, tiktok videos, etc. helping them out, but when an inexperienced person with romance/sex past their teens/early 20s talks about how lonely they are, people either trivialize their problems telling them this is nothing important in life and tell them how they can or cannot feel about what they're going through, or people just ridicule them for being inexperienced. Society is why these forums exist. Misogyny and sexual entitlement is only a secondary reason. It's not the main reason and the fact that misogynistic people or sexual entitlement exists out there in this world is a mere coincidence.
How do I know most people here joined for belongingness or were simply influenced by these forums?
In my poll of 120 respondents (so far) asking them why they joined, 49.2% said they discovered the blackpill and read about it, 56.7% said that because society lacks empathy towards sexually/romantically inexperienced people and trivializes their problems, and 41.7% said it's a forum where they can reveal they're a virgin without being ridiculed. In another poll of mine with 202 respondents so far, when asked if joining this forum or reading about the blackpill changed their opinion of women to negative, 44.1% said yes, 36.6% said they hated women before joining this forum or discovering the blackpill but that this forum increased their hatred, and 19.3% said they hated women before they joined these forums or discovered the blackpill, period. This means a majority (about 65.5%) of the ones who initially still hated them became more hateful. It could be they didn't think anything violent or intense about women or really anyone at all. And a few who said they still hated women before this forum said it's because before joining this forum they were on other similar forums. In another poll of mine with 108 respondents so far, when asking users if they would've still joined the forum if society didn't stigmatize virgins or lack empathy towards lonely romantically/sexually inexperienced people, 44.4% said they probably or definitely would not have joined, and many of the ones who said they still would've joined perhaps would've sung a different tune if the hypothetical scenario happened.
TLDR: incels on here aren't a threat, many just joined a forum that influenced them, but if society wants to fix this problem, they should do something about virgin shaming and society's stigma against relationship virgins, too. They should stop telling romantically/sexually inexperienced people "sex and relationships aren't important. there's more to life than that" when many of them experience it regularly and take it for granted. They should help inexperineced people learn how to find a partner rather than tell them how they can or cannot feel about it, which just invalidates how they feel and alienates them. Society should stop disacknowledging the existence of adult virgins while acknowledging the existence of 13 year olds who have sex or relationships or people who fuck 100 people, which is not as a common as adult virgins/relationship virgins. Society should realize that if misogyny or sexual entitlement didn't exist as much as it does, these forums would still attract members because many initially didn't hate anyone, and misogyny (hate of women) isn't as widespread as people think. In fact, ideas such as women should be mothers or shouldn't be breadwinners have more to do with benevolent sexism or gender roles/social norms than hatred of women. Most sexism on Earth is benevolent sexism, and misogyny isn't as widespread. If society wasn't like this towards inexperienced people, these forum users probably wouldn't have resorted to these forums to begin with, regardless of whether misogyny and sexual entitlement exists in society or not.
In fact, subreddits like IT telling people here they deserve to be miserable and kicking them while they're down just reinforces why they joined in the first place. People here needed confidants, not ridicule, and that could've deterred resorting to these forums. People on this forum need confidants in order to no longer need these forums.
Myth 8: Sexually frustrated virgins only want sex.
Actually, most adult virgins often want relationships, love and intimacy too. In fact, most people here even said they prefer romantic relationships over casual sex. Most people here also are into relationships or intimacy or love instead of just simply sex.
Myth 1: There are zero virgins left after a certain age (e.g. 18 or 21 or 25 or something)
Many people believe this myth. Nope. There are still virgins after 18 or 21, etc. Most people think almost everyone (95%) loses their virginity by the age of 18 and that 100% of people have by the age of 21 or so. Many people think there couldn't be any virgins at 25 or 30. If you're that age and you tell people you're a virgin they won't even believe you sometimes.
Unfortunately, the CDC didn't make any new surveys figuring out how many people are a virgin as of 2022 (recent years). According to the CDC data from 2006-2008, of men ages 25-29, 3.8% have never had any sexual contact with the opposite sex, and 3.1% of men ages 30-34 haven't. 1.3% of men ages 35-39 and 1.2% of men in their early 40s haven't. This is compared to 3.4% of women ages 25-29 being virgins, 1.9% of women in ages 30-34 being virgins, and 0.4% of women in their early 40s being virgins. Prevalence varies, with some studies showing that 5% of men at 25 and 3% of women that age are virgins. In fact, in the UK, they found 12.5% of 26 year olds are now virgins and that virginity was more common in recent years, but almost 80% lost it by age 19. According to CDC in 2006-2008, 12% of women and 14% of men age 20-24 were virgins, so this is like prevalence of left-handedness. These percents might be higher because many virgins don't admit they're virgins.
Guess what? Less than 3% of YOUNG people (they're more likely to admit it and most are pro-gay) identify as gay or lesbian, which remained stable in the past few decades while the percent admitting to being bisexual skyrocketed. In 2022, only 2.5% of Generation Z reported being gay and 2% were lesbians. 15% were bisexual, while other generations were way less likely to admit to being bi. Just 2.1% said they're trans. In May 2022, on pew research polls, 2% of young adults said they're trans and 3% said they're non-binary.
So, the odds of meeting an adult virgins in their mid-20s or older are like the odds of being a gay person or trans person. Admittedly these percentages for gay or trans people could be higher because they won't admit it but the same could be true for virgins. Also, these people who admit it could be ones who are out of the closet, so it could be maybe like the odds of meeting an openly gay or trans person (although many closet ones might admit it in anonymous surveys too). Nonetheless, most gays and lesbians are out of the closet, unlike bisexuals. Maybe that's why the percentage of young people identifying as gay didn't skyrocket much in recent decades unlike the percentage of young people identifying as bi. 75% of gays/lesbians said all or most people important to them in real life know their sexual orientation, compared to only19% of bisexuals. Only 23% of bisexuals said SOME knew. Only 11% of gay people came out to a few or none of them, compared to 57% of bisexuals. So it could be most gay people are honestly about admitting they're gay in polls unless they're a gay elder.
Myth 2: If a man is a virgin or never could find a girlfriend, it means his standards arec too high or he only goes after supermodels or women "out of his league".
Quite the opposite actually. In fact, MANY people like to assume this about virgin men, but just because many people say this is true about them, doesn't mean it's true (why do you think the word "myth" exists?). Any anecdote "proving" this is common isn't valid evidence (contrary to what many people think, anecdotes aren't valid evidence and are often unverifiable). Even if you have met virgin guys who only want supermodels, you probably met MANY MORE who didn't. You probably don't remember them because they aren't as noteworthy or because they never even told you they're inexperienced.
This study shows it's a myth. Link to study here.
110 volunteers with 47 male and 63 female (mean age=22.36 years, SD=3.64) (the vast majority of them were heterosexual) participated in this study.
Next paragraph right below but read this: according to the methodology, they wanted to use average-looking people because it's the best way to measure how high a person's standards can be (because many people get attracted to conventionally attractive people but not many like ugly people. Apparently, women are more conventionally attractive than men on average:
In the study, inexperienced men had more romantic/sexual interest in a woman with medium physical attractiveness. Oxytocin made inexperienced men more selective. Inexperienced men were more romantically interested in medium attractiveness women than experienced men. In other words, they were less selective than experienced men. With oxytocin, inexperienced men were only slightly less interested romantically in medium attractiveness women than experienced men (in other words: only slightly more selective). When it came to romantic interest, oxytocin made both experienced and inexperienced men more selective, especially inexperienced men. It reduced romantic interest for both types of men, especially inexperienced men. Inexperienced men had more sexual interest in medium attractiveness women than experienced men, but less sexual interest in medium attractiveness women than experienced men when the men all were taking oxytocin. Oxytocin reduced sexual interest in inexperienced men but did not affect sexual interest in experienced men. In short, inexperienced men are less selective than experienced men, but are slightly more selective and officially more selective than experienced men when it comes to oxytocin. Inexperienced men have their romantic/sexual interest reduced with oxytocin.
On the other hand, inexperienced women were slightly less romantically interested in medium-attractiveness men than experienced women, therefore slightly more picky than experienced women. Under oxytocin, however, they were officially more romantically interested in medium attractiveness men than experienced women (AKA less selective than experienced women). Oxytocin increased romantic interest in inexperienced women but decreased romantic interest in experienced women. When it came to sexual interest, they were a little less sexually interested in medium attractiveness men than experienced women (AKA a little pickier than experienced women), but officially more sexually interested in medium attractiveness men than experienced women when both were under oxytocin (AKA less picky than experienced women). Oxytocin reduced sexual interest in experienced women but slightly increased sexual interest in inexperienced women. In short, inexperienced women are a little pickier than experienced women romantically/sexually but less picky than experienced women romantically/sexually when it comes oxytocin. Oxytocin increased interest levels in inexperienced women but reduced interest levels in experienced women.
Men had more romantic interest in average looking women than women did in average looking men (although inexperienced women but notexperienced women had just as much romantic interest as men in average-looking people of the opposite sex). When it came to sexual interest, both experienced men and inexperienced men were both more sexually interested in the opposite sex's average looking women than women (both experienced and inexperienced) were sexually interested in average-looking men regardless of oxytocin.
Are there virgin men who struggle to find a girlfriend who only want supermodels? Sure, but it's rare. And men who chase after supermodels might not necessarily be inexperienced with relationships or sex. It could be there were times where they did find an average-looking girlfriend because they personally found her very attractive or maybe they found a conventionally attractive woman as a girlfriend and had luck.
Myth 3: Virgins are clingy
Many people believe this about virgins, and no, it isn't often true. In fact, it's really patronizing when people say "I won't date a virgin because it's a huge responsibility taking someone's virginity and they might be clingy". This type of attitude towards virgins is quite common. It's like they think they can dictate what you emotionally can or cannot handle or what your behavior should be like just because of your mere level of experience.
No, virgins aren't particularly clingy, and this stereotype is especially ascribed to virgin women. But it isn't true for virgin women nor virgin men for that matter.
In multiple studies, they measured the love styles of inexperienced people, sexually experienced people and sexually coercive people. They looked at both men and women.
Study 1
173 university men at a private Midwestern university were recruited and the average age was 20.94 (SD=3.48). 46 of the men were inexperienced (26.6%), 62 of them (35.8%) were sexually experienced but no coercive and 63 of them (36.4%) were sexually coercive because they have engaged in sexual coercion or violence at least once.
One can measure clinginess perhaps by looking at love styles, which is a person's idea of what a relationship should be like. They were asked to describe their love styles, and these are the results:
Virgin men scored highest on agape and sexually coercive men scored lowest (but still scored quite high), which emphasizes unconditional love and caring for a person. Ludus was a manipulative form of love style focusing on deception, low commitment, and playful teasing. They might womanize too. Sexually inexperienced scored higher on it than experienced men but not nearly as high as coercive men, so this doesn't signal manipulative or womanizing behavior from virgin men. Virgin men scored lowest on Eros while experienced, non-coercive men scored highest, but all scored quite high. Eros was particularly clingy and emphasized extremely passionate love focusing on deepening the relationship.
Study 2
In a sample of 185 college women (mean age=21.02, SD=5.21) at a private midwestern university, they classified them into three groups: virgin (27%), sexually experienced but not coercive (54%), and sexually coercive (18.2%). Measuring their love style attachments, they found this:
Admittedly, they scored higher on Mania than experienced women but not as high as coercive women, and that gap could've been bigger anyways. but they scored lower than the other 2 groups on Eros. They don't appear to be particularly clingy then.
Study 3
123 college men (mean age=19.6, SD=1.33) were in a study. Two-thirds were freshmen or sophomores. 20% were virgins, 34% were coercive, and 46% were experienced but non-coercive. Here are the results when looking at their ideas of what relationships should be like:
Eros and Mania are clingy lovestyles, especially mania. They admittedly scored higher on mania, but that gap could've been way bigger, but scored lowest on Eros and lowest on Ludus (so they clearly aren't predatory).
They scored highest on "when my lover gets too dependent on me, I want to back off a little.", which shows they aren't clingy. They didn't score that high on predatory statements, sometimes really low.
They scored lowest on secure attachment style but that could be due to relationship inexperience and thus fearing what the first relationship would be like. They scored high on avoidant attachment style which is anti-clingy. They scored lowest, however, on anxious/ambivalent, so they aren't needy.
They scored lowest on trust in what their idea of relationships and/or their actual experiences in relationships are like, but this could be due to inexperience with relationships and thus anxiety over experiencing it the first time. They scored higher on fear of closeness which is anti-clingy. They scored lowest on jealousy. They admittedly scored higher on obsessive preoccupation but the gap could've been bigger.
So they don't appear to be particularly clingy, at least not too much. But remember, studies on this could vary.
In fact, while we all hear about virgins who cling, we got to realize that virgins who don't cling aren't anything remarkable of a good gossip story so we don't hear stories about virgins who don't cling. Anecdotes, however, aren't valid evidence and anecdotes can vary and won't necessarily represent what is typically true.
It could be that many virgins cling, but it could be age that causes it, not virginity per se. According to this article, which explains it perfectly:
So it could be that virgins might cling because many are teenagers and teens tend to be emotional and full of puppy love, and thus would cling after losing their virginity, but not all teens necessarily cling after virginity loss and clinginess isn't necessarily long-term.
A person you take the virginity of isn't going to think of you the rest of your life or their life because you took their virginity. Do you think all day about your first partner? Probably not, so this shouldn't be different.
In fact, studies show that those who lose their virginity late (after age 19) tend to report MUCH better relationships in young adulthood. They had MUCH more satisfactory relationships. Sounds like virgins aren't necessarily clingy and can be good significant others.
So, this idea of virgins being clingy or taking their virginity will be dangerous is stupid and patronizing, and it infantilizes them by portraying them as "manchildren" or "womanchildren" who cannot distinguish love from sex. People portray virgins as still mentally children and unable to distinguish the two. You are acting like you can dictate what they can or cannot handle or be ready for or what their behavior or sexuality is like based off their mere level of experience. This is not only bullshit but it is patronizing and subtle virgin shaming. Are there virgins over 18 who cling? Sure, but is it more common among them than among experienced people? No. Besides, there could be experienced people who are clingy anyways.
Myth 4: People who lack relationship experience will be bad with relationships.
Actually, the study two paragraphs above shows that those who lose their virginity late (after age 19) report MUCH better relationships in young adulthood with much more satisfaction. These people had less romantic partners than people who started as a teen and about 60% of them never dated as a teenager. Relationships are about communication, and as long as you're good with communication, you're good with relationships, regardless of "experience". There are some subjects in life that you get better with through experience depending on the characteristics of the subject and how it works, like karate or singing, but relationships aren't one of them.
Myth 5: If a man is a virgin, he was a reject who no woman wanted but if a woman is a virgin, she is simply waiting until marriage.
This is why virgin women are labeled a tease or a prude or why virgin men are labeled losers. I think this assumption exists because men pursue, women get pursued. Men are expected to be the initiators and thus are expected to do everything they can to find a sexual partner. Women were the pursued, and are expected to be the gatekeepers. Although virgin women are stigmatized too now and women who have premarital sex are now seen as normal, historically, women were expected to wait until marriage but not men (men thus would get with hookers). People think if a woman is a virgin, she must've been pursued by many men already and is saving herself for someone special and is old-fashioned. Men were always expected to pursue or be initiators of sex, so people assume he tried to find a partner and no woman wanted him. The idea of a man waiting until marriage is implausible to many people because men were expected to do whatever they can to have sex. Women who wait until marriage are seen as old-school because nowadays, everyone is expected to have premarital sex. Long ago, only women were expected to wait until marriage. Men weren't except maybe in some religious families if anything.
Admittedly, it is uncommon for virgin women to be involuntary virgins (virgins who simply never had the opportunity) and it is quite common for virgin men to be involuntary virgins. Nonetheless, it's just as common for virgin men to be voluntary virgins and there are a minority of virgin women who simply never had the opportunity. In the study "Virgins at Age 26: Who Are They?", they found that among virgins at age 26 in Switzerland, 47.2% of virgin men said they had not had the occasion compared to just 15.5% of virgin women. Most virgin women were virgins by choice. 45.9% never found the right person, 10.3% were virgins for religious/morla reasons, 19% are waiting until marriage, 5.9% were not emotionally ready and 0.6% wanted to wait until they're older. Many men were virgins by choice though. 18.6% did not find the right person, 10.9% are abstaining from sex for religious/moral reasons, 12.8% are waiting until marriage, and 3.2% are not emotionally ready. Some men are virgins by choice and some not by choice, it's half-and-half. Involuntary virgin women were relatively uncommon. Nonetheless, both exist, but voluntary virgin men are way more common than involuntary virgin women.
Myth 6: Virgin men are more misogynistic (or misogynistic men are often virgins bitter they don't have sex).
Quite the opposite actually. It's really rare for misogynistic men to be virgins, and the vast majority of virgin men, including the involuntary ones, aren't misogynists.
In a study of 2,703 teenagers in Spain ages 14 to 20 (M=15.89; SD=1.29), including 1,350 teenage boys (M = 15.95; SD = 1.30) and 1,353 teenage girls (M = 15.83; SD = 1.28), researchers found a very strong correlation between sexism and sexual and romantic success. The study revealed that sexually active teenage boys have more benevolent sexism, more hostile sexism, and more ambivalent sexism than non-sexually active teenage boys. Additionally, benevolently sexist men had their first sex at an earlier age and hostile sexist men had a lower proportion of condom use. The study also revealed that women are attracted to benevolently sexist men. The study revealed that teenage boys without sexual experience had the least amount of hostile sexism, benevolent sexism and ambivalent sexism. Boys with non-penetrative sexual experience had more of the three types of sexism, and boys with penetrative sexual experience had the most amount of the three types of sexism.
Another study took 555 men ages 18 to 25 (mean age=20.6, standard deviation=2.1) and had them fill out surveys testing them on how misogynistic they are, how much they adhere to traditional masculine stereotypes, and other characteristics. They had discovered that misogynistic men (N=44) had more one-night stands, significantly more sex partners, watched more pornography, committed more sexual assault and intimate partner violence, were more likely to pay for sexual services (43% of misogynistic men have paid for sexual services before), and often were involved in fraternities (58%), sports teams (86%), and intramural sports (84%). Misogynistic were compared and contrasted with normative men, normative men involved in male activities or groups, and sex focused men (men who engaged in an exceptionally large amount of sexual activity but are not necessarily misogynistic).
The researchers state:
As you can see here, misogynistic men aren't a bunch of virgins bitter they never have sex or relationships. They usually are hypermasculine, promiscuous womanizers who are interested in hypermasculine activities such as frats, sports, porn and promiscuity.
Rapists tend to be highly sexually experienced men.
Rapists often were found to have misogynistic or hostile attitudes towards women, and misogynistic men were far more likely to commit sexual assault. Rapists DO have consensual sex. In fact, studies have consistently shown that rapists typically have far more consensual sex partners than other men, more dating partners, more one night stands, lose their virginity earlier than other men and begin dating at an earlier age than other men. Men with unrestricted sociosexuality (positive attitudes and behaviors endorsing promiscuity or casual sex, etc.) were found to be more sexually active, have more frequent sex, lose their virginity early and had far more sex partners, and they were found to have adversarial sexual beliefs, conservative attitudes about women, high rape myth acceptance, and past sexual aggression.
In the book Rape Investigation Handbook by John O. Savino and Brent E. Turvey, they showed studies showing how many rapists attract women and are sexually active with many women. "Groth (1979, p. 5) dispels the myth of the predominance of 'loner' and socially outcast rapists by explaining that 'one third of the offenders that we worked with were married and sexually active with their wives at the time of their assaults. . . . Of those offenders who were not married (that is, single, seperated, or divorced), the majority were actively involved in a variety of consenting sexual relationships with other persons at the time of their offenses." Also, "furthermore, Groth and Hobson (1983, p. 161), who studied 1,000 offenders over a 16-year period, found the following: "All of the offenders we have seen were sexually active males involved in consensual relationships at the time of their offense. No one raped because he had no other outlet for his sexual needs."
No link between male virginity and misogyny or violence.
Studies have found no link between male virginity and misogyny.
In a survey of 2,972 college men from a nationwide, quasi-random sample of college classes from 32 universities, of all the men who admitted to committing acts that met the definition of rape (84% of the men who admitted to rape believed they were not a rapist at all), just 12% were virgins, with the average age of the rapists at the time of the rape being 18.5. This is a low percentage and at 18, virginity is not as unusual compared to later on in life. Admittedly, 33% of men who attempted rape were virgins. Nonetheless, these were college men and these men were in a time period of life where virginity is less rare compared to later in life. Besides, it could be because virgin men often don't know how to have sex or the anatomy of the vulva and thus it could become an attempted instead of completed rape. Nonetheless, a majority of attempted rapists (67%) were not virgins.
In a sample of 304 male college students ages 19 to 46 with an average age of 21.3 (SD = 2.87), of all the college men who admitted to committing sexual aggression, only 1 was a virgin and virgin men comprised 46.3% of the non-violent group of men. The non-violent men scored lower than the sexually violent men in terms of hostility toward women, acceptance of interpersonal violence, and rape proclivity, and the virgin men in the non-violent group did not differ in any variables (not even hostility toward women, acceptance of interpersonal violence, and rape proclivity) from the sexually experienced men who were also non-violent. This means virgin men were no more likely than other men to be misogynistic, accepting of interpersonal violence or prone to rape.
In a sample of 136 men ages 17 to 36 (Mean age = 20.5, SD = 2.6), they found that while sexually coercive men had more sexual experiences and higher self-perceived mating success, they found that sexually inexperienced men had a low likelihood to commit sexual violence, less preference for casual sex and partner variety, and less antisocial tendencies.
In a study of 191 college men (mean age = 19.1) including 23 virgin men (12% of the sample), virgin men scored lower than sexually experienced men and sexually aggressive men on willingness or acceptance toward using exploitation or force on a woman sexually. Virgin men also scored lower on being aroused by the idea of raping or committing sexual coercion against a woman and getting away with it, including scoring lower on the hate, sex, or power aspects of raping or committing sexual coercion against women.
In a sample of college students, it was found that virgin men scored lower than non-virgin men on the Sexual Narcissism Scale, including exploitation (e.g.: “I could easily convince an unwilling partner to have sex with me”), entitlement (e.g.: “I should be permitted to have sex whenever I want it”, and skill (e.g.: “I really know how to please a partner sexually”). Among women, virgin women scored higher on exploitation but scored slightly lower on entitlement and much lower on skill compared to non-virgin women. Nonetheless, both virgin and non-virgin men scored higher than virgin and non-virgin women on exploitation and entitlement, so this does not suggest virgin women are high on sexual narcissism. Additionally, despite virgin men scoring lower than non-virgin men on the overall Sexual Narcissism Scale and virgin women scoring higher than non-virgin women, both virgin men and virgin women scored higher than non-virgin men and women on low empathy (e.g.: “The feelings of my sexual partners don’t usually concern me”). This could be, however, due to lack their sexual experience making them not know about communication during sex rather than lack of morals or hostility toward the opposite sex. Although sexual narcissism was significantly associated with sexual aggression and coercion among non-virgins, it was not significantly associated with sexual aggression and coercion among virgins.
Admittedly, in one sample of 65 men with a mean age of 19.9 years (SD = 1.3), of the 15 virgin men, the virgin men reported more attraction to sexual aggression (M = 12.40) than the experienced men (M = 7.98). Nonetheless, the sample size of virgin men was small and aforementioned studies showed results indicating the opposite finding.
Admittedly, these studies typically sample men who are often around 18 to 21 years old, which is not a later-in-life virgin, but these findings are still noteworthy and still study young adults rather than teenage minors (it is much more common for teenage minors to be virgins). Additionally, many Incels.is users are often between the ages of 18 and 25, with many being 18 to 21, identical to this age group. Furthermore, people who are virgins or who have a low number of sexual partners by young adulthood engage in less antisocial behaviors as adolescents (Contrary to popular belief, antisocial doesn't mean socially withdrawn or introverted. That's being asocial. Antisocial means lacking empathy and violating the rights of others, being characteristic of antisocial personality disorder.).
Misogynistic men aren't usually virgins. The Internet and social media likes to emphasize ones who are (e.g.: incels who believe in the blackpill philosophy and men with "nice guy syndrome"). Nonetheless, these men are rare. Social media likes to emphasize them so much that it makes them seem more common than they really are. For example, most people probably didn't know what "nice guy syndrome" was until the Internet told them about it. In fact, "nice guy syndrome" is just some overly nice, excessively attentive guy who gets frustrated from consistent rejections and then concludes that women didn't want him because he's nice and only want jerks after seeing himself fail to find a girlfriend and watching violent men or domestic abusers have girlfriends. It isn't just any guy, no matter how nice he claims to be or no matter how successful at dating he is, who is simply being nice to get sex as a reward. In fact, most overly nice, excessively attentive men probably don't have nice guy syndrome. Also, before the Internet had an obsession with nice guy syndrome, the definition of a nice guy was simply an overly nice, unassertive guy who got bullied and taken advantage of by people because he's too nice and women found him unattractive because they consider him a pushover. It wasn't until the 2010s when the Internet changed the definition because of these guys they detected who really only exist on the Internet. In fact, 90% of the time when i hear about nice guy syndrome online, it's just the Internet complaining about them rather than me actually seeing one. And r/niceguys is a karmawhore subreddit. Those text message conversations on there show the same fuckin thing each time and sometimes really satirical conversations. I won't be shocked if at least half those conversations were fake and just some friend they hired to feign nice guy syndrome for karma points. Same could be true for r/creepyPMs. In fact, many of those guys featured on r/niceguys might not have nice guy syndrome. They might say "why are you ignoring me? I'm just being nice" in the text message conversation when she ignores them or shows disinterest, but that doesn't signal nice guy syndrome. He could be taking her disinterest personally and could be saying that to disarm her because he thinks disinterest means she hates him or something. Maybe that's why they called themselves nice. The idea of being a nice guy and women going after jerks doesn't necessarily enter these guys' heads. There's a lot of ambiguity. If these guys said: "how dare you ignore me! You probably only like jerks instead of nice guys like me who will treat you right", then yeah, that's nice guy syndrome. In fact, we don't know the backgrounds of any guys on r/niceguys screenshots who send those messages. They could be very romantically/sexually experienced regardless of whether they get rejected or get mad because of rejection (which doesn't mean they are inexperienced). All we see is a mere unverifiable text message conversation that could be fake for karma points. The earliest mention of nice guys who conclude women only like jerks goes back to 2002 with a blog post condemning them by Heartless Bitches International. Even back then, the Internet rarely spoke about these guys (this changed in the 2010s thanks to subreddits like r/niceguys).
So yeah, 90% or more of us wouldn't even know what nice guy syndrome is if it wasn't for the Internet always complaining about them, and virtually ever time I hear about them online, it's just people online complaining about nice guys than me actually seeing one. The Internet has an odd obsession with them and I think it's because the Internet needs a group of people they can ridicule for kicks and because nice guys purportedly lack romantic/sexual success and men who struggle to attract women are heavily stigmatized and because these guys criticize women and because men who criticize women are hated by society, nice guys are an easy target for ridicule. I think that's why the Internet has an obsession with them. And neckbeards and fedora hats? I'm sure most nice guys don't look like that (they probably look like ordinary guys). Hardly anybody wears fedora hats nowadays (this isn't the 1950s) and neckbeards are unusual (most guys have stubble beards not neckbeards now, and mustaches are coming back in style).
As for incels on this forum? Well, incel means involuntary celibacy. I guess we could call blackpilled incels "blincels" (blackpill+incels). For the sake of this thread, we'll call them blincels. Blincels aren't just any misogynistic virgin. Not all misogynistic virgins will necessarily know about the blackpill or even the word "incel" itself. Notice how people on blincel forums tend to believe in the blackpill? I wouldn't call Elliot Rodger the same as people on this forum. He was practically REDPILLED. He believed dressing in certain clothes, making lots of money at the lottery, etc. would help him attract women. He isn't blackpilled. He would've been hated on here for saying that Asians and Indians have it easy getting white girlfriends. He would've been banned for bragging about his looks (which he did a lot) and for racebaiting or expressing redpilled beliefs about moneymaxxing or clothesmaxxing. He's a proto-blincel given that people on this forum often talk about him (although contrary to what the media says, not everyone here likes him, and many don't like him). If he joined here, even people who like him would've hated him.
Blincels are involuntarily celibate men who believe in the blackpill, and they hate women and even just humans in general. In fact, people here hate literally men too. Average men are normies. Attractive men are chads. Men who marry are betabuxxers. Men who disagree with us are cucks. Virgin men who disagree with us (most virgin men would hate us) are incels in denial. Anyone here who isn't short and ugly and ethnic is a fakecel (so we hate our own fellow members of the forum). People here only approve of men who are involuntarily celibate AND who hate women and humans in general and who also believe in the blackpill AND who also are short and ugly. Only 0.1% of men at most will fulfill all those expectations, so almost every man on Earth is hated by people on here.
We only have like 10,000 members, most of who are banned forever or inactive (most people here within 1 or 2 years get permabanned or just leave the forum). We have 150 users a day, often the same people each time, and the 1,000 visitors a day are often IncelTear members or curious observants who don't necessarily agree with us. IncelTear has way more members and active users than us.
So yeah, you can't know what misogynistic men are like (or what romantically/sexually inexperienced men are like for that matter) just by what you see online. Rare people are more common online. What you see online doesn't debunk statistical and empirical evidence. For example, in real life, death metal fans are rare to meet, but online, they're more common.
Misogynistic men aren't usually virgins. It just seems that way because social media and the news often emphasize the rare ones while ignoring the usual ones who are promiscuous, hypermasculine womanizers? Why? Because virgin men are an easy target for ridicule. Chads and sexually active men are not.
Myth 7: Blincels are a threat to society and are potential violent criminals.
No they are not, contrary to what IncelTear (aka IT) will tell you. In fact, most threads here are non-violent. IT just screenshot the most controversial or intense threads, which is cherrypicking.
Although a few massacres have been committed by self-identified incels, these are only a few massacres, comprising a minuscule percentage of massacres. In fact, Alek Minassian (the man whose massacre gave the word "incel" headlines on the news) later told an investigator that he is not an incel and only made that up for media attention, claiming anxiety over his job was his motive. Additionally, Elliot Rodger appeared to possibly have traits of narcissistic personality disorder. In fact, the media’s attention to incels and potential killers hearing about these killers in the media might encourage these mass shootings, given that this is a common motive among mass shooters. It is probable that many incel shooters had other traits that predisposed them to violence to begin with, and, without the incel community, would have still committed crime but with another motive. They do not appear to necessarily use or be influenced by forums.
In fact, it appears that self-identified incels are more likely to hurt themselves than hurt others. For example, there are more posts on the forums about suicide than homicide. Many use the word “rope” to describe suicide in general. Many believed the forum was helpful for them and they felt welcomed on the forum, expressing gratitude for it in their posts. Some even feared how heartbroken their families would be, which deterred them from resorting to suicide, and they were more likely to mention this as a deterrent than suicidal men in the general population. According to polls on the main forum Incels.is, most users reported seriously considering suicide. In fact, according to polls, alongside most users being suicidal, most users reported being frequently depressed or suffering extreme anxiety or stress. Although many users on the forum make misogynistic statements about women, some users are secretly not that misogynistic. For example, in polls, only about half of the users rated themselves as a 4 or 5 on a scale of 1 to 5 when asked how misogynistic or hateful toward women they were. A fifth rated themselves a 3, and about a quarter rated themselves a 1 or 2. In one poll created by a user instead of an administrator, about half of the incels said they do not hate women. This means they might pretend to hate women to blend in, resulting in a spiral of silence. In fact, the users were slightly more likely to be misanthropic (i.e.: hateful towards humans) and slightly more likely to be non-misogynists than non-misanthropes. This is obvious due to the fact that the users on there also denigrate other men as “chads” or “normies” or stereotype men who do not fit in with the forum as “cucks”, “betabuxxers” or “fakecels”. The forum also uses the phrase “clown world” to condemn society. Some incels tried talking to therapists, but it usually did not work, and some lacked access to mental health services. In fact, many adult virgins in general lack access to professionals, said they were afraid of talking to professionals because they worry professionals wouldn't understand their inexperience problems or would ridicule them, or even had negative experiences with professionals. This is why "seek a therapist" is easier said than done. Many self-identified incels said they do not have any friends, which also prevents them from having confidants. While most report being suicidal, the vast majority said they do not plan on carrying out an act of violence due to involuntary celibacy. In fact, on a scale of 1 to 5 of how dangerous they perceive themselves to be due to being incel, most did not consider themselves dangerous and only a minuscule percentage considered themselves that dangerous. It is unknown if the low minority who said they will commit violence would actually commit violence and if it is going to be murder or rape or just merely a crime like physical assault.
Incels.is, the most popular self-identified incel forum, tends to have much more self-loathing than loathing others. People on the forum tend to post more about self-loathing than loathing others. It is common to see people on the forum condone suicide more than violence against others. Although 38% of the forum said they entertain thoughts of violence against others, the vast majority do not plan to become violent. When asked if they would rape a woman if they could get away with it (a hypothetical scenario), 79.4% said no, and 76.8 to 82% did not admire killers like Elliot Rodger, Alek Minassian or Christopher Harper Mercer. Alexander Ash, the creator of the forum who eventually left, said that incels typically join the forum because they cannot find a place to talk about their issues given that most people cannot understand or empathize with their romantic or sexual inexperience. They typically are lonely and join the forum because they have nowhere else to go. After joining these forums, the forums influenced them, and many of the most extremist users mentioned becoming more extremist as they used the forum more. People on the forum do not just crave sex, but also love, affection and relationships. It is possible that if society did not stigmatize romantically or sexually inexperienced people, act like they do not exist in adulthood or lack empathy towards what they go through, these forums would never have flourished. In other words, society caused these forums to exist. Misogyny and sexual entitlement appears to be a symptom of the forum instead of a cause. Misogyny might be a secondary factor for these forums’ existence whereas stigmatization by society and mental health problems is a primary factor.
Given that women might also be subjected to intimate partner violence or even intimate partner rape, this means that men who harm women are rarely virgins or romantically inexperienced. Men who harm women often are romantically or sexually experienced. Due to how self-identified incel forums grow like what was mentioned earlier and due to statistics about what misogynistic men and men who attack women really are like, the self-identified incels should not be viewed through a criminal perspective but should be viewed through a stigmatization and mental health perspective. To prevent these forums from attracting members, society needs to change its attitudes towards romantically or sexually inexperienced people. It is important to reduce society’s tendency toward virgin shaming and society’s lack of empathy or understanding toward what involuntarily celibate people go through in order to reduce the number of people resorting to misogynistic, misanthropic incel forums. This could prevent people from resorting to these forums. Additionally, the subreddit r/IncelTears, a subreddit that takes screenshots of incel threads and mocks and insults them, has been shown to further alienate incel forum users or damage their mental health even more, sometimes to the point where they make self-identified incels feel suicidal. Subreddits like r/IncelTears could be interpreted as cyberbullying subreddits.
Incel violence is rare (the media just overemphasizes it), and most of the people on here eventually get permabanned or just simply leave the forum. They usually just go through a phase. Hardly any are a threat to others, and they need to be helped and have a confidant. This could've made us less likely to have resorted to these forums.
This appears to be one of the few forums where we can speak about our problems without gaslighting cunts who tell us "relationships and sex are nothing important". Even on r/ForeverAlone or r/virgin, there are visitors coming occasionally who do that shit to people on those subreddits. People on this forum needed to find a place of belongingness, and just got influenced by these forums, but where else can we go anyways?
I wish society was more understanding and helpful towards sexually/romantically inexperienced people. When sexually active people talk about their lack of satisfaction because their partner is bad at sex or they have erectile dysfunction or they aren't having sex frequently or orgasming enough we have ads, news articles, tiktok videos, etc. helping them out, but when an inexperienced person with romance/sex past their teens/early 20s talks about how lonely they are, people either trivialize their problems telling them this is nothing important in life and tell them how they can or cannot feel about what they're going through, or people just ridicule them for being inexperienced. Society is why these forums exist. Misogyny and sexual entitlement is only a secondary reason. It's not the main reason and the fact that misogynistic people or sexual entitlement exists out there in this world is a mere coincidence.
How do I know most people here joined for belongingness or were simply influenced by these forums?
In my poll of 120 respondents (so far) asking them why they joined, 49.2% said they discovered the blackpill and read about it, 56.7% said that because society lacks empathy towards sexually/romantically inexperienced people and trivializes their problems, and 41.7% said it's a forum where they can reveal they're a virgin without being ridiculed. In another poll of mine with 202 respondents so far, when asked if joining this forum or reading about the blackpill changed their opinion of women to negative, 44.1% said yes, 36.6% said they hated women before joining this forum or discovering the blackpill but that this forum increased their hatred, and 19.3% said they hated women before they joined these forums or discovered the blackpill, period. This means a majority (about 65.5%) of the ones who initially still hated them became more hateful. It could be they didn't think anything violent or intense about women or really anyone at all. And a few who said they still hated women before this forum said it's because before joining this forum they were on other similar forums. In another poll of mine with 108 respondents so far, when asking users if they would've still joined the forum if society didn't stigmatize virgins or lack empathy towards lonely romantically/sexually inexperienced people, 44.4% said they probably or definitely would not have joined, and many of the ones who said they still would've joined perhaps would've sung a different tune if the hypothetical scenario happened.
TLDR: incels on here aren't a threat, many just joined a forum that influenced them, but if society wants to fix this problem, they should do something about virgin shaming and society's stigma against relationship virgins, too. They should stop telling romantically/sexually inexperienced people "sex and relationships aren't important. there's more to life than that" when many of them experience it regularly and take it for granted. They should help inexperineced people learn how to find a partner rather than tell them how they can or cannot feel about it, which just invalidates how they feel and alienates them. Society should stop disacknowledging the existence of adult virgins while acknowledging the existence of 13 year olds who have sex or relationships or people who fuck 100 people, which is not as a common as adult virgins/relationship virgins. Society should realize that if misogyny or sexual entitlement didn't exist as much as it does, these forums would still attract members because many initially didn't hate anyone, and misogyny (hate of women) isn't as widespread as people think. In fact, ideas such as women should be mothers or shouldn't be breadwinners have more to do with benevolent sexism or gender roles/social norms than hatred of women. Most sexism on Earth is benevolent sexism, and misogyny isn't as widespread. If society wasn't like this towards inexperienced people, these forum users probably wouldn't have resorted to these forums to begin with, regardless of whether misogyny and sexual entitlement exists in society or not.
In fact, subreddits like IT telling people here they deserve to be miserable and kicking them while they're down just reinforces why they joined in the first place. People here needed confidants, not ridicule, and that could've deterred resorting to these forums. People on this forum need confidants in order to no longer need these forums.
Myth 8: Sexually frustrated virgins only want sex.
Actually, most adult virgins often want relationships, love and intimacy too. In fact, most people here even said they prefer romantic relationships over casual sex. Most people here also are into relationships or intimacy or love instead of just simply sex.
