The American Politics thread

[vcs]

If he was in India, he'd probably hate his parents too.. but for the opposite reason - what with his Mom relentlessly trying to introduce him to "nice girls from stable families".

 

[Ausage]

Don't think it's a good idea to conflate people on the spectrum, 99% of whom are incredibly decent people, with people like this

Yeah fair enough, but I don't buy the narrative that these are just failed PUA's with an extra dash of actual misogyny. Looks to me like a community of people so incapable of face to face social interactions that they've warped into something pretty sinister. Calling it a movement is not really putting it in the right bucket.

 

[Spark]

I mean we already have a framework for people like this and what has happened to them - online radicalisation - that works very well and that we're perfectly willing to apply in other contexts, idk why we aren't here.

 

[Ausage]

I mean we already have a framework for people like this and what has happened to them - online radicalisation - that works very well and that we're perfectly willing to apply in other contexts, idk why we aren't here.

I don't have a problem with applying that framework. It's just a vastly different problem to the other instances of it.

 

[Spark]

I don't have a problem with applying that framework. It's just a vastly different problem to the other instances of it.

Well, to what extent? Surely like other cases you have to attack the "root causes" - in this, and in most other cases, badly de-socialised angry young men - as well as trying to dissolve the ideology which creates communities of monsters, frankly.

Yeah fair enough, but I don't buy the narrative that these are just failed PUA's with an extra dash of actual misogyny. Looks to me like a community of people so incapable of face to face social interactions that they've warped into something pretty sinister. Calling it a movement is not really putting it in the right bucket.

Hard to measure how much most online communities are "organised" tbf.

 

[Ausage]

Well, to what extent? Surely like other cases you have to attack the "root causes" - in this, and in most other cases, badly de-socialised angry young men - as well as trying to dissolve the ideology which creates communities of monsters, frankly.

Hard to measure how much most online communities are "organised" tbf.

I think calling it an ideology is giving it far too much credit. I think most of these people have social disorders so extreme it doesn't compare to the problems of your radicalized Islamists, White Supremacists or the radical left.

 

[harsh.ag]

Two things make it seem a bigger problem than it is imo. Firstly, such people always existed and the internet just gives them a vocal platform and a low level form of community. Some men are supposed to be incels. Basic competition stuff.

Secondly, part of this is transitory. Can't have a large (overall desirable) change like women's liberation without it. Numbers should come down in the next generations.

 

[Flem274*]

They're hurt because they don't know how to talk to girls, there is huge societal pressure to 'get a girlfriend' and have failed miserably at talking to girls when they've tried, and they weren't strong enough to prevent their hatred from consuming them.

Very similar to Islamic terrorists, gun nut militias and 'release zoo animals onto busy streets' animal liberators imo.

They need therapy and we need to encourage them to come forward voluntarily before they kill or rape more women.

 

[Ausage]

If female rejection, societal pressures and misogyny was all it took to get to this place our societies would have collapsed long ago.

 

[harsh.ag]

If female rejection, societal pressures and misogyny was all it took to get to this place our societies would have collapsed long ago.

Female rejection on a systemic scale is a fairly new phenomenon though. Earlier, you could get a woman for marriage much more easily because of societal pressures and restraints on women, pre marital *** etc.

 

[Uppercut]

Female rejection on a systemic scale is a fairly new phenomenon though. Earlier, you could get a woman for marriage much more easily because of societal pressures and restraints on women, pre marital *** etc.

Is there data on this?

 

[Spark]

Is there data on this?

It'd be quite hard to measure accurately to say the least

 

[Shri]

The vast majority of people who post here are massive studs so attracting the ladies won't be an issue for us so some here won't be familiar with incels.

But basically its "involuntarily celibates" aka lads who can't get laid and resent the opposite *** for this. Its in the news due to Alek Minassian who murdered ten people a week ago. Elliot Rodger would be considered one of the most prominent members of this movement. Utterly bizarre movement to say the least.

https://www.glamour.com/story/what-is-incel-breaking-down-online-community-celibate-men

Mainstream virginity.

 

[Redbacks]

Two things make it seem a bigger problem than it is imo. Firstly, such people always existed and the internet just gives them a vocal platform and a low level form of community. Some men are supposed to be incels. Basic competition stuff.

Secondly, part of this is transitory. Can't have a large (overall desirable) change like women's liberation without it. Numbers should come down in the next generations.

That's quite a fatalistic viewpoint, probably the same one the followers hold. More likely they need to get out and talk to 100's of women, seek counselling or a support group.

 

[harsh.ag]

That's quite a fatalistic viewpoint, probably the same one the followers hold. More likely they need to get out and talk to 100's of women, seek counselling or a support group.

Yeah. Agreed. But then they wouldn't be "those men" anymore. In the sense they would have to change. So guess what I meant was certain behaviour, via basic competition mechanism, is supposed to result in involuntary celibacy in a free-ish society.

 

[Victor Ian]

They always existed. They now just have internet and a catchy name. Previously known as creeps.

 

[hendrix]

Female rejection on a systemic scale is a fairly new phenomenon though. Earlier, you could get a woman for marriage much more easily because of societal pressures and restraints on women, pre marital *** etc.

Is there data on this?

Yeah I really don't know if this is true. I understand the logic for it - but I don't know if it ever actually played out - the idea that more men would get to marry and procreate because of societal pressure to marry. I do understand the logic for it but I still think that most of the genetic evidence suggests that even with societal pressures there's still been quite a large sector of men without the opportunity to mate. I think there's a bit more going on.

 

[Victor Ian]

Yeah I really don't know if this is true. I understand the logic for it - but I don't know if it ever actually played out - the idea that more men would get to marry and procreate because of societal pressure to marry. I do understand the logic for it but I still think that most of the genetic evidence suggests that even with societal pressures there's still been quite a large sector of men without the opportunity to mate. I think there's a bit more going on.

How does this genetic evidence work? I think that would be fascinating. How would it extrapolate dead nodes out of a genetic line? (hope that makes sense)

 

[hendrix]

How does this genetic evidence work? I think that would be fascinating. How would it extrapolate dead nodes out of a genetic line? (hope that makes sense)

You can look at the variation in X chromosome vs overall variation, or look the Y chromosome variation.

https://investigativegenetics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2041-2223-5-13

Another question of interest is the extent to which the genetic contributions of males versus females have been the same or differed (as measured by their respective effective population sizes, Nm and Nf, respectively). Previous studies of Nm and Nf have largely relied on comparisons of X chromosome vs. autosomal variation, and have come to varying conclusions concerning the historical Nf/Nm ratio, for example, finding that this ratio suggests a large excess of Nf to Nm [8], a moderate excess of Nf to Nm [76], or even a decreased Nf relative to Nm [9]. These differences variously reflect methodological differences, difficulties in accounting for differences in male versus female mutation rates, and/or the potentially greater effect of selection on the X chromosome than on the autosomes [10, 11]. Comparison of mtDNA versus NRY variation offers a more direct assessment of Nf/Nm that is free of some of the issues concerning X:autosome comparisons (albeit not all, as discussed below), but requires unbiased estimates of NRY variation, which until our study were only available from either whole genome sequencing studies [5, 14, 15, 16] or more limited targeted studies of NRY sequence variation [7, 77]. Our results indicate a consistent strong excess of Nf versus Nm starting even before the out-of-Africa migration that has been carried through almost all subsequent migrations. East Asia may be an exception, and indeed our estimates of Nf and Nm are substantially larger than previous estimates of Ne in east Asians based on autosomal diversity [78, 79]. However, these previous studies were based solely on data from Han Chinese and Japanese, whereas the HGDP includes a much more diverse sampling of east Asian populations, which may account for the higher effective population size estimates for the HGDP. The excess of Nfversus Nm become even more pronounced in recent times due to higher rates of growth in Nf than in Nm (Figures 4, 5, and 6); these results are in line with previous studies of smaller datasets that used different methods [4, 80]. These results suggest, in turn, that ***-specific processes that reduce Nm, such as polygyny and/or ***-specific migration [2], have characterized humans over most of our prehistory.

 

[StephenZA]

I suppose this could have gone into either of the 2 threads....