Randy Thompson #pratt incel.blog

Misconceptions About the Blackpill

There are lots of misconceptions, even from within the Incel community about this topic. I am here to clear up some of these misconceptions.

The Blackpill is an ideology

The idea that blackpill is an ideology that we follow is incorrect. Incels don’t have a belief system and the members of the community come from many political and ethnic backgrounds. There are many disagreements within the community and anyone that has spent time around the community knows this.

The black pill is simply a grouping of simple truths about looks and dating that society as a whole tends to ignore. Incels Wiki explains this well in its Blackpill article.

For a more in-depth view of the blackpill, you can read the scientific blackpill article on Incels Wiki as well, as it does go into the stats and cites many studies that arrive at interesting conclusions. Even if you’re not a big fan of incels, it is hard to ignore the studies that support many incel theories.

The Blackpill is dangerous

There is nothing dangerous about the conclusions that reached in the blackpill. Again, people associate lots of bad stuff to the blackpill and sometimes refer to it as “cultish”, but all the blackpill is at the end of the day is theories and the data that support those theories. The blackpill doesn’t advocate for violence or say anything about violence at all.

Over the years, detractors and journalists have tried to stretch the meaning of blackpill to mean everything terrible about incels, but that is false. In the community, the blackpill has always had a simple definition, and that meaning has not changed. It has always been a group of theories supported by scientific data.

The Black Pill Philosophy Will Destroy Your Life

This is a title of video made by Bulldog Mindset, also known as Bluepilled Mindset to most incels.

I’m not going to give a play by play on what is in this video, but you can probably quickly figure out what was in this video. Bulldog acknowledges that some of the things we say are correct, but he falls back on the bluepill and says that looks don’t matter but personality does. Bulldog aligns with the PUA/Redpill community, so it’s not surprising to see this at all.

The blackpill won’t destroy your life. In fact, it has done the opposite for many of the people in the community. My life improved dramatically after researching and discovering the truths behind dating and female nature. We can now figure out ways to cope with our ugliness or looksmax if we choose to do so.

Going down this road can lead you down many great paths, too. Instead of focusing on the ELO-driven slot machines that are modern dating apps, we can either work on improving our looks or just opt-out of the whole game altogether. Both are valid options for men in the modern age.

Self-defeatist or Lay Down and Rot has been classed as dangerous by many academics and journalists, but we don’t see it that way. Giving up when you have no options would be the logical and sane thing to do. Some people don’t understand this, though.


There is lots of misinformation surrounding the blackpill. It is not misogynistic, defeatist, or dangerous as some people would like you to believe. People should do their own research and utilize their critical thinking skills before jumping to conclusions.

Randy Thompson #wingnut #dunning-kruger #crackpot #sexist incel.blog

The Irrational Hate Towards Incels

Many of our enemies hate us to an extreme degree, but why?

This is the question that I ask every time I have nasty words thrown my way on Twitter. They accuse me of being vile and hateful, but I don’t really say mean things. I am but only representing a forum, and I am only one person. To them, I am every ugly person they have ever met, and they treat me as such.

They accuse us of being the worst human beings on earth. They regularly lecture and tell us that it’s our personalities and not the way that we look. We bring up countless studies ranging from the biological to the behavioral, but they continuously deflect and discount those studies and provide news articles as proof. When you point out that women found 80% of men unattractive, they ignore it or deflect. Countless studies prove that physical attraction matters above all else, but they find a way to refute this.

So why the irrational hate?

My first theory is that it’s ideological.

The support of feminism is standard in those that hate us, although the feminist women are the vilest and most toxic. Leftist politics in America very much align with the goals of feminism, and you’ll see much overlap between leftists, feminists, and those that support socialism, for example. They very much believe that we’re the “privileged” gender and that our problems don’t matter because we’re “privileged” men, which couldn’t be further from the truth.

imageThey only care about “sexism” towards women.

Some feminists will disagree with everything that we say, even if it’s objectively true just because you’re an incel. No amount of proof or studies will convince them of anything because they’ve been brainwashed into believing in their worldview and can’t see the world in any other way.

My second theory is that we’re right about many of the issues facing men today.

We are right about many things, such as physical attributes being most important in initial attraction, and we cite the studies whenever we make these claims. Incels being right destroys their worldview because they have always been taught that personality is the most important thing that attracts a woman.

We know this to not be true.

This article from Psychology Today proves this wrong. When women were given the choice between unattractive men with “good” personality traits that women desire and their attractive counterparts, the women chose the attractive men even when assured that the unattractive men had the traits the women were looking for. The study concluded that most women may not even realize what they find attractive in a partner which is a conclusion that many of us have reached a long time ago.

Even with the science behind us, they choose to ignore it and direct ad-hominem attacks against us instead. Call us names, or tell us to “have sex, incel,” They instead decide to cherry-pick threads from incel boards to demonstrate that all incels are bad people or that all incels hold one opinion, but their arguments fall flat when they are told that not all incels hold the same beliefs.

When their arguments fail, they resort to silencing and shaming us.

Mass reporting, de-platforming, and abuse complaints are the tactics that they resort to when they lose the argument. When they can’t silence you, they will try to smear and misrepresent in the worst way possible so they can convince other people to hate you. They call us domestic terrorists for the actions of a few crazy people. They want to silence all of us because of the actions of 2-3 people.

Their irrational hate of us is ultimately our strength. The best arguments are made from reason and evidence and not from emotion.

Naama Kates #sexist incel.blog

The “Misogynistic Spectrum”

The manosphere today is considered a hotbed of radicalization, a misogynistic spectrum of which incels represent the most violent and toxic extreme, due mostly to their reckless online rhetoric and the heinous actions of a few. But incels are a large and diverse group, united more by their lack of contact with women than their hatred for them.

One of the most pervasive misconceptions about incels’ unique brand of misogyny, and incels themselves, is that it’s primitive and superficial, all about sex. The way they talk about the body, rank attractiveness, and promiscuity — it smacks not just of resentment, but common depravity.

Furthermore, they objectify women, reducing them into little more than potential conquests to reflect their own status, a prize of masculine achievement.

Though fewer than their masculine counterparts, the words available to describe females abound, and they range from the comical to the cruel: a “Stacy” is an extremely attractive, top-tier female, while a “Becky” is something of a Plain Jane. Certain characteristics are usually associated with these respective designations — Stacies are generally considered vacuous and traditionally feminine, while Beckies are pseudo-intellectual or rebellious, usually feminists. But these opinions vary and are often the subject of some debate. The categorization is based primarily on physical beauty. There are also overweight “landwhales,” and a variety of ethnic epithets such as “noodle-whore” as a complement to those that exist for men.

The most ubiquitous of these neologisms, of course, is “femoid,” often shortened, simply, to “foid.” Cold and medicalized, the word suggests some kind of automaton or lower-order primate, devoid of consciousness and driven entirely by a set of instructions or urges compelling it to eat, drink, and “fuck Chad.”

And indeed, in incel spaces, female behavior is often explained as exactly that, with references to a growing body of work from social scientists, clinical psychologists, and neurologists who agree that the majority of our idiosyncratic human routines can be understood as basic survival skills which date back hundreds of thousands of years. So it would follow that one should “never trust foids,” who can’t help their treachery, their laziness, their lust or their greed, because it is hardwired.

However, a deeper look into the etymology of the word reveals a more complicated relationship with actual women and femininity. If we parse the term down, we find the root “femina” from the Latin for “woman,” followed by the suffix “-oid,” also from the Latin, which is used to form adjectives and nouns denoting form or resemblance. Thus, the term is not an indictment of women themselves, but rather of these women, these cheap imitations, these imposters, that look and act like the real deal but lack any soul or humanity. Modern women, the women that reject and object, that taunt and betray, that exploit both the beta males and their own sexuality for profit — these are the femoids, the objects of derision and contempt. According to incels, foids are often cruel to them, demonstrating their inability to feel compassion or think abstractly by laughingly dismissing them and using the term as a pejorative. They refuse to acknowledge the incels’ humanity, thereby proving that they lack it in themselves. As an observer, I can confirm that this occurs a lot in online spaces, where we increasingly spend our time.

But back to “feminoid.” I don’t believe in linguistic coincidences, and the word reveals that on some level, for incels, actual women represent something good or at least neutral. Actual women are coveted, as is actual intimacy, while meaningless sex is generally considered an excess and an aberration.

Such paradoxical nuance is present throughout the black pill or incel “ideology,” which is basically, like most philosophy, a broad critique of modern society — our lack of community, of spirituality, of authenticity. It is a criticism of the narcissism, greed and insincerity required to navigate the world with our FaceTuned, filtered avatars instead of ourselves, to exist in a virtual marketplace where sex still sells better than ever, often traded for doses of influence or attention. Is such criticism really undeserved?

Incels’ brand of misogyny lauds the loudest and the lewdest, but also presents respect for intellectual rigor. This worldview is not benign, but it’s also nothing new. Misogyny exists at the core of most hate-based ideologies and a great deal of violent crime. It also exists, however, in the volumes of most religions, scientific works, and revolutionary political treatises, if one looks back into the past. (And if women are mentioned at all, which they usually are.) We have evolved, in large thanks to the antiquated systems of the past, and to the tireless curiosity and dedication of those thinkers who sat off on the sidelines and observed their fellow humans as they danced their strange ritualistic dance. They bucked at the social consequences of turning inward and asking why, and for that, we owe them a debt of gratitude.

Not every incel is on a noble quest for understanding, but some are. Not every normie is obligated to understand incels, but maybe more of them should try. Because we are all human, behind the keyboard, and the filters, and the fifty dollar words.

Alexander Ash #wingnut incel.blog

Censorship and Incels

Censorship is tricky. Too much of it, and despotism arises. Too little of it, and chaos ensues. How much is the right amount, and how are incels affected by it?

Literary classics like 1984 and Brave New World have shown what might happen to a society that abuses its powers of censorship. Not as many authors however have explored the consequences of no censorship whatsoever – a wild-west scenario. In such a world, death threats could be sent to anyone and everyone, with no repercussions to be had. Military weapon schematics and blueprints for dangerous biochemical pathogens could be leaked, without a crime having been committed. Truth and falsehood would lose their meaning, for no law or taboo would exist to dictate any preference of one over the other.

Finding balance is not easy. The paradox of tolerance states that undesirable and dangerous ideals must be censored; otherwise, the intolerant might overtake society. However, increasing censorship is easy, decreasing it is not. We often see companies and governments give in to evermore censorship in the name of fairness, equality, or justice (e.g., the four horsemen of the infocalypse); yet, because censorship effects restrain over a person’s autonomy and freedom of speech, new rules and laws implementing further censorship should only be allowed when the majority agrees to such censorship.

In the case of incels, the community has always had a disdain for censorship. For one, they have been repeatedly banished from social media sites like reddit over the years due to their type of speech. In the case of the incels.co forum, domains have been seized and hosting space revoked, at times for little more than as a public relations maneuver. These events have only worked to fuel the desire of incels to retain their culture.

Secondly, incels tend to be realists. Their desire for the truth behind their situation as singles often demands a cold approach to our social dynamics, for the answer is often unpleasant and cannot be easily found in the mainstream narrative. As a result, incels often have little regard for politeness and so-called “politically correct speech”, and instead prefer to be blunt and straightforward. For example, “currycel” is a term sometimes used to refer to users who, at least partly, are involuntary celibate due to their Indian ethnicity. The term is used not because incels wish to mock Indians, but because it is an unambiguous and straightforward way to address a person’s situation in a single word.

As a result of these two points, the vast majority of incels wants to minimize censorship wherever possible, save for necessary rules banning the discussion of previous romantic experiences, bullying of other users, and spam. Outsiders to the community often shun away from terminology they deem offensive; incels on other hand embrace these terms and make them part of their culture.

If the incel community at large desires to maintain an ample range of freedom of speech, then it is those standards that should be reflected in the rules. The incels.co forum attempts to cater to these desires as best as it can, within the bounds of the law. If mainstream communities such as reddit desire to increase the pressure of censorship, then they are in their right to do so; however, it has been often the case that such a road is one-way only.

Alexander Ash #wingnut #conspiracy incel.blog

(First article on incels.co’s new blog)

Incel Phenomenology

Phenomenology is the study of lived experience from a first-person perspective. As of yet, it has not been applied to incels. Here I will argue that it should be.

An incel is an involuntary celibate, a person who is unable to find a romantic partner despite desiring one. Previously ignored, incels have recently gained a staggering prominence among scholars of violent extremism. For example, this year the Royal Canadian Mounted Police added incels to their Ideologically Motivated Violent Extremism classification, effectively labeling them as terrorists.

However, from the point of view of incels, this is all rather baffling; while a handful may fit the mold, violence against the public by an ideology of extremism is as foreign to incels as it is to the reader.

Most academics do present their work by stating that the vast majority of incels are neither violent nor extremist. However, as existing research magnifies the attention given to the extremist variant, the impression is given that all incels are alike, and all are a danger. This is a failure of contextualization, one whose results we have seen before as research developed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks: Islam became securitized, not because it was a security threat, but rather because the majority of attention was focused on a few violent extremists, tainting in the process every other Western non-extremist Muslim.

For incels, the misattribution of their beliefs and desires has caused trouble for many of them: How are they to open up and discuss their plights of loneliness and hopelessness if public perception is that incels are people only interested in violence? The answer is that often they simply can’t.

Perhaps worse still, scorn received from outsiders to the community often leads to a process of chiseling, chipping away at the mental health of incels. Not only must then they carry a burden of solitude, but they also must retreat from the public eye in order to avoid further ostracizement. In practice, such alienation may eventually compound into mental disorders like anxiety and depression, or in extreme cases into self-harm and even suicide.

A proposed solution to this issue is phenomenology. For one, responsible research should seek to avoid unnecessary securitization and promote effective de-escalation. Secondly, resources should be significantly expended towards understanding inceldom as a life situation. The result will be a wider and better understanding of incels at large, as well as a more accurate portrayal of the community to the public.