Incels 30 times more likely to be autistic, study finds

Post Reply New Topic

The number I've heard is something like 70-85%.

Personal experience 80% sounds about dead on.

As in you get 5 guys on the spectrum in the same room 4 will be very lonely.

Correction, a group of people who are bitter and resentful at society as a hole because of being rejected by women. It's quite clear incels resent "giga-chads" and liberal men just as much as they have hostility to women.



If you're gonna claim to be a professional and misrepresent people, so fundamentally I don't know what to tell you.




This isn't a question if you understand it, again this shouldn't at all be a question. Women on average are not attracted to autistic men.

Turns out one of the key features a woman is looking for when selecting a partner is their ability to navigate social situations/life in general.

Just the same if you're a man and 5 feet tall, the vast majority of women will not be attracted to you.












Why on earth do you need to deny a simple reality. Men get rejected and feel bitter, they gain an understanding of why they are rejected and get more bitter.

What I find particularly frustrating is that you're given an overwhelming number of 30 times more likely and are trying to widdle it down to 29 times as some form of intellectual win.



Start with an appropriate understanding of the community. One of the reasons incels are so hostile on average is exactly because they present evidence and they're met with aggressive and exhaustive efforts to debunk virtually everything they say, purely on ideological grounds.

If you're not at least on the surface open to incel theory, you cannot pretend to understand it beyond anything other than a strawman.

One shouldn’t always believe everything they hear. Do you have a valid source?

Evidence please. This stat differs from the 75-80% you mentioned.

Sometimes people blame their single status on being autistic, short, overweight, etc., but many women struggle with those things themselves and wouldn’t expect the “perfect guy” (whatever that means) when it comes to choosing a partner.

Many women on this forum have dated autistic men or would be open to doing so.

Last edited by TwilightPrincess on 26 Feb 2024, 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

They usually seem to hate everyone who isn't mired in hated like themselves, but that doesn't mean they don't reserve the bulk of their vitriol for women who aren't willing to settle for them.

Then, when and if they find a woman who will settle they make excuses for why she's not good enough for them because they've built an identity around being bitter and forever alone.

What happened to people simply being long-term single?

Why do incels have to identify as being incels? Even if being single is involuntary, labelling oneself as such seems self-defeating.

Agreed. Making being alone part of one's identity does seem to make it harder to move on if opportunities present themselves.

Exactly.

The issue how the involuntary celibate handle the rejection and the natural ensuing negative thinking. Putting all women in one group is a flawed way of handling it. Not all women select mates one way and all men another way ie. “men are from mars, women are from venus”. Take physical attraction. Conventional wisdom says that physical attraction is the main factor for men and a lesser factor for women. That does not mean physical attraction is the only factor for men and no factor for women. And it does not mean there are not women that go for only looks. This is not an argument that gender is not an important factor to take into consideration that it is not the only one.

The problem is not only that incels categorize women, but categorize them as gold diggers among other negative things who are denying them what they are entitled to. Without knowing what you did apparently you do not feel entitled, thus knew you had to earn it and was successful not in attracting women but the right woman.

Because the evidence is pretty clear, that's factually how that works. That's the whole point there's endless mountains of sociological research on the topic, and I could literally give you 30 different research papers and you'd spend a month trying to question every assumption, and then give nothing but personal anecdotes regarding the opposite.

You cite sources when you're talking about a unique and novel claim. There's nothing unique or novel on the claim that women are more selective than men when dating.

Males have a massive preference for youth and appearance.

Women have a massive preference for income, height and social charisma.

This isn't some fringe theory, it's well studied.

This is the frustration of the incel. People won't acknowledge their existential problem and constantly play the game of obstruction, no matter how blatant the evidence is.

This whole thread is "30 to 1 is extreme, clearly 20 to 1 is more realistic"

It doesn't matter if the number is 2 to 1, 500 to 1, there's no willingness to accept the data and claims as is and move on from there.

"your data isn't perfect therefore I can't validate your struggles in any shape or form" or " the fact you could even consider collection such data means you're a far right geonicidal maniac that just wants to beat women to death".









Yes women struggle with being highly selective. Men struggle because women are highly selective.





Sure but which one? Usually the tallest/richest/best looking. If it's anything more than just a curiosity fling.

I'm autistic, my wife is autistic. When I met my wife every guy in the room was pursuing her. I was the tallest/smartest/best looking, I got the girl. I'm not bragging it's seriously depressing. Those guys are now my close circle of friends, none of them have had any romantic success, it's brutally depressing and I'm powerless to help them.

When we met we were all in our 20s, 10 years later and we're all in our 30s. They've all more or less given up. They were never and won't be bitter "incels" online, they just live in a state of denile.

Strangely specific.

If you spent 10 minutes with a credible incel and understood the conservation you'd realize that isn't a consideration.

The whole point is that women are attracted to multiple things, appearance, income, raw IQ score, social ability, and the list goes on. A guy can be pretty ugly if he's got height money, etc Or vice versa.

The thing is if you're below average on multiple fronts you're sunk. And the math again and again checks out.

A massive number being autistic is exactly what you expect.

I'm autistic I've never had trouble with women, but I'm also 95th percentile in height, 95th percentile in IQ, I also obsess over people and social relations, which gives me an extra edge. I'm not bragging, one of the literal most depressing moments of my life was when I realized my personal successes would never carry over to my less fortunate autistic peers. I didn't work hard to make myself smarter or taller.





One thing you have to appreciate in this conversation is that an average incel has spent 10,000 hours trying to work past their limited options. Meanwhile the person critical of the incel has spend a grand total of 10 minutes actually listening to them.

That isn't directed at you personally, I'm hopeful some incels can be saved, but listening to credible incels for 10 hours plus is a great start.



This is the claim that gets made again and again, usually via not having a actual conversation with these people.

A late stage incel might be pretty hateful in their rhetoric no doubt, but if you actually enter a genuine discussion that isn't the course of the conversation.





Problem is you only live so long. And common starting points are people dishing out very bad advice.

Without appropriate sources, one is left with no choice but to dismiss many of your claims. Even if there is some truth to what SOME men and women prefer, there are many exceptions to it. Everyone is different.

Lots of women are unhappily alone too. Loneliness isn’t solely a male, autistic thing. However, women, even very lonely ones, aren’t likely to go for people who openly express misogynistic viewpoints.

Last edited by TwilightPrincess on 26 Feb 2024, 3:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'm trying to articulate the extremes of the denial obstruction spectrum.

I ask you where are you on this spectrum?

Sounds like you're hoping to pull off the No True Scotsman fallacy in regards to the incels we have encountered.

EDIT: You're illustrating exactly what I'm talking about. You have no choice but to "dismiss claims outright" The correct answer is if you're not providing solutions that you need to do some research of your own.



Have you even attempted to google the topic?

This isn't some fringe new topic, university researchers love the topic, it's actually quite easy to research.







"some truth" are you able to set a truth threshold?





Alright lets assume there's 1 million exceptions, 10 million men can't date that 1 million women, unless you're engaging in polygamy.

This is the problem, incels have done the math.



Except they're not really, this is an emotional sentiment. Science proves pretty conclusively that sexual attraction isn't remotely some deep higher abstraction that can't be understood.

Most people have a short list of traits they are attracted to. To deny this is to deny sexual attraction even exists in the first place.

Part of the incel frustration is exactly this refusal to acknowledge that sexual attraction in gross aggregate isn't complex at all.












Right but the obstacles for women are completely different.

Past 40 it's brutal for women.

Under 30 the issue is women simply don't find most men attractive.

I'm not sugguesting women should be forced to marry incels they aren't attracted to. They simply need to admit they aren't attracted to them, and they aren't unique snowflakes some men are just not attractive to the majority of women.

Last edited by ChiefEspatier on 26 Feb 2024, 3:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.