Sexual Socialism

    Sexual Socialism: The Demands of the Incel

Yet another open letter which will be subject to future edits.

The concept of the incel has apparently faded from popular dialogue in the months since the attack in Montreal. I think this is because Feminist hypocrisy was on full display with how often they demand empathy yet offered none to people who were clearly suffering socially and psychologically.

Yet what interested me most was not the different sides, but how similar they really were to one another.

Hayek says of Fascism and Communism that they hate each other not because they are so different, but because they are so very much the same. Their pool of possible recruits is virtually identical, so they naturally hate each other because to allow the other to exist would be to necessarily lessen one's own numbers.

This is true of the Feminist and the Incel. It is not that they are so different, but that they are very close to being the same. In fact, some male Feminists would be Incels if only they had encountered that subgroup first. Their anger instead is channeled into woman worship, by which they hope to show their goddess such devotion that she cannot do anything but bestow her graces upon him. Of course, reality is much different, and like any other religion, the promises of Feminism are never realized to the male adherent.

Yet that is not the point. Rather, I wish to focus on how similar Feminists are to Incels. In fact, both modes of thought can be summed up like this: I am good. I want x. Some one else has x. They will not give me x. Therefore, that some one else is bad. For the Feminist, being inherently Marxist nowadays, x is money. For the Incel, x is sex.

It is not because they are inherently opposed to one another's philosophy that Feminists so hate Incels and the reverse. It is because they both have what the other wants, and whoever has what the other wants and does not readily give it up is, according to Socialists of every stripe, inherently wicked.

The Feminist flaunted her greed and her cruelty any time she mentioned the Incel. They were supposed to be a Feminist Society's dirty little secret, yet they did not remain so. However, she could have cured the Incel of his affliction by simply laying on her back. He would have no room to complain anymore. But she did not, for to do so would be to surrender the power she held over the religious male Feminists. She would have been empathetic, indeed, but not pragmatic. And a woman's primary virtue is pragmatism.

But it is not the failure that Feminism leads to that I want to discuss. I am currently more interested in the sexual economy imagined by the Incel and why it will, like Socialism inevitably does, lead to the crash of Society. Better men than I have discussed why Feminism is failure, instead but let us talk about why socializing sex is not the answer.

Let us examine the most extreme and draconian solution to the Incel problem that would satisfy them. What if we were to simply make it illegal for a woman to say “no” to any man's sexual advances?

Nevermind the effect on ordinary women who take no part in either Feminism or Socialism; rather consider the economic and social effects of a world where every man is legally entitled to sex from any woman he approaches.

Some one once said that all of society, all accomplishments, is the result a man trying to impress a woman. If men who do not produce (and let us not kid ourselves, there are no Incels who are also prominent contributors to Society) are getting laid, what incentive is there to produce? None.

An example of this is evidenced by the rise of the undisciplined and antisocial male. Bad behavior is now the staple of not only teenage males wrestling with their hormones, but also among young men. There has been a distinct disregard for class and etiquette among males. This is because women flocked to these undisciplined men in their youth, thereby teaching all men that this was the proper way to behave. On an aside, for those women who whine “where have all the good men gone?” I can only say “you spent your youth bouncing on the wrong dicks”.

However, if this draconian law is to be passed, we will see a dramatic decline in contribution. Men will know their pleasure is guaranteed, and will do nothing to impress women. Of course some men and women will continue to contribute occasionally, but the overall degraded state of society will result in a lack of growth. This does not mean a fall of civilization, but a realization of the Solow model. There will be little societal advancement and growth will essentially cease.

This is because the desires of men will be immediately sated, and there will be no need to contribute. Women, for the most part, will be in such a state of despair that they would have no cause to contribute.

Now any number of programs could be devised which are aimed at ridding Incels of their burden, but none of them do so not at the expense of Society itself. People will seek out their own self-interests, and they also follow the path of least resistance. Thus more men will dedicate themselves to becoming whatever it is that guarantees them sexual satisfaction. So, no social program must exist for the curing of Incels. It is much like the Feminist demands, who want to be praised without contributing, to do cure them at the expense of Society.

If I may propose a solution which originates neither from Feminism nor from the Incels themselves, it would be to legalize prostitution. The Feminist hates this because it provides her with competition. Suddenly she cannot explicitly make such absurd demands as “rich, hot, under thirty, and Progressive” and expect to be satisfied. Rather, she must compete with the Prostitute for the attention of men. This does not mean debasing herself in the way the whore does, but she will be made to offer more to potential mates. Fidelity and loyalty, a brain, and contributing to the needs of the household would suddenly become traits she would have to develop.

Likewise, to get laid, the Incel would have to contribute in order to get paid. He would have to provide some service or produce some good that others would demand in such an amount that he could have income remaining after his expenses to hire the whore.

 The Feminist who refuses to come down from her castle would see her vagina grow dry and the man who refuses to contribute would spend his days pleasuring only himself. Such is the effect of implementing Utilitarianism rather than Socialism.