A classic from the DNC archcuck Ezra Klein:
The Yes Means Yes law could also be called the You Better Be Pretty Damn Sure law. You Better Be Pretty Damn Sure she said yes. You Better Be Pretty Damn Sure she meant to say yes, and wasn't consenting because she was scared, or high, or too tired of fighting. If you're one half of a loving, committed relationship, then you probably can Be Pretty Damn Sure. If you're not, then you better fucking ask…
The Yes Means Yes law is trying to change a culture of sexual entitlement. That culture of sexual entitlement is built on fear; fear that the word “no” will lead to violence, or that the complaint you bring to the authorities will be be (sic) ignored, or that the hearing will become a venue for your humiliation, as the man who assaulted you details all the ways you were asking for it. “No Means No” has created a world where women are afraid. To work, “Yes Means Yes” needs to create a world where men are afraid.
For that reason, the law is only worth the paper it’s written on if some of the critics' fears come true. Critics worry that colleges will fill with cases in which campus boards convict young men (and, occasionally, young women) of sexual assault for genuinely ambiguous situations. Sadly, that's necessary for the law’s success. It's those cases — particularly the ones that feel genuinely unclear and maybe even unfair, the ones that become lore in frats and cautionary tales that fathers e-mail to their sons — that will convince men that they better Be Pretty Damn Sure.
It could hardly be more obvious that that repellent little worm is seething at Chad and exuberantly fantasizing about destroying Chad's life while posturing as the Nice Guy- erm I mean Male Ally, when really he just wants to punish Chad for having sex that he can't. Heck, maybe "Chud" is a Freudian slip, it is rather close to "Chad" after all.
This is from an old essay of his from the height of metoo, and lefties try to gaslight everyone about metoo not having been as batshit insane as it actually was, when they really only reeled it back a bit for rapefugees, trannies, and Joe Biden. Because of course it was never really about protecting women.
But it's important to not allow the memory of metoo to fade, because the gender war is being dialed back up again, spiteful troons and landwhales are still brainwashing kids with the metoo ideology, and it's important to emphasize that it isn't just randos on tumblr or twitter or tiktok espousing these insane beliefs. A high-level DNC propagandist openly and explicitly advocated for a totalitarian policy with the intent of destroying the lives of innocent men, and they're gearing up to try it again with zoomers, even as they allow vibrancy and troons to rape little girls.
Male feminism was, is and always will be camouflage for rapists to get easy marks. Man-haters (feminists) could squash them and end it overnight, but that would mean admitting the "enemy" was correct, so they'll take the hits and grin and bear it.
Comparing incels to male feminists is pretty unfair I feel, they are not the same and never will be and I feel like we need to properly define incel because it's a term that gets abused far too much even in these circles. Actual incels are extremely mentally depressed people who consider themselves too ugly to get laid and have zero confidence in themselves to the point of being thoroughly black pilled.
Fucked up people within these groups for sure, but male feminists are definitely not the same. They've still got the determination to manipulate their way through leftist circles in order to either rape or get laid.
Being an incel isn't a linear path. You either wind up like those we generally think of when using the term, or you can branch off and be a
makemale feminist, or troon out.It's not necessarily that they consider themselves unattractive, it's that everyone else considers them unattractive. The halo effect and ugly tax are real things and your looks (predominantly genetic so you can't change them at the gym) do influence how people treat you and whether you are welcomed into social groups. If you're unattractive, you need to be exceptionally talented in a social activity to overcome thar. Neuroatypicality also have an effect. We know that a disproportionate number of incels have things such as autism.
I don't think it's even that, when you look into them you realise a lot of them have had bad experiences or simply don't understand why they haven't been able to even by noticed by a girl. There are countless guys like that, the difference is the rest of us either get over whatever school etc. trauma we might have had or we take advantage of autism and improve ourselves to a ridiculous degree no one would recognise us.
I bring this up because I remember ages ago seeing an article pop up about an journalist who interviewed an incel in person and to her credit it was a fair one. She was shocked at how normal he was and he had to explain to her that even talking to a woman like her was a rare occurrence for him.
It's like the old stereotype of how leftists especially like to harp on about virgin neckbeard's living in the mum's basement ( Despite them being the biggest soy manlets around ) and I've got this feeling that if the WEF got what they wanted and did a mass doxxing of anyone anonymous they would probably be shocked at how many guys calling them faggots online are actually their co-workers or at a minimum high functioning autists or guys with money.
The reason I'm fairly confident stating this is, no one who fits the stereotype would be capable of having the high level conversations I've seen about glowies and financials on a daily basis and this tends to be a trend that stretches across groups. Meanwhile the average normie on the street is a massive retard that barely knows how bank accounts work.
This is why I'm very stubborn when it comes to incels and at least defining them properly. Don't get me wrong, you do have the odd ones out that often fit the gremlin stereotype of a fat virgin that never goes outside but I'm not convinced about the majority.