Inside The Mind of a Modern-Day Incel
Written by Edward K.
In her essay “The Rage of the Incels,” Jia Tolentino, an award-winning writer for her exploration of gender-related issues, illustrates the complex thought processes and actions of ‘incels’ and exposes their internet community scene. Incels are sexually unattractive men who believe women owe them sex. While they exist as an internet subgroup, their aggressive misogyny has caused hate crimes towards women. Considering the time of publication, the article can be an extension of the #MeToo movement, which reached its apex in 2018. The movement brought forth the attention of the world to the sexual assault that women experience and showed the deeply ingrained gender inequality, which incels’ operate on. Tolentino provides insight into how their views are geared towards the consolidation of male supremacy, allowing us to see the gravity of the issue.
Tolentino exposes the reasoning behind these specific adult virgins through the explanation of the word ‘incel.’ ‘Incel’ is a combination of the two words: ‘involuntary’ meaning lack of choice, and the word ‘celibate’ meaning abstaining from sex. Speculating on the meaning, Tolentino effectively brings up her point that the reasoning behind associating themselves with a word with such a negative connotation is to blame women for their celibacy, namely their inability to get laid. They victimize themselves to portray their version of “justice” as sex from women of their choosing, as they view sex as a “natural right” (192). This view is paradoxical, considering that incels such as Alex Minassian and Elliott Rodger are assailants who attacked innocent individuals out of rage against women for “depriving them of sex” (194). The incels hold a firm belief that they are marginalized, yet are selfish oppressors.
Tolentino explores the concept of hyper-capitalization of sex in the US, and how that caused the marginalization of those who are unwanted in terms of sex to show the absurdity of incels’ response to unwantedness. She states that sex is a “deregulated marketplace” (196), then explores how different genders respond to the bitterness of being unwanted. While women are motivated to better themselves, incels blame women for not providing them with what they believe is their natural right: sex. The essence of incels’ argument roots in deeply patriarchal and chauvinistic thought that trampling on someone else’s right doesn’t matter as long as their ‘natural right’ is protected. I agree with Tolentino’s claim that the bigotry of incels only furthers inequality that traps women to be “decorative sex objects,” which, I believe, is a perspective that should be eradicated (194).
My understanding of incels' logic goes beyond this article. I still distinctly remember my first encounter with these ideals. In fifth grade, while reading horror stories online, I clicked on the ‘personal opinions’ section and unknowingly saw an ‘incels’ sub-category. I saw unfathomable twisted thoughts and scenarios and had to close the page before I even finished reading the second line. After a while, I erased this experience from my mind. As someone opposed to incels but didn’t understand the underlying issue, I found the article somewhat cathartic seeing the author swiftly jabbing the arguments of incels. Tolentino debunks their argument that what they need is sex by providing evidence that incels abhor prostitution, expressing “extreme disgust at the idea of whores. (194)” This further proves that they actually want “dominion” (193) over women not just sex with a desirable woman, and reveals the fact that incels do not want “sexual redistribution” as they do not care about the victims of sexual marginalization such as trans, gay, or females not within the boundaries of conventional attractiveness. The apt characterization of incels as illogical and blinded bigots struck me as I realized incels furthered the continuation of oppression of objectified women.
If you’d like to read the original essay that Edward responds to, click here.
