Incel organ donors should be allowed to have sex with dead women, really horny incel argues

Yup. It’s not about sexual pleasure.

You have really awesome sex if the other person is turned on and likes you and wants to have sex with you. Studies of incarcerated serial rapists show that they get more sexual pleasure out of that type of consensual sex than out of raping someone. It’s about domination, a lack of concern for others, or a need to have a sense of masculinity validated.

If you wanna tell him, make a throwaway twitter account. You could use it to engage with others like him too.

As of this posting, the person’s account has been suspended by twitter, so it’s too late to let him know.

@SFHC, it may be that he knowingly used someone else’s photo, with full awareness that it shows a retinoblastoma. In which case, he’s an even bigger scumbag, who deserved his Twitter ban thoroughly. (I tend to assume the worst of trolls, especially alt-right turds. I could be wrong, of course, but two decades of ugly internet experience have taught me that the worst is rarely too much to assume when it comes to trolls and/or Nazi types.)

Ah, bugger – I was in the process of making a throwaway right when he got banned (holy hell, Twitter banned a Nazi? First time for everything), but after sleeping on it, Bina’s probably right. Didn’t even think of that at the time, heh, I just saw the cancer and thought “OH CRAP.” Well, thanks for putting up with my seriously misplaced morals, all. ^^;;

And that’s enough derailing from me!

I don’t think Criminal Minds even went this far. Close, oh most definitely, but not all the way.

The grossness! The creepiness! The entitlement! I can’t even–*does a scream like at the beginning of the Slayer song Angel Of Death*

The problem is that bestiality wasn’t illegal in some US states at some point in the past few years.

In Washington where I grew up, it was legal until the 2005 Enumclaw horse sex case. I was a senior in high school at the time and man, you could not even mention horses for like a year without setting off the jokes.

The best one I remember was “It was a Trojan horse.”

You still can’t mention Enumclaw without some people’s minds going there.

“We’re located conveniently near Mount Rainier National Park, but do they call us Enumclaw, the Mount Rainier city? No!

“We’re a great place to explore Washington’s local wineries, but do they call us Enumclaw, the winery city? No!

“We host the Pacific Northwest Scottish Highland Games, but do they call us Enumclaw, the Scottish Highland Games city? No!

“But one guy fucks one horse…”

I ran this one by my husband, who has stated for the record that if fucking corpses becomes a requirement for organ donors, he is having himself removed from the list.

OK, so I have one question. The incels usually demand hot young women. If you are over 25 years of age you are an old hag that no real man would ever fuck. Incelology 101. But most women who die are way older than 25. The supply of fresh fuckable corpse pussy will be very low. …I have changed my mind, I don’t think I want to know.

The supply of fresh fuckable corpse pussy will be very low.

This might be the most horrible sentence I have written in my entire life.

Thank you, @Gatecrasher, for sending my mind to the bad place. I honestly thought I had built up an immunity to horrible, but apparently I was wrong.

@History Nerd
Is it that study https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01542105?LI=true ? Because I want such a study for my Frequently-Argued-Quarrels-mindmap. Please?

@Lyzzy, I don’t have access to that study so can’t confirm or deny anything, but I do know that Springer is really good (for your first link) and they don’t publish garbage.

(Nevermind the fact that they’re where I’ve been published…)

Your second link, the book, has a high number of citations and is consistent with other findings, so you can probably trust what it says! Written 2013, too, so should be quite up to date.

Here’s another article you might find useful:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0162309596000763

“A test of the mate deprivation hypothesis of sexual coercion”

Abstract
According to the mate deprivation hypothesis of sexual coercion, males are more likely to use sexually coercive tactics if they are disadvantaged in gaining access to desirable mates. This hypothesis was tested in a sample of 156 young, heterosexual, mostly single men enrolled in a Canadian university. Differential access to mates was indexed by self-perceived mating success, self-reported sexual history, and relative earning potential. Sexual coercion was assessed using the Koss’s sexual experiences survey. Results did not support the hypothesis: men who identified themselves as sexually coercive tended to have higher self-perceived mating success, had significantly more extensive sexual histories, and did not report lower relative earning potential. Coercive men reported a greater preference for partner variety and casual sex. Sexual strategy theory is used to propose two alternative models of sexual coercion.

Keywords
Mate deprivation hypothesisSexual coercionMating strategy, Sexual history, Sexual strategy theory

Let me know if you need/want details from the paper, I have that one.

Eugh. This whole thread. This, just, eugh.

I am seriously contemplating removing my organ donor status from my license.

shudder