[Serious] Secular humanism is one of the main reasons why this society hates incels
I will continue with the analysis of the modern West and why it is so hateful towards the incels.
The secular humanist mentality that is prevalent in the West is that humans are masters of their own destiny and if you do something wrong, you need to find a solution and fix it. This is the mentality of the modern Western society and it is from this position that incels are judged in the sense that you need to stop complaining and find solutions, usually followed by either a some generic useless advice (just do this, just do that) or straight ridicule.
Once you examine secular humanism a bit more, you realize that it comes from arrogance. In reality, human beings are not in control of everything and never will be.
To illustrate the difference between the Western secular humanist mentality and non-Western non-secularist religious mentality: I remember an interview with some European jihadi fighter who said that American soldiers get PTSD from wars while the true religious Muslim soldiers don't suffer from it because from a religious viewpoint, if you tried to do something with good intentions then you shouldn't feel guilty about yourself even if you came up short. On the other hand, the Western man, under the influence of the secular humanist mentality, will start blaming himself for his mistakes and his position in life. A Western secularistic atheist soldier who came out of cruel war will inevitably start blaming himself that he went through bloodshed and traumatic events, while a religious soldiers like medieval crusaders would see it as God's divine providence (a doctrine which asserts that God is in complete control of all things) and God's will. This is also the reason while medieval Christian soldiers were so much mentally tougher than the modern Western soldiers, the Christian warriors of the past went through gruesome medieval battles yet remained sane and found strength in religion, but these modern NATO soldiers seem broken. On the other hand, when you look at the religious jihadis today, like the Taliban for example, they have amazing will power and faith in what they're doing.
Now, I don't want to turn this into an argument about religion as such. You might say that religion is a cope, but you even from this perspective you can probably see it as a good cope for those who believe in it.
Either way, the more important thing is to understand how this reflects on social level, because this is what is the most relevant for us.
For the Western secularist society and in the eyes of secular humanism, you (as individuals) are the root of your own problems. The West doesn't believe in things like God's providence and at the same time it believes that the modern West is a wonderful progressive society. So in their eyes, who could be blamed for your problems but you yourselves as individuals?
Western secularism is a very peculiar ideology because while it technically stands only for separation of state and religion, it does this from the position that the state is superior to religion, thus making the State the new religion. You can observe this easily, whenever people point out that state and religion should be separated, the latter is seen as negative, while the state is never questioned. They basically mean that the state should be protected from religion and not the other way around (Western secularists, for example, don't have a problem when state institutions start meddling into "backward" religions and punish religious people for "hate speech" and things like that - where is the separation here?).
Western secularism worships the state, its institutions, its ideological norms (muh freedom, muh equality), its laws. It also worships progress and science and this material world the West created. Secular humanism is basically the key mindset behind it, as it believes that through these instruments, an ideal rationalistic society will eventually be implemented, or at least, we will get as close to is as possible. They believe that we're on our way there.
So whenever you, as a man, complain in the West that something is wrong not because of you and your individual failures but because of some factors out of your control - yet alone if you directly blame the state and society for it, like many incels do - the Western society doesn't want to hear it. The position of Western secularist ideology is: "We (as in, our state with its institutions) gave you this wonderful progressive society with freedom and equality, if you can't make it, then YOU are the problem because YOU didn't work hard enough for it." That's why this society is so aggressive towards incels because the incels question the fundamentals of this secularist state-worship and institution-worship.
The only people who can complain in the West are groups that do it in the context of the ruling ideology of "freedom" and "progress" like the feminist women, LGBT, "minorities" etc. because they argue that their problems will eventually be solved as we become more "progressive". They don't blame the modern society as such, but rather say that this society isn't modern enough. So they fit in the narrative and strengthen the secularist state.
But when incels blame the society for the problems, this is where the secularist West doesn't want to hear it. The West doesn't want to give legitimacy to a group of men that blame things that are out of their control for their problems because then it would give up on its own legitimacy. So this is why, at first, the Western society tried to respond to incel problem by trying to help (this is how the inceldom first started to be discussed in the 90s) and when they saw that they couldn't do anything to solve it, they started ridiculing it and mocking it and at the same time trying to repress it (we're in this stage now in the 2010s).
A response of a non-Western, non-secularist traditional religious society to the incel situation would be very different. In a traditional religious society, people in incel position (those who can't find wives) would be seen as the less fortunate. They wouldn't be blamed for their problems, or at least no exclusively. For example Catholic Church always gave advice to people who couldn't marry (who were basically 'incels') to accept celibacy as a blessing (basically they should become 'volcels'). Again, I'm aware that many of you wouldn't like such advice either, but the key difference is that in a religious society, you wouldn't be personally blamed for your inceldom and you wouldn't be ridiculed or attacked for it. It would be seen as God's divine providence and something outside of your control. IMO this would be a much better position than being seen as an evil outcast.
I think the main reason why many of us are so resentful of this modern society is because of this BS secular-humanist-like advice of "find solutions and fix it" and "it is your own fault" type of mentality which inevitable leads to mockery and attack on basic human dignity ("no woman likes incels because they're evil/losers/lazy/have bad personality"). In reality, love and relationships in this modern dating world are a perfect example of something that is not in your own control. You can't force people to like you, it's as simple like that. If there is one thing you can't possibly have any control over, it's this. It's basically in God's hands - if you're religious. And if you're not religious then you can explain it by losing the genetic lottery. It all comes down to similar things, basically - it was something out of your control.
Like I said, whether you're religious or atheistic is not really relevant here. The modern West is not atheist but rather "pagan" because it worships this idols like the secularist state and its ideology. So even if you're an atheist, you should have a problem with this. The Westerners are really fanatical in their modern 'paganism', and that's why they don't want to accept that a group of men (the incels) has it so bad in their wonderful modern society that they worship like some pagan idol-worshipers.