Why do almost all 'incels' blame their situation on looks?
22 Aug 2019, 2:45 am
Aspie1 wrote:
hurtloam wrote:
Actually, most of the single guys I know have this frenetic nervousness about them that makes me anxious.... good thing I'm too old for them anyway and they're not interested in me, but that's them in their natural state, can you imagine what they're like with girls they fancy.
"Frenetic nervousness" is spot-on. When I was with my first girlfriend, freshman year of college, I was perpetually nervous around her, especially while on dates. Back then, I already knew that girls/women will lose interest in a man at any moment for any reason or even for no reason. So I was constantly worried that I might do something to make her stop liking me. Unfortunately, the only knowledge I had to fall back on were TV shows I watched and observing other couples around us during our dates. As well as hoping that our relationship gets serious quickly, so that I can stop worrying about her losing interest, or at least worry less. Needless to say, when I took her to a dance event a few months later, she didn't want to dance close with me. (Which meant she already stopped liking me before that night.) I pretty much ghosted her afterwards, without as much as calling her next morning to tell her I had a nice time at the dance.What's sad and ironic is that a female friend I have today is more affectionate with me than my first girlfriend was. By "affectionate", I mean little things, like full-body hugs, cuddling, close dancing, hand touches, etc. I don't mean kissing or fondling, which would be inappropriate for friends to begin with. If she weren't 11 years younger than me, I'd sell my soul to have met her the same year in college. She's much more fun than my first girlfriend could ever be, and a lot better-looking too.
On the other hand, I was hideously ugly at age 18, but can pass for handsome today at 36. So I had that limitation to contend with: girls like my friend would want nothing to do with me. Which isn't true today, obviously.
I never was nervous like that, probably because dating & asking out never was anything I ever desired to do. I just kept doing what was natural, and the girls kept being interested for a long time. I suppose I grew confident that it worked back then, which is still useful and still keep me from being nervous in those contexts.
When it comes to dancing and asking for a dance, that works great too. I think it helps a bit that I'm pretty good at it, and that I add some unexpected things from time to time. I can easily ask a pretty girl for a dance, and usually, she will accept. In fact, even if I don't ask a single woman for a dance, I will still get asked by women for a dance. However, asking for a dance and asking out are completely different things. The former is just a cultural "script", while the latter is related to the mating game, and I have a strong aversion against asking out for the purpose of dating.
23 Aug 2019, 9:19 pm
I've talked to a lot of incels over the years (mostly on-line)...and yes, I do think looks play a major role.
Let me explain...most incels I've known couldn't even get a first date with a woman. If you can't even get a first date, then I would think looks are your problem (though you admittedly have some control over them). If, on the other hand, you get dates but just can't ever advance to a relationship and/or sex, then maybe you can blame your personality/social skills. A woman can't know your personality very well if she won't at least get a cup of coffee with you.
Think of looking for a job as an analogy. If you can't get interviews, your resume (looks) sucks. If you're getting interviews (dates) but not jobs (relationships), then your presentation/attitude sucks.
23 Aug 2019, 11:19 pm
BDavro wrote:
In the 19th century you could say anything you wanted about black people, you could attribute the very worst to them and believe them to be the root cause of all evil.
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
When in this thread did anybody say anything about black people or saying black people are the root of all evil?
23 Aug 2019, 11:26 pm
Hollywood_Guy wrote:
BDavro wrote:
In the 19th century you could say anything you wanted about black people, you could attribute the very worst to them and believe them to be the root cause of all evil.
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
When in this thread did anybody say anything about black people or saying black people are the root of all evil?
I was drawing a comparison, incels, n word, trying to get people to see how easily they have slipped.
24 Aug 2019, 12:11 am
BDavro wrote:
Hollywood_Guy wrote:
BDavro wrote:
In the 19th century you could say anything you wanted about black people, you could attribute the very worst to them and believe them to be the root cause of all evil.
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
When in this thread did anybody say anything about black people or saying black people are the root of all evil?
I was drawing a comparison, incels, n word, trying to get people to see how easily they have slipped.
Its totally different. "Incels" on the internet are people who does negative, even harmful ideas.
They aren't just a different colour. We don't feel angry with them because they look a little different to us. We're not even irked by them being virgins.
We don't like the deluded negativity.
You are allowed to criticise people's ideas and debate with them. That's not any where near the same as racism.
24 Aug 2019, 2:09 am
hurtloam wrote:
BDavro wrote:
Hollywood_Guy wrote:
BDavro wrote:
In the 19th century you could say anything you wanted about black people, you could attribute the very worst to them and believe them to be the root cause of all evil.
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
When in this thread did anybody say anything about black people or saying black people are the root of all evil?
I was drawing a comparison, incels, n word, trying to get people to see how easily they have slipped.
Its totally different. "Incels" on the internet are people who does negative, even harmful ideas.
They aren't just a different colour. We don't feel angry with them because they look a little different to us. We're not even irked by them being virgins.
We don't like the deluded negativity.
That's what the media would have you believe, and there are some members of the group that fit that description, but I scrolled through an incel forum recently and most of the guys there were just talking about how soul-destroying and lonely it is to never be able to have a romantic partner, and how the advice from outsiders is often so out-of-touch with the reality that incels face.
People in that life situation are often told to do things they already do, or are given meaningless platitudes that don't help at all. It's pretty patronising to be told things like "just have a shower bro" by people who just can't grasp what being alone romantically your whole life is like.
24 Aug 2019, 2:20 am
LookWhoItIs wrote:
I've talked to a lot of incels over the years (mostly on-line)...and yes, I do think looks play a major role.
Let me explain...most incels I've known couldn't even get a first date with a woman. If you can't even get a first date, then I would think looks are your problem (though you admittedly have some control over them). If, on the other hand, you get dates but just can't ever advance to a relationship and/or sex, then maybe you can blame your personality/social skills. A woman can't know your personality very well if she won't at least get a cup of coffee with you.
Think of looking for a job as an analogy. If you can't get interviews, your resume (looks) sucks. If you're getting interviews (dates) but not jobs (relationships), then your presentation/attitude sucks.
Let me explain...most incels I've known couldn't even get a first date with a woman. If you can't even get a first date, then I would think looks are your problem (though you admittedly have some control over them). If, on the other hand, you get dates but just can't ever advance to a relationship and/or sex, then maybe you can blame your personality/social skills. A woman can't know your personality very well if she won't at least get a cup of coffee with you.
Think of looking for a job as an analogy. If you can't get interviews, your resume (looks) sucks. If you're getting interviews (dates) but not jobs (relationships), then your presentation/attitude sucks.
Great analogy, my dude.
This is a line of thinking that makes a lot of sense, and that I've had myself. Even down to the job interview analogy for love and dating.
I would add that looks aren't the only thing that can stifle your potential to get first dates, but they're arguably the most significant. If you have poor social skills, awkward mannerisms or commonly make bad first impressions, those things can inhibit your ability to get first dates too.
On the other hand, being good-looking can sometimes compensate for some of those things.
24 Aug 2019, 2:33 am
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
magz wrote:
What factors are you talking about and what goals are you considering?
Googling "factor to successful relationship statistics" gave me these sites on the top:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... ip-success
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... ationships
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d543/6 ... 50570a.pdf
https://www.divorcesource.com/blog/fact ... -marriage/
None of them mentions looks... but I've always been looking for long term so my goal may differ from Boo's.
Googling "factor to successful relationship statistics" gave me these sites on the top:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... ip-success
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... ationships
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d543/6 ... 50570a.pdf
https://www.divorcesource.com/blog/fact ... -marriage/
None of them mentions looks... but I've always been looking for long term so my goal may differ from Boo's.
I said it's the most deterministic factor, not the only factor. Meaning if looks is not 'passed', nothing further is passed because it's the very first factor that can be easily evaluated.
Why you gals here on WP always assume this? When someone mentions looks in a thread you all assume this someone means that it's only the looks.
Funny lot.
Absolutely correct. For most people, if someone doesn't consider a prospective romantic partner to be physically attractive enough, that prospective partner will be written off, and nothing else about them will matter enough to make that someone consider them.
That doesn't mean that that someone is "only going for looks" or expects a supermodel or anything like that. If the lowest physical attractiveness rating you'll accept is a 3/10, and a 1/10 approaches you, in general, it doesn't matter what their personality is like or even how successful they are (except to gold diggers), they still won't make the cut.
And there's nothing wrong with that. It's perfectly valid for people to set their standards as they see fit. But it does mean that people who are perceived as being too physically unattractive by most of their dating pool are going to struggle significantly with dating.
24 Aug 2019, 2:40 am
Donald Morton wrote:
The whole point is senseless as there is nothing short of plastic surgery that will change your physical appearance. The only things you have the power to affect are grooming, clothing, attitude. The looks you were born with are barring the above mentioned surgery the same looks you will have when you die. Make the best of what you have. All this research into something that is unchangeable is a waste of time. Placing undue emphasis on your looks is narcissistic. C'mon Man!
There are things about appearance that cant change in the absence of surgical intervention, but there are also significant things that can.
Different body fat percentages, how big and/or toned your muscles are, your posture, your hairstyle and your clothing style can have a significant impact on your physical attractiveness, and on how you are perceived by other people.
24 Aug 2019, 8:42 am
The Grand Inquisitor wrote:
hurtloam wrote:
BDavro wrote:
Hollywood_Guy wrote:
BDavro wrote:
In the 19th century you could say anything you wanted about black people, you could attribute the very worst to them and believe them to be the root cause of all evil.
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
When in this thread did anybody say anything about black people or saying black people are the root of all evil?
I was drawing a comparison, incels, n word, trying to get people to see how easily they have slipped.
Its totally different. "Incels" on the internet are people who does negative, even harmful ideas.
They aren't just a different colour. We don't feel angry with them because they look a little different to us. We're not even irked by them being virgins.
We don't like the deluded negativity.
That's what the media would have you believe, and there are some members of the group that fit that description, but I scrolled through an incel forum recently and most of the guys there were just talking about how soul-destroying and lonely it is to never be able to have a romantic partner, and how the advice from outsiders is often so out-of-touch with the reality that incels face.
People in that life situation are often told to do things they already do, or are given meaningless platitudes that don't help at all. It's pretty patronising to be told things like "just have a shower bro" by people who just can't grasp what being alone romantically your whole life is like.
The majority of people on Earth are average-looking, and most average-looking people end-up in relationships with other average-looking people (that's why it's called "average-looking").
The average average-looking person works to improve their attractiveness through scent, having interesting hobbies, cultivating solid conversation skills, developing good physical fitness, ect. You may call it "patronizing," but it really is the only things you can realistically recommend.
When it comes right down to it, as was explained to me by a men's lib advocate, "attraction" functions much like the pieces of a puzzle: some pieces fit together, while others just don't. There may be no logical reason for it, but you usually don't have romantic attraction to every person you interact with daily because......reasons. Too many men view the ability to "get" women as a sort of "worthiness" scale, when, in reality, it's a lot more like the aforementioned puzzle pieces.
Lastly, most pictures of "incels" reveal average-looking guys. The vibe I get is that they're mad that they aren't in the percentage of people who hit the genetic lottery in terms of looks, and have romantic partners fall into their laps.
_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."
-XFG (no longer a moderator)
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,685
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
24 Aug 2019, 9:42 am
XFilesGeek wrote:
When it comes right down to it, as was explained to me by a men's lib advocate, "attraction" functions much like the pieces of a puzzle: some pieces fit together, while others just don't. There may be no logical reason for it, but you usually don't have romantic attraction to every person you interact with daily because......reasons. Too many men view the ability to "get" women as a sort of "worthiness" scale, when, in reality, it's a lot more like the aforementioned puzzle pieces.
I know some neuro-atypical NT's who have themselves together quite well, highly conscientious, but they get ignored. It seems like there's almost a radar for 'he/she is different' that instantly turns a subconscious social and libidinal switch. Noting what various ape species do to anything that's 'different' this seems to make a degree of evolutionary sense, rather sadly it seems to indicate that we spent much of the back half of the 20th century lying to ourselves - ie. clean slate, social construct, etc., as it seems like the influence seems to be to be back to the other side of 50/50 on genetic determinism and in that factor I'd include inexpungible genetic tendencies so pervasive, and in the direction of negative consequence, that even people who don't have those tendencies have to dance with that game or risk the animal wrath of the surrounding culture.
_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.
24 Aug 2019, 9:45 am
XFilesGeek wrote:
The majority of people on Earth are average-looking, and most average-looking people end-up in relationships with other average-looking people (that's why it's called "average-looking").
The average average-looking person works to improve their attractiveness through scent, having interesting hobbies, cultivating solid conversation skills, developing good physical fitness, ect. You may call it "patronizing," but it really is the only things you can realistically recommend.
The average average-looking person works to improve their attractiveness through scent, having interesting hobbies, cultivating solid conversation skills, developing good physical fitness, ect. You may call it "patronizing," but it really is the only things you can realistically recommend.
Yes, I agree with all that you've said here. But I would add that the average average-looking person is capable of getting a relationship, so when someone cant do that, they're going to deviate from their average peers in life course and attitude. I've heard it asserted that more men these days are struggling to get relationships and sexual experience, which sounds plausible to me, but I'll concede that my perception could be biased since I am struggling with love and dating myself.
What I called patronising was "Just have a shower bro", and things along those lines that are probably already being done by the individual being advised. I wouldn't put the things you listed above in that category. I don't think anyone is going to be told that they just need to shower and then magically a light bulb goes off in their head and they can get a partner. Such obvious advice should be reserved for people for whom there's reason to believe that they neglect their hygiene. If somebody complains about doing poorly with first dates or their partner not wanting to have sex with them, nobody is going to turn to them and say "have a shower bro".
Additionally, the things you mentioned about self-improvement are completely reasonable and valid, but there is an added layer of difficulty achieving those things when you are depressed, and the inability to ever have a romantic relationship or sex seems to have a tendency to be depression-inducing for people who want those things.
XFilesGeek wrote:
When it comes right down to it, as was explained to me by a men's lib advocate, "attraction" functions much like the pieces of a puzzle: some pieces fit together, while others just don't. There may be no logical reason for it, but you usually don't have romantic attraction to every person you interact with daily because......reasons. Too many men view the ability to "get" women as a sort of "worthiness" scale, when, in reality, it's a lot more like the aforementioned puzzle pieces.
Yeah I would agree with the puzzle analogy to the extent that some people click together and others don't, but I would say there are generally logical reasons for it.
When your puzzle piece doesn't fit with anyone else's, it's not incomprehensible that you would look at those whose puzzle pieces fit with a lot more people, with envy.
And men may view the ability to "get" women as a sort of worthiness scale because the ability to get a partner satisfies your desire to get a partner, which is pretty important to most people. And the more women you can "get", the more prospective partners you have to choose from.
People view the ability to make money as a worthiness scale too, because money brings with it the ability to purchase things you'd like to have, and the more of it you can get, the more you're able to get the things you want out of life that money can buy.
XFilesGeek wrote:
Lastly, most pictures of "incels" reveal average-looking guys. The vibe I get is that they're mad that they aren't in the percentage of people who hit the genetic lottery in terms of looks, and have romantic partners fall into their laps.
I don't know that I'd say most are average-looking, but I would say most are not absolutely hideous.
And I would agree that many incels are mad that they aren't in the percentage who are the best-looking people, but they're only mad about that because the most good-looking guys have an abundance of options when it comes to women while they have none. If incels were able to attract women and get partners, I dont believe they'd be worried about the top percentage of good-looking people.
It's comparable to if the poor and homeless were mad at and blaming the rich for their lot in life. If the poor and homeless received enough money to lead satisfactory lives out of poverty, they wouldn't be as worried about the rich.
When you see someone with an excess of something that you wish you had more than anything, and you have none of it, that evokes envy.
24 Aug 2019, 10:07 am
^ I completely agree with everything you've written, and even though I'm asexual, I totally acknowledge the important role sex and relationships play in the lives of sexual people.
As for the average male living in today's times, I read an article that there has been an increase in men and boys being diagnosed with body-image disorders. Some believe that the up-tick may be attributed to the rise of social media and "influencers," and by the media's increasing use of digital enhancements for male models and actors. It's seriously screwing with people's perception of what "average" looks like.
I suspect that many of these "incels" ARE depressed and have body-image disorders. Frankly, if there was a movement that was convincing young women that they are ugly and beyond hope romantically (like these incel groups do to men), that society would be taking the problem much more seriously.
_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."
-XFG (no longer a moderator)
24 Aug 2019, 10:09 am
The Grand Inquisitor wrote:
hurtloam wrote:
BDavro wrote:
Hollywood_Guy wrote:
BDavro wrote:
In the 19th century you could say anything you wanted about black people, you could attribute the very worst to them and believe them to be the root cause of all evil.
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
When in this thread did anybody say anything about black people or saying black people are the root of all evil?
I was drawing a comparison, incels, n word, trying to get people to see how easily they have slipped.
Its totally different. "Incels" on the internet are people who does negative, even harmful ideas.
They aren't just a different colour. We don't feel angry with them because they look a little different to us. We're not even irked by them being virgins.
We don't like the deluded negativity.
That's what the media would have you believe, and there are some members of the group that fit that description, but I scrolled through an incel forum recently and most of the guys there were just talking about how soul-destroying and lonely it is to never be able to have a romantic partner, and how the advice from outsiders is often so out-of-touch with the reality that incels face.
People in that life situation are often told to do things they already do, or are given meaningless platitudes that don't help at all. It's pretty patronising to be told things like "just have a shower bro" by people who just can't grasp what being alone romantically your whole life is like.
You must have been on a different forum to the ones I had a look at. MGTOW made me feel queasy.
24 Aug 2019, 11:02 am
XFilesGeek wrote:
^ I completely agree with everything you've written, and even though I'm asexual, I totally acknowledge the important role sex and relationships play in the lives of sexual people.
As for the average male living in today's times, I read an article that there has been an increase in men and boys being diagnosed with body-image disorders. Some believe that the up-tick may be attributed to the rise of social media and "influencers," and by the media's increasing use of digital enhancements for male models and actors. It's seriously screwing with people's perception of what "average" looks like.
I suspect that many of these "incels" ARE depressed and have body-image disorders. Frankly, if there was a movement that was convincing young women that they are ugly and beyond hope romantically (like these incel groups do to men), that society would be taking the problem much more seriously.
As for the average male living in today's times, I read an article that there has been an increase in men and boys being diagnosed with body-image disorders. Some believe that the up-tick may be attributed to the rise of social media and "influencers," and by the media's increasing use of digital enhancements for male models and actors. It's seriously screwing with people's perception of what "average" looks like.
I suspect that many of these "incels" ARE depressed and have body-image disorders. Frankly, if there was a movement that was convincing young women that they are ugly and beyond hope romantically (like these incel groups do to men), that society would be taking the problem much more seriously.
With the body issue thing, I think online dating and not being able to get a partner are affecting that too. If you're trying and failing to get a partner, you're going to try to figure out why that is, and if you don't have the best body, you may come to believe that your body may be negatively impacting on your ability to get a partner. And online dating is really bad for your self-esteem when you swipe through hundreds or thousands of people and get little to no matches.
I think most men who become incels already share some beliefs with them, and they find a home on incel forums because they can relate with other incels, and they feel alienated and misunderstood by the rest of society.
The problem is that when you have a bunch of people depressed about their inability to get a partner congregating together, they tend to reinforce each other's negative emotions and feelings of hopelessness in the same way that if you have a recovering drug addict spending a lot of time with other drug addicts, they're more likely to relapse. The toxicity spreads and becomes more robust.
I do agree that if this group of "incels" were primarily women, that society would likely handle it differently.
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
|
Am I Too Blame?
in Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions |
07 Jul 2026, 7:09 pm |
