Post #2376055

Yes, people do call even the ones who aren’t being assholes “incels.” It’s a derogatory term that gets used against anyone who doesn’t get laid. Like calling someone a “virgin.” It’s shitty, and it promotes toxic masculinity. It also objectifies women by implying that men need to “get p***y” in order to be worthy of basic respect. And I’m tired of hearing this excuse that “it doesn’t refer to literal involuntary celibates, it refers to redpilled misogynistic jerks.” But that simply isn’t true, because people definitely apply it to literal “involuntary celibates” and use it as an insult like calling someone a “virgin.” It’s childish and immature. Also, there are lots of misogynistic jerks who get laid. Focusing all your ire on “incels” misses the point entirely, lets those people off the hook, and perpetuates the issue by communicating the subtext that “you can be a misogynistic jerk as long as you get laid, and then we’ll still respect you.” If you can’t see how that’s toxic and detrimental to society, then I can’t help you. And do you think that women are not judged if they behave in the femcel manner? They’re more likely to be fetishized, which is bad in a different way. But it certainly hasn’t risen to the level of a cultural pastime like shaming incels has. It seems like you’re applying a double standard, there. I’m not the one applying a double-standard. I’m pointing out the double-standard. I never said “femcels should be shamed, and incels shouldn’t be.” I said “femcels don’t get shamed the same way incels do.” If the former is how you interpret the latter, that’s on you. If I need to explicitly state what I meant, it’s closer to this: “Maybe nobody should be shamed for being lonely and having poor social skills, regardless of gender.” If the issue is misogyny, target the misogyny. Not the inability to get sex, because that is going to do nothing to address the misogyny.