I used to frequent r/incels, a sub-reddit where sexually frustrated and angry men from all over the world and of different ages, congregated to express their growing discontentment of their circumstances. Shortly after my discovery of this sub-reddit, It was eventually taken down by Reddit after it updated its site-wide policy to prohibit content that “encourages, glorifies, incites or calls for violence or physical harm against an individual or group of people.”
During my brief visits of that sub-reddit, one of the common themes in the posts by various posters (men) was the fact that nearly all of them were respectful and courteous towards women for the majority of their lives; It was only after years of being ignored, ostracized, laughed at, mocked and ridiculed by women that they developed hatred towards them.
The most common argument against incels is “If you didn’t hate women then maybe one of them would give you a chance.” It feels like you’re being trolled whenever normies (normal people) make that argument, as the entire argument exists on the premise that misogyny is the CAUSE of one’s inceldom, rather than it being THE EFFECT of inceldom (which is actually caused by unattractiveness, NOT misogyny or other perceived personality flaws). To further illustrate how ridiculous normie arguments are in relation to inceldom, here is an analogy.
Imagine there is a man with a pet dog, a dog which is innocent and just wants to live in comfort and under the protection of this man, the dog is willing to be subservient and loyal, it just wants to be the “mans’ best friend.” The man regularly abuses the dog, he frequently beats it and deprives it of proper food/nutrition/exercise/shelter etc. One day, this dog bites its owner (the man) in self-defence, due to which the dog gets put down (euthanized). Normies will argue that the man was in the right for abusing the dog, and that his actions were disciplinary in nature because the dog was always biting him for no reason and that he only abused the dog to “teach it how to behave” JFL. Truth is, the dog only bit the man BECAUSE the man abused it in the first place, the dog biting the man is the EFFECT of the man abusing it, normies will argue that the dog biting the man is the CAUSE of the man abusing it.
Misogyny is not the CAUSE of inceldom, misogyny is CAUSED BY inceldom (it is the EFFECT of inceldom). Arguing that misogyny is the cause of inceldom is like putting the cart before the horse, it’s like arguing that the universe is the CAUSE of the big bang rather than the universe being CAUSED BY the big bang. Normies are so unintelligent that they label the consequence of an action as being the action itself, while labelling the action as the consequence, because they lack the cognitive ability to properly understand the principle of “CAUSE AND EFFECT”.
During my brief visits of that sub-reddit, one of the common themes in the posts by various posters (men) was the fact that nearly all of them were respectful and courteous towards women for the majority of their lives; It was only after years of being ignored, ostracized, laughed at, mocked and ridiculed by women that they developed hatred towards them.
The most common argument against incels is “If you didn’t hate women then maybe one of them would give you a chance.” It feels like you’re being trolled whenever normies (normal people) make that argument, as the entire argument exists on the premise that misogyny is the CAUSE of one’s inceldom, rather than it being THE EFFECT of inceldom (which is actually caused by unattractiveness, NOT misogyny or other perceived personality flaws). To further illustrate how ridiculous normie arguments are in relation to inceldom, here is an analogy.
Imagine there is a man with a pet dog, a dog which is innocent and just wants to live in comfort and under the protection of this man, the dog is willing to be subservient and loyal, it just wants to be the “mans’ best friend.” The man regularly abuses the dog, he frequently beats it and deprives it of proper food/nutrition/exercise/shelter etc. One day, this dog bites its owner (the man) in self-defence, due to which the dog gets put down (euthanized). Normies will argue that the man was in the right for abusing the dog, and that his actions were disciplinary in nature because the dog was always biting him for no reason and that he only abused the dog to “teach it how to behave” JFL. Truth is, the dog only bit the man BECAUSE the man abused it in the first place, the dog biting the man is the EFFECT of the man abusing it, normies will argue that the dog biting the man is the CAUSE of the man abusing it.
Misogyny is not the CAUSE of inceldom, misogyny is CAUSED BY inceldom (it is the EFFECT of inceldom). Arguing that misogyny is the cause of inceldom is like putting the cart before the horse, it’s like arguing that the universe is the CAUSE of the big bang rather than the universe being CAUSED BY the big bang. Normies are so unintelligent that they label the consequence of an action as being the action itself, while labelling the action as the consequence, because they lack the cognitive ability to properly understand the principle of “CAUSE AND EFFECT”.
Last edited:
