I think the point is that in the absence of the patriarchy and a natural outlet for young men through lawful marriage, it's inevitable that we end up with an army of disgruntled, angry and frustrated men who feel lost. Few of our forefathers had to endure celibacy until their thirties or forties and fight all the modern temptations we have on top of that, like pornography or women publicly dressing worse than street hookers did in the 19th century. There's a reason patriarchal societies typically punished adultery and fornication (though especially so in the case of women) and enforced a dress code on women while still tolerating prostitution on some level. One might say that's "hypocritical" but it's because they were realistic about human nature. We should obviously be teaching and promoting the virtue of sexual abstinence to single men and the mess we're in may even be an opportunity for many of us to pursue that goal and stop pedestalizing women in the process. But it doesn't change the fact that what we have today is contrary to the natural order and unsustainable. And in the end it's bad for both sexes and therefore society as a whole. Even Saint Paul was realistic enough to tell those "burning with desire" to get married. He could say that because he lived in a patriarchal society - but we no longer do. I predict that if this goes on, violence will ensue sooner or later when the hoards of "incels" or divorce-raped men wake up to reality and seek their revenge. Their existence is a symptom of a much deeper problem.
Incels And Fornicators Are Almost The Same
- Thread starter Roosh
- Start date
If you're using your "sex drive" to find a wife that you will certainly select a woman based on lust (i.e. the wrong woman).
Last edited:
That's not how I interpret @Spro23's message though, Roosh. I think what he's driving at is that we're naturally inclined to seek a wife and procreate and marriage used to be one of the ways in which society dealt with the problem of lust. You're right, of course, that we have to exercise self-control and struggle against our passions. Still, even St. Paul said the following:
The flesh is weak. This is why at a societal level we need the patriarchy to keep the passions in check and channel men's weaknesses toward matrimony, with God's grace sanctifying the marital bond. The current configuration encourages lust to reign in our hearts.
The problem with incels though is that they cannot take responsibility for their being an incel, or for the state of the society that puts them in such a position. They tend to just blame women for not liking 'nice men'. And it's not like they see the real problem. They just see the problem that everyone else is getting to have sex and they aren't. They'd be fornicators if they were able, they just lack the social skills to achieve it, and the common sense to understand how to tackle the problem.
The responsibility to change things lies with men. And this involves men learning self-control. Men need to stop pursuing feminist, fornicators, and pursue godly women who want to commit to a man and raise a family with traditional values. If men did this society would change and the patriarchy would re-assert itself. This is what a patriarchy is; men in control. Not just of society but of themselves. As things stand men are not in control of themselves, and thus they are not in control of society. It doesn't matter how much you burn with desire, to get out of this mess you've got to get a handle on it, even if that means not having sex for a very long time.
Nobody here is arguing against single men repenting of their sins, accepting and dealing with reality, putting their trust in God, and abstaining from premarital sex. I'm all for that. What some of us are arguing is that it's an oversimplification of reality to suggest that this mess of a society is the fault of ordinary men lacking self-control and that all it takes to turn it around is for them to regain "self-control". I believe this serves no purpose other than to add even more culpability to men who are berated on a daily basis.
There is a deeper, societal dimension to the problem that goes beyond mere individual responsibility.
The destruction of the patriarchy in the name of equality is a concerted and ongoing ideological effort to undermine society and destroy masculinity by inverting the natural order. It's Eve ruling Adam with God entirely out of the picture. It's not an "organic" change at all. It's reflected not only in the legal system but also in education, the corporate world, the entertainment industry, mainstream politics, in many churches, and in the economic realities many young men are facing which prevent them from fulfilling their natural role as providers.
Modern-day Western society's configuration is such that it is conducive to sin and vice and destructive of the family unit, whereas prior to Feminism society's configuration was more in line with natural law and therefore more conducive to virtue and family formation. "Incels" did not create this society; they merely inherited it. They are the product of a lost civilization soaked in nihilism, and it's too easy to claim they are entirely responsible for the state that they're in. I put "incel" between brackets because in reality it really just means "single men".
Obviously we all agree that this does not give single men license to fornicate and blame women for all their problems, but I'd say it does imply diminished culpability in the sense that society has taken away men's very raison d'être. In other words, some problems are beyond our immediate control as individuals. There is only so much you can do as an individual - even if you "hit the gym" and lead a holy life, which you should (the latter in any case), the odds in society are still against you by their very design, and you may still end up remaining single.
Some here argue it's "black pill" merely to point this out. I say it's simply plain reality. You don't have to agree but I hope this clarifies.
There might be more to it than just men lacking self control, however in terms of solving problems all we can hope to do is assume our individual responsibility. I honestly think if every man seriously did this there would be a huge amount of change for the better.
I think it is important to emphasise that men need to change. This is not akin to the kind of berating that men get from feminists is more like an encouragement to be what they are. It's a positive thing for a man to realise his responsibility to embrace his purpose and to develop discipline. I don't think it is on any level the same as the berating men get from feminists. But ultimately moaning about the state of women or what feminism has done is not a solution, nor is it proactive. The most pro active thing a man can do is to take responsibility for themselves and stop exacerbating the problem.
Like I say. If enough men actually did this, you'd soon start seeing a change in the women. We can't make other men change, but that doesn't mean we cannot take responsibility for ourselves. We aren't entitled to a wife, or anything else in this world. We can either whine about how feminism has ruined everything and how if only some one else would come and restore the patriachy for us, or we can do something however small to reduce our involvement with the evils of this world
You’re not wrong, but with a little foresight we can see as society degenerates rapidly that women like this will simply not exist or be a rare find.
Ironically good men will be forced to “incel” waiting for a unicorn.
I agree with all of this. It’s a win-win situation for men:
- If only a relatively few men get fit, develop integrity, develop self-confidence, live a Godly life, and marry abroad if a woman in the west who is wife material can not be found, then those men will do OK, even though we live in a sinful generation.
- If a lot of men were to do all of the above, women will change and they will become more desirable in the west.
The point is this: There is a solution to incel life.[1] As long as a man blames society for his inceldom, and does nothing to keep his own house in order, he will remain an incel. As soon as he takes the bull by the horns, and does something to change his incel life, he can start the long path to finding a Godly wife and starting a Godly family. It took me years and becoming fluent in another language, as well as very intense exercise, and dealing with online dating, but I got that Godly wife. I stopped being an incel. Within the last 15 years. It can be done
Now, there probably are men out there who will not be able to find a Godly wife, no matter what they do. I think it’s a small minority of the incels out there. If you asked me 20 or 25 years ago, I would had told you that my fate was to die an incel. In the extreme case of being completely unable to find a wife, guess what, you’ve been blessed by God. Let’s go to I Cor 7:7-8 (italics means the word isn’t there in the original Greek, but added to make the passage more readable):
So, if an incel does everything (physical fitness, not being needy, not making a relationship a priority, being social, online dating at Christianmingle, go to another country if possible, etc.) and still can not find a Godly wife, he is blessed, I repeat blessed with the gift of celibacy. Sometimes, with all the stresses of family life and career life, I have wished I was a celibate monk in a monastery instead of the provider and breadwinner for a family.
I also am sure there are posters and lurkers here who think they have the blessing of the celibate life who, in fact, once they engage in action (Gym, remove neediness, avoiding any and all simping, self confidence, etc.) will find out God’s plan is for them to start a family. That was God’s plan for me, even though I couldn’t see it at the time.
[1] When I say incel, I mean in this post a man who wishes to have a Godly wife. An incel in the sense of a man who wishes to fornicate with a woman regardless of whether she is wife material and regardless of whether or not the sacrament of matrimony has been performed is a sinner, and will continue to suffer in his sin, whether or not he can find someone to fornicate with, as long as he does not repent.
Last edited:
There's no doubt in my mind that you have the heart in the right place when you try to encourage men to take the necessary steps to improve their lives and take their responsibility. I think all of us see the value and necessity of that. However, if they "improve" themselves but still find themselves having to move abroad in the hopes of finding a suitable wife, what does that tell you?
In many cases this ends up being a blame game minimizing or denying the societal problems that impact young men or demotivating those who have already undertaken the necessary steps to improve themselves yet still find themselves hitting a brick wall. Marriage may not be a matter of entitlement, but it's what the vast majority of us are called to. In the absence of that prospect, human nature being what it is, it's hardly surprising that men give themselves up to their vices - even more so in a society which teaches that there is no good or evil anyway.
Celibacy used to be the exception for a reason. Here's the thing I think many are overlooking: "marriage" is not merely a spiritual institution, it also has a natural, social and economic function in which both sexes have their roles to play. When I hear people say we have to be "worthy" of a good wife, I don't disagree, but many "worthy" men still do not find a "worthy" wife and will not have offspring that would allow for positive generational change and the formation of our own communities. So technically they remain "involuntary" celibates.
Society used to raise men and women in such a way as to make them mature and fit for marriage at an early age. In doing so they kept the vices of lust and fornication in check and allowed for the bloodline, the culture, the nation, traditions, customs, and faith to be perpetuated. Modern society openly sabotages this. The social fabric made it so that even the less gifted among men could find a spouse, and temporal legislation reflected natural law and favored stability by encouraging monogamy and penalizing adultery, fornication, sodomy, divorce, and infanticide.
Flash forward to the 21st century and we live in an age where cohabitation is the norm; divorce rates keep going up; more children are born out of wedlock than within; birth rates keep dropping to below replacement levels; babies are aborted on a daily basis with taxpayer money; your children are basically State property; young women brag online about getting sterilized or opt to have their ovaries frozen in order to further their careers and claim their "right to have a child" once they've hit 40; young men are relegated to being wage slaves and have trouble finding or keeping jobs; more often than not, they find themselves lorded over by a female-dominated HR department; etc. etc.
All of this sanctioned by the State and Big Business.
This is ultimately what we're up against thanks to the cultural revolution that's been imposed on us and the complacency of previous generations who've burdened young men with the consequences of their utterly irresponsible and perversely selfish choices. It's no wonder that many fall into lust, laziness, vices and despondency when society has deprived them of a higher purpose and actively works against their interests. Men have a need to serve and work for something greater than themselves, e.g. a family, their nation and God. Take that away and chaos will ensue.
Young men should courageously accept reality and do what they can to improve their individual lives. But they do not deserve to be blamed for the feminism that was inflected on them.
Last edited:
It's obvious that the women have been corrupted, but that isn't going to resolve by itself. Like I said if every desirable man started to insist on pursuing godly, chaste women you'd strangely start to notice a whole lot more of those kind of women cropping up.
No one is blaming them, but it still remains that every individual man has their own responsibility for how they contribute to an existing problem. If your dog defecated on your carpet, you're not just going to leave it and tell visitors "well it's not my fault, stop blaming me it was the dog" you'd just clean it up. Telling someone to take responsibility is not the same as blaming them. It's just saying "well if you wanna fix it, you know what to do."
I don't know quite what the disagreement is. I don't say it's men's fault that they are in this predicament, but only that it's on men to get out of it. Again nobody is entitled to anything. We are here to serve God that is all. If He seems it necessary that we be single for the rest of our lives in order to be saved then so be it. But also through Him all things are possible.
My point is just saying "If I was born 200 years ago I'd have a wife, then I'd be happy..." Doesn't achieve anything. You were born in this generation, you can't find a wife what are you going to do about it?
Telling men not to be passive victims is empowering to them, it's not blaming them for the situation it's merely offering them a way out of it.
Lawrence, you and many others keep saying we can fix this mess simply by becoming more virtuous individuals. I'm looking at it from a societal perspective and am saying that I do not believe we can do much about it on the individual level because the problem is too institutionalized.
That doesn't mean I'm saying we shouldn't bother becoming better persons, quite the contrary! I am also not justifying passivity. All of this has been addressed several times already by myself and others.
We are here to serve God and we serve Him by serving others, too, if possible by transmitting the gift of life to children whom we teach the faith. We also have a role to play in society even if it's pagan. I very much doubt God wants to see all His children remain childless when it's the first command He gave to man: "be fruitful", etc. If anything it's our adversary who's more than happy to see us unable to produce offspring and die out. I say that as someone who has a high regard for celibacy and does not idolize the married life. But it is not and never has been the norm. Hence why I keep saying marriage is not only a spiritual bond.
What we have today is a historical anomaly that was brought upon us by evil intent. This mess goes well beyond just one's lack of ability to find a wife, and I'm afraid that's why you keep missing the overall point some among us have been making here.
But to answer the question: I'm going for celibacy and strive for chastity. But here is the problem: long-term this strategy is undesirable and untenable for the vast majority of young men out there, whether Christian or not. If this became the general trend among Christian men then we'd effectively be signing our own death warrants. Given the low birthrates most of our countries are facing, in large part due to feminism, we're already going extinct. At this point I believe only a miracle could really put an end to societal insanity and restore the balance between male and female.
I'm not saying we can fix this I'm saying we have to try.
It may be so that things are too far gone, but we have to try. Maybe it will take a miracle, but God may well grant a miracle when sufficient repentance is shown.
I don't really see where we are disagreeing. I just think we have to do what we can as individual men to not participate in the evils of society. We might not receive the reward in this life, but that's okay. Maybe we will plant seeds for later generations, or maybe we are spiraling towards the end. I don't know. But I just think it's a waste of time to blame society, we've just got to pick up our individual cross and bear it, because we are contributing to the denigration of things daily with our sins.
Most people are unhappy with the way things are and that includes women. More and more people are realising that it's untenable to carry on the way we are and are searching for answers and truth. There are reasons to be hopeful.
I don't really see that we have any substantive disagreement to be honest.
Lawrence, I didn't mean to single you out here but your reaction to @Spro23's post offered an opportunity for me to clarify why many of us disagree with the trend of blaming society's problems on men. Perhaps that's not exactly your position and I do see you have a more moderate approach, but your posts are still reflective of that trend.
While you don't see the substance of the disagreement, you're still assuming that our position is basically to say that we don't even have to try fixing things; that our point is to just to "blame society" and absolve men from all personal responsibility; that "women" are unhappy with the situation, too (please don't fool yourself now); that our personal holiness will (or can) lead to systemic change; that we have lost all "hope" in pointing out that young men don't bear personal guilt for what society has become.
I maintain that this is an oversimplification of reality. You focus on the individual, I look at the broader context and the ideological forces at play. What you effectively end up doing is still blaming young men, whether intentionally or not, by putting them on a collective guilt trip and brushing off perfectly legitimate concerns as a "cross" they have to bear. More often than not this is accompanied by white-knighting those "poor" women who in times past would have been put to shame for their behavior (often by their female peers, by the way!).
Note that none of us are singularly blaming "women" in general, either. If any of us ever were stereotypical "incels", we've certainly moved past that and become mature enough to know that ultimately women's nature is what it is and we needn't pedestalize them nor hate them for it. But let's not fall into naiveté, either. The "tradthot" phenomenon is still very real and some of us have found out the hard way.
The evil inflicted on young men is hardly something God can look upon favorably, regardless of their personal sins. Individuals don't live in a bubble, after all, they're formed and shaped by their education, society, history, culture, the legal system, and ruled by corporate and political forces which are openly hostile to men. Many young men have virtually no perspectives today and for the most part that is not of their own doing. I've seen how even married young men struggle very much as they face opposition on all fronts, sometimes even from their "trad" wives. They're never good enough and can do nothing right.
We only have direct control over our personal sins and that, of course, is where I agree we have to assume our responsibilities. Yet to characterize confused young men as a bunch of "incel" losers is unfair and simplistic. That's precisely what feminized society calls otherwise normal men just because they lack a girlfriend or wife. The "blame men" trend inadvertently plays into that. At times this turns into a fake piety spiral of feel-good niceties and platitudes that lack realism.
The modern English language regrettably uses the same pronoun for both the 2nd person singular and plural which often leads to misunderstandings. So keep in mind that "you" doesn't necessarily equal "@Lawrence87" here. It's meant as a general response above all.
I'll end this here because I've been repeating myself and I'm afraid we're just talking past each other at this point. If your position helps you to remain hopeful, good for you. Personally, I can do without. There may come a time when you come to the same realization.
Last edited:
Thank you for your honesty in this article. This is true for many men and women today. "eighteen years of my life had passed me by, and the only “children” I accumulated were stuffed animals in the backseat of my car." Fornication is the opposite of procreation. No good can come from it.
I have often seen people online say "just because you're a virgin, doesn't mean you are an incel". The question is, how does this work? An incel is someone who wants sex, but can't get it. Unless a man is religious and waiting for marriage, he is an incel if he is a virgin.
This seems like society is playing a collective mental gymnastics game in order to deter men from becoming pissed off at the system. They are effectively saying "the blackpill threatens the status quo, therefore not only are incels not entitled to sex, they are not entitled to defining what an incel is, we will hijack it because we can, and we will act ignorant when doing so we can abuse the power of plausible deniability."
And I said before, if one is religious, this doesn't apply. This refers to men who are non religious incels trying to disassociate from the label. This is basically trying to have it both ways.
This seems like society is playing a collective mental gymnastics game in order to deter men from becoming pissed off at the system. They are effectively saying "the blackpill threatens the status quo, therefore not only are incels not entitled to sex, they are not entitled to defining what an incel is, we will hijack it because we can, and we will act ignorant when doing so we can abuse the power of plausible deniability."
And I said before, if one is religious, this doesn't apply. This refers to men who are non religious incels trying to disassociate from the label. This is basically trying to have it both ways.
Last edited:
Bump up. I have been looking at Ray Comfort, the evangelists videos, where he's winning other people to the Lord by pointing out their faults based on the 10 commandments, branding everyone a liar, thief and adullterer at heart, and urging everyone to repent and receive Jesus.
For example, He asks everyone if they have ever looked lustfully at someone. 100% of the people he speaks to says yes. He says they have committed adultery in their heart and are guilty under the law and lead them to conclude they will go to hell. This sort of stopped the enjoyment of looking at escort pics earlier last week because it caused me to question if I'm really saved and still like looking at these things.
This article says incels are better off than fornicators. But if both end up in hell, is that to say unrepentant incels will occupy a different place in hell? I don't understand the difference if lust is lust. For example, my moral weakness is looking at escort pics and fapping at them. I don't want to go to hell over that so obviously I want that out of my life and I'm incel. How does this contrast to a married man with a family that does this and their children starve because he used their food money for fleeting pleasure? Obviously two different scenarios and two different types of sin. However, may God have mercy on my soul and just wipe this desire out of my heart somehow. I cant shake this off since 1997 and I'm worried about being in this state.
For example, He asks everyone if they have ever looked lustfully at someone. 100% of the people he speaks to says yes. He says they have committed adultery in their heart and are guilty under the law and lead them to conclude they will go to hell. This sort of stopped the enjoyment of looking at escort pics earlier last week because it caused me to question if I'm really saved and still like looking at these things.
This article says incels are better off than fornicators. But if both end up in hell, is that to say unrepentant incels will occupy a different place in hell? I don't understand the difference if lust is lust. For example, my moral weakness is looking at escort pics and fapping at them. I don't want to go to hell over that so obviously I want that out of my life and I'm incel. How does this contrast to a married man with a family that does this and their children starve because he used their food money for fleeting pleasure? Obviously two different scenarios and two different types of sin. However, may God have mercy on my soul and just wipe this desire out of my heart somehow. I cant shake this off since 1997 and I'm worried about being in this state.
I don't think it is useful to worry about such questions as where fornicators and incels go in hell. All of us have different weaknesses and shortcomings.
Personally, I find confession and Holy Communion to have been a valuable asset in fighting spiritual battles. Your profile states that you are a Protestant, so I guess that these things are either unwanted or unavailable to you. The next best thing is to buddy up with someone you trust and tell them when you've had a fall. You don't have to go into gruesome detail, but just tell them your intention to stop, and then make a pact that you have to tell them when you've slipped up. You want someone who will be supportive, rather than someone disinterested. And someone who is liable to make you feel a sense of letting them down if you do fall. Being accountable to someone else will help you a lot, not as much as Confession and Holy Communion but it will give you more imperative to give up your lustful habits.
Be careful of simpleton thinking and putting God into a box of legalistic judgment. This also led to atonement theory which is not correct, and is (like Comfort here) very dangerous. God is the source of truth, but his mercy is also an attribute we cannot easily understand, especially when we "commit" crimes/sins. Many saints (David perhaps the greatest example) broke the commandments, even the highest level offenses that are included, with the end result of repenting and changing their ways, which is why they were "faithful" ultimately. How could it be any other way, since all men sin and fall short of the glory of God? Hell is a state of being that denies the faithfulness of repentance and, accordingly, wants to reject God, for whatever reason. At best, Mr. Comfort can speculate what behaviors are dangerous, but he certainly cannot assume he has any idea of who will go to Hell, apart from generic qualities shared by the devil and his angels, if such a person professes them.
Unfortunately I know no one apart from my own folks, a female friend of the family. Not close to my relatives. Therefore this is not an option. There is limited accountability through personal journals. However generally I dont gel with people or think I have an addictive problem. If I like something then it is a heart problem.
I did come across Ray Comfort vids when I fell or dived into sin so it looks like random youtube vids are that human to human accountability in the modern age. God is displeaaed so He chastises me by sending a Ray Comfort video to put me back in the straight and narrow.
I agree; living in your fantasies is much more enslaving than having a cold dose of reality to wake you up to the emptiness of those fantasies. We weren't designed for pornography and masturbation; men don't need to fornicate but we do need real interactions with women.