Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Theory Simone de Beauvoir on incel extremism

Shaktiman

Shaktiman

Major
Joined
May 24, 2022
Posts
2,067

Simone de Beauvoir on incel extremism​

Understanding their quest for feminine validation​


18th January 2024
| Dr Filipa Melo Lopes is a Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh.
1,166 words
Read time: approx. 6 mins
The concept of the incel – a community of men embittered by their perception of rejection at the hands of women – has haunted the popular imagination since Elliot Rodger’s mass shooting ten years ago. The conventional view is that incels resent feminism for disempowering men – here, Filipa Melo Lopes argues that incels are instead motivated by a thwarted craving for feminine approval better understood by Simone de Beauvoir than contemporary feminist discourse.

Nearly a decade ago, 22-year-old Elliot Rodger killed 7 people, including himself, in Isla Vista, California. In his lengthy manifesto, “My Twisted World”, Rodger laid out an epic tale of rejection, isolation, resentment, and vitriolic misogyny which started a public conversation about ‘incel’ extremism — violence connected to online communities of self-proclaimed ‘involuntary celibate’ men.
Feminists have typically insisted that incel attacks should be understood as backlash against feminism and gender equality. Some have argued that what incels want is a world where women can be treated as sex objects, rather than full humans with preferences and desires. Others have claimed incels feel entitled to women’s loving attention and want to put them back in their place as loyal servants. On both views, what is bothering men like Rodger is not being single or sexless, but seeing that women today have independent lives of their own.

However, these feminist explanations don’t really work. First, saying that incels see women as sex objects misses the fact that men like Rodger want admiration and love, not just a woman’s body. It also does not make sense of their aggrieved resentment towards women and of the way they feel wronged by them as moral actors. Second, the idea that incels want women to be obedient servants doesn’t explain why Rodger claims “all women must be quarantined like the plague they are”. He ends his manifesto with the dream of a “fair and pure world” where women have no place at all: sex is outlawed, and only a few women are “kept and bred” in secret labs.
But perhaps the biggest problem with these feminist explanations is that they do not make sense of incels’ ambivalence towards women. If incel attacks were a form of backlash, you might think they would target feminists, women in male-dominated professions, or women perceived as bucking patriarchal norms. On the contrary, they have targeted college sororities, yoga studios, and erotic massage parlors. These are places associated with the hyperfemininity that incels are obsessed with and that they encapsulate in the Stacy meme.
The Stacy is a curvy, hypersexualized character with long blonde hair and full make-up that lets Chad (her alpha-male counterpart) control and abuse her. The Stacy is the ideal woman, and yet she is reviled. According to incels, she is unintelligent, vain, fake, sociopathic, and lazy. When Rodger declares “War on Women”, it is the Stacys he targets: “hot, beautiful, blonde”, “model-like girls” who are also “vicious, stupid, cruel animals”. Incels seem then to hate what they love and love what they hate.

We can understand this paradox by thinking differently about what incels want. What they are after is not a real woman, but what philosopher Simone de Beauvoir called a feminine “Other” — an impossible and ambiguous creature, closer to a nymph or mermaid than to a sex-doll or a loyal wife. An “Other” is a device through which men can achieve a certain sense of themselves. She is a repository of their brightest dreams, but also of their worst nightmares.
For de Beauvoir, all human beings are caught in a bind between the need to act and the risk of action. We all want to do things in the world that will make us feel proud, whether it is getting a degree, painting a room, or rebuilding a car. But there is an unavoidable danger of failure that comes with striving to achieve anything. Success requires taking risks. This is something everyone must learn to live with, but that we all would like to avoid. Men are often culturally encouraged to avoid these risks by adopting a distorted view of themselves as uncriticizable — as always able to control anything, even the uncertain judgement of others. Think of little boys taught to identify with lonesome heroes, or of online masculinity gurus peddling magical shortcuts to becoming a billionaire. Elliot Rodger, for example, saw himself as “a living god” and thought life was a competition he would obviously, somehow, win. But this does not make sense. What men like Rodger want is to be heroes, regardless of their actions. This means that Rodger ends up insisting he is “destined for great things”, even while he drops out of school, refuses to get a job or to even leave his room.

Woman as “Other” becomes the only way to feel recognized as this special being in the absence of any actual accomplishment. To fulfil this function, this dream girlfriend must be another human who can praise Rodger, but not a full human who can spontaneously criticize him. Her approval must be fully conquerable. She must be an entity that can be picked up like a piece of fruit or a flower, but who can then genuinely smile back at you like a person. This is why, for Beauvoir, nymphs and mermaids are perfect “Others”. They are natural objects animated by a human consciousness. They are miraculous, supernatural beings that can finally establish Rodger as godlike.
But nymphs and mermaids are not real. The more men pursue this impossible fantasy, the more they doom themselves to a bitter disenchantment. Just like you cannot be a hero without doing heroic deeds, you cannot expect someone to worship you without the possibility of criticism. The risk of negative judgment always creeps back in. And if her regard can bestow ultimate triumph, this “Other” can also bestow ultimate failure. When his feminine saviours fail to anoint him as a hero, Rodger’s fear grows. Beautiful women become hateful enemies and violence becomes the only answer: “on the Day of Retribution, I will truly be a powerful god”, he said.
So, even though incels talk obsessively about women, looking closely at murderers like Rodger reveals that their struggle is mainly with themselves. Their anger at their ‘celibacy’ is often an anger at being just part of the crowd. Violence becomes a desperate attempt to gain control over the world and to achieve the recognition that they feel they naturally deserve. Countering incel radicalization requires men to stop thinking of themselves as living gods and instead cultivate a healthy sense of competition, personal responsibility, and humility. It also requires all of us to reject the idea that women are the answer to men’s problems. In the words of de Beauvoir, “only man can be an enemy for man; only he can rob him of the meaning of his acts and his life.”

References
Rodger, Elliot. 2014. My twisted world: The story of Elliot Rodger.https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/1173619/rodger-manifesto.pdf
Beauvoir, Simone de. 2011. The second sex. Trans. Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier. New York: Vintage Books
 
I swear I will read it, just not today tho :forcedsmile:
 
WTF is the point of posting these gaslighting articles where they put words into men's mouth? You do seem to have a fetish for reading foids' articles on incels. I can practically feel their smugness from the word go.
 
Is a smug cunt better than a snug one?

Asking for a fren...
 

Simone de Beauvoir on incel extremism​

Understanding their quest for feminine validation​


18th January 2024
| Dr Filipa Melo Lopes is a Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh.
1,166 words
Read time: approx. 6 mins
The concept of the incel – a community of men embittered by their perception of rejection at the hands of women – has haunted the popular imagination since Elliot Rodger’s mass shooting ten years ago. The conventional view is that incels resent feminism for disempowering men – here, Filipa Melo Lopes argues that incels are instead motivated by a thwarted craving for feminine approval better understood by Simone de Beauvoir than contemporary feminist discourse.

Nearly a decade ago, 22-year-old Elliot Rodger killed 7 people, including himself, in Isla Vista, California. In his lengthy manifesto, “My Twisted World”, Rodger laid out an epic tale of rejection, isolation, resentment, and vitriolic misogyny which started a public conversation about ‘incel’ extremism — violence connected to online communities of self-proclaimed ‘involuntary celibate’ men.
Feminists have typically insisted that incel attacks should be understood as backlash against feminism and gender equality. Some have argued that what incels want is a world where women can be treated as sex objects, rather than full humans with preferences and desires. Others have claimed incels feel entitled to women’s loving attention and want to put them back in their place as loyal servants. On both views, what is bothering men like Rodger is not being single or sexless, but seeing that women today have independent lives of their own.

However, these feminist explanations don’t really work. First, saying that incels see women as sex objects misses the fact that men like Rodger want admiration and love, not just a woman’s body. It also does not make sense of their aggrieved resentment towards women and of the way they feel wronged by them as moral actors. Second, the idea that incels want women to be obedient servants doesn’t explain why Rodger claims “all women must be quarantined like the plague they are”. He ends his manifesto with the dream of a “fair and pure world” where women have no place at all: sex is outlawed, and only a few women are “kept and bred” in secret labs.
But perhaps the biggest problem with these feminist explanations is that they do not make sense of incels’ ambivalence towards women. If incel attacks were a form of backlash, you might think they would target feminists, women in male-dominated professions, or women perceived as bucking patriarchal norms. On the contrary, they have targeted college sororities, yoga studios, and erotic massage parlors. These are places associated with the hyperfemininity that incels are obsessed with and that they encapsulate in the Stacy meme.
The Stacy is a curvy, hypersexualized character with long blonde hair and full make-up that lets Chad (her alpha-male counterpart) control and abuse her. The Stacy is the ideal woman, and yet she is reviled. According to incels, she is unintelligent, vain, fake, sociopathic, and lazy. When Rodger declares “War on Women”, it is the Stacys he targets: “hot, beautiful, blonde”, “model-like girls” who are also “vicious, stupid, cruel animals”. Incels seem then to hate what they love and love what they hate.

We can understand this paradox by thinking differently about what incels want. What they are after is not a real woman, but what philosopher Simone de Beauvoir called a feminine “Other” — an impossible and ambiguous creature, closer to a nymph or mermaid than to a sex-doll or a loyal wife. An “Other” is a device through which men can achieve a certain sense of themselves. She is a repository of their brightest dreams, but also of their worst nightmares.
For de Beauvoir, all human beings are caught in a bind between the need to act and the risk of action. We all want to do things in the world that will make us feel proud, whether it is getting a degree, painting a room, or rebuilding a car. But there is an unavoidable danger of failure that comes with striving to achieve anything. Success requires taking risks. This is something everyone must learn to live with, but that we all would like to avoid. Men are often culturally encouraged to avoid these risks by adopting a distorted view of themselves as uncriticizable — as always able to control anything, even the uncertain judgement of others. Think of little boys taught to identify with lonesome heroes, or of online masculinity gurus peddling magical shortcuts to becoming a billionaire. Elliot Rodger, for example, saw himself as “a living god” and thought life was a competition he would obviously, somehow, win. But this does not make sense. What men like Rodger want is to be heroes, regardless of their actions. This means that Rodger ends up insisting he is “destined for great things”, even while he drops out of school, refuses to get a job or to even leave his room.

Woman as “Other” becomes the only way to feel recognized as this special being in the absence of any actual accomplishment. To fulfil this function, this dream girlfriend must be another human who can praise Rodger, but not a full human who can spontaneously criticize him. Her approval must be fully conquerable. She must be an entity that can be picked up like a piece of fruit or a flower, but who can then genuinely smile back at you like a person. This is why, for Beauvoir, nymphs and mermaids are perfect “Others”. They are natural objects animated by a human consciousness. They are miraculous, supernatural beings that can finally establish Rodger as godlike.
But nymphs and mermaids are not real. The more men pursue this impossible fantasy, the more they doom themselves to a bitter disenchantment. Just like you cannot be a hero without doing heroic deeds, you cannot expect someone to worship you without the possibility of criticism. The risk of negative judgment always creeps back in. And if her regard can bestow ultimate triumph, this “Other” can also bestow ultimate failure. When his feminine saviours fail to anoint him as a hero, Rodger’s fear grows. Beautiful women become hateful enemies and violence becomes the only answer: “on the Day of Retribution, I will truly be a powerful god”, he said.
So, even though incels talk obsessively about women, looking closely at murderers like Rodger reveals that their struggle is mainly with themselves. Their anger at their ‘celibacy’ is often an anger at being just part of the crowd. Violence becomes a desperate attempt to gain control over the world and to achieve the recognition that they feel they naturally deserve. Countering incel radicalization requires men to stop thinking of themselves as living gods and instead cultivate a healthy sense of competition, personal responsibility, and humility. It also requires all of us to reject the idea that women are the answer to men’s problems. In the words of de Beauvoir, “only man can be an enemy for man; only he can rob him of the meaning of his acts and his life.”

References
Rodger, Elliot. 2014. My twisted world: The story of Elliot Rodger.https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/1173619/rodger-manifesto.pdf
Beauvoir, Simone de. 2011. The second sex. Trans. Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier. New York: Vintage Books
Holy shit that’s a lot of words
 
Stacy isn't just curvy blonde and chads don't abuse Stacie's this author is kind of retarded. Not reading any more this trash
 
lots of words said. I don't agree with the main thesis, it's not how we perceive ourselves that's the problem, THE PROBLEM IS THE BAR IS TOO DAMN HIGH.

This is like telling some schizophrenic homeless that they would be able to make rent if they just got a high enough paying job.

This is why foids and fags think the honest answer to change our fundamental sexuality in some way whether that be full on faggot or asexual or tranny.
 
lots of words said. I don't agree with the main thesis, it's not how we perceive ourselves that's the problem, THE PROBLEM IS THE BAR IS TOO DAMN HIGH.

This is like telling some schizophrenic homeless that they would be able to make rent if they just got a high enough paying job.

This is why foids and fags think the honest answer to change our fundamental sexuality in some way whether that be full on faggot or asexual or tranny.
Just run on the hamster wheel faster bro
 
smug cunt
Some "female philosopher" discovered in the last century that men happen to be looking for some sort of "alterity" in a partner of the other sex, breaking news, totally worth the word salad (no)
 
Some "female philosopher" discovered in the last century that men happen to be looking for some sort of "alterity" in a partner of the other sex, breaking news, totally worth the word salad (no)
I like salad! (From my yard)
 
yeah lonely men bad we got it you really think anyone will read this
 
On both views, what is bothering men like Rodger is not being single or sexless, but seeing that women today have independent lives of their own.

Never read his manifesto but from what i know this is just fake bullshit and a projection on their part. Looks like they WANT him to be this ultimate misogynist so bad, although unlike Marc Lépine for example, he was barely critical of foids in a deep societal sense.

These are places associated with the hyperfemininity that incels are obsessed with and that they encapsulate in the Stacy meme.
According to incels, she is unintelligent, vain, fake, sociopathic, and lazy. When Rodger declares “War on Women”, it is the Stacys he targets: “hot, beautiful, blonde”, “model-like girls” who are also “vicious, stupid, cruel animals”. Incels seem then to hate what they love and love what they hate.

Lmao wtf are these people serious :feelshaha:it's just the old trope of the pretty popular girl - often blonde - that goes back to the 90's or even before. It's just like when Eliott describe the sucessful guys as "loud, obnoxious brutes" implying the jock trope, cause he was an autist that saw things in archetypes (although they can hold some truth, at least esthetically).

I could criticize the rest but i won't be doing it, skimmed it and it's typical muh academical hot garbage when people just make shit up to feel or appear smart, but this one takes the cake because they act like he was some sort of patriarcal nemesis when in reality he was an immature mentally ill kid in his early 20's that's so stupid. What a dehumanizing, nefarious old hag that can't take off her feminist goggles :feelspuke:
 
WTF is the point of posting these gaslighting articles where they put words into men's mouth? You do seem to have a fetish for reading foids' articles on incels. I can practically feel their smugness from the word go.
more advertising for us. it doesnt matter how they spin the message. what matters is the awareness
 

Simone de Beauvoir on incel extremism​

Understanding their quest for feminine validation​


18th January 2024
| Dr Filipa Melo Lopes is a Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh.
1,166 words
Read time: approx. 6 mins
The concept of the incel – a community of men embittered by their perception of rejection at the hands of women – has haunted the popular imagination since Elliot Rodger’s mass shooting ten years ago. The conventional view is that incels resent feminism for disempowering men – here, Filipa Melo Lopes argues that incels are instead motivated by a thwarted craving for feminine approval better understood by Simone de Beauvoir than contemporary feminist discourse.

Nearly a decade ago, 22-year-old Elliot Rodger killed 7 people, including himself, in Isla Vista, California. In his lengthy manifesto, “My Twisted World”, Rodger laid out an epic tale of rejection, isolation, resentment, and vitriolic misogyny which started a public conversation about ‘incel’ extremism — violence connected to online communities of self-proclaimed ‘involuntary celibate’ men.
Feminists have typically insisted that incel attacks should be understood as backlash against feminism and gender equality. Some have argued that what incels want is a world where women can be treated as sex objects, rather than full humans with preferences and desires. Others have claimed incels feel entitled to women’s loving attention and want to put them back in their place as loyal servants. On both views, what is bothering men like Rodger is not being single or sexless, but seeing that women today have independent lives of their own.

However, these feminist explanations don’t really work. First, saying that incels see women as sex objects misses the fact that men like Rodger want admiration and love, not just a woman’s body. It also does not make sense of their aggrieved resentment towards women and of the way they feel wronged by them as moral actors. Second, the idea that incels want women to be obedient servants doesn’t explain why Rodger claims “all women must be quarantined like the plague they are”. He ends his manifesto with the dream of a “fair and pure world” where women have no place at all: sex is outlawed, and only a few women are “kept and bred” in secret labs.
But perhaps the biggest problem with these feminist explanations is that they do not make sense of incels’ ambivalence towards women. If incel attacks were a form of backlash, you might think they would target feminists, women in male-dominated professions, or women perceived as bucking patriarchal norms. On the contrary, they have targeted college sororities, yoga studios, and erotic massage parlors. These are places associated with the hyperfemininity that incels are obsessed with and that they encapsulate in the Stacy meme.
The Stacy is a curvy, hypersexualized character with long blonde hair and full make-up that lets Chad (her alpha-male counterpart) control and abuse her. The Stacy is the ideal woman, and yet she is reviled. According to incels, she is unintelligent, vain, fake, sociopathic, and lazy. When Rodger declares “War on Women”, it is the Stacys he targets: “hot, beautiful, blonde”, “model-like girls” who are also “vicious, stupid, cruel animals”. Incels seem then to hate what they love and love what they hate.

We can understand this paradox by thinking differently about what incels want. What they are after is not a real woman, but what philosopher Simone de Beauvoir called a feminine “Other” — an impossible and ambiguous creature, closer to a nymph or mermaid than to a sex-doll or a loyal wife. An “Other” is a device through which men can achieve a certain sense of themselves. She is a repository of their brightest dreams, but also of their worst nightmares.
For de Beauvoir, all human beings are caught in a bind between the need to act and the risk of action. We all want to do things in the world that will make us feel proud, whether it is getting a degree, painting a room, or rebuilding a car. But there is an unavoidable danger of failure that comes with striving to achieve anything. Success requires taking risks. This is something everyone must learn to live with, but that we all would like to avoid. Men are often culturally encouraged to avoid these risks by adopting a distorted view of themselves as uncriticizable — as always able to control anything, even the uncertain judgement of others. Think of little boys taught to identify with lonesome heroes, or of online masculinity gurus peddling magical shortcuts to becoming a billionaire. Elliot Rodger, for example, saw himself as “a living god” and thought life was a competition he would obviously, somehow, win. But this does not make sense. What men like Rodger want is to be heroes, regardless of their actions. This means that Rodger ends up insisting he is “destined for great things”, even while he drops out of school, refuses to get a job or to even leave his room.

Woman as “Other” becomes the only way to feel recognized as this special being in the absence of any actual accomplishment. To fulfil this function, this dream girlfriend must be another human who can praise Rodger, but not a full human who can spontaneously criticize him. Her approval must be fully conquerable. She must be an entity that can be picked up like a piece of fruit or a flower, but who can then genuinely smile back at you like a person. This is why, for Beauvoir, nymphs and mermaids are perfect “Others”. They are natural objects animated by a human consciousness. They are miraculous, supernatural beings that can finally establish Rodger as godlike.
But nymphs and mermaids are not real. The more men pursue this impossible fantasy, the more they doom themselves to a bitter disenchantment. Just like you cannot be a hero without doing heroic deeds, you cannot expect someone to worship you without the possibility of criticism. The risk of negative judgment always creeps back in. And if her regard can bestow ultimate triumph, this “Other” can also bestow ultimate failure. When his feminine saviours fail to anoint him as a hero, Rodger’s fear grows. Beautiful women become hateful enemies and violence becomes the only answer: “on the Day of Retribution, I will truly be a powerful god”, he said.
So, even though incels talk obsessively about women, looking closely at murderers like Rodger reveals that their struggle is mainly with themselves. Their anger at their ‘celibacy’ is often an anger at being just part of the crowd. Violence becomes a desperate attempt to gain control over the world and to achieve the recognition that they feel they naturally deserve. Countering incel radicalization requires men to stop thinking of themselves as living gods and instead cultivate a healthy sense of competition, personal responsibility, and humility. It also requires all of us to reject the idea that women are the answer to men’s problems. In the words of de Beauvoir, “only man can be an enemy for man; only he can rob him of the meaning of his acts and his life.”

References
Rodger, Elliot. 2014. My twisted world: The story of Elliot Rodger.https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/1173619/rodger-manifesto.pdf
Beauvoir, Simone de. 2011. The second sex. Trans. Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier. New York: Vintage Books
Dnr
 

Simone de Beauvoir on incel extremism​

Understanding their quest for feminine validation​


18th January 2024
| Dr Filipa Melo Lopes is a Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh.
1,166 words
Read time: approx. 6 mins
The concept of the incel – a community of men embittered by their perception of rejection at the hands of women – has haunted the popular imagination since Elliot Rodger’s mass shooting ten years ago. The conventional view is that incels resent feminism for disempowering men – here, Filipa Melo Lopes argues that incels are instead motivated by a thwarted craving for feminine approval better understood by Simone de Beauvoir than contemporary feminist discourse.

Nearly a decade ago, 22-year-old Elliot Rodger killed 7 people, including himself, in Isla Vista, California. In his lengthy manifesto, “My Twisted World”, Rodger laid out an epic tale of rejection, isolation, resentment, and vitriolic misogyny which started a public conversation about ‘incel’ extremism — violence connected to online communities of self-proclaimed ‘involuntary celibate’ men.
Feminists have typically insisted that incel attacks should be understood as backlash against feminism and gender equality. Some have argued that what incels want is a world where women can be treated as sex objects, rather than full humans with preferences and desires. Others have claimed incels feel entitled to women’s loving attention and want to put them back in their place as loyal servants. On both views, what is bothering men like Rodger is not being single or sexless, but seeing that women today have independent lives of their own.

However, these feminist explanations don’t really work. First, saying that incels see women as sex objects misses the fact that men like Rodger want admiration and love, not just a woman’s body. It also does not make sense of their aggrieved resentment towards women and of the way they feel wronged by them as moral actors. Second, the idea that incels want women to be obedient servants doesn’t explain why Rodger claims “all women must be quarantined like the plague they are”. He ends his manifesto with the dream of a “fair and pure world” where women have no place at all: sex is outlawed, and only a few women are “kept and bred” in secret labs.
But perhaps the biggest problem with these feminist explanations is that they do not make sense of incels’ ambivalence towards women. If incel attacks were a form of backlash, you might think they would target feminists, women in male-dominated professions, or women perceived as bucking patriarchal norms. On the contrary, they have targeted college sororities, yoga studios, and erotic massage parlors. These are places associated with the hyperfemininity that incels are obsessed with and that they encapsulate in the Stacy meme.
The Stacy is a curvy, hypersexualized character with long blonde hair and full make-up that lets Chad (her alpha-male counterpart) control and abuse her. The Stacy is the ideal woman, and yet she is reviled. According to incels, she is unintelligent, vain, fake, sociopathic, and lazy. When Rodger declares “War on Women”, it is the Stacys he targets: “hot, beautiful, blonde”, “model-like girls” who are also “vicious, stupid, cruel animals”. Incels seem then to hate what they love and love what they hate.

We can understand this paradox by thinking differently about what incels want. What they are after is not a real woman, but what philosopher Simone de Beauvoir called a feminine “Other” — an impossible and ambiguous creature, closer to a nymph or mermaid than to a sex-doll or a loyal wife. An “Other” is a device through which men can achieve a certain sense of themselves. She is a repository of their brightest dreams, but also of their worst nightmares.
For de Beauvoir, all human beings are caught in a bind between the need to act and the risk of action. We all want to do things in the world that will make us feel proud, whether it is getting a degree, painting a room, or rebuilding a car. But there is an unavoidable danger of failure that comes with striving to achieve anything. Success requires taking risks. This is something everyone must learn to live with, but that we all would like to avoid. Men are often culturally encouraged to avoid these risks by adopting a distorted view of themselves as uncriticizable — as always able to control anything, even the uncertain judgement of others. Think of little boys taught to identify with lonesome heroes, or of online masculinity gurus peddling magical shortcuts to becoming a billionaire. Elliot Rodger, for example, saw himself as “a living god” and thought life was a competition he would obviously, somehow, win. But this does not make sense. What men like Rodger want is to be heroes, regardless of their actions. This means that Rodger ends up insisting he is “destined for great things”, even while he drops out of school, refuses to get a job or to even leave his room.

Woman as “Other” becomes the only way to feel recognized as this special being in the absence of any actual accomplishment. To fulfil this function, this dream girlfriend must be another human who can praise Rodger, but not a full human who can spontaneously criticize him. Her approval must be fully conquerable. She must be an entity that can be picked up like a piece of fruit or a flower, but who can then genuinely smile back at you like a person. This is why, for Beauvoir, nymphs and mermaids are perfect “Others”. They are natural objects animated by a human consciousness. They are miraculous, supernatural beings that can finally establish Rodger as godlike.
But nymphs and mermaids are not real. The more men pursue this impossible fantasy, the more they doom themselves to a bitter disenchantment. Just like you cannot be a hero without doing heroic deeds, you cannot expect someone to worship you without the possibility of criticism. The risk of negative judgment always creeps back in. And if her regard can bestow ultimate triumph, this “Other” can also bestow ultimate failure. When his feminine saviours fail to anoint him as a hero, Rodger’s fear grows. Beautiful women become hateful enemies and violence becomes the only answer: “on the Day of Retribution, I will truly be a powerful god”, he said.
So, even though incels talk obsessively about women, looking closely at murderers like Rodger reveals that their struggle is mainly with themselves. Their anger at their ‘celibacy’ is often an anger at being just part of the crowd. Violence becomes a desperate attempt to gain control over the world and to achieve the recognition that they feel they naturally deserve. Countering incel radicalization requires men to stop thinking of themselves as living gods and instead cultivate a healthy sense of competition, personal responsibility, and humility. It also requires all of us to reject the idea that women are the answer to men’s problems. In the words of de Beauvoir, “only man can be an enemy for man; only he can rob him of the meaning of his acts and his life.”

References
Rodger, Elliot. 2014. My twisted world: The story of Elliot Rodger.https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/1173619/rodger-manifesto.pdf
Beauvoir, Simone de. 2011. The second sex. Trans. Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier. New York: Vintage Books
They bring up ER in like EVERY. FUCKING. ARTICLE. about incels/inceldom. Like holy shit we fucking get it, yeah he killed people. These people don't think like... dozens more die to gang shootings in shithole cities like Detriot, Baltimore, Chicago, etc? But they don't say shit about gang violence or gang crime. In fact they actively encourage it sometimes, even blatantly or openly too. Just look at how many "journalists" and "researchers" jerked off to the crimes that happened in 2020 during protests and shit. I mean I don't like cops either but they're clearly not applying the same standards to us. They heavily criticize us over every move and then harp on and on over ER, Minassian, Cho, and Davison. That's like what? Four people? With a combined kill count in like the 20s or 30s max? Almost as many people die in Detroit in one fucking month! And yet these disingenuous fucks still support the corrupt mayors and governments pretending that crime is down or whatever because it fits their gay agenda.

Fuck these hypocritical scum. "Journalistic Integrity" is a lie and always was. I can't wait for more of these faggots to lose their jobs to AI.
 
tl;dr
"incels don't hate women because of feminism, they hate women because of rejection"
and then she makes up some BS about how our expectations are unrealistic
 
Simone de Beauvoir was a pedophile, same as her partner Jean-Paul Sartre.
 

Similar threads

ilikecomputers
Replies
16
Views
471
Regenerator
Regenerator
HiramAbiff33
Replies
9
Views
229
highschoolcel
highschoolcel
Seahorsecel
Replies
49
Views
645
caineturbat2003
caineturbat2003

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top