By David Futrelle
Incels: asking the questions that no one else dares to. Perhaps because these questions are really, really terrible.
Just so you know: Yes, incels and other edgelords like to call the coronavirus “coronachan.” And yes, incels really do believe that large numbers of white women regularly have sex with their dogs. It’s like a whole thing with these guys; they call it “the dogpill” They think they’re literally being cucked by dogs, who are happily having sex with hot babes who would never dream of having sex with an incel.
Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.
We Hunted the Mammoth relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!
Justin Campbell says:
I’ve never seen that. It’s usually idealization of the culture based mostly on aesthetics. Japan seems both futuristic, yet steeped in history. It’s exotic and, as a wealthy, modern nation, seemingly familiar. It’s adorably innocent and incorrigibly lecherous (often both at once). A lot of fascists are attracted to the idea of Japan as “pure” nation untainted by multiculturalism, yet one that also idolizes whiteness.
In essence, Japanese culture easily reflects whatever ideal one cares to project onto it, with a visual appeal that other cultures struggle to match.
NOBODY says:
While Japan’s imperial history is a big part of it, these are themes that certain creators are celebrating, not “processing”. Think Dave Sim or Frank Miller, not Alan Moore.
These aren’t works made for the export market. They’re made for the Japanese equivalent of incels, MGTOWs and alt-righters. They should say a lot about the Japanese, anime and manga.
One thing people who like to parrot this line completely miss is that there are niche markets for introverted geeks within the broader storytelling mediums, and they have very little crossover with the mainstream works that appeal to most people.
At this point, I have to be “that guy” and will point out that “Corona-chan” is always depicted with the traditionally Chinese niújiǎotóu hairstyle (the double buns with viruses as hairclips, wearing a Chinese dress.
So, not only a Moe version of a horrifying disease, it also serves the whole “Chinese virus” narrative.
@Justine Campbell
It has been my experience that the principles that conservatives claim, like “personal responsibility,” “small government,” and “Christian values,” are not principles that they actually believe in, but justifications that they adopt as discard according to the needs of the moment.
The only consistent principles I have been able to find with conservatives are “We are Good, They Are Bad, and thus hurting Them is Good.”
@Allandrel
I can think of a few others:
“Hurting ourselves is ok so long as They get hurt too.”
“Fuck you, I got mine.”
“No rules for me, all the rules for thee.”
Those tend to be pretty consistent among anyone on the right.
@Allandrel:
Barring an act of God out of a Blake Edwards/Vincent Minelli movie, “Justin,” not “Justine”
And yeah, I know.
I just find disconnects between espoused principles and actual practices worthy of being called out, common though they may be.
Though considering how rare consistent application of principle is, it’s several orders of magnitude more noteworthy.
@Alan Robertshaw:
OT, but what is this odd affectation the New Yorker has with putting umlauts in words that don’t normally have them?!
@Demonhype:
You might also quote him this:
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” — Sun Tzu
@TacticalProgressive:
Bioterrorists at that. Isn’t there some anti-terror law that can be used now to lock them up? I mean, when they thought Iraq might have acquired bioterror WMDs they fucking invaded the place and blew half of it up. Double standards much?
@Naglfar:
And all are at best zero-sum. The first is negative-sum.
The contrast with the left’s focus on seeking positive-sum outcomes is remarkable. Seems to come at least partly from a scarcity vs. abundance outlook, and yet it’s the ones with personal experience of abundance and privilege who seem to most often have a worldview that assumes scarcity, and vice versa. So odd.
If I had to guess, I’d say their office has a glut of umlauts lying around, so they sprinkle them generously over their words.
On the other hand, the New Yorker seems to suffer from a chronic shortage of numerals, which is why the reader encounters, for example, nineteen-fifties. They make do with what they have.
@Justin Campbell
My apologies. That’s what I get for not copy/pasting.
@Naglfar
One of the best descriptions of conservative voting that I have seen is “These are people who would be willing to end up living in a cardboard box under a bridge, so long as that brown family over there did not even have a box.”
There is a very good Frank Wilhoit quote:
“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”
@Surplus
It has been my experience that conservatives view everything as zero-sum. Any gains for one mean losses for another. A group becomes less oppressed? That must mean someone else became more oppressed.
This may be a factor in why hurting Others is the highest good – if We make somebody else’s life worse, that must mean Our lives are better. That’s just math.
It’s also why Trump is such an incompetent dealmaker. He’s convinced that in any deal, one side is screwing the other. So if the other side seems happy with a deal, that must mean they’re screwing him over in some way that he can’t see, and he calls off the whole thing in a tantrum. The idea of a mutually beneficial deal is inconceivable to him.
@Allandrel
They also always assume that the someone else getting more oppressed is them. And they already think they are the most oppressed people ever. I’ve actually heard conservatives say that straight male Christian conservatives are the most oppressed people on Earth, or that Christians are the only oppressed group, or something like that.
Zero-sum outlooks are a key part of ideologies like capitalism, patriarchy, white supremacy, and others like them (and those are also closely entertwined) because zero-sum outlooks discourage people from trying to fix broken systems. If people realize it’s possible for more people to do better at once, they won’t tolerate a system that oppresses them, but if they think it’s the best system that works, they will live with it and won’t try to enact change.
Some Democratic politician (Paul Wellstone?) once said that “when we all do better, we all do better.” This is the antithesis of conservatism.
@Naglfar
Some years ago, I personally overheard a guy say “White people are the most oppressed group in America, because I can’t call a c**n a c**n.”
I think that this was shortly after George Zimmerman’s acquittal.
@Justin Campbell:
The more appropriate question might be, Is there anything that’s right with them?
I’ve been thinking about this in regard to one recurring Trump talking point – namely, the notion that other coutntries used to “laugh” at America, but now, thanks to Trump, they “aren’t laughing anymore”.
People seem to often mistake this as referring to how competent the US leadership looks on international stage. Obviously, in this sense, the claim would be not only untrue, but rather diametrically opposed to reality. This reality would be likely undeniable to any MAGAhats who care to think about foreign countries to begin with.
However, I think it’s a actually roundabout way of saying that both allies and enemies used to get away with exploiting the USA, because former presidents (esp. Obama) were somehow too naive and good-willing in their international dealings. (Not necessarily “incompetent” as such, though in Trump level understanding of foreign policy, ruthlessness probably equals competence.)
It’s probably true that America’s recent weirdness has been detrimental to international community at large – some tinpot strongmen notwithstanding. It’s probably not true that America has gained anything from this, especially in the long term.
@Lumipuna
If anyone was laughing but stopped, it’s probably because they’re terrified off he worldwide far right fascist wave that Trump is part of.
About “everyone laughing at America”:
One thing which comes across clearly in David Cay Johnston’s book The Making of Donald Trump is that Trump has always craved respect by people he sees as the elite, but has always fallen short, and resented this. When Trump says that “the world used to laugh at America, but they aren’t laughing now”, he’s really talking about himself: I finally made it to top dog, and those snooty intellectuals and old-money people have to take me seriously now. Privately, though, he probably knows that he’s still seen as a bad joke, and I hope that eats him up inside.
Right now, it’s hard to laugh at America when shit like this happens: