By David Futrelle
It’s always a little strange to see self-described “involuntary celibates” — that is, guys who by their own admission are currently (and perhaps forever) unable to locate any women who want to fuck them — discussing sex as if they actually have first-hand knowledge about it.
But here are two dudes on the Braincels subreddit earnestly discussing what to them is a major sex controversy: should you bother to give women orgasms, assuming female orgasms even exist?
![AjitPaiFan1 Corinthians 7 1 point 17 days ago I don't care whether or not a BITCH gets her cumcums. That's the reality. The thing is, however, hoes talk about getting fucked amongst each other. If you fuck a bitch so hard she starts PISSING involuntarily and squirming like a sea creature (sometimes wrongly conflated with the transcendental male experience called "orgasm"), then every single one of her friends is going to hear about it and want in on the action. Considering the size of the social circle of the average female, making one of them cum opens up the opportunity for fucking dozens of other sheepish, millennial, STD ridden, bangin babes in a casual context. permalinkembedunsavereportgive goldreply [–]derpyderpderp42069[S] 1 point 17 days ago Or you could just fuck another girl whenever you want instead of being a beta cuck trying to please women. Jesus what's wrong with you cucks. "Maybe if I jump through these hoops and give some thot a super orgasm she will tell her friends and they will like me too teeheehee" Sheesh grow some self respect.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/ry7ctuf8vyig9uohjp.png?resize=580%2C615&ssl=1)
I really can’t imagine why women aren’t lining up to bed these fellows.
Not listening/reading and circular arguing?
And I’m dubious about even that (there’s no reason why the conventionally attractive must themselves have conventional tastes), but trying to argue against it tends to run into a variant on the “no true Scotsman” argument where any couple you point as a counter-example gets dismissed as not counting because “she must just be with him because he’s famous/rich.”
Which also conveniently reinforces the “all women are shallow/materialistic” stereotype that the whole incel philosophy is based on.
I never really realized it this way before, but racism/sexism requires a lot of the same mental gymnastics that belief in conspiracy theories do: in this case, everything is evidence of the conspiracy/stereotype – even counter-examples.
All of the Unfortunate Beliefs share that, I think. The “conspiracy theory” mentality of everything being evidence is another way to say “confirmation bias”, which is a universal human trait.
I wouldn’t call it mental gymnastics; it’s basically the normal mode of operation for the brain. There are a few possibilities.
1) This thing happened which is easy to integrate into my current belief system? Great, integrate it. Believe the thing more, I just got evidence for it.
2) This thing happened which is hard to integrate into my current belief system? That sucks, think about it. Can it fit? Somehow? Mayb- okay, there, it fits now. Great, integrate it. Believe the thing more, I just got evidence for it.
3) This thing happened which I can’t integrate into my current belief system. Uh, well, darn. Uh. Can’t? No? Not even a little? I – well, I guess I should believe the thing less.
1 and 2 result in the same outcome – believing the thing more. Note that 2 is what we’re talking about here – evidence against someones’ beliefs. Humans are creative and their brains are constantly churning up ways to put experiences together; they can usually figure out how it fits.
3 almost never happens, because usually they’ll figure out some way that it fits together, at which point it becomes 2.
End result is that everything we see is evidence of what we believe. I can guarantee that some of the evidence of the omnipresent patriarchal state that I see everywhere is #2 processes going on in my head that I’ve been able to integrate, as an example.
Short-circuiting this process takes discipline and attention and a lot of mental energy, things that we don’t teach or provide. You have to know when to consciously intervene in your own reasoning process and to shut down your own beliefs. That’s hard.
I’m doin up a ramble here, so I’ll just say – the trick we need to learn is how to do that intervention on other people. Learning to do it on yourself is hard enough; doing it with others, I don’t even know where to begin really.
Not to disagree with the hive mind, but I think there’s another aspect of the “conventionally attractive women all want something that I’m not” thoughtline which we’ve overlooked.
Almost everyone wants a partner who acts kindly towards them, who considers their feelings, and who shows respect. Almost everyone wants someone who practises self-care, doesn’t mistreat them, and doesn’t see them just as a means to an end. Almost everyone wants someone who is honest, who respects their limits, and who can be trusted.
These nine things that I’ve italicised are pretty basic parts of being a decent human being. They are all, notably, things that someone does rather than something that they are.
If you don’t do these things, most people will choose not to date you, and that’s a reasonable choice on their part.
Some people resent this. They don’t want to do such basic things, but feel entitled to the attentions of a partner (conventionally-attractive or otherwise) anyway. They feel that it’s not fair to expect them to be a decent human being, and that others should just put up with it. They then act surprised when others choose not to date them.
When I see incels posting things like “women don’t like guys like me,” this is what it translates to in my head.
@Scild
Thanks for clarifying and focusing my thoughts on this; as with most things, there truly is nothing new under the sun.
@EJ
While that is a very cogent and undoubtedly accurate point, unfortunately you disagreed with the hivemind, so you must self-terminate.
😉
First thing through my mind with one of those incel whines is “Why the hell should women like you? You know yourself best and you obviously don’t.”
See, I think conventional attractiveness is partially a choice. It’s not completely a choice as some people might not be able get thin/fit enough for it, might have skin problems they can’t get rid, don’t have the money for stylish clothes and straight white teeth etc. But when I say that sad boner whiners want conventionally attractive women, I don’t really just mean on the thin side with well proportioned facial features. I mean women who put effort into conforming with mainstream beauty standards. Since I mentioned Bachelor contestants before, I’ll go with that.
http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/mp/9VEKsw5WP46l.jpg
Notice that despite the variety of hair and skin colors, they all kind of look the same. All but one of them has long and perfectly coiffed hair. Their dresses are all normal formalwear. Nobody is wearing anything gothic, androgynous, super retro etc. All of them except (I happen to know because I watch the show) the short haired one have shaved legs and armpits. They’re all fit and clearly work out but none of them have done workouts that will make them more muscular looking than is considered beautiful for women. They’re all wearing plenty of makeup. Genes have contributed for a big part of their appearances, but obviously not all of it. Conventional beauty for women is not something you attain by genetic lottery alone. It’s something that must be worked for. There’s a certain status that you get from maintaining conventional beauty.
Now, this is a generality. Some women who put lots of time and effort into their appearance don’t care if their partners are also conventionally attractive. But because a lot of conformity to beauty norms is about status as much as it is about personal aesthetics, the people who care about this status are likely to seek a partner of similar status.
Although I don’t think it’s good to say 100% of attractive women only date attractive men. But I do think it’s naive to say that a person (of any gender or orientation) who puts a lot of effort into conforming with with beauty standards is just as likely to want to date people who don’t conform to beauty standards as people who do. Like I said, a lot of conformity to these standards is a conscious choice.
I think the issue is that a lot of men want to level up their social status with a partner who is conventionally attractive. They feel entitled to this without putting in the effort to become attractive to the people who also care about these things. They either don’t know or don’t care that the “assholes” and “hot guys” who are frequently partnered with them don’t just sit back and get showered with “HB10s” The demands of conventionally beauty aren’t as strict for men, but they do still involve working out and wearing stylish clothes that fit well. But popular culture teaches men that just being the protoganist earns them a trophy girlfriend. Since everyone is the protagonist in their own story, a good portion of men will become aggrieved when this doesn’t happen. Since they don’t see women as people, it doesn’t occur to them to look for things like emotional and mental compatibility in a partner. They just ask out a few women with high social status due to looks and social graces, get turned down and decide either “women are shallow bitchy prudesluts” or “I must be hideous and undateable.”
I hope that clarifies what I mean a little bit better.
And I should also clarify that I don’t think it’s bad to only be interested in people who look a certain way. I just think people (by which I mean mostly men) need to realize that if they’re going to be picky about looks, it’s going to make it harder to find a partner. It’s also not a good thing to care only about looks. Be as choosy about looks as you like, but understand that it’s not the one and only thing long term relationships are based on. A big thing sad boner whiners have in common is that they always seem to just want “a girlfriend.” You never hear them speak about wanting to share their interests and lives with someone. Even most people who are looks focused when choosing a partner seem to get that partnership also involves values and interests in common. Incel types don’t and that’s also a big part of their problem.
I want to make an amendment to my previous post. If a sad boner whiner is in a specific subculture, his version of a trophy girlfriend might be slightly different than those women in the picture above. But it still involves model/Hollywood actress good looks with some different fashions and hairstyles. Either way, I think they’re less concerned with actual attraction or making a connection than they are with attaining higher status in the group they’re in or want to be in via an attractive girlfriend.
That is they want their partner to do beauty labor on their behalf but without being expected to do any beauty labor in return.
Re: that picture from the Bachelor:
Looks like someone’s really gone to town with the clone tool. Not as frightening as that sorority video that went viral a few years back, but close.
(I’m a fan of John Wyndham 😛 )
@WWTH
Maybe his wrist circumference isn’t up to snuff.
dslucia:
It’s all about the canthal tilt these days. Chicks dig canthi.
My money’s on a feminine midface.
holy shit, feministguy has still managed to NOT get banned yet? I guess he’s learning after all, yet hes still stinking up the place
@Moggie
I had literally never even heard of “canthal tilt” until like, three weeks ago or something. That was a strange day.
Again, teaching incels and undateable guys HOW TO DEAL with a life with no romance is key. Not every guy is cut out for romance. Not every guy will be able to become intimate. We need to keep their minds active, healthy and ambitious to stop them being destructive
As for evidence of my conversations, I promised that it would be confidential to the incels so I wont share, if people dont want to believe me, then I completely understand
As for me, Im an ugly fuck. Always have been, always will be. Thats life. Theres lots of things going for me. Ive graduated, I have a degree, I have healthy family, I play sports, been to 19 countries, I rather focus on what I CAN DO and appreciate what I DO HAVE, than worry about something I cant get. Its human nature to obsess over something they cant have rather than appreciate what they do have.
And thats what Im trying to get incels to do. I am sure they have their own strengths, their own hobbies. I want them to EMBRACE what they are good at and not worry about dating or sex, or whatever damn insecurity they have which is making them miserable
Yep, some guys will get rejected by every woman. Some women will be rejected by every guy. Thats how it is. There are a small minority of humans who are undateable
Problem is men are more violent, more entitled, so they will become destructive. Women dont.
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/090/478/e11.gif
Okay. I know I shouldn’t be encouraging you to talk more about yourself. But I’m curious. How are you ugly? What specific feature or set of features make you so ugly that no woman on the planet will date you?
I retract that statement. Seriously, feministguy couldn’t hold it in long enough. Fuck-ing hell.
Feministguy has removed all doubt in my head that he is a sock.
edit; bad grammar
@Feministguy,
Could you at least acknowledge a single thing directed at you that confronts the position you have? Like, one?
So far it’s been like this:
“Some guys are just too ugly for dating!”
“No, that’s not true, it’s not ugliness, it’s other things.”
“But some guys just can’t date ’cause they’re too ugly!”
“Stop that, you’re saying women are too shallow and vain to date someone not conventionally attractive.”
“We need to help these undateable guys find other goals in life!”
I mean, jees, @feministguy, engage once, just once, with the words being sent your way. WWTH has put piles of excellent things into the thread and you’ve ignored them. All you’re doing is making raw assertions that support the incel argument that they can’t help but be the way they are. Stop it and engage.
And for heck’s sake, change your ‘nym. You aren’t a feminist; feminists don’t claim guys are undateable for being too ugly. Because feminists aren’t that superficial.
EDIT:
In fact, I think we should have a Troll Challenge.
Engage with a meaningful confrontation of your position, or we call down a suitfull of angry kittens.
Its nature. There has to be physical attraction for a chance of a spark. Obviously other things are required for a long lasting healthy relationship too.
@Treehugger
You wouldnt want to see a picture of me . Ill save you to favour! As human beings there are certain things we can do, and things we cant do.
Theres being not attractive and average, then theres being an ugly looking Ghollum like me. Hahaha! I win on that 😛
@Feministguy
Except many people have refuted this claim of yours, across multiple threads now. Why do you persist in believing it?
Because it true. All my female friends and male friends agree that there has to be SOME kind of physical attraction in order for a date request to be accepted. Sure, the guy or the woman doesnt have to be zac efron or cheryl cole, but there has to be some attraction there
I suppose you missed starfury’s excellent post in the previous thread. A big one that you were recommended to read and respond to, and never did? This one? Here’s the bit that responds to this claim:
Imagine that! They were unattractive, and yet affection bloomed anyways. There are plenty of people who can find love without having physical attraction first.
Confront that.