FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > More incels identify as left-wing rather than right or centre
More incels identify as left-wing rather than right or centre
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"What's the definition of an incel? " Involuntary celibate. Young, almost exclusively, straight men, who define themselves by the fact they want to but can't get laid. They have a lot of online communities where they discuss their frustrations about their sexual rejections and the injustices of the dating world | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"What's the definition of an incel? Involuntary celibate. Young, almost exclusively, straight men, who define themselves by the fact they want to but can't get laid. They have a lot of online communities where they discuss their frustrations about their sexual rejections and the injustices of the dating world " Oh. I don't know why they would have a political leaning as a whole. It seemed fairly evenly spread. Younger people tend to be more left leaning, and if they're mostly young people, it would make sense that there's a slight left bias. But like mentioned, the whole political compassion in the states is skewed so far to the right, it's meaningless. They have no "left wing" in their politics. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"In fairness, most straight young men could fall into the category of wanting to get laid but not being able to. Think it's the fact they join online communities and constantly post on them and their whole identity is based around how women find them repulsive " I think this is so close to the truth! I remember back in the day, I would meet my mates for a drink in town, and groups of young people who called themselves Emos used to hang around. They all seemed to have the same hair cuts, and black makeup was definitely the thing. They would sit around not talking to each other, sad looking but somehow they seemed to feed off one another's negative energy. It wasn't uncommon to see them cutting themselves! I think these types of outliers were lucky to have found other like minded people back then, but today must be no problem at all and I would imagine in large numbers via social media and the internet. If they are anything like the Emos, there would be a lot of emotional baggage in one place to keep upping the emotional anti. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1..." You know you probably are 
There will be extremists on the left and right.
What side of the political divide a person sits, is not a good indicator for a persons extremisms or violent tendencies, and I doubt rightly or wrongly you have studied this subject in any meaningful depth to arrive at your conclusion.  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1..." So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. " Only the ones on the right, the others are okay | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. " Absolutely there are very few groups that are 100% violent extremists. The studies show the violence among Incels comes from the right. There may be instances where it is incels on the left, but by the data it seems they consider it statistically negligible in comparison. take 100 people ask them to pick odd or even. if 95 of them pick even and 5 pick odd. which is more accurate? 1) both odd and even are picked 2) the vast majority pick even. Both are technically correct. but I would argue 1 is more misleading. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. Absolutely there are very few groups that are 100% violent extremists. The studies show the violence among Incels comes from the right. There may be instances where it is incels on the left, but by the data it seems they consider it statistically negligible in comparison. take 100 people ask them to pick odd or even. if 95 of them pick even and 5 pick odd. which is more accurate? 1) both odd and even are picked 2) the vast majority pick even. Both are technically correct. but I would argue 1 is more misleading." Misleading you say, is that based on what study you read and if it fits your bias? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. Absolutely there are very few groups that are 100% violent extremists. The studies show the violence among Incels comes from the right. There may be instances where it is incels on the left, but by the data it seems they consider it statistically negligible in comparison. take 100 people ask them to pick odd or even. if 95 of them pick even and 5 pick odd. which is more accurate? 1) both odd and even are picked 2) the vast majority pick even. Both are technically correct. but I would argue 1 is more misleading." Can you name these multiple studies then? I think someone doing a PhD at a big university is going to have done a fair amount of research to back up their claims. I didn't say they were overwhelmingly left-wing, just that the most popular answer given was left-wing, which is surprising given the media always presents the incel movement as a far-right movement. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. Absolutely there are very few groups that are 100% violent extremists. The studies show the violence among Incels comes from the right. There may be instances where it is incels on the left, but by the data it seems they consider it statistically negligible in comparison. take 100 people ask them to pick odd or even. if 95 of them pick even and 5 pick odd. which is more accurate? 1) both odd and even are picked 2) the vast majority pick even. Both are technically correct. but I would argue 1 is more misleading. Misleading you say, is that based on what study you read and if it fits your bias? " But she's done 10 minutes of internet research and can obviously dismiss the findings of a PhD student and researcher who spent months doing in depth studies, because the results don't fit her argument | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. Absolutely there are very few groups that are 100% violent extremists. The studies show the violence among Incels comes from the right. There may be instances where it is incels on the left, but by the data it seems they consider it statistically negligible in comparison. take 100 people ask them to pick odd or even. if 95 of them pick even and 5 pick odd. which is more accurate? 1) both odd and even are picked 2) the vast majority pick even. Both are technically correct. but I would argue 1 is more misleading. Misleading you say, is that based on what study you read and if it fits your bias? But she's done 10 minutes of internet research and can obviously dismiss the findings of a PhD student and researcher who spent months doing in depth studies, because the results don't fit her argument" You know I didn't say the original study was wrong right? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. Absolutely there are very few groups that are 100% violent extremists. The studies show the violence among Incels comes from the right. There may be instances where it is incels on the left, but by the data it seems they consider it statistically negligible in comparison. take 100 people ask them to pick odd or even. if 95 of them pick even and 5 pick odd. which is more accurate? 1) both odd and even are picked 2) the vast majority pick even. Both are technically correct. but I would argue 1 is more misleading. Misleading you say, is that based on what study you read and if it fits your bias? But she's done 10 minutes of internet research and can obviously dismiss the findings of a PhD student and researcher who spent months doing in depth studies, because the results don't fit her argument You know I didn't say the original study was wrong right?" No, but you said that there were MANY studies that say incels are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. So give the name of at least 2 | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. Absolutely there are very few groups that are 100% violent extremists. The studies show the violence among Incels comes from the right. There may be instances where it is incels on the left, but by the data it seems they consider it statistically negligible in comparison. take 100 people ask them to pick odd or even. if 95 of them pick even and 5 pick odd. which is more accurate? 1) both odd and even are picked 2) the vast majority pick even. Both are technically correct. but I would argue 1 is more misleading. Misleading you say, is that based on what study you read and if it fits your bias? But she's done 10 minutes of internet research and can obviously dismiss the findings of a PhD student and researcher who spent months doing in depth studies, because the results don't fit her argument You know I didn't say the original study was wrong right? No, but you said that there were MANY studies that say incels are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. So give the name of at least 2" No that isnt what I said | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. Absolutely there are very few groups that are 100% violent extremists. The studies show the violence among Incels comes from the right. There may be instances where it is incels on the left, but by the data it seems they consider it statistically negligible in comparison. take 100 people ask them to pick odd or even. if 95 of them pick even and 5 pick odd. which is more accurate? 1) both odd and even are picked 2) the vast majority pick even. Both are technically correct. but I would argue 1 is more misleading. Misleading you say, is that based on what study you read and if it fits your bias? But she's done 10 minutes of internet research and can obviously dismiss the findings of a PhD student and researcher who spent months doing in depth studies, because the results don't fit her argument You know I didn't say the original study was wrong right? No, but you said that there were MANY studies that say incels are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. So give the name of at least 2 No that isnt what I said" "I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists" That's a direct quote from you. But that's not what you said? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. Absolutely there are very few groups that are 100% violent extremists. The studies show the violence among Incels comes from the right. There may be instances where it is incels on the left, but by the data it seems they consider it statistically negligible in comparison. take 100 people ask them to pick odd or even. if 95 of them pick even and 5 pick odd. which is more accurate? 1) both odd and even are picked 2) the vast majority pick even. Both are technically correct. but I would argue 1 is more misleading. Misleading you say, is that based on what study you read and if it fits your bias? But she's done 10 minutes of internet research and can obviously dismiss the findings of a PhD student and researcher who spent months doing in depth studies, because the results don't fit her argument You know I didn't say the original study was wrong right? No, but you said that there were MANY studies that say incels are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. So give the name of at least 2 No that isnt what I said "I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists" That's a direct quote from you. But that's not what you said?" Did you read the next paragraph? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. Absolutely there are very few groups that are 100% violent extremists. The studies show the violence among Incels comes from the right. There may be instances where it is incels on the left, but by the data it seems they consider it statistically negligible in comparison. take 100 people ask them to pick odd or even. if 95 of them pick even and 5 pick odd. which is more accurate? 1) both odd and even are picked 2) the vast majority pick even. Both are technically correct. but I would argue 1 is more misleading. Misleading you say, is that based on what study you read and if it fits your bias? But she's done 10 minutes of internet research and can obviously dismiss the findings of a PhD student and researcher who spent months doing in depth studies, because the results don't fit her argument You know I didn't say the original study was wrong right? No, but you said that there were MANY studies that say incels are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. So give the name of at least 2 No that isnt what I said "I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists" That's a direct quote from you. But that's not what you said? Did you read the next paragraph?" Yes I did "If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right" So name some of these studies that say violent extremists incels are right-wing | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. Absolutely there are very few groups that are 100% violent extremists. The studies show the violence among Incels comes from the right. There may be instances where it is incels on the left, but by the data it seems they consider it statistically negligible in comparison. take 100 people ask them to pick odd or even. if 95 of them pick even and 5 pick odd. which is more accurate? 1) both odd and even are picked 2) the vast majority pick even. Both are technically correct. but I would argue 1 is more misleading. Misleading you say, is that based on what study you read and if it fits your bias? But she's done 10 minutes of internet research and can obviously dismiss the findings of a PhD student and researcher who spent months doing in depth studies, because the results don't fit her argument You know I didn't say the original study was wrong right? No, but you said that there were MANY studies that say incels are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. So give the name of at least 2 No that isnt what I said "I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists" That's a direct quote from you. But that's not what you said? Did you read the next paragraph? Yes I did "If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right" So name some of these studies that say violent extremists incels are right-wing" I don't need to. I agree The OP's study says what it did, you questioned me "dismissing" that, I have shown that not to be the case. Or are you changing your criticism/argument now? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. Obviously the lone study is telling the truth though. If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right. Cue people calling me wrong in 3, 2, 1... So the suggestion would be not all Incels are violent extremists. Absolutely there are very few groups that are 100% violent extremists. The studies show the violence among Incels comes from the right. There may be instances where it is incels on the left, but by the data it seems they consider it statistically negligible in comparison. take 100 people ask them to pick odd or even. if 95 of them pick even and 5 pick odd. which is more accurate? 1) both odd and even are picked 2) the vast majority pick even. Both are technically correct. but I would argue 1 is more misleading. Misleading you say, is that based on what study you read and if it fits your bias? But she's done 10 minutes of internet research and can obviously dismiss the findings of a PhD student and researcher who spent months doing in depth studies, because the results don't fit her argument You know I didn't say the original study was wrong right? No, but you said that there were MANY studies that say incels are overwhelmingly right wing extremists. So give the name of at least 2 No that isnt what I said "I find one study (prolly the one they mentioned) that says more left wing (and only just). I find MANY that say they are overwhelmingly right wing extremists" That's a direct quote from you. But that's not what you said? Did you read the next paragraph? Yes I did "If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that people across the spectrum politically identify as incels, but the violent extremists among them are on the right" So name some of these studies that say violent extremists incels are right-wing I don't need to. I agree The OP's study says what it did, you questioned me "dismissing" that, I have shown that not to be the case. Or are you changing your criticism/argument now?" I'm the OP. And why don't you need to? You say you didn't dismiss the study you effectively did by claiming it was a one off and that you found MANY studies that prove the opposite. So name some of these studies you found. And you're one to talk about changing arguments. It's literally your tactic on every thread. You present an argument it's proven wrong, you say that's not the argument you were making | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I'm the OP. And why don't you need to? You say you didn't dismiss the study you effectively did by claiming it was a one off and that you found MANY studies that prove the opposite. So name some of these studies you found. And you're one to talk about changing arguments. It's literally your tactic on every thread. You present an argument it's proven wrong, you say that's not the argument you were making " Your original post stated the details of a study, which I accepted at face value (specifically stating that). You then moved on to comment about how Incels are normally portrayed in the media. I did a couple of searches and gave a very basic generalisation accepting those results at face value, like the original study. In order to offer a potential explanation as to why they are viewed that way. My next post was me stating that not all of any group are extremists, but they exist on both sides. But a lot of the time they exist more on one side than the other. And people tend to use one of two ways of describing it, one way being more accurate than the other. What exactly is it you have a problem with? One of my actual points, or a badly worded sentence I have already explained? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I'm the OP. And why don't you need to? You say you didn't dismiss the study you effectively did by claiming it was a one off and that you found MANY studies that prove the opposite. So name some of these studies you found. And you're one to talk about changing arguments. It's literally your tactic on every thread. You present an argument it's proven wrong, you say that's not the argument you were making Your original post stated the details of a study, which I accepted at face value (specifically stating that). You then moved on to comment about how Incels are normally portrayed in the media. I did a couple of searches and gave a very basic generalisation accepting those results at face value, like the original study. In order to offer a potential explanation as to why they are viewed that way. My next post was me stating that not all of any group are extremists, but they exist on both sides. But a lot of the time they exist more on one side than the other. And people tend to use one of two ways of describing it, one way being more accurate than the other. What exactly is it you have a problem with? One of my actual points, or a badly worded sentence I have already explained?" This is far from the picture you were painting before you got pulled up, you came across as studying the subject, an expert and playing the game of agreeing with the post but changing that view to bring in your own unchecked bias's to make a point. You did it yesterday, you have done it again today, the problem is you deny it and we can all read.. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I'm the OP. And why don't you need to? You say you didn't dismiss the study you effectively did by claiming it was a one off and that you found MANY studies that prove the opposite. So name some of these studies you found. And you're one to talk about changing arguments. It's literally your tactic on every thread. You present an argument it's proven wrong, you say that's not the argument you were making Your original post stated the details of a study, which I accepted at face value (specifically stating that). You then moved on to comment about how Incels are normally portrayed in the media. I did a couple of searches and gave a very basic generalisation accepting those results at face value, like the original study. In order to offer a potential explanation as to why they are viewed that way. My next post was me stating that not all of any group are extremists, but they exist on both sides. But a lot of the time they exist more on one side than the other. And people tend to use one of two ways of describing it, one way being more accurate than the other. What exactly is it you have a problem with? One of my actual points, or a badly worded sentence I have already explained? This is far from the picture you were painting before you got pulled up, you came across as studying the subject, an expert and playing the game of agreeing with the post but changing that view to bring in your own unchecked bias's to make a point. You did it yesterday, you have done it again today, the problem is you deny it and we can all read.." LOL So your argument is that because you read what I said and added your own inflection, then my argument is wrong? (sounds like bringing your own unchecked bias to me) "If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that " doesn't sound like someone presenting themselves as an expert to me... but we may have different standards, that happens in life. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I'm the OP. And why don't you need to? You say you didn't dismiss the study you effectively did by claiming it was a one off and that you found MANY studies that prove the opposite. So name some of these studies you found. And you're one to talk about changing arguments. It's literally your tactic on every thread. You present an argument it's proven wrong, you say that's not the argument you were making Your original post stated the details of a study, which I accepted at face value (specifically stating that). You then moved on to comment about how Incels are normally portrayed in the media. I did a couple of searches and gave a very basic generalisation accepting those results at face value, like the original study. In order to offer a potential explanation as to why they are viewed that way. My next post was me stating that not all of any group are extremists, but they exist on both sides. But a lot of the time they exist more on one side than the other. And people tend to use one of two ways of describing it, one way being more accurate than the other. What exactly is it you have a problem with? One of my actual points, or a badly worded sentence I have already explained? This is far from the picture you were painting before you got pulled up, you came across as studying the subject, an expert and playing the game of agreeing with the post but changing that view to bring in your own unchecked bias's to make a point. You did it yesterday, you have done it again today, the problem is you deny it and we can all read.. LOL So your argument is that because you read what I said and added your own inflection, then my argument is wrong? (sounds like bringing your own unchecked bias to me) "If you take all the studies at face value (and I am not saying you should) it indicates that " doesn't sound like someone presenting themselves as an expert to me... but we may have different standards, that happens in life." You said you read MANY studies | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"You said you read MANY studies " No i didn't | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"You said you read MANY studies No i didn't " The quote 'I find MANY studies'. So are you just finding them and not reading them? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"You said you read MANY studies No i didn't The quote 'I find MANY studies'. So are you just finding them and not reading them?" I read the synopsis and took them as stated at face value, I also said that I was not saying everyone should do that. But I still don't see what your problem is... what is it you object to? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"You said you read MANY studies No i didn't The quote 'I find MANY studies'. So are you just finding them and not reading them? I read the synopsis and took them as stated at face value, I also said that I was not saying everyone should do that. But I still don't see what your problem is... what is it you object to?" I object to you making an argument, being asked to provide evidence for your argument, then claiming you never made that argument. As I said previously that seems to be your tactic in every thread you engage in. It's basically online gaslighting | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"You said you read MANY studies No i didn't The quote 'I find MANY studies'. So are you just finding them and not reading them?" | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"You said you read MANY studies No i didn't The quote 'I find MANY studies'. So are you just finding them and not reading them? I read the synopsis and took them as stated at face value, I also said that I was not saying everyone should do that. But I still don't see what your problem is... what is it you object to? I object to you making an argument, being asked to provide evidence for your argument, then claiming you never made that argument. As I said previously that seems to be your tactic in every thread you engage in. It's basically online gaslighting " That is a what I have been trying to workout, you are right, it is gaslighting. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"You said you read MANY studies No i didn't The quote 'I find MANY studies'. So are you just finding them and not reading them? I read the synopsis and took them as stated at face value, I also said that I was not saying everyone should do that. But I still don't see what your problem is... what is it you object to? I object to you making an argument, being asked to provide evidence for your argument, then claiming you never made that argument. As I said previously that seems to be your tactic in every thread you engage in. It's basically online gaslighting " Yeah accusation of gaslighting, this conversation is over. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"You said you read MANY studies No i didn't The quote 'I find MANY studies'. So are you just finding them and not reading them? I read the synopsis and took them as stated at face value, I also said that I was not saying everyone should do that. But I still don't see what your problem is... what is it you object to? I object to you making an argument, being asked to provide evidence for your argument, then claiming you never made that argument. As I said previously that seems to be your tactic in every thread you engage in. It's basically online gaslighting Yeah accusation of gaslighting, this conversation is over." And now trying to be the victim in an argument. Textbook narcissistic behaviour | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"You said you read MANY studies No i didn't The quote 'I find MANY studies'. So are you just finding them and not reading them? I read the synopsis and took them as stated at face value, I also said that I was not saying everyone should do that. But I still don't see what your problem is... what is it you object to? I object to you making an argument, being asked to provide evidence for your argument, then claiming you never made that argument. As I said previously that seems to be your tactic in every thread you engage in. It's basically online gaslighting Yeah accusation of gaslighting, this conversation is over." That is how you are coming across, in lots of threads. If you are not trying to project that, maybe you can use this feedback positively? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"So I was listening to the Triggernometary podcast and they had a guy on called William Costello, who is a researcher and PhD student at the University of Austin. He did a research paper on Wellbeing among incels. One of the questions was where they would define themselves politically using the left/right spectrum. 39% said they were right of centre, 17% said centrist, and 44% said left of centre. This really shocked me as from how they're portrayed in the media you'd think they were all far-right, neo-nazis. Also 60% were white, which is obviously still majority white, but again you wouldn't expect such a high percentage of non-white incels given as I said in the previous sentence, they're generally portrayed as far-right white supermascists. Why do you think the majority of them identify as left-wing? Bad research? Coincidence? Those questioned lying about their allegiances? Or is there something in a left-wing attitude to life that makes these types of self-pitying groups more appealing? (Just to clarify I would identify myself as left of centre and don't necessarily believe this theory, just playing devil's advocate)" I can't help but think a bit more wanking might help take the edge off their ire. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
