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 The Problem with Media Coverage of ER Incidents is How Society Diagnoses The Perpetrator After Their Violent Rampage

ResidentHell

ResidentHell

Officer
★★★★★
Joined
Jul 30, 2022
Posts
902
Society diagnoses Violent Rampage as either Terrorism or Mental Illness by Default

If someone goes ER, there’s basically one of two ways that society and the media will diagnose them based on their motive:

(a) If their motive is comprehensible and impersonal (i.e., it was for a greater cause), its terrorism

(b) If their motive is comprehensible and personal, it was mental illness

(c) If their motive is incomprehensible (i.e., they had a violent emotional meltdown), it was mental illness

(d) If their motive is unclear, it was probably mental illness, because a motive for terrorism is normally easier to uncover, than a motive for violence by emotional meltdown​

Basically, if someone goes ER - Society says that it was either a case of mental illness or terrorism, or both. But the issue with this approach to ERs is that it's a black-and-white approach, like psychological splitting. It only allows two possibilities: MENTAL ILLNESS or TERRORISM. Bluepillers by default will assume one of the two possibilities as to why someone would go ER. From bluepiller POV, it is either a case of terrorism or mental illness

Another issue with this approach to ERs is that sometimes it is not a case of terrorism, but a “mental illness” that is reflective of a wider social issue that has some negative impact on a certain population of people in society. There’s one example I want to mention, cause it mirrors what could potentially happen in the future as a result of “incels” who go ER in future


The Assassination of Shinzo Abe & the Rationale of his Killer's Actions

Remember Shinzo Abe, ex-Prime Minister of Japan, who was assassinated around Summer 2022. His killer, Tetsuya Yamagami, was a 41 y/o man who was unemployed with no criminal history, and probably was also “incel” based on the details surrounding his personal life. You could even consider the actions of Tetsuya Yamagami as another case of “incel rampage” - Except it also included other factors that led to his besides a failed social/romantic life, e.g., financial struggles that were caused by his mother's excessive donations to the Christcuck cult, the suicide of his father and brother, his mother begging him for money so she can donate more money to Christcuck cults

The thing about Tetsuya Yamagami, is that his motive for killing Shinzo Abe, made sense. Yamagami’s motive was certainly not terrorism, based on the accounts of his personal life leading up to his day of retribution against Shinzo Abe. But his motive was understandable, and it’s hard to argue that he was a psychopath, based on the fact that he had no history of criminal violence, and he was in fact a victim of arrested development. He was an abused dog for most of his childhood and adult life

The reports say that Tetsuya Yamagami was a “second-generation” of some Christcuck cult that started in South Korea during the 1950’s which eventually reached Japan. It was also said that many of the “second generation” descendants of religious cults in Japan were subject to a traumatic upbringing and felt like they had no sense of purpose or direction in life once they reached adulthood.
But this was a phenomenon that was previously not known to the Japanese public, as many of these “second generation people” in Japan felt like they had no one to share their personal issues with. Tetsuya Yamagami blamed Shinzo Abe for the alienation and emotional trauma that affected the “second generation” of ricecucks and noodlewhores who descended from religious cults in Japan, because Shinzo Abe (when he was PM of Japan) was the one of the politicians who consistently supported the religious cults that emerged in Japan, and he created policies that catered to those cults in Japan



From Yamagami’s perspective, Shinzo Abe was the primary cause of the issues that “second generations” faced while growing up under their cucked parents, and it makes total sense why Yamagami ultimately reached this conclusion. Yamagami was an abused dog, thanks to the bluepilled ricebots who he descended from, and he inevitably became hateful of the Christcuck cult that his ricebot family were church members. Killing Shinzo Abe was his ultimate act of retribution for the years that he endured as a lost, marginalized ricecel in Japanese society

It took this traumatized ricecel-descendant of a Christcuck rice cult to pick up a shotgun and shoot Shinzo Abe in public for the Japanese public to become aware of the emotional trauma & existential crisis of "second generation". Many other ricecucks & noodles from the “second generation” also empathized with Yamagami, as they were also victims of this cult phenomenon. The Japanese government would eventually acknowledge the issues that affected the “second generation”, and as a form of reparations, the Japan government issued a court order to dissolve the Christcuck cult that affected the lives of “second generation” ricecucks in Japan

Basically it took this lost ricecel to carry out an act of extreme violence for the Japanese public to become aware of a social issue that affected a certain demographic of Japan for a long time, and eventually their government took action to compensate the “second generation” for what they endured when no one else in Japanese society was really aware of it. Yamagami tried to rehabilitate and seek therapy or emotional support, and it obviously didn’t work

Yamagami was not a terrorist, because his violent actions had no political agenda behind it – It was purely an act of retribution. Yamagami was not a psycho either - He was traumatized as an involuntary subject of Christcuck cults that surfaced in 20th century Japan (thanks to his older family members), which eventually pushed him off the edge. Yamagami’s decision to kill Shinzo Abe was based on a logical motive, because Shinzo Abe was the main person who enabled and supported religious cults that emerged in Japan during the 20th century, which resulted in the arrested development and emotional trauma of Tetsuya Yamagami and other ricecels from the “second generation”
. By killing Shinzo Abe, public awareness was brought to a problem that was previously not known to the rest of Japanese society, and the Japanese government would eventually take action to help those marginalized rice & noodles who were affected by this problem


What if a Socially/Romantically Failed Man goes ER for a Non-Terrorist Motive that is also Understandable?

If you try and connect the story about Tetsuya Yamagami to the issue of “inceldom” in western society - The same could be said about someone who goes ER because of their failure in having a satisfactory social and sexual life

If a socially and romantically failed man goes ER, their motive is not usually terrorism, becausethe “incelosphere” is not an organized political movement with an agenda, and there are probably more “incels” in the world who aren’t :blackpill: than “incels” who are :blackpill:. Plus sexlessness/alienation are conditions that affect a large share of young men in western society, and there is solid data to back this up

A sexless/dateless, frustrated man can go ER for understandable motives as well – As in motives that at least make sense and aren't terrorism, some examples:

“I killed her because she rejected me and my ego/self-esteem was hurt, so I attacked her as a sort of defence mechanism to protect my injured ego/self-esteem”

“I had a crush on her, but I found out that she was fucking another man, and I decided that I would rather not allow other men to have her when I don’t have her, even if it means her death”

“I used to date her, but she cheated, and my emotions were hurt so I attacked her in response to vent my emotional trauma”

“people in my school/workplace bullied me, so I decided to seek retribution for the emotional trauma that I endured while subjugated to bullying”


In fact, Normies and Chads kill women and underage girls MUCH MORE OFTEN than incels do for these stated reasons (excluding the 4th reason). But there are two key issues with this perspective on men who go ER for a comprehensible reason based on a failed social/sex life:

1. It looks like women do not feel as if it is their “moral duty” to provide sex to men who are struggling in having a social/sexual lifestyle. Instead, women might say

I) “it’s the men’s fault for their failure to obtain a sex partner without paying”, which is pretty much gaslighting, considering the most recent data on zoomer dating and sexual lifestyle

II) “you’re not entitled to sex/GF”, as a way of deflection to avoid taking on “moral accountability” for something that they as women have control over, which has negatively affected the emotional states of a certain demographic of young men (aka sub7 zoomer males) in western societies

2. Bluepillers continue to pretend as though the issue doesn’t exist, when the data clearly shows that it does for some 25% to 50% of zoomer males in western countries


If women or other people in power decided to empathize with sexless men, they might actually try to propose a reasonable solution that would at least mitigate the issue of male sexlessness. Therapy and mental health support are not reasonable solutions, because they don’t address the elephant in the room that led to the emotional upset or alienation of certain young men in the first place. Castration/sterilization of men are not a safe solution either. You’re dealing with humans. A sterilized male will have less to lose, than a male who isn’t sterilized. It will only provide “incels” and “blackpillers” with a stronger motivation to rebel against society with force and violence

At least, women could support or advocate for the development and commercialization of sexbots/sexdolls and AI girlfriends for men who struggle and fail to find an organic female sex partner. It might not be the ultimate solution - But it would at least show that women are empathetic and care to some extent about the plight of sexless and socially alienated young men in western countries. Instead of just antagonizing them by brandishing them as “creeps” or “dangerous” men who should be imprisoned or institutionalized by mental health services

The real question is this: How many more “incel rampages” will it take for governments in western countries to realize there is a problem which has affected a certain proportion of young men?
Sometimes the only practical way to bring about change is through violence, cause the societal issues that affect a marginalized people aren’t always taken seriously by the powers that be - Until someone decides to pick up a weapon and delete people in public spaces with bullets or other things that are heavy or sharp. The rate of sexless men will only get higher as alpha gen males reach adulthood, and I guarantee there will be more males in alpha gen who go ER in the future

The REAL danger is if “incels” ACTUALLY attempt and succeed in creating an organized, multi-national “blackpill” political movement, cause if they successfully do this, it could easily evolve to become violent insurgencies, like HAMAS or Boko Haram. All this can be prevented if the issue is addressed on a political scale sooner, with sincerity and seriousness. It’s better to domesticate the lion in an urban city while it’s still a cub, than allow it grow up to become a big ferocious beast without nurturing and socializing it, because a big, feral animal free-roaming in an urban city will inevitably lead to casualties that could have been avoided, if the big feral animal was properly socialized when it was still a little cubs

(Relevent thread)
 
They're trying to re-define the meaning of terrorism anyway, which is the usage of "scare" to achieve particular political goals. Since violence against foids do cause wide spread scare, some are trying to re-define the meaning of terrorism.
 
Society diagnoses Violent Rampage as either Terrorism or Mental Illness by Default

If someone goes ER, there’s basically one of two ways that society and the media will diagnose them based on their motive:

(a) If their motive is comprehensible and impersonal (i.e., it was for a greater cause), its terrorism

(b) If their motive is comprehensible and personal, it was mental illness

(c) If their motive is incomprehensible (i.e., they had a violent emotional meltdown), it was mental illness

(d) If their motive is unclear, it was probably mental illness, because a motive for terrorism is normally easier to uncover, than a motive for violence by emotional meltdown​

Basically, if someone goes ER - Society says that it was either a case of mental illness or terrorism, or both. But the issue with this approach to ERs is that it's a black-and-white approach, like psychological splitting. It only allows two possibilities: MENTAL ILLNESS or TERRORISM. Bluepillers by default will assume one of the two possibilities as to why someone would go ER. From bluepiller POV, it is either a case of terrorism or mental illness

Another issue with this approach to ERs is that sometimes it is not a case of terrorism, but a “mental illness” that is reflective of a wider social issue that has some negative impact on a certain population of people in society. There’s one example I want to mention, cause it mirrors what could potentially happen in the future as a result of “incels” who go ER in future


The Assassination of Shinzo Abe & the Rationale of his Killer's Actions

Remember Shinzo Abe, ex-Prime Minister of Japan, who was assassinated around Summer 2022. His killer, Tetsuya Yamagami, was a 41 y/o man who was unemployed with no criminal history, and probably was also “incel” based on the details surrounding his personal life. You could even consider the actions of Tetsuya Yamagami as another case of “incel rampage” - Except it also included other factors that led to his besides a failed social/romantic life, e.g., financial struggles that were caused by his mother's excessive donations to the Christcuck cult, the suicide of his father and brother, his mother begging him for money so she can donate more money to Christcuck cults

The thing about Tetsuya Yamagami, is that his motive for killing Shinzo Abe, made sense. Yamagami’s motive was certainly not terrorism, based on the accounts of his personal life leading up to his day of retribution against Shinzo Abe. But his motive was understandable, and it’s hard to argue that he was a psychopath, based on the fact that he had no history of criminal violence, and he was in fact a victim of arrested development. He was an abused dog for most of his childhood and adult life

The reports say that Tetsuya Yamagami was a “second-generation” of some Christcuck cult that started in South Korea during the 1950’s which eventually reached Japan. It was also said that many of the “second generation” descendants of religious cults in Japan were subject to a traumatic upbringing and felt like they had no sense of purpose or direction in life once they reached adulthood.
But this was a phenomenon that was previously not known to the Japanese public, as many of these “second generation people” in Japan felt like they had no one to share their personal issues with. Tetsuya Yamagami blamed Shinzo Abe for the alienation and emotional trauma that affected the “second generation” of ricecucks and noodlewhores who descended from religious cults in Japan, because Shinzo Abe (when he was PM of Japan) was the one of the politicians who consistently supported the religious cults that emerged in Japan, and he created policies that catered to those cults in Japan



From Yamagami’s perspective, Shinzo Abe was the primary cause of the issues that “second generations” faced while growing up under their cucked parents, and it makes total sense why Yamagami ultimately reached this conclusion. Yamagami was an abused dog, thanks to the bluepilled ricebots who he descended from, and he inevitably became hateful of the Christcuck cult that his ricebot family were church members. Killing Shinzo Abe was his ultimate act of retribution for the years that he endured as a lost, marginalized ricecel in Japanese society

It took this traumatized ricecel-descendant of a Christcuck rice cult to pick up a shotgun and shoot Shinzo Abe in public for the Japanese public to become aware of the emotional trauma & existential crisis of "second generation". Many other ricecucks & noodles from the “second generation” also empathized with Yamagami, as they were also victims of this cult phenomenon. The Japanese government would eventually acknowledge the issues that affected the “second generation”, and as a form of reparations, the Japan government issued a court order to dissolve the Christcuck cult that affected the lives of “second generation” ricecucks in Japan

Basically it took this lost ricecel to carry out an act of extreme violence for the Japanese public to become aware of a social issue that affected a certain demographic of Japan for a long time, and eventually their government took action to compensate the “second generation” for what they endured when no one else in Japanese society was really aware of it. Yamagami tried to rehabilitate and seek therapy or emotional support, and it obviously didn’t work

Yamagami was not a terrorist, because his violent actions had no political agenda behind it – It was purely an act of retribution. Yamagami was not a psycho either - He was traumatized as an involuntary subject of Christcuck cults that surfaced in 20th century Japan (thanks to his older family members), which eventually pushed him off the edge. Yamagami’s decision to kill Shinzo Abe was based on a logical motive, because Shinzo Abe was the main person who enabled and supported religious cults that emerged in Japan during the 20th century, which resulted in the arrested development and emotional trauma of Tetsuya Yamagami and other ricecels from the “second generation”
. By killing Shinzo Abe, public awareness was brought to a problem that was previously not known to the rest of Japanese society, and the Japanese government would eventually take action to help those marginalized rice & noodles who were affected by this problem


What if a Socially/Romantically Failed Man goes ER for a Non-Terrorist Motive that is also Understandable?

If you try and connect the story about Tetsuya Yamagami to the issue of “inceldom” in western society - The same could be said about someone who goes ER because of their failure in having a satisfactory social and sexual life

If a socially and romantically failed man goes ER, their motive is not usually terrorism, becausethe “incelosphere” is not an organized political movement with an agenda, and there are probably more “incels” in the world who aren’t :blackpill: than “incels” who are :blackpill:. Plus sexlessness/alienation are conditions that affect a large share of young men in western society, and there is solid data to back this up

A sexless/dateless, frustrated man can go ER for understandable motives as well – As in motives that at least make sense and aren't terrorism, some examples:

“I killed her because she rejected me and my ego/self-esteem was hurt, so I attacked her as a sort of defence mechanism to protect my injured ego/self-esteem”

“I had a crush on her, but I found out that she was fucking another man, and I decided that I would rather not allow other men to have her when I don’t have her, even if it means her death”

“I used to date her, but she cheated, and my emotions were hurt so I attacked her in response to vent my emotional trauma”

“people in my school/workplace bullied me, so I decided to seek retribution for the emotional trauma that I endured while subjugated to bullying”


In fact, Normies and Chads kill women and underage girls MUCH MORE OFTEN than incels do for these stated reasons (excluding the 4th reason). But there are two key issues with this perspective on men who go ER for a comprehensible reason based on a failed social/sex life:

1. It looks like women do not feel as if it is their “moral duty” to provide sex to men who are struggling in having a social/sexual lifestyle. Instead, women might say

I) “it’s the men’s fault for their failure to obtain a sex partner without paying”, which is pretty much gaslighting, considering the most recent data on zoomer dating and sexual lifestyle

II) “you’re not entitled to sex/GF”, as a way of deflection to avoid taking on “moral accountability” for something that they as women have control over, which has negatively affected the emotional states of a certain demographic of young men (aka sub7 zoomer males) in western societies

2. Bluepillers continue to pretend as though the issue doesn’t exist, when the data clearly shows that it does for some 25% to 50% of zoomer males in western countries


If women or other people in power decided to empathize with sexless men, they might actually try to propose a reasonable solution that would at least mitigate the issue of male sexlessness. Therapy and mental health support are not reasonable solutions, because they don’t address the elephant in the room that led to the emotional upset or alienation of certain young men in the first place. Castration/sterilization of men are not a safe solution either. You’re dealing with humans. A sterilized male will have less to lose, than a male who isn’t sterilized. It will only provide “incels” and “blackpillers” with a stronger motivation to rebel against society with force and violence

At least, women could support or advocate for the development and commercialization of sexbots/sexdolls and AI girlfriends for men who struggle and fail to find an organic female sex partner. It might not be the ultimate solution - But it would at least show that women are empathetic and care to some extent about the plight of sexless and socially alienated young men in western countries. Instead of just antagonizing them by brandishing them as “creeps” or “dangerous” men who should be imprisoned or institutionalized by mental health services

The real question is this: How many more “incel rampages” will it take for governments in western countries to realize there is a problem which has affected a certain proportion of young men?
Sometimes the only practical way to bring about change is through violence, cause the societal issues that affect a marginalized people aren’t always taken seriously by the powers that be - Until someone decides to pick up a weapon and delete people in public spaces with bullets or other things that are heavy or sharp. The rate of sexless men will only get higher as alpha gen males reach adulthood, and I guarantee there will be more males in alpha gen who go ER in the future

The REAL danger is if “incels” ACTUALLY attempt and succeed in creating an organized, multi-national “blackpill” political movement, cause if they successfully do this, it could easily evolve to become violent insurgencies, like HAMAS or Boko Haram. All this can be prevented if the issue is addressed on a political scale sooner, with sincerity and seriousness. It’s better to domesticate the lion in an urban city while it’s still a cub, than allow it grow up to become a big ferocious beast without nurturing and socializing it, because a big, feral animal free-roaming in an urban city will inevitably lead to casualties that could have been avoided, if the big feral animal was properly socialized when it was still a little cubs

(Relevent thread)

Radicalised virgins will always exist in any society with excess males.If properly funded by enemy countries like jihadis then they can create havoc in their home countries.Misogynistic terrorism is the latest version of this type and it looks like with the rejection of god and therefore inherent morality societies may have a tough time coping with this.The elites may have a solution of imposing trannification of men to stop this danger.Trannies though arent biologically born that way so it all depends on the industrial state's capacity to indoctrinate,feminise and hotmonise men to weaklings who would never resist
 
That’s not exactly true anymore. Most nowadays default to “he was evil at birth” even when evidence points to a somewhat tangible motive. Bluepillers are retarded, water is wet
 

Similar threads

Seahorsecel
Replies
40
Views
611
qbicus
qbicus
Kselectedvirgin
Replies
4
Views
237
THE TRUE DIGLET
THE TRUE DIGLET
AsiaCel
Replies
7
Views
319
Emba
Emba
aswellfella
Replies
45
Views
497
lifesucksandyoudie
lifesucksandyoudie

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top