Just to clarify from the outset, I am not a member of a group or ideology. I consider the Chad/Stacy stuff to be absurd, ridiculous and intellectually devoid nonsense. I don't want any part of their ideology, their lingo or anything else about them. In pointing out the mass deceit about this group from the media and in particular the left, I am defending the mentally ill, the developmentally disabled, the loners and the undesirable men from a campaign of utter bullshit waged against them. I am fighting against the idea that any group of people you dislike you can freely brand terrorists through a campaign of mass deceit. Deceit is evil and the rampant lies in the media need to be wiped out (uncorrected, unbalanced falsehoods in the press start wars and genocide and control people), but creating social stigma further entrenching peoples isolation and misery based on a campaign of deceit is even worse. And a campaign that has not been corrected by any other worthless journalist who allows the falsehoods to propagate. Adults today like to think they're against bullying. The reality is they're freely bullying vulnerable people and by extension of that teaching their children to also bully the undesirable, developmentally disabled or shy MALE children at school. They kick people when they are down, and then pretend to be against bullying like utter hypocrites.
I probably wouldn't have started on this journey if the media and left only targeted those directly engaging in capital I 'incel' public forums (people who name themselves 'incels' and have a collection of beliefs). Branding people terrorists because you dislike their politics with a campaign of MASS DECEIT is bad, but it was their behavior of extending the definition of 'incel' to other men, such as those who do not participate in such communities or hold such beliefs, and branching it out to people with girlfriends/wives even that brought me into this dispute, and now like it or not, I will stand by what is right regarding the matter of truthfulness in their depiction of this group and other outliers. In my life I have only ever voted for left wing politics, but your endless deceit over the last 10+ years has made me into a non-voter for the rest of my life. You're not a side of truth and social justice as you falsely proclaim yourselves to be. Hopefully other men will wake up to what you represent: rampant discrimination and prejudice.
In 2014, there was a mass stabbing and shooting by a guy named Elliot Rodgers. I'm sure you all know, certainly if you're here reading this. The guy stabbed his 3 male roommates to death, then shot and killed 3 further people, including two women. It was revealed this guy regarded himself as an 'incel', that he posted videos expressing his desire for revenge, and allegedly that he participated in online 'incel' forums (I have only seen 'Pick Up Artist Hate' posts personally, but that will be the closest connection you will get to 'incel' forums for the next 6+ YEARS! What about Alec Minassian? I will cover that shortly). Not one of the journalist twits provided evidence that he had talked to others about mass murder, or that there was complicity from the community as a whole, just the lone act of a single perpetrator. No one told him to go on a murder spree, he done it all on his own and broadcast his views on murderous retribution on YouTube, not the 'incel' forums that allegedly are riling up men into murder sprees (he did allegedly write about retribution, about a revolution, which one user mentioned in the form of a workers strike; he didn't, to my awareness, talk about murder on those forums; he didn't talk candidly about massacring people, nor did the people he talk to on the public forums).
Despite the fact that he was the only capital I 'incel' (someone who subscribed to an ideology, not someone who was only unable to find a partner) mass killer at the time and that there was no evidence his actions were anything but his own, the media targeted this community. They used such language as calling him the Patron Saint of 'incels', often parroting the exact same language suggesting each 'new' writer was just repeating what one person had written before without verifying any of it. They claimed he was widely celebrated on such forums. They didn't provide any proof to back up these claims, just anecdotal claims from people whose credibility should be seriously questioned in the first place. If ANY of it was true, they likely drew on trolls or shitposters or anything to skew their sensationalist hysteria. (I am in no doubt that more 'word extremists' are there¹, people who're more inclined to write unpolitically correct or engage in depraved communication. Whether they're a place for terrorists is ANOTHER MATTER ENTIRELY.)
¹ I was a member of the IMDb forums for a number of years. There were a
few trolls who would keep returning despite IMDb's capcha and other
protections against such a thing. IMDb administration, with the
financial backing of a large corporation, couldn't eliminate these
trolls. They would keep returning. One would constantly write something
racist, the other would post real life crime scene pictures including of
Black Dahlia, Elizabeth Short. Elizabeth Short had a 'smile' carved into her face and was probably the inspiration for the Joker from Batman. Her body was also bisected (cut in half at the torso). This was potentially in the view of a teenage
girl who visited the forum! I think his presence was the last time I
saw her. This is the reality of the internet: there will be trolls,
especially on marginalized communities in the first place. So I do
expect a website that has marginalized people and poor moderation to
have more trolls. And it is not really an indictment of a community as a
whole. In case people don't already realize this! Trolls will be
trolls! They will post shock content.
This began years of campaigns by the media to blame every attack on 'incels', and continually they were proven WRONG. One such incident was the Santa Fe High School shooting. They drew on the claim that the shooter was rejected for a date as proof this shooter was yet another 'incel' spree shooter. They didn't have any connection to an ideology or community, they just had the fact that he couldn't find a mate and killed for being rejected by a girl. But the reason why this shooter was rejected was because the girls mother told her 'you don't date someone who has dated your best friend'. Additionally, there were claims he was dating another girl from another school at the time. Continually, case after case, they were trying to blame as many spree killers on 'incels'. One was the Orlando Nightclub Shooter, who was twice married and married at the time of the attack. They claimed the fact that he had dysfunctional marriages was proof he was yet another 'incel'.
Until they finally found their gold mine, the case they had been waiting for: the Alec Minassian attack in Canada. They had 'proof', or so it seemed. He had mentioned an 'incel rebellion' in a social media post just before his massacre. For the next year or so, he became their proof that there was this terrorist movement of 'incels'. And this was made worse when the interrogation tape was released in which he described not only his 'incel' plot, but that he had been in concert with two other 'incel' killers: Elliot Rodgers and Chris Harper-Mercer (not otherwise connected with incel communities), which should have made ANYONE begin to question whether or not he was actually telling the truth (evidently not the 'forensic' experts on YouTube who happily concluded he was telling the 100% unquestionable truth). In all likelihood, journalists asked the investigator what his opinion was, and they chose not to publish it, to deliberately propagate a LIE. But I have no evidence of that. What I do know is that when the trial happened, it was revealed he had made up the entire story. That's right, the story you are still being told today about the capital I 'incel' terrorist Alec Minassian, the convenient story that you were fishing for for years that fell into your laps, was discredited if not entirely disproved during the trial. He had been harboring mass murderous thoughts since childhood and thought he would get mileage out of the hysteria the media had created about 'incels'. Canadian press reported on this, then mostly covered it up. The world press never reported on the revelation, but continued to parrot it as the unquestioned truth to you. Wikipedia opens with it in the intro of the incel article without correction, but does briefly mention it later on only after talking about the 'incel' killer Minassian for some time.
As for Chris Harper-Mercer, there were claims he once said he was 'celibate, involuntarily so'. But that does not connect him with ANY community of disenfranchised undesirable men. Wikipedia articulates a bunch of shit (as their authors will, especially when they have been granted authoritarian control of certain articles as reportedly they have there²) but stops shy of saying the forums he participated in were incel ones. He does use his 'involuntary celibacy' to justify his attack, but he also said he would rule over peoples souls in hell, with references to the pentagram and demons and did not single out women (4 of his 9 victims were women). His manifesto includes mention of Elliot Rodgers, but it also includes mention of Victor Lee Flannigan (a gay sex worker in his 20s, not someone who seemed to blame lack of sex in his later years, if true, on his act), Adam Lanza (not someone who specified his lack of sex as a motive for his attack and also gay in online profiles linked to him in the official police report which contradicts the usual narrative of the 'straight white incel'), Seung Hui Cho (a person who seems to have been sent off for being branded a stalker for unwanted advancements to a woman, but whom never specified romantic rejection as a culprit for his violence) and the 'Columbine Kids' (who were known to have had dates). There were claims he was a white supremacist (which is odd because his mother who he lived with was total African American) or targeted Christians, but he did not appear to target his victims as part of an incel motive (eg. targeting women or couples).
² From a member on the talk page: "This entire article is under the purview of one hyper-authoritative administrator since 2018. Should they decide to swoop down and grant your request to change existing original, existing content in any manner that changes meaning of sentences, you'd be among the first. Keep filing complaints about the article, or edit it, and they'll (they'll being a few veterans) ban you and claim consensus, as they have at least 3 or 4 people, even before they moved to other wikis."
(Since Wikipedia couldn't connect him up with an incel community, they have mentioned never proved claims that he may have been on a 4Chan board as someone who gave a threat of a campus shooting where other incels may or may not have existed (since it wasn't explicitly a forum for incels) as their connection. It should be noted when they say 'suspected', they don't specify by whom. I am completely unaware of any police investigation suspecting such a link, from my knowledge it was suspected by journalists and maybe some members of that community because of the coincidence of it, and quickly dropped. A half-truth is always a nice way of getting away with a lie.)
Also after the Alec Minassian interrogation tape, the world went into hysteria over the prospect of an 'incel' shooting up the movie showings of the Joker. They still have not addressed this for what it was: media induced mass hysteria. The former Batman shooter was a guy who was in a relationship with a Indian girl.
Numerous attacks occurred after that point that were blamed on incels, only it turned out repeatedly they were NOT, many of whom had intimate partners.
Then the media got another story they could create mass hysteria over in 2021, the Plymouth mass shooting in the UK by an 'incel'. Put this into perspective: you had the first such shooter connected with 'incel' communities, Elliot Rodgers, in 2014. It took another 7 years before you had another, despite CASE AFTER CASE these bigoted twits blamed on lonely men. Not a SINGLE OTHER mass murderer between 2014 and 2021 had been connected to the forums where the link hasn't since been disproved. It took 7 years before another case fell into their laps of someone connected with the community who went on a spree killing. As someone who once done some research on mass murderers, I counted about 100 incidents over a 5 year span. So 1 incident out of 100? That's less than the amount of female killers. And yet, the media and forums where awash with 'every mass shooter ever is an incel'. During that 7 years, the world went into 7 years of hysteria over 'incel terrorists' and the communities whipping up their following into mass murder sprees and there hadn't been another case until 2021. There had been just 1 single case (and a lie for a 2nd case), and for that one single case they never provided any evidence whatsoever that the community indoctrinated him or were co-complicit in his massacre (yet are calling for government intervention to brand these communities terrorist communities). Until the Plymouth shooter fell into their laps.
(You can branch out the count to mass killers with 'incel-like' motives, whether or not they are connected to the community or identify themselves as members of that community, and in that case the grand total would be 3 such mass killers [George Sodini (2009), Elliot Rodgers (2014) and Scott Beierle (2018)] over a 12 year span (2009-2021) which would still equate to only around 1.5% of mass murderers out of an expected 200 during that span (barely more than mentioned above), and even then the 'incel-like' motive wouldn't be applicable to the 2021 incident as explained below.)
Initially, police ruled the Plymouth shooting as a homicide that spilled out into the streets, but due to pressure from people outside the investigation who wanted the motive to be 'incel' terrorism, they had to revise it. To date, there has been NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that the Plymouth shooter killed out of incel ideology. The only evidence they have was that he had made several posts on incel forums where he NEVER ONCE broadcast any desire to kill anyone.
There was a mass murder spree between 2014 and 2021 by a person who was ideologically motivated with similar ideology to 'incels': evidence that he murdered his victims because he couldn't find a 'decent' partner. That was the 2018 Tallahassee shooting that killed two women. The guy was never once connected with the community. Heck, it isn't even known if he was a virgin or incel. He likened himself to an incel, allegedly saying something to the effect of 'that was me in high school'. He never said he himself was an incel in adulthood. There was NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that he was a member of the community, and there is little evidence on whether or not he was involuntary celibate.
(In what appears to be a new line since last I looked, Wikipedia now describes him as a 'follower of incel ideologies for some time'. The source of that is a .PDF Assessing the Threat of Incel Violence. This 'research' says he is the 3rd in their list of unambiguous incel terrorists (including Alek Minassian, who has since been disproved so I guess it wasn't so unambiguous after all, and Elliot Rodgers) and says the exact same thing. But who do the authors of this .PDF cite as their 'unambiguous' source? A Buzzfeed news story! These 'serious' researchers who are researching this group with the intention to advise politics to persecute a social group are using media speculation and claiming it is unambiguous, but what's worse this Buzzfeed news story doesn't even have the gall to say he was unambiguously a follower of incel ideologies. It says he 'appears' to be an incel. What do they base that on? His overall hatred of women and him likening himself to an 'incel' when he was an adolescent based on the hot topic of the day, Elliot Rodgers. Following the trail of that source, neither Wikipedia, nor the authors of that .PDF, nor the news story it was sourced from justify ANY connection with the incel movement or ideologies. I stand by what I said: all they have is a similar motivation, and certainly no link to any broader community.)
The press and other groups have since backdated their claims of 'incel' attacks to other attacks, including the Sandy Hook shooting, the 2009 Collier Township Shooting and even the Ecole Polytechnique Shooting from 1989. Whilst it looks pretty certain Adam Lanza didn't have an intimate partner, he was proudly gay having posted about lusting for men in online profiles accredited to him in the police reports. He was also never connected with the 'incel' community. The George Sodini shooting was ideologically similar to incel violence, but with two special clauses: 1) he was never once connected with a community of other incel men; 2) he said he had had sex many times in his 20s. It is also said he was dating at the time of the massacre. (As for the other stereotype of these killers all being basement dwellers living with their parents, Sodini was a frequenter of the gym, lived independently and frequently went to social events. I can't think of a single killer who fits that profile! The closest is Adam Lanza, who despite common misconception left his home on a regular basis to play DDR and watch movies with a friend.) I have personally watched as all evidence of the Ecole Polytechnique shooter having had a girlfriend he impregnated scrubbed from the internet. Apparently she was going to have an abortion, which is what prompted his massacre, and yet Wikipedia doesn't feel that important enough to mention.
So what do you have, in total? You have two killers shown connected to the forums over a span of 7 years of an expected 100, and evidence only one of these men was 'incel' ideologically motivated. You had a couple of other incidents (but not the Plymouth one) that share common traits with this motivation, but no evidence of any link with incel communities for a grand total of 3 of an expected 200 mass murders over a 12 year span.
You may notice that this only concerns mass murders, it doesn't include plots and single killings. One bombing plot by an 'incel': turned out the guy had a serious girlfriend for a number of years.³ While it is true Canada experienced a homicide that was incel ideologically motivated, it was inspired by the attack by Alec Minassian, who was playing up to the media hysteria and feigning an attack in the name of incels. He was told and taught by the sensationalist and deceitful press that there was this war going on (the guy was also young enough to not be able to be legally named, so never lived a life of being alone). His victim may still be alive today if it weren't for the press, not the incel community. Another murder that was blamed on incels: the murder of Bianca Devins. The press happily concluded the attack was perpetrated by an incel, but was in fact perpetrated by someone in a relationship with the victim. Once again, for every homicide or other crime by an incel, there will be many perpetrated by others.
³ Looking it up, I can't find the original articles that described the plotter as having a girlfriend for years. But suspecting it was Cole Carini, I typed it into Google. I subsequently found scans of a FBI report that described him as having a girlfriend that seems to stretch back years. Wikipedia has a paragraph saying he self-described as an incel. I would seriously begin to question that. All I have found evidence of was he said Elliot Rodgers will always be remembered. Given plotting mass murderers celebrate other mass murderers generically, and the Isla Vista shootings were fresh and hot topic when he said it, I don't even consider that remarkable. *I have since found the original articles I read, and it involved his mothers testimony to him having a steady girlfriend for years. The police reports also emphasize that he was in a loving relationship for years and continued post arrest.
They have taken such extraordinary liberties with the label to justify their social persecution of these people. And it is not a true generalization, killers come in all different molds. But the media, in particular the left, continue to play with stereotypes, something they, of all people, shouldn't be doing! They have some nerve to lecture these people on matters of persecution and tolerance when they are freely dishing out persecution against those people, even to the point of REPEATEDLY blaming them for crimes they did not commit. They are so blood thirsty they're willing to bend the truth to extraordinary extents to justify their persecution of this group.
The media, both mainstream and alternate, are equally to blame for their scapegoating of vulnerable people. It is inexcusable the amount of lies being published by these sources. The holocaust itself started with the community targeting the mentally vulnerable. While nothing has risen to the levels of wanting to genocide people, I have seen many say all 'incel' men should be made to fight their wars (and it IS their wars, it is almost obligatory for a leader to present as a family man or at least a socially adjusted one). The hatred is there, and it doesn't just involve the press of 1 country, but WORLDWIDE. Unquestioned, uncorrected by ALL of you.
EDIT: Since posting, an alleged 'incel' YouTuber (Jacob Yerkes) posted a video of himself describing himself once stalking a woman he knew from work a couple of blocks playing his music. He has been arrested and the media is awash with claims he was an 'incel'. Let me make this clear: the stalker has NEVER once been connected with 'incel'-anything! You are basing your judgements on whether or not he is an 'incel' by his attitude and appearance (he isn't even that ugly if he shaved off his face hair, besides his nose not being perfect). This is prejudicial behavior you on the left, you 'progressives', are suppose to be standing against. You know jack about his private life. You are LIARS and hypocrites of the highest order.
I saw comments in the YouTube videos that women like independent men and saying this man (not probably, actually as in assumed) lives with his mother in her basement. If you are an independent person, fair enough. If you like clean men and you are a clean person, that sounds fair to me. We all seek people who we share a common bond with. But you have not a single SHRED of evidence this man wasn't living independently! In fact, I saw one article say he was arrested at his apartment. George Sodini was also one of your 'worthy' independent men. Elliot Rodgers was also living with roommates (who he ended up killing). Seng-Hui Cho was living with roommates. Men who live with their parents do it because they have never had a single shred of support from the community, from friends or encouragement from girlfriends in their entire lives, and probably have compounded mental and anxiety disorders, and your insistence that all bad men are such men only entrenches the problem (if not part of the cause of the problem) and is a further use of them as a scapegoat.
The Daily Mail article that used the quotes 'delusional incel' to describe Jacob Yerkes is a perfect example of crooked journalism, which is basically all of them and everything they print. They buried the source of the quote far down their article and it was... a commenter. No one with ANY special knowledge about the guy, not family, not acquaintances, not neighbors (not like they normally have any special knowledge that journalists credit them with having, but this was lower than that even). Just someone from the internet who decided to use that label, so the journalists could get away with 'journalistic ethics' for their liberal-feminist buzzword regardless of credibility, which is how they conduct their business when they label shooters 'loners': they fish around for their label until they get it, and because someone (ANYONE) said it it passes the grade of journalistic standards. Honestly, since I am a lone voice on this matter (except maybe Naami Kates), you all deserve deceitful media and whatever potential hell may come from it.
No comments:
Post a Comment