Is this the dark age in masculinity?

I did google the Red Pill Club, and it says they are a community of "incels" which I am told is short for involuntarily celibate. In my day, they just called them losers. There has always been an audience for losers, but their influence is limited to say the least. I am not sure why you are giving them so much credit.

They exist, yes. Are they influential? Not to the overwhelmingly vast majority of people. Just because you can find them on the internet does not mean they therefore are all that influential. The internet literally contains examples of every possible weird notion in existence. You are giving it more importance than it deserves.

You are being led astray into believing this is worthy of discussion.

 

The incels are much more closely related to the black pill movement than the red pill movement. I'm not giving them credit. I'm reporting, accurately, that they are influential. Which is irrefutable. How can you be searched for more than Trump and not be influential? Good luck explaining that. Again, when boys and young men try looking up anything about masculinity, these are the first people they are going to find. I'm sorry you disagree that men's health is worthy of discussion.

 

As incels, they are losers incapable of getting laid that are angry at women as a result

So what? You are overstating their importance. Just because you can find something on the internet does not make it of high importance. The interent is literally filled with everything. Your belief of its importanbce is a function of your searching habits rather than a reflection of society as a whole.


"The red pill is an internet incel made up of anti-feminists on Reddit."
Red Pill: Understanding the Red Pill Ideology And Movement Among Men (mensgroup.com)

 

The movements are related, but they aren't the same thing. None of the influencers I mentioned are incels.

No. My belief in their influence is based on what other people are searching for, their following, etc. These are hard numbers. I guarantee you every single middle schooler in your area has heard of Andrew Tate. And, yes, he has been influential. Highly influential. This is an objective fact. The facts don't care about your feelings.

 

Meh.

Much ado about nothing.

Your disbelief that someone has not heard of these people tells us everything we need to know about your skewed perception of their importance..

 

I didn't say no one has never heard of these people. I'm telling you that young people have. Hell, I grew up in a small rural town, my sister teaches there now, and all of the boys are talking about Tate . . . and it is causing a lot of problems. I still remember the day my street was paved instead of being dirt. I still remember the day we got a traffic light. And these kids are obsessed with Tate. I'm sorry you can't face reality, but this is a thing as much as it offends you to the point that you have to play make-believe that it isn't a thing.

 

It is NOT about the individual, it is about the family. When families thrive, so does your society. Women have made many of their gains to the detriment of the family. NOT sustainable.

 

What you said that I was reacting to was "I call BS on you never hearing about the Tates."

Back in the 1940's I believe, there was a TV show called the Little Rascals. They used to have the "He Man Women Hater's Club."

Men talking shi*t about women, and conversely, women talking sh*t about men is as old as time itself. This doesnt make it important. People talk sh*t all the time. This is nothing new. In a nation of 350 million people, you will find plenty of examples of whatever it is that you want to find.

You are making a big deal out of nothing.

 

There are all kinds of things that happen to people that are not broadcast on the nightly news. If this is happening to 1 in a million people, then it does not deserve the kind of attention it is getting. Society needs to deal with issues that affect a significant percentage of the population first and foremost.

Again, I have no idea how I would deal with the above. I would hope I would deal with it in the way it made the most sense. What else can one do?

 

Incel is an unfortunately used term. When they call themselves incels they mean that they can't get sex. When wider society says incel, they don't mean just that but also that the incels are nasty and hateful and full of spite and misogyny. Of course that puts people who can't get sex but are not nasty and hateful in a spot where they too will feel attacked, and may grow into the nasty sort of incel.

I was terminally shy and accordingly completely unable to get girlfriends until I was in my mid 30s and changed. This was before incel talk, so I was just a shy loser, but I didn't feel villainized for it. Had I been, I may have been less likely to come out of my shell and more likely to gravitate towards these fresh and fit type guys.

It is backwards to how progressive mindset usually works. You have people declaring victimhood and then lashing out and the reaction is to equate the two in the literal meaning of the term used for them. Imagine if we did that with people who see themselves as victims of racism or whatever else.

I would put incel along with toxic masculinity and patriarchy as terms that are bound to increase rather than decrease the problem.

 

The OP states that women who have multiple sexual partners are whores. No such derogatory terms apply to men who have multiple sexual partners. Others added that such women cannot become trustworthy as life partners, but nothing about the trustworthiness of men who have "played the field."

 

As I'm sure you are aware, there is no derogatory label or stigma for men who have multiple sexual partners.

 

That's actually not true for millions of women. Sex feels good by design. But in our still patriarchal society, women who admit that, or heaven forbid act on it, are stigmatized, villainized, and shamed for it. Men are not.

I get the trust and attachment issues, been there, felt that. Those would be lesser issues if we stopped shaming young women for wanting what we should, by nature, want.

 

Society is to blame for the existence and proliferation of people such as Tate. If such people were outcasts rather than venerated they wouldn't be in the positons of influence and power. Our society raises them above the rest because we value hedonism, materialism, and anti-traditional behaviors. No different to how you can blame society for corrupting and degenerating someone via drugs, porn, mental insanity, etc. All of these avenues of corruption and degeneracy destroy people. Merely waving it off as if its personal choice alone when there is indeed addictions attached to them and they're promoted/normalized is an infantile thought.

Also if my "claim" to Social Marxism is indeed false at least debate it rather than again just waving it off. They're all connected to the social rot society has fallen to.

 

I'll give you the benefit of my doubt and guess that the word "whoremonger" escaped you.

 

You could use the same lame excuse for any criminal.

So we agree that these "manosphere" dudes shouldn't be venerated or defended. Neat.

He's literally a criminal defendant.

Yes, using those to shift the blame from people's actions is equally lame.

Not nearly as infantile and intellectually dishonest as this hand waving.

If you would like to talk about Marxism, we can do that in a thread where that is the subject. Happy to do so. But it has nothing to do with this topic. Again, I encourage you to look up the origin of the term. Hint: it has something to do with a German political figure from the 30s who had a funny mustache.

 

Which is true. Our society coddles criminals to the point where we let men such as Darrel Brooks off on bond who has broken it in the past and used a vehicle to assault someone. What happened? Six people died because we let multi felons out on bond. Our society allows even criminals to be tolerated by the state unless of course you're of the wrong religion & skin color.

Look at my previous posts in this topic. Whore creators are degenerates and should be treated as outcasts. I'd even go as far as to publicly whip them or brand them as such.

How long did it take for him to become a criminal defendant? How many women did he destroy? How many did he enslave? Nip it in the bud before it becomes a problem where such men as he have influence to corrupt.

The difference between a persons actions and society is that if the choice isn't there the action cannot be done. A person cannot choose to look at porn if porn isn't available. A person cannot choose to do heroin if the drug isn't there. Prevention is far better because it wouldn't allow such behaviors to even occur. We have men who are still actively promoting the swinger/hedonist lifestyle. Another Tate in the making but, we can't do anything because being judgemental is wrong because tolerance is a virtue in today's world.

If it was hand waving I couldn't provide evidence to support it. Addictions related to drug use, porn, societal trends, electronics, etc are all easily and readily available to provide that these sources degrade a person which leads to further corruption.

It has everything to do with the fall of Masculinity within western society. Social Marxism attacks the fundamental core of society by turning everything on its head. Being a man is toxic. Being a woman wanting to have children is slavery & bad for the environment.

 

Agreed. I do have to wonder if one day, there will be no scarcity due to automation. Then we all become like the Eloi in The Time Machine? At that time, bad ideas like collectivism will lose their ability to harm. Until then, people need stuff which comes from places and things. You need a functioning society and economy. Will things collapse, requiring those strong men again? I think so. Soon.

 

Depending on who is saying it, the term "player" can be a derogatory term used for men.

The biggest difference is that men have more of a tendency to look down upon a "whore", while women have a tendency to desire "players", even though if asked they tend to deny having this desire.

I would also add that probably the biggest purveyors of the word "whore" are other women, not necessarily men.

 

When was the last time you heard anyone use that word? I'm in my 70s, and have only seen it it period-piece novels.

Women are whores. Men who exhibit the same behavior are players. Or, at worst, dogs ... but who doesn't love dogs?

It's a double standard. Is there a particular reason why you can't admit that?

 

But it is more common in women than in men. Research has shown this. And it makes perfect sense. It is not a bad thing.

Most women by nature want a secure trust filled sexual relationship with a partner who loves them. Most women do not want lots of sex with random strangers who don't care about them. Most men by nature enjoy both.

 

If I've learned one thing in my decades of two marriages and a few other long-term monogamous relationships, it's this: Men need to be loved. Women need to be wanted.

 

call me old fashioned but that’s how it should be …

 

Though I know he doesn't meet the specs, as an idolized male image, yet don't you think that Claudius made a good Emperor (for that time)?

<Google Snip #1>
What are 3 major accomplishments of Claudius?

Despite these dangers, Claudius worked hard at his job, starting work just after midnight every day. It began to pay off: he made major improvements to Rome's judicial system, passed laws protecting sick slaves, extended citizenship and increased women's privileges.
https://www.pbs.org › romans › cl...
in the First Century. The Roman Empire. Emperors. Claudius | PBS
<End Snip #1>


<Google Snip #2>
What is the Emperor Claudius best known for?

Claudius (full name Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus) was the fourth Roman emperor from 41 to 54 A.D. Best know for the successful expansion of Rome into Britain and parts of Africa and the Middle East, Claudius was an accomplished leader who brought forth improvements to the empire's judicial system, ...Oct 12, 2014
https://www.history.com › news
8 Things You May Not Know About Emperor Claudius | HISTORY
<End Snip #2>

And yet he'd only been Emperor, for 13 years.

 

Having recovered from some serious substance abuse, l really don't have much sympathy for ANY drug addicts..... it's a choice for a man OR a woman......just like choosing to quit.