More Thought on Incels.
Yes. Empathy means putting yourself in the shoes of others. Your experience isn't universal. What a woman says isn't necessarily true. A 'friend of yours' is even more removed. Observe the sort of men she actually does date. Realize that a woman's word isn't necessarily based in fact. Don't believe what a person says; rather, observe what a person does.
Saying, "This ONE woman I know in passing said X, therefore, can all incels assume all women think this way?..." is very much a perversion of empathy. You lack empathy big time!
Yeah, this is rapidly turning into an "examples section" for what the OP was saying. Even to the point of viciously turning on One Of Us who has bucked the trend, as predicted several pages previously. Seriously guys, look around you. There are married men and men with girlfriends everwhere. Are they all tough, wealthy, smooth-talking Adonises with pecs the size of footballs? Really? One of the most happily-married men I know is obese, bald, mentally ill, chronically unemployed and has a habit of making offensive jokes when he's nervous. His good points are not exactly classic "Alpha Male" ones- loyal, caring, funny, creative. His wife is dotty about him.
_________________
You're so vain
I bet you think this sig is about you
^^&^ Definitely!
It is the "usual suspects", with their ignorant claims, their sweeping generalizations, their one-source rumors, and their cherry-picking of (alleged) facts that are providing examples of the arguments I stated in the first post, 41 pages ago.
The only thing incels seem to be good at is making excuses for not putting forth any effort at self-initiative and self-improvement. One of their favorite excuses is to blame everyone else for their lack of popularity when the single most common factor in all of their complaints is themselves!
Okay now, cue the "Yeah, buts" and "What ifs" from those usual suspects, sit back, and have a good laugh.
It is this female individuality that seems to frustrate incels to no end, because there is no one, single "magic" method for attaining intimate status that will work with all women, or even with one woman all of the time.
Looks, attitude, behavior, and evidence of personal responsibility are all significant factors in being attractive. The more of these factors a person possesses, the more likely that person will find fulfillment in an intimate relationship.

Sweetleaf
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,029
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
Yes. Empathy means putting yourself in the shoes of others. Your experience isn't universal. What a woman says isn't necessarily true. A 'friend of yours' is even more removed. Observe the sort of men she actually does date. Realize that a woman's word isn't necessarily based in fact. Don't believe what a person says; rather, observe what a person does.
Saying, "This ONE woman I know in passing said X, therefore, can all incels assume all women think this way?..." is very much a perversion of empathy. You lack empathy big time!
And what are men the epitome of honesty?

_________________
We won't go back.
Food for thought.
Food for thought.
Hardly "stable", as he ain't the main breadwinner. If anything, I suspect he's rather good in bed...
_________________
You're so vain
I bet you think this sig is about you
funeralxempire
Veteran

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 31,437
Location: Right over your left shoulder
Food for thought.
Hardly "stable", as he ain't the main breadwinner. If anything, I suspect he's rather good in bed...
It's not implausible. Knowing how to make your partner's legs twitch can make up for other deficits.

_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Make America Great (Depression) Again
The conversation had shifted to looks, which are essential. Of course the average man doesn't need to be some epitome of perfection. I don't think anyone here ever claimed that.
The average man is not super attractive, nor unforgivably ugly. The average man is simply that, average. Passable enough. The average man will indeed have relationships.
Looks are very much a spectrum, and there is indeed a point where some men do fall into the ugly camp. By "ugly camp," I mean very unappealing to the average woman. It's hard as men for us to discern this threshold when looking at other men. We may see both passable and ugly men as "average" in our eyes. But women are the choosers, and if the vast majority of women find a man unattractive, chances are he's in the ugly camp.
How you, as man, perceive the attractiveness/ugliness of the guy in your anecdotal, cherry-picked example is irrelevant.
So, what exactly is your argument?
The conversation had shifted to looks, which are essential. Of course the average man doesn't need to be some epitome of perfection. I don't think anyone here ever claimed that.
The average man is not super attractive, nor unforgivably ugly. The average man is simply that, average. Passable enough. The average man will indeed have relationships.
Looks are very much a spectrum, and there is indeed a point where some men do fall into the ugly camp. By "ugly camp," I mean very unappealing to the average woman. It's hard as men for us to discern this threshold when looking at other men. We may see both passable and ugly men as "average" in our eyes. But women are the choosers, and if the vast majority of women find a man unattractive, chances are he's in the ugly camp.
How you, as man, perceive the attractiveness/ugliness of the guy in your anecdotal, cherry-picked example is irrelevant.
So, what exactly is your argument?
We do seem to be fighting two slightly different battles here....
I was specifically addressing the "alpha males get all the girls" argument which has been running all the way through this thread. My point was not that this man is in some way "objectively ugly," more that he does not check any of the boxes for the steroetypical "alpha male" and yet is romantically successful. And while he's a very obvious example of this trend, I think the point that the majority of men in relationships are not exceptional "alpha males" stands.
I've also noticed that women often have ideals of masculine beauty which are not reflected in their choice of actual partners, indicating that it's only one of many factors weighted in different ways. Again an anecdote (I am not a social scientist, OK!): one of my friends is a grade-A connoisseur of smokin' hot beefcake. Seriously, I have never seen another woman ogle a shirtless dancer so blatantly. Her boyfriend is none of that- he has the average physique of a middle-aged office worker. If she really wanted a muscular boyfriend, I reckon she could get one. He doesn't have an especially alpha-ey personality either- he's very quiet and self-effacing. I know she loathes macho types. Point is, in her personal romantic equation, she's clearly weighted personality as more important than looks. And the preferred personality is not one of those held up by incels as the kind who gets all the girls. I see this kind of thing over and over again. Should I really dissect the relationships of every woman I know?
Women's tastes seem to me to be both more variable and more complex than men's. And men aren't exactly simple either. The stereotype of a horde of shallow horndogs all lusting over slim, clear-skinned young women with huge breasts is absolute nonsense. (raises hand) I like fat girls. I am perfectly capable of feeling lust for women I don't like that much. I have fallen in love with women who weren't physically "my type." I'm more likely to attempt flirting with a woman whose taste in books is similar to mine than with a women in a low-cut top. None of these things are unusual for men; why should the equivalents be for women?
(I'm going to bed. Trying to express my point has involved so much repetition of phrases that even I'm sick of them!)
_________________
You're so vain
I bet you think this sig is about you
Not exactly. Her husband may not be the supermodel type, but he still has to be good enough looking. If he were ugly, all the personality in the world wouldn't make up for it. I think it is somewhat common for some people, male and female, to not want a long-term relationship with a VERY good-looking person, as the worries of infidelity are greater.
However, it's incorrect to assume she found personality "more important" than looks. He may not be the sexiest man she's ever met, but he's not ugly. Again, he's average-looking. Average-looking men are commonly in relationships. Why do you assume it's really good-looking vs everyone else. In reality, it's good-looking vs average looking (passable) vs too-ugly-to-touch. And the line between average and ugly is very hard for men to spot in other men.
I still see an incel as one who is involuntarily celibate, regardless of who they are. In this thread, the term is used like a political ideology. What personality do these political incels feel they need to get a girlfriend?
But no, I don't think you should dissect anything. Your examples sound truthful, but they're not really addressing the looks quotient. Your friend could have a relationship with a man she finds super sexy, but like most, settled for a more average (not ugly) looking man. There are those out there who are too ugly to pass; personality becomes meaningless. You still need passable looks (not necessarily really good looks) to at least get your foot in the door (like your friend's average-looking husband). So, rather than compare super-sexy to average...perhaps the correct approach is to compare average to the bottom-rung.
that1weirdgrrrl
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,090
Location: Between my dreams and your fantasies
ProfessorJohn
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jun 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,153
Location: The Room at the end of 2001
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Food for thought? |
07 Feb 2025, 12:20 pm |
I ever thought this scene is an allegory about burnout. |
31 Jan 2025, 5:26 pm |
Thought on Autism rainbow logo |
25 Mar 2025, 1:54 pm |
24 Things People With ADHD Thought Were Totally "Normal"...
in Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions |
06 Mar 2025, 6:45 pm |