Categories
empathy deficit entitled babies incels irony alert men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny rape rape culture rape is good actually redistribution of sex

Incel: “Women should not be allowed out without a man”

Uh oh! This one’s escaping!

By David Futrelle

On Incels.me, a hangout for some of the internet’s most hopeless involuntary celibates, one young fellow has come up with a simple yet ingenious answer to the Woman Question — that question being “why do these women keep having sex with guys other than the angry woman-hating weirdos who populate sites like Incels.me?”

His answer: because they are allowed freedom of movement. His solution?

[Serious] Women should not be allowed out without a man. Thread starterJackAutismo Start dateToday at 12:24 PM JackAutismo JackAutismo Recruit - Today at 12:24 PM#1 Women are dangerous whores who will have sex with Chad unless they are escorted by a man all times. If a roastie goes out unescorted and an ugly Male looks at her, she will accuse him of having raped her. Women are like adult bodied children and should thus not be allowed out without a chaperone to protect men from their degenerate sluttery.

Amazingly, one of the commenters actually has an issue with this plan, wondering if keeping women locked up and/or chaperoned 24 hours a day might actually make it harder for incels to have sex with them. But JackAutismo has an answer all ready, and it sounds a bit like that “enforced monogamy” we’ve been hearing so much about.

JackAutismo Recruit - Today at 1:38 PM#10 Henry de Montherlant said: How are you supposed to end involuntary celibacy by suppressing all celibate female presence in the street ? Low IQ as fuck. Women would be assigned a man to be their husband and would only be allowed to go outside with him- if she went outside alone and got ‘raped’ it would be declared that she was trying to decay society and she would get the death penalty.

Say what you will about the tenets of inceldom; at least it’s an ethos.

83 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Cat Mara
Cat Mara
6 years ago

That incels believe their own rot— that is, that these are modest proposals in defence of civic order against the base and chaotic urges of women; that the worldview they profess is nothing more than the good, old-fashioned, benign patriarchy that existed in The Good Old Days before the wicked Marxist/ Post-Modernist/ Feminist Conspiracy™ made it a bad word; and they are just misunderstood nice (sic) guys thwarted in their natural rights to be lovers, fathers, bread-winners, etc., etc. — is frightening. Just thinking of the kind of fathers these self-centred, sniveling, emotional vampires would make makes my blood run cold…

Virgin Mary
Virgin Mary
6 years ago

I do know one in real life, and it’s worrying that he has young daughters. I’ve seen his rants on facebook, and even tho he is a friend of a friend his posts are pretty worrying. He basically believes in a libertarian future, and he sees himself as the defender and protector of his family. He sees this as his divine responsibility. He knows that myself and another friend is trans, and he likes to call us nonces and paedos, as he is pretty obsesses with child molesters, especially LGBT and Muslims who feature highly in his fantasies. He talks about making things illegal, such as sex dolls and trans people, but I have tried to reason with him on this, as he does not agree with paying tax as a sovereign citizen, there will be no police, judiciary or government to enforce these ‘laws” so in fact there won’t be any laws. He basically believes in pitchforks at dawn and mob rule. He says he believes in freedom for his children, but believes that us socialists are trying to steal his children’s inheritance. I argue, that as he has daughters not sons, his children won’t have an inheritance in the world he imagines. He says that as I don’t have kids, I have no stake in the future, but that’s a bit rich coming from a man who believes in aggressive unregulated capitalism, and denies climate change :/

Moggie
Moggie
6 years ago

Damn 2018. Imagine you’d been away from the news for a few days, maybe hiking the Appalachian trail or something, and you come back and everyone is talking about Bigfoot erotica like that’s just a normal part of the political landscape now.

I’ve said it before: we’re living in a simulation, and we’re at the point where the person controlling it is all “I’m bored with this now, let’s just whack the ‘weird shit’ slider way the fuck up and see what happens”.

Katamount
Katamount
6 years ago

Damn 2018. Imagine you’d been away from the news for a few days, maybe hiking the Appalachian trail or something, and you come back and everyone is talking about Bigfoot erotica like that’s just a normal part of the political landscape now.

It was pointed out on Wonkette: why did this guy put his own name to this stuff? I mean, there’s a reason that I go under this pseudonym and the reason isn’t all that far off from Bigfoot erotica.

Who knows, maybe there’s a future for furries in politics after all. As long as they aren’t those damned alt-right furries… *shakes fist*

Incidentally, I’m a much better artist than whoever he hired to do the cover.

kupo
kupo
6 years ago

The better question is, “why are we focusing on the bigfoot erotica when he’s a fucking white supremacist?”

KindaSortaHarmless
KindaSortaHarmless
6 years ago

@kupo

Because in the year twenty-fothermucking-eighteen, Bigfoot porn is weird, and neo-Nazis aren’t.

kupo
kupo
6 years ago

@KindaSortaHarmless
Right? Like how did we get here, where being a white supremacist is normal and fine for a political candidate, but if they watch/read unusually porn that’s a big deal?

Moggie
Moggie
6 years ago

Yeah, a white supremacist is barely even newsworthy now. Fuck.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
6 years ago

It’s one thing to have (and write about) sexual fantasies, but it takes a special kind of Nazi fuckwit to argue that they should be codified into law.

Talonknife
Talonknife
6 years ago

@Katamount

Who knows, maybe there’s a future for furries in politics after all. As long as they aren’t those damned alt-right furries… *shakes fist*

I do hope so. Sometimes I think that I’d like to run for office, but then I think about the fact that I’ve shared pictures of myself IRL on various furry accounts I have and I wonder how that would affect my campaign, especially given that I live in a more conservative area.

Podkayne Lives
Podkayne Lives
6 years ago

It’s one thing to have (and write about) sexual fantasies, but it takes a special kind of Nazi fuckwit to argue that they should be codified into law.

Wait, he wants to legally require people to have sex with Bigfoot?

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Bigfoot is the ultimate incel. Nobody wants to fuck a super hairy dude that lives in the woods by himself. And don’t even get me started on that canthal tilt.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
6 years ago

@Podkayne – Well, with a title like “The Mating Habits of Bigfoot And Why Women Want Him”, I wouldn’t be surprised…Sure, it’s supposed to be satire, but we all know how well white supremacists do satire. I’m sure that book will end up being a stalking horse for all sorts of crappy, retrograde ideas about women.

Come to think of it, Bigfoot would make an ideal chaperone. Anyone who can’t see him, well, that’s their problem.

the real cie
6 years ago

Well, they caught me. Every time I go to drop off a meal during the course of my shift as a highly esteemed food delivery courier, I’m having sex with a Chad approximately every three dropoffs. Sometimes I also friendzone a beta just for shits and grins.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
6 years ago

Interesting article on how morally and intellectually bankrupt conservatism is (and always was):

https://www.gq.com/story/on-conservatism

Katamount
Katamount
6 years ago

@Surplus

Good article. Reminiscent of Corey Robin’s central thesis of conservatism as a pure reactionary force to the emancipatory movements that arise and especially the ones that are successful.

Regular Mammotheers know I like to go off on local events on occasion (all politics are local, etc.) and Toronto’s politics are nothing short of a clusterfuck right now.

Doug Ford–yes, crack mayor’s brother and current Premier of Ontario–unilaterally slashed the number of council seats in Toronto’s city council from 47 to 25. On the last day for municipal candidates to file their candidacy for office. No consultation, no referendum, just doing it. Legally it probably is in his power to do so given municipalities don’t appear in the constitution, but sensible Premiers tend to avoid this because it’s a recipe for chaos, blatantly ignores the duly elected representatives in the municipality and in general is a dick move. I say “sensible” Premiers don’t do this because this is what Mike Harris did in 1997 with the “megacity” amalgamation, which merged the six boroughs, who each had their own councils and mayor, into a single council with a single mayor.

The rationale behind this move is “saving” $25 million in salaries for councillors and their staffs, and allowing council to be more “efficient” because of the perceived gridlock of having 47 people sound off on every measure. Except those salaries only amount to $9 million. And the workload doesn’t go away.

Needless to say, Mayor John Tory was blindsided, council was furious and I attended my first rally at City Hall Friday night in opposition to this move. Because I can’t sit idly by and let this asshole bully my city in this way. He hated Toronto when he was a councillor and this is nothing more than a vengeance play. The fewer council staffers to vet development proposals is just icing on the cake.

But what’s more chilling is just how ignorant those in favour of this move (read: Ford Nation) are about city governance. Reading the Twitter feeds of Ford supporters like Raymond Cho had the same theme: “Nobody wants more politicians, amirite, hur hur hur….”

I could only sit there and think “Holy shit, these people really do think that all councillors do is sit and vote on stuff… they have no freakin’ clue what the council staff is responsible for….” A simple search of the city website would show it, but they’re so wedded to their contempt for government that they wouldn’t dare venture into a place that informed them.

But what disturbed me even more was the sheer level of hate these people have for Toronto. There was always a joke that Toronto thinks its the center of the universe and it’s the city everyone loves to hate, but that wasn’t a joke, apparently. The suburbs really do loath us, as I found out on the Huffington Post comment sections where several self-identified suburbanites were gleeful that this made Toronto cry. They clearly loath us so much that they’re willing to take a sledgehammer to our very municipal cohesion… for what? To save a buck? There’s a bloated police budget and a $3 billion one-stop subway extension you can take an axe to if it’s money you want to save. This isn’t about savings. It’s about injuring people they hate. Pure and simple.

This is the same dynamic we see all over. It’s “trigger the libs” made manifest, only it’s going to impact my city for years to come!

Mayoral candidate Jennifer Keesmaat, the former city planner, has suggested that Toronto secede from Ontario, as it has more people in it than half the other provinces in the country. I can’t say I’m not unsympathetic to that idea. Now, it’s likely just a headline grabbing statement from her, but it got my attention. And it’s not a suggestion that just came about now; there were murmurings of secession during the megacity merger given Mike Harris’ blatant meddling. I’d like to read Keesmaat’s platform when she releases it.

Frankly, Toronto needs to stand up for itself. This is the second time in as many decades that populist conservative blowhards have sought to kneecap the city for partisan resentment, and that’s what’s really holding the city back: the resentment between the suburbs and the urban core. Doesn’t matter if it’s 25 councillors or 47; if half the councillors simply hate the other half and are against any initiatives that might improve the core, it’ll be the same gridlock that currently has Toronto in its grip. The resentment politics need to end if this city is to get anywhere.

So yeah, that’s how I spent my weekend! Yayyyyy….

Moon_custafer
Moon_custafer
6 years ago

Katamount@ —

I’d say it’s not just a vengeance play, but a piece of gerrymandering intended to bring Toronto (the central part in particular) under Conservative control.

Katamount
Katamount
6 years ago

@Moon_custafer

Without a doubt. But the mask slipping off Ford Nation isn’t one of consolidation of power, it’s about injury. That’s why I think vengeance is still the animating factor, even with the power-grab component factored in.

Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
6 years ago

I think vengeance is still the animating factor, even with the power-grab component factored in.

I think we can say this about every conservative political platform since the advent of Richard Nixon….

KindaSortaHarmless
KindaSortaHarmless
6 years ago

I might be from the colony that fought a war to get rid of our king, but I have to say that women in ponds lobbing swords at people is, at the very least, not on its face an inherently worse form of government than “what can we do to make people suffer?”

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

So…

Is Facebook trying to help Republicans win the midterms. Like, blatantly?

First they say they can’t get rid of right wing hate speech and conspiracy mongering.

Then Donald Trump makes the claim that the Russians are actually trying to help the Democrats.

Now Facebook is briefing lawmakers on new efforts to manipulate the electorate and the one topic their focusing on is foreign actors creating leftist abolish ICE pages.

I’m not saying they aren’t creating left leaning pages to sow discord too. They did this in 2016 too. But, are we supposed to believe that they’re only doing abolish ICE pages and not white nationalist pages? Really? And why only bring it up after Trump starts putting into a place a strategy to delegitimize the probable blue wave in November?

It just seems like something in the milk ain’t clean, you know?

Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
6 years ago

@ Surplus:

Thanx for that article. I need that occasionally, cuz sometimes I think post-nixonism is an anomaly and conservatism used to be something other than robber barons….

Today’s Republican Party is nothing more than a gross celebration of inequality. It is loose collective of yahoos and rich assholes and fringe libertarians and pious hypocrites whose only shared trait is their vindictiveness.

THIS

Raven, Nudger of Dead Things and Loremaster of Dark Ugly Places
Raven, Nudger of Dead Things and Loremaster of Dark Ugly Places
6 years ago

@wwth: I think you’re right. IME Facebook just don’t police the (alt) right-wing sites and people nearly as hard.

I’ve seen people get temporarily banned just for using the word “white” to describe someone, or have comments deleted for the same. Conversely, when I reported comments that were direct threats against (left leaning) individuals, advocated sexist attacks and murder of women, or used actual racial slurs, I got the note back from Facebook telling me that they support a large variety of viewpoints and they saw nothing offensive about the comment.

I think it’s safe to say that Facebook is SIGNIFICANTLY alt-right compromised, no matter how they might protest.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

When people get their accounts suspended for posting their own breastfeeding pics, but Holocaust denial pages can’t be taken down because that doesn’t count as fake news and freeze peach of Nazis can’t be interfered with, something is not right.

Of course, the “SJW” set has been pointing this incongruity out for years and were ignored. It’s only now that the story is gaining traction.

Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
6 years ago

@ Raven:

Apparently farcebook has “gone google”, (a tactless reference to goog’s original “Don’t Be Evil”, now truncated to “Be Evil”)

At the end of the day, all the “nouveau rich”, Zuckerberg, Bezos, Musk, etc… are still, first and foremost… rich.