Post by mirrororchid on Sept 27, 2023 20:31:45 GMT -5
angelwanderer posted a podcast episode called "Sexless Marriage or INCEL?" in which he lamented the heavy baggage associated with the expression "involutarily celibate" or "incel" for short.
He expressed similar dismay here:
iliasm.org/thread/6244/new-vocabulary?page=1&scrollTo=145311
I describe the history of the term "incel" at this post:
iliasm.org/thread/6244/new-vocabulary?page=1&scrollTo=145320
A woman invented it and, at the time, it was a term conveying sympathy for those unable to secure intimacy.
She remains active in her pursuit, though not using the term any longer and she focuses on getting people partnered with lifemates, but is not focused on the physical intimacy angle.
I had mentioned married celibate people (marcels) as a problem and she seemed uninterested in the difficulties refused spouses get. The impression I got is that she felt refused spouses were far better off than lonely people who have non-physical companionship.
While listening to Angelwanderer, the term "non-consensually celibate" occurred to me and it made sense for celibate spouses.
It means much the same thing, but can provide for a term for those who have celibacy forced upon them by duress, usually in the form of financial ruin, but perhaps excommunication, disinheritance, shunning, isolation from offspring, or other grievous penalty.
Were such penalties threatened upon the refuser, it would appropriately be seen as monstrous for a spouse to deliberately impose so much hardship on someone unless they do something they desperately don't want to do. Either have sex, or be celibate.
Non-consensual sex brings about reasonable expressions of horror.
Non-consensual celibacy may be able to invoke a sense of curiosity about what it may mean and whether forcing someone to be celibate is somehow okay.
It may gain some public acceptance that it is not, and lead to solutions to teh problem that are currently condemned by society.
Involuntary celibacy can be an exaggerated condition. Some people are celibate because their standards are unrealistic. They could get physical intimacy but are actually choosing not to because of delusion or a sense of self-worth.
They may be able to engage in sex for money, but they are celibate out of pride.
Married people may face disastrous ruin no matter how low their standards may be or no matter how much they'd be willing to pay.
The non-concel, is truly over a barrel. A condition many, if not most incels, cannot rival in its wretchedness.
He expressed similar dismay here:
iliasm.org/thread/6244/new-vocabulary?page=1&scrollTo=145311
I describe the history of the term "incel" at this post:
iliasm.org/thread/6244/new-vocabulary?page=1&scrollTo=145320
A woman invented it and, at the time, it was a term conveying sympathy for those unable to secure intimacy.
She remains active in her pursuit, though not using the term any longer and she focuses on getting people partnered with lifemates, but is not focused on the physical intimacy angle.
I had mentioned married celibate people (marcels) as a problem and she seemed uninterested in the difficulties refused spouses get. The impression I got is that she felt refused spouses were far better off than lonely people who have non-physical companionship.
While listening to Angelwanderer, the term "non-consensually celibate" occurred to me and it made sense for celibate spouses.
It means much the same thing, but can provide for a term for those who have celibacy forced upon them by duress, usually in the form of financial ruin, but perhaps excommunication, disinheritance, shunning, isolation from offspring, or other grievous penalty.
Were such penalties threatened upon the refuser, it would appropriately be seen as monstrous for a spouse to deliberately impose so much hardship on someone unless they do something they desperately don't want to do. Either have sex, or be celibate.
Non-consensual sex brings about reasonable expressions of horror.
Non-consensual celibacy may be able to invoke a sense of curiosity about what it may mean and whether forcing someone to be celibate is somehow okay.
It may gain some public acceptance that it is not, and lead to solutions to teh problem that are currently condemned by society.
Involuntary celibacy can be an exaggerated condition. Some people are celibate because their standards are unrealistic. They could get physical intimacy but are actually choosing not to because of delusion or a sense of self-worth.
They may be able to engage in sex for money, but they are celibate out of pride.
Married people may face disastrous ruin no matter how low their standards may be or no matter how much they'd be willing to pay.
The non-concel, is truly over a barrel. A condition many, if not most incels, cannot rival in its wretchedness.
