Parents of boys who became incels

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think one clear message on which we can all agree, form this whole incel thing, is:

- boys need to be far more educated and raised as feminists. It is the antidote to toxic masculinity. I am talking to you, boy-moms.

It is more complicated than that. I have to be sympathetic to their perceptions since THEY seem to be bearing the brunt of the mistakes and bad behavior of generations of men before them. My boys know and have been told about the inequities in history (not just towards women but other cultural groups and races). They know to stand up for people. But all they know is the life they are living and struggling through themselves.

For example, my oldest's college roommate (boys) worked for weeks on a presentation for a prestigious internship position. There were spots for 2 boys and 2 girls from their school. There were about 20 boys and 3 girls who applied. His roommate did not get it despite being very qualified (grades, ecs etc) but one of the girls who got it had actually ran out of the presentation room in tears due to nerves. This really upset my feminist-raised ds on behalf of his roommate. It isn't going to make them the next Joe Rogans or anything but it doesn't engender empathy.

It is easy to say raise them that way but they face so many other factors and situations outside of the home especially as they get older - peers, reality, internet, other adults and leaders, etc.

Weird example, as it’s just a numbers game here. This shouldn’t have anything to do with feminism or empathy—just, sometimes life’s not fair. You can’t always get what you want, and all that.

It feels like everyone is constantly looking for someone to blame for every single disappointment, rather than shrugging it off and looking for a different opportunity.

I see this example went over your head. In their minds the competition should be for 4 positions total without gender specifications. They know intellectually why there is such a thing but when they see how they are disadvantaged personally and in a specific way, it is not reality to think a 20yo guy would say "ok well I understand that since women my grandmother's age would not have had the same chances as men 60 years ago, then my classmate who is a girl should take this spot even though I performed better than she did." It doesn't help the girls either. And it makes men/boys more susceptible to victimhood thinking, deserved or not. Even as a 'feminist' who has raised awareness and non-entitled thinking in my boys growing up, I can see why they might feel this way.

They need to go back to their textbooks and try harder then, especially if this is in a field that hopes to make significant money. More gender diversity is linked to greater profitability, and prestigious internships are bottom line about… the bottom line. This is the kind of thing bright college students with great ecs and good grades learn, right?

https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/featured%20insights/diversity%20and%20inclusion/diversity%20wins%20how%20inclusion%20matters/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters-vf.pdf

I don't disagree and I don't think they would either, intellectually. But as a practical matter it is hard to swallow and I can see why there would be resentment about the process. It is one thing to be ideological and aspirational but it is another when it impacts you and your future personally, especially 20yo guys. The don't see girls or women as inferior or needing extra help or what have you at all. Especially college women.

It’s not ideological or aspirational: it’s just about money. More diverse teams are more profitable. Companies with gender diverse boards make more money. So yeah this company (in a clearly male dominated field) wants women more than they want a third-best guy. They’re not doing it to “help” anyone.

That is all fine and well. I am talking about the personal impact and resulting feelings about it.

I get that they’re hurt, my point is just they’re not being rational in their blame. And sure, hurt feelings are rarely rational, but assuming that a company with a prestigious internship took “less qualified” staff in order to “help them” really isn’t rational.

It has nothing to do with their grandmothers lack of opportunities, it has nothing to do with (their perception) that they performed better, it is truly just down to what a company thinks will make more money. I hope you’re teaching your sons to look critically at their assumptions. Your 20 y/o is absolutely capable of that level of understanding.

Making more money is not the same as acting in an ethical manner. Anyone should be outraged about corporations exploiting racial and gender differences just to make a profit. It’s destroying our society.

These boys wanted to work at this company— I assume to make money? That’s ethical, but the company acting in a way to maximize their profits isn’t? The boys could go become public school teachers and help struggling young men if that’s their mission in life and what they hope to achieve in their careers— it’s not the role of the company to take a profit hit to cater to them.

In fact it IS the role for all of us to prioritize ethics over profit. But I guess this is a brave new world where selfishness reigns supreme.

[Anonymous]

You guys can debate ethics or profit motive all you want. But a practical result of boys/young men feeling personally disadvantaged in specific situations very likely could be resentment towards those policies, whatever their provenance. I am not saying this makes them incels or justifies red pill culture, but on a human level it is understandable to feel it is 'unfair'.

[Anonymous]

This is a very strange thread.

A male cannot be manly if he doesn't do or know manly things.

Seriously, what the heck does that mean? How do you--or anyone else-have the right to decide what is manly and, perhaps more importantly, what isn't? What are the "manly" things a man must know to be a man? If there's some widely accepted list, nobody sent me the memo.

The list --if one exists--certainly isn't biologically predetermined and it varies among cultures and even in the same culture in different eras.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You guys can debate ethics or profit motive all you want. But a practical result of boys/young men feeling personally disadvantaged in specific situations very likely could be resentment towards those policies, whatever their provenance. I am not saying this makes them incels or justifies red pill culture, but on a human level it is understandable to feel it is 'unfair'.

Then that’s the answer for OP. Teach your sons to be critical thinkers, who are able to move past emotional and illogical knee-jerk reactions. Feeling “personally disadvantaged” by for-profit companies acting…for-profit…is going to be a very painful way to go through life and yes absolutely will lead to resentment and bitterness, even if it isn’t targeted at women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys can debate ethics or profit motive all you want. But a practical result of boys/young men feeling personally disadvantaged in specific situations very likely could be resentment towards those policies, whatever their provenance. I am not saying this makes them incels or justifies red pill culture, but on a human level it is understandable to feel it is 'unfair'.

Then that’s the answer for OP. Teach your sons to be critical thinkers, who are able to move past emotional and illogical knee-jerk reactions. Feeling “personally disadvantaged” by for-profit companies acting…for-profit…is going to be a very painful way to go through life and yes absolutely will lead to resentment and bitterness, even if it isn’t targeted at women.

Somehow you think that the profit notice erases the fact that people can be “personally disadvantaged” or that it doesn’t matter somehow? That’s not critical thinking at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys can debate ethics or profit motive all you want. But a practical result of boys/young men feeling personally disadvantaged in specific situations very likely could be resentment towards those policies, whatever their provenance. I am not saying this makes them incels or justifies red pill culture, but on a human level it is understandable to feel it is 'unfair'.

Then that’s the answer for OP. Teach your sons to be critical thinkers, who are able to move past emotional and illogical knee-jerk reactions. Feeling “personally disadvantaged” by for-profit companies acting…for-profit…is going to be a very painful way to go through life and yes absolutely will lead to resentment and bitterness, even if it isn’t targeted at women.

Somehow you think that the profit notice erases the fact that people can be “personally disadvantaged” or that it doesn’t matter somehow? That’s not critical thinking at all.

Did these boys feel individually disadvantaged by every firm that only recruited out of higher-tier colleges? They disadvantaged all 20 of them.

Did they feel individually disadvantaged by every internship at the firm that was given to the child of a donor, an executive, or a contact?

Or do they only feel disadvantaged because the firm made the choice to recruit girls as well as boys?

If they’re choosing to resent women in the context of all the other people who didn’t give them internships than no, they’re not remotely critical thinkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys can debate ethics or profit motive all you want. But a practical result of boys/young men feeling personally disadvantaged in specific situations very likely could be resentment towards those policies, whatever their provenance. I am not saying this makes them incels or justifies red pill culture, but on a human level it is understandable to feel it is 'unfair'.

Then that’s the answer for OP. Teach your sons to be critical thinkers, who are able to move past emotional and illogical knee-jerk reactions. Feeling “personally disadvantaged” by for-profit companies acting…for-profit…is going to be a very painful way to go through life and yes absolutely will lead to resentment and bitterness, even if it isn’t targeted at women.

Somehow you think that the profit notice erases the fact that people can be “personally disadvantaged” or that it doesn’t matter somehow? That’s not critical thinking at all.

Did these boys feel individually disadvantaged by every firm that only recruited out of higher-tier colleges? They disadvantaged all 20 of them.

Did they feel individually disadvantaged by every internship at the firm that was given to the child of a donor, an executive, or a contact?

Or do they only feel disadvantaged because the firm made the choice to recruit girls as well as boys?

If they’re choosing to resent women in the context of all the other people who didn’t give them internships than no, they’re not remotely critical thinkers.

Pretty sure that all of that is unethical, sure. Of course people feel disadvantaged by all of that. This isn’t either/or.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You guys can debate ethics or profit motive all you want. But a practical result of boys/young men feeling personally disadvantaged in specific situations very likely could be resentment towards those policies, whatever their provenance. I am not saying this makes them incels or justifies red pill culture, but on a human level it is understandable to feel it is 'unfair'.

So, young men have had advantages that women didn't have for centuries, and now that they are on more equal footing with women (education and jobs), they can't handle it? They need to be coddled?

This type of weak self pitying attitude is not very attractive to women FYI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys can debate ethics or profit motive all you want. But a practical result of boys/young men feeling personally disadvantaged in specific situations very likely could be resentment towards those policies, whatever their provenance. I am not saying this makes them incels or justifies red pill culture, but on a human level it is understandable to feel it is 'unfair'.

Then that’s the answer for OP. Teach your sons to be critical thinkers, who are able to move past emotional and illogical knee-jerk reactions. Feeling “personally disadvantaged” by for-profit companies acting…for-profit…is going to be a very painful way to go through life and yes absolutely will lead to resentment and bitterness, even if it isn’t targeted at women.

Somehow you think that the profit notice erases the fact that people can be “personally disadvantaged” or that it doesn’t matter somehow? That’s not critical thinking at all.

Did these boys feel individually disadvantaged by every firm that only recruited out of higher-tier colleges? They disadvantaged all 20 of them.

Did they feel individually disadvantaged by every internship at the firm that was given to the child of a donor, an executive, or a contact?

Or do they only feel disadvantaged because the firm made the choice to recruit girls as well as boys?

If they’re choosing to resent women in the context of all the other people who didn’t give them internships than no, they’re not remotely critical thinkers.

Pretty sure that all of that is unethical, sure. Of course people feel disadvantaged by all of that. This isn’t either/or.

Women have, for thousands of years, been disadvantaged. Cry me a river.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys can debate ethics or profit motive all you want. But a practical result of boys/young men feeling personally disadvantaged in specific situations very likely could be resentment towards those policies, whatever their provenance. I am not saying this makes them incels or justifies red pill culture, but on a human level it is understandable to feel it is 'unfair'.

Then that’s the answer for OP. Teach your sons to be critical thinkers, who are able to move past emotional and illogical knee-jerk reactions. Feeling “personally disadvantaged” by for-profit companies acting…for-profit…is going to be a very painful way to go through life and yes absolutely will lead to resentment and bitterness, even if it isn’t targeted at women.

Somehow you think that the profit notice erases the fact that people can be “personally disadvantaged” or that it doesn’t matter somehow? That’s not critical thinking at all.

Did these boys feel individually disadvantaged by every firm that only recruited out of higher-tier colleges? They disadvantaged all 20 of them.

Did they feel individually disadvantaged by every internship at the firm that was given to the child of a donor, an executive, or a contact?

Or do they only feel disadvantaged because the firm made the choice to recruit girls as well as boys?

If they’re choosing to resent women in the context of all the other people who didn’t give them internships than no, they’re not remotely critical thinkers.

Pretty sure that all of that is unethical, sure. Of course people feel disadvantaged by all of that. This isn’t either/or.

It seems to be. You don’t seem worried that the boys will become labor rights advocates, you just assume in a universe of disparate hiring practices (some of which disadvantage them) they will focus in on resenting….women. Why do you believe that?

[Anonymous]

No trad moms it plays into the downfall of men.

A mom who is an equal is the only way to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys can debate ethics or profit motive all you want. But a practical result of boys/young men feeling personally disadvantaged in specific situations very likely could be resentment towards those policies, whatever their provenance. I am not saying this makes them incels or justifies red pill culture, but on a human level it is understandable to feel it is 'unfair'.

So, young men have had advantages that women didn't have for centuries, and now that they are on more equal footing with women (education and jobs), they can't handle it? They need to be coddled?

This type of weak self pitying attitude is not very attractive to women FYI.

The affected thing men have barely been alive for two decades and certainly not “centuries”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys can debate ethics or profit motive all you want. But a practical result of boys/young men feeling personally disadvantaged in specific situations very likely could be resentment towards those policies, whatever their provenance. I am not saying this makes them incels or justifies red pill culture, but on a human level it is understandable to feel it is 'unfair'.

Then that’s the answer for OP. Teach your sons to be critical thinkers, who are able to move past emotional and illogical knee-jerk reactions. Feeling “personally disadvantaged” by for-profit companies acting…for-profit…is going to be a very painful way to go through life and yes absolutely will lead to resentment and bitterness, even if it isn’t targeted at women.

Somehow you think that the profit notice erases the fact that people can be “personally disadvantaged” or that it doesn’t matter somehow? That’s not critical thinking at all.

Did these boys feel individually disadvantaged by every firm that only recruited out of higher-tier colleges? They disadvantaged all 20 of them.

Did they feel individually disadvantaged by every internship at the firm that was given to the child of a donor, an executive, or a contact?

Or do they only feel disadvantaged because the firm made the choice to recruit girls as well as boys?

If they’re choosing to resent women in the context of all the other people who didn’t give them internships than no, they’re not remotely critical thinkers.

Pretty sure that all of that is unethical, sure. Of course people feel disadvantaged by all of that. This isn’t either/or.

Women have, for thousands of years, been disadvantaged. Cry me a river.

But that was a bad thing, right? So then it is bad to do the same to men. Especially since these men are not responsible for any of that history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys can debate ethics or profit motive all you want. But a practical result of boys/young men feeling personally disadvantaged in specific situations very likely could be resentment towards those policies, whatever their provenance. I am not saying this makes them incels or justifies red pill culture, but on a human level it is understandable to feel it is 'unfair'.

Then that’s the answer for OP. Teach your sons to be critical thinkers, who are able to move past emotional and illogical knee-jerk reactions. Feeling “personally disadvantaged” by for-profit companies acting…for-profit…is going to be a very painful way to go through life and yes absolutely will lead to resentment and bitterness, even if it isn’t targeted at women.

Somehow you think that the profit notice erases the fact that people can be “personally disadvantaged” or that it doesn’t matter somehow? That’s not critical thinking at all.

Did these boys feel individually disadvantaged by every firm that only recruited out of higher-tier colleges? They disadvantaged all 20 of them.

Did they feel individually disadvantaged by every internship at the firm that was given to the child of a donor, an executive, or a contact?

Or do they only feel disadvantaged because the firm made the choice to recruit girls as well as boys?

If they’re choosing to resent women in the context of all the other people who didn’t give them internships than no, they’re not remotely critical thinkers.

Pretty sure that all of that is unethical, sure. Of course people feel disadvantaged by all of that. This isn’t either/or.

It seems to be. You don’t seem worried that the boys will become labor rights advocates, you just assume in a universe of disparate hiring practices (some of which disadvantage them) they will focus in on resenting….women. Why do you believe that?

I never said any such thing. How about a good faith discussion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys can debate ethics or profit motive all you want. But a practical result of boys/young men feeling personally disadvantaged in specific situations very likely could be resentment towards those policies, whatever their provenance. I am not saying this makes them incels or justifies red pill culture, but on a human level it is understandable to feel it is 'unfair'.

Then that’s the answer for OP. Teach your sons to be critical thinkers, who are able to move past emotional and illogical knee-jerk reactions. Feeling “personally disadvantaged” by for-profit companies acting…for-profit…is going to be a very painful way to go through life and yes absolutely will lead to resentment and bitterness, even if it isn’t targeted at women.

Somehow you think that the profit notice erases the fact that people can be “personally disadvantaged” or that it doesn’t matter somehow? That’s not critical thinking at all.

Did these boys feel individually disadvantaged by every firm that only recruited out of higher-tier colleges? They disadvantaged all 20 of them.

Did they feel individually disadvantaged by every internship at the firm that was given to the child of a donor, an executive, or a contact?

Or do they only feel disadvantaged because the firm made the choice to recruit girls as well as boys?

If they’re choosing to resent women in the context of all the other people who didn’t give them internships than no, they’re not remotely critical thinkers.

Pretty sure that all of that is unethical, sure. Of course people feel disadvantaged by all of that. This isn’t either/or.

Women have, for thousands of years, been disadvantaged. Cry me a river.

But that was a bad thing, right? So then it is bad to do the same to men. Especially since these men are not responsible for any of that history.

DP. It’s a bad thing to disadvantage anyone on purpose, but it’s impossible for any individual to go through life without ever feeling like they’ve gotten the short end. You’ve made it sound like this one instance is setting this young man up to feel resentful towards all women.