• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
swiss_democracy_for_all

Anyone here read "incels" ?

Recommended Posts

That was also my question on reading that.  Was it a perfectly reasonable discussion board with the odd loony tune on it (like most forums) or was its whole rationale as nasty as is being portrayed?

My natural inclination, given the So-Called BBC's track record, is to lean to the former view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, swissy_fit said:

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-41926687

never read it myself but wondered if it was really so bad, the So-Called BBC article has that feminazi bullshit feel about it. 

I have never read it. From the article:

Quote

It is unclear if there was a specific incident which led to the subreddit's closure, but the ban came after some users discussed castrating another user's roommate.

Is there a feminist site in existence where castrating men doesn't feature somewhere in the comments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having googled it I would hardly call it "discussed' and certainly not "conspired". Two idiot users making two idiot comments in a forum of 40,000.

I think most of us have been here before with this sweeping tarring of whole thoughtful discussions because of the odd idiot comment.

That said when I have looked at Reddit or the Chans they do some to be populated primarily by halfwits with tourettes.

DOG4f5_VwAA32NF?format=jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

 

That said when I have looked at Reddit or the Chans they do some to be populated primarily by halfwits with tourettes.

DOG4f5_VwAA32NF?format=jpg

Had a look at 4chan once and felt the need for a shower immediately afterwards. The entire site is deeply on the spectrum.

Reddit is slightly more readable but it's pretty evident that the majority of it's users fall into an age bracket that I lumpenly fell out of about ten years ago. There are some decidedly grim topics (and footage) on there though and it's a bit of a worry that it seems to be the 'go-to' site for kids. Maybe I'm just a fart but if I was brought up on that, I think I'd be thoroughly desensitised by about 25

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

Having googled it I would hardly call it "discussed' and certainly not "conspired". Two idiot users making two idiot comments in a forum of 40,000.

I think most of us have been here before with this sweeping tarring of whole thoughtful discussions because of the odd idiot comment.

That said when I have looked at Reddit or the Chans they do some to be populated primarily by halfwits with tourettes.

DOG4f5_VwAA32NF?format=jpg

That reads almost in the same vein of some of the daft thread swerves on here. Yes we can and do make daft comments but these tend to be in reaction to something silly posted - normally from the msm or government. It is done as a joke, a reaction.  A kind of gallows humour if you like. 

Taken out of context, some posts on here could be construed in all sorts of problematic ways. I include some of my own posts in this. o.O

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, One percent said:

That reads almost in the same vein of some of the daft thread swerves on here. Yes we can and do make daft comments but these tend to be in reaction to something silly posted - normally from the msm or government. It is done as a joke, a reaction.  A kind of gallows humour if you like. 

Taken out of context, some posts on here could be construed in all sorts of problematic ways. I include some of my own posts in this. o.O

Indeed. It's quite annoying to think that we should probably be considering how our posts could be taken out of context and misrepresented by some scumbag SJW/copper/lawyer/journalist, one of the reasons I like posting here is that I feel I need to consider that less.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, One percent said:

That reads almost in the same vein of some of the daft thread swerves on here. Yes we can and do make daft comments but these tend to be in reaction to something silly posted - normally from the msm or government. It is done as a joke, a reaction.  A kind of gallows humour if you like. 

Taken out of context, some posts on here could be construed in all sorts of problematic ways. I include some of my own posts in this. o.O

That's the problem isn't it.  I am guessing that Incels was actually a fairly nasty place but I don't know and reading the So-Called BBC certainly won't tell me either way.

If @spunko2010 wanted to ban you and felt obliged to justify it he could use some indeterminate slurs and pull out some posts that, in isolation, look bad.  Fully justified banning.

This however can be done to pretty much any poster on any forum, and hence any forum.  So any discussions that don't fit the globalist agenda of Google Advertising can be closed on apparently reasonable grounds.

I'm not suggesting a rally for Incels but Reddit had previously closed "far right" forums and when you start banning all such discussions then you end up being driven to places where you can discuss them.  I have no wish to end up on Stormfront as being the only place where certain subjects get discussed but that is the logical conclusion of such censorship in mainstream discussion forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, swissy_fit said:

Indeed. It's quite annoying to think that we should probably be considering how our posts could be taken out of context and misrepresented by some scumbag SJW/copper/lawyer/journalist, one of the reasons I like posting here is that I feel I need to consider that less.

 

👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Frank Hovis said:

That's the problem isn't it.  I am guessing that Incels was actually a fairly nasty place but I don't know and reading the So-Called BBC certainly won't tell me either way.

If @spunko2010 wanted to ban you and felt obliged to justify it he could use some indeterminate slurs and pull out some posts that, in isolation, look bad.  Fully justified banning.

This however can be done to pretty much any poster on any forum, and hence any forum.  So any discussions that don't fit the globalist agenda of Google Advertising can be closed on apparently reasonable grounds.

I'm not suggesting a rally for Incels but Reddit had previously closed "far right" forums and when you start banning all such discussions then you end up being driven to places where you can discuss them.  I have no wish to end up on Stormfront as being the only place where certain subjects get discussed but that is the logical conclusion of such censorship in mainstream discussion forums.

Agree and it is all very 1984. Censorship and oppression of free speech rarely ends well.  You don't stop people thinking and feeling in certain ways, you just push it underground.  Far better to take people with you and govern through consensus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, swissy_fit said:

Indeed. It's quite annoying to think that we should probably be considering how our posts could be taken out of context and misrepresented by some scumbag SJW/copper/lawyer/journalist, one of the reasons I like posting here is that I feel I need to consider that less.

Yeah, but at least you can get away with misplaced apostrophe's there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hail the Tripod said:

It's a bit flammable-ist, but I for one appreciate the misspilling.

 

3 minutes ago, swissy_fit said:

What is the penalty for this horror?

:Jumping:

death by firing squad seem to be apt punishment. I'll go and get my blindfold.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to go on reddit quite a lot, for my shame, and stumbled into that subreddit on a few occasions. It didn't strike me as being worthy of a ban, although many of the users in there were clearly warped when it came to relationships and human contact. It did seem a bit of a  woe is me self-defeating thing: let's all sit around and whine how we can't get any because we're ugly/short/poor/whatever, and let's poke fun at those who do to make ourselves feel better. There was a bit of "misogyny" but nothing that you wouldn't witness if a group of male friends got together in a pub etc.

I think the average age was probably about 15 and got the distinct impression it was something that will be grown out of by most of the users.  If interested Archive.org has it covered:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170710093337/http://www.reddit.com/r/incels

ETA: One common discussion point that I remember as it made an impression on me, was that women do not like muscly men per se, and men using the gym are wasting their time when they could be making money instead which women are more attracted to etc etc. Not sure if I agree with that or not, but it was an interesting topic nonetheless.

I don't know why any right-leaning younger folk would use reddit now. They are clearly on a purge. 4chan is much better for that kind of thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found it a few weeks back actually and spent a while reading it.

They're a harmless bunch and certainly don't warrant banning. Basically it's a group of misfits and people who got dealt bad hands genetically who find it impossible to get their romantic needs met in today's hyper-hypergamous tinder-fuelled sexual marketplace. (remind you of anyone?)

There would be lots of posts on it that would have a strong sense of irony, but when taken out of context could be used to convince people that it's a board full of future mass-murderers.

Some of their theories were actually quite funny, most of all the term "gymcel"; which is basically an incel who thinks that if he obsesses over lifting weights he'll become attractive to women, and after years building a killer body....still can't get laid.

The thing is it's actually true - out of the few guys I've known over the years who did really well with women, none of them ever saw the inside of a gym. Whereas I know quite a few gym-obsessed young men who haven't had a shag in years, basically because they haven't got the looks or attitude to pull a young woman.

The only major downside with it is that if someone on the brink of depression started reading it, it could drag them into a dark place and stop them making changes to better their life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

I found it a few weeks back actually and spent a while reading it.

They're a harmless bunch and certainly don't warrant banning. Basically it's a group of misfits and people who got dealt bad hands genetically who find it impossible to get their romantic needs met in today's hyper-hypergamous tinder-fuelled sexual marketplace. (remind you of anyone?)

There would be lots of posts on it that would have a strong sense of irony, but when taken out of context could be used to convince people that it's a board full of future mass-murderers.

Some of their theories were actually quite funny, most of all the term "gymcel"; which is basically an incel who thinks that if he obsesses over lifting weights he'll become attractive to women, and after years building a killer body....still can't get laid.

The thing is it's actually true - out of the few guys I've known over the years who did really well with women, none of them ever saw the inside of a gym. Whereas I know quite a few gym-obsessed young men who haven't had a shag in years, basically because they haven't got the looks or attitude to pull a young woman.

The only major downside with it is that if someone on the brink of depression started reading it, it could drag them into a dark place and stop them making changes to better their life.

Most of that could be interpreted as a description of dosbods Joe. o.O

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

I found it a few weeks back actually and spent a while reading it.

They're a harmless bunch and certainly don't warrant banning. Basically it's a group of misfits and people who got dealt bad hands genetically who find it impossible to get their romantic needs met in today's hyper-hypergamous tinder-fuelled sexual marketplace. (remind you of anyone?)

There would be lots of posts on it that would have a strong sense of irony, but when taken out of context could be used to convince people that it's a board full of future mass-murderers.

Some of their theories were actually quite funny, most of all the term "gymcel"; which is basically an incel who thinks that if he obsesses over lifting weights he'll become attractive to women, and after years building a killer body....still can't get laid.

The thing is it's actually true - out of the few guys I've known over the years who did really well with women, none of them ever saw the inside of a gym. Whereas I know quite a few gym-obsessed young men who haven't had a shag in years, basically because they haven't got the looks or attitude to pull a young woman.

The only major downside with it is that if someone on the brink of depression started reading it, it could drag them into a dark place and stop them making changes to better their life.

I quite like currycel. It is as you imagine... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't "incels" just the male equivalent of a DOSBODS? The few I've known have always insisted they have these really high floor standards for dating women. I accept that that is largely just rationalising not getting anywhere, but they mostly seemed obsessed with glamour models who maybe skewed their idea of average in the same way as Rom Coms do for women.

I have been out of the dating game for nearly 20 years but it's hard to believe the world has really changed that profoundly, and I find plenty of women still seem keen to flirt with me (married, mid 40s, not rich). Certainly one of my mates, whose wife left him recently because he wasn't making enough money, seems to be "knee deep in clunge" (as Jay from The Inbetweeners would say).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By sarahbell
      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-48740811
      A controversial fundraising page set up by sacked Australian rugby player Israel Folau has been shut down for promoting the exclusion of LGBT people, website GoFundMe says.
       
      Folau is a Christian who argues his contract termination was an act of religious discrimination.
      He had received about A$760,000 (£414,000; $530,000) in donations since the page was set up last week, Australian media reporte
    • By The Masked Tulip
      About 6 hours ago. Took her passport. Still being questioned.
    • By Chewing Grass
      Here is a classic I'm an idiot so it should be banned from sale, I'm sure there are plenty similar stories.
      51 y/o Nick from Wakefield drinks 25 Red Bull and Monster energy drinks in about 4 hours and the veins in his head explode.
      https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5496816/dad-drinks-red-bull-monster-brain-haemorrhage/
      Not being very bright Nick doesn't realise its like drinking 50 Starbucks and eating nearly 2Kg of sugar.
      Quote “They should not be sold. They are as bad as drugs and should be banned.”
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.