Feminism / Internet / Movies / Sex

Interview With a Love Shy

When I wrote my review of Shy Boys: IRL, I was really just trying to spread the word to a wider audience. I only have about 200 friends on Facebook, and I wanted to convince more people they should watch the documentary. Not long after it was published, though, the review attracted the attention of two prominent love shies/incels, and Sara Gardephe, the documentary’s director.

The Kickstarter for the full-length documentary has begun, and it needs your support! Their goal is $27,000, and it’s just a little shy. If you have an interest in seeing love shyness and the community explored further, consider backing!

Sara Gardephe!

It’s Sara Gardephe!

The love shies engaged with us through comments on the article. Governmentsgetgirlfriends was pretty rude. He didn’t have a whole lot to say about the review, though he did promise (and not deliver) a long reply “dealing with the lies and nonsense in [our] article.” Visiting his blog was much more illuminating than actually engaging with him (he is kind of weird).

Rammspieler, on the other hand, was very informative and filled us in on a lot of details we didn’t get from the film. He was willing to dish, and enthusiastic about explaining the nuances of love-shyness and the board itself. He is a moderator of the forum, and a love shy. In his comments on the original article, he was defensive. Derisive of just about everyone. Still, he cut a nice contrast to Governmentsgetgirlfriends, who is clearly kind of a piece of shit.

In case you didn’t click on the links, GGG has been arrested several times. For assaulting his parents, for threatening to murder a girl who wouldn’t give him the time of day. Aside from many, many women, he’s begged his therapist and even his own mother for sex. He’s admitted to blackmailing a woman into sex (he doesn’t admit to “blackmailing,” but he admits readily to actions that any normal person would recognize as blackmail). His involuntary celibacy is the very worst thing in this world to him, as “curing” it supercedes basically any other moral standard, such as “don’t kill,” “don’t rape,” and “don’t try to fuck your mom.”

So Rammspieler’s fairly normal tone and willingness to fill in the blanks in the documentary excited us. And his interview left us feeling pretty happy that we landed one of the normal love shies, one that unlike Advanced, Urban White Trash, and GGG, seemed to have his head on straight, and was able to look at his condition with a critical eye. Aside from an unhealthy anxiety about women and sex, he came off as a normal dude with an advanced case of a common problem.

But in researching Rammspieler further, we discovered an upsetting trend: Every love shy we’ve ever come in contact with or been exposed to is kinda nuts.

Yes, I did encourage Alexius to go buy a gun and kill his crush. Yes, in fact I do admire Cho, The Columbine Duo, George Sodini and any other individual who has found the courage to do what they did and both deliver a warning to society and at the same time challenge our collective morality. I will neither retract, apologize or somehow make my opinion more palatable. I have stood by my comments and I will continue to do so. If you have a problem with that somehow ruining the forums for you, then tough shit. I’m the owner and I say what I want whereas at a moments notice I can restrict your right to do the same.

Rammspieler, who at one point was the de facto owner of the love shy forum, in fact egged Governmentsgetgirfriends on to to threaten his crush. He seems to be in the same school of thought as GGG that people being unable to get ladies indicates a broken society that must be fixed by killing people. George Sodini, whose sexual frustration gave him the excuse to fire upon a women’s aerobics class, killing 3 and injuring 9, is the most telling member of the list. Rammspieler also wrote for The Daily Raider,  a site which published an article about trolling Virginia Tech grief groups on Facebook. There is also a wealth of 4chan-y stuff about him, light doxxing, a small article on Encyclopedia Dramatica, a short comic series ridiculing his life.

It paints an ugly picture of Rammspieler, and even with the uncertainty that comes with the internet, I’m inclined to believe most of it. The shame is that love shyness, whether or not it’s a diagnosable complex, is a real problem. Like I said in my review, it’s really shitty that some people have such a tough time finding romance. It deserves to be noticed and looked into. And it’s too bad that the community’s most outspoken members are so objectionable, because normal people are affected.

Despite what we discovered, Rammspieler’s interview depicts a normal, reasonable guy, the kind of guy we thought we were going to be talking to. It’s a look into the head of a love shy one can sympathize with.

How does love-shyness differ from run-of-the-mill social anxiety?

Rammspieler: Whereas in social anxiety, the idea of general social interaction drives you into a state of panic, in the case of a love-shy, it’s just limited to the idea of casually interacting with a woman that you feel attracted to that drives you into panic mode. Of  course, there could be self-proclaimed love-shies who may just be suffering from general social anxiety issues. But I think that there are plenty whom have no problems socializing with people in general and may be part of a large and diverse social circle. They may even be what most people would never consider to be a “shy guy” because they could be the conventionally good looking and popular guy in school or work, or the life of the party. But when it comes to approaching and speaking to that cute girl they may as well be running for their lives from a Bengal tiger. You desperately want to talk to her but your body responds with the classic fear response. Some may even feel physically sick.

What are some misconceptions of the love-shy community? What do you most wish you could make people understand about love-shyness?

R: The first misconception people have is they tend to group us along with those who consider themselves “incel” or involuntary celibates, and sometimes even with the now defunct “True Forced Loneliness” movement that started on YouTube a few years back. We may all share the same “symptoms” of not being able to enter and maintain a romantic/sexual relationship with someone else, but the causes are different.
A love shy may blame it on personal issues and social anxiety. An incel may blame it on external factors such as not being conventionally attractive enough, not being an “asshole”, not being tall enough, etc and lay the blame on women or society in general. On the other hand, a TFLer would blame his lack of romantic/sexual success on The Illuminati.

Then there is the misconception that love-shyness was made up by white, privileged, North American males with too much time spent on the Internet who found some obscure research study about the subject and decided to self-diagnose. We in fact have many members from different continents and non-Anglo based cultures over there so to dismiss it as a “nerdy middle class white guys” problem is unfair.
The basis for the site is on the work of Dr. Brian Gilmartin, so I wouldn’t call this an Internet nerd’s invention. Many of us believe that Dr. Gilmartin’s study was deeply flawed with pseudo-scientific concepts like astrology and that some of his suggestions for treating LS were kind of “out there” (selective abortion of male fetuses, banning school sports, etc), but that doesn’t mean the idea doesn’t have merit.

What are the demographics of the forum? Who uses it? What’s the overall tone and climate?

R: It’s pretty diverse, actually. Most of our members are from either North America, the UK and Australia. But we also have members from Europe, Russia, South America and we even have someone from mainland China. I myself am from Puerto Rico. We also come from varied racial backgrounds and socio-economic strata. From what I can gather, Dr. Gilmartin may have been right when he said that most love-shies are either underemployed or unemployed, as I can only identify a handful of truly successful members, career wise. Most of us may have college degrees, but we aren’t what you would exactly call “successful” in a career setting, as either a love-shy may be denied a promotion or can only find more menial jobs.
Although our female segment is small, we do have an active member who identifies herself as a lesbian love-shy, so I guess that should put an end to the argument as to whether or not women and LGBTs can be love-shy as well. Of course there are still those who beg to differ, despite the evidence right in front of their noses!

You mentioned in comments that therapists don’t take your condition seriously. What was your experience? Are there any forum success stories of people who got treatment, or simply broke through and were able to interact romantically?

R: Seeing as how the problem is pretty complex and based on the individual, I don’t believe that there is an easy solution. Some may go to therapy, although there isn’t any real improvement. There are those who even say that they feel worse after seeing a therapist or going on drug treatments, as they feel as if the therapist doesn’t quite understand their problem or the drugs make them feel even more depressed than before. Pretty much the only exception is an ongoing log from one member about his interactions with his therapist and the different assignments that she assigns him to. There is a hint of positivity and hope in that thread. And believe me, that those kinds of threads are rare these days. I personally believe that it’s because the member is from Colombia and perhaps treatment methods are different over there.

The only true success stories I have seen so far have been cases when one has persevered on an online dating site, or got to know somebody online first and then later on met in real life. It was through the Internet that I have managed to go on the handful of dates that I have gone out on, so I can attest to this. Despite the fact that the number of active female users on our site can be counted on one hand, a love connection being made on our forums is not unheard of.

How does Men’s Rights Advocacy (MRA) influence the climate of the board? Do you think feminism is a partial cause or stumbling block for love-shyness?

Who ever said BYSU was a classy lady?

R: While there are members on the forum that subscribe to MRA/MGTOW ideas and would call themselves as such, we original members of the forums like to keep a distance from such movements, as we feel that the goal of the forums is to provide a safe place for guys to vent their frustrations, encourage each other whenever there is a chance for success, and the rare success story.
It is frustrating to see over the past two years, a rise in MRA sentiment on the board spurred on by newer members who have come who identify as incels and whom may have heard about us from other sources. It’s a shame really, as the original idea that we had was for the forums to be an inclusive place where “normal” people and women could come by and offer us their input. But thanks to the more angry MRA-ish incel segment who are frustrated with women and dating, there was an attempt to steer the site into a more MRA-leaning place and try to earn its acceptance into the “manosphere“. These newer members took it upon themselves to drive out most of the female posters that we already had and to turn the place into a sort of “men only” club. Of course, some of us staff members saw this and decided that if we let the forums go that particular route, then nobody would take us seriously. The only reason why we never banned them or took any action initially is due to our free speech stance. But yeah, it’s basically thanks to them that feminists see us as they do.
While I may have my own reservations about feminism (I have the same reservations about MRAs, as neither has convinced me enough to fully support one or the other), I don’t see it as a cause for love-shyness. As I mentioned before, Love-shyness is a problem of the individual.

Is the forum a volatile place? You mention disagreements and flame wars. What topics commonly cause drama?

R: It can be pretty volatile. You see, most everybody that comes on there is an incel. These are the guys who are most bitter. Everybody has a pet theory as to why they can’t get a girl, and these theories usually come into conflict with each other.
There is the so-called “Looks-ist Crew” which believes it’s not looking like a perfect specimen of classical male beauty that hurts their chances with women and therefore, they are doomed to a life of solitude. On the opposite end of the ring, we have the “Confidence Mafia”, that says it’s all about not projecting yourself in the proper manner, and they are the ones who most likely follow PUA advice. Yeah, the names may be silly, but I guess it sort of reflects the dark humor that goes on over there.

There are arguments regarding politics and ideology. Before, when the forums were mostly populated by love-shies, it had, on average, a sort of center-left inclination. However, with the arrival of the more MRA-ish incels, it has sort of shifted towards the Far Right. There are Theist vs. Atheist arguments. Basically the sort of arguments that you can expect from fairly intelligent grown men with the social adaptation level of toddlers.

Of course, a topic that will always be popular is any topic trying to understand and analyze the modern woman. “Why are women so irrational?” “Why did they give me their number or friend me on Facebook and then ignore me?” “Why do women sign up for dating sites saying they are ‘looking for friends’?” “Are modern Western women amoral?” I think the most misogynistic topic is also the funniest. “Women are hypergamous sluts!” always has me laughing because the term “hypergamous” just sounds so funny to me. I don’t necessarily agree with these topics. But it’s an interesting reflection on how bitter these guys must of have become and on what drove them to such bitterness.
For the most part it looks like we normally shit on each other and engage in constant flame wars and arguments, but I don’t think that there is any real animosity amongst us. We tend to band together when we feel that we are under attack or when of our own is going through an emotional rough spot like if one threatens suicide (even though, as shown in the documentary, someone started a thread on painless methods of suicide).

Governmentsgetgirlfriends believes governments should run a social program that connects love-shy individuals with paid volunteers in order to match them up and build romantic skill. Is this a commonly held view on the board? Are there other proposed government or societal solutions?

murderers

R: GGG is suggesting that the government basically do what Dr. Gilmartin suggested in his study as a possible treatment. Of course I don’t agree with the way that GGG structured his program, but of all the suggested treatments that Dr. Gilmartin advocated, the most feasible one that we all agree on is the concept of “practice dating”. Dr. Gilmartin suggested that love-shy men be paired off with equally anxious women, where they could go on “practice dates” and gauge each other, while practicing on social skills that are required for pursuing romantic or sexual opportunities. This and sexual surrogate therapy were both suggested in his original study.

Is the documentary widely-known and watched on the forums?

R: How many have watched it, I wouldn’t know, but I suspect the latest rash of new members means “a lot.”
Although many believe that having Advanced and Urban White Trash in the film actually hurt our image more than help it, some of the guys have managed to find humor in it, even if it was unintentional. We have to keep in mind that both Advanced and UWT had a reputation on our forums for a reason. Advanced because he was basically the father of the “Looks-ist Crew” and for his desire to pursue plastic surgery to look like your average androgynous-looking Asian male pop star.

Advanced, leader of the Looks-ist Crew

Advanced, leader of the Looks-ist Crew

UWT, on the other hand, was basically known for bringing entertainment value to the forums, with his sea shanties and “forum fan fiction”. When he found our forums, he dabbled in PUA and even joined one particular PUA lair in the DC area. It seemed to operate almost like a cult, and he was prohibited from even talking to us. I guess that was when he appeared on the film. Both have left the forums ever since filming wrapped up, as Advanced felt that he was portrayed in a negative light, and UWT left because he felt that his real-life identity would be known after a series of troll invasions occurred on the forums.

Why are you love-shy?

R: The toughest question is always the last one, right? Heh. Well, from what I have experienced, I can say that it’s mostly due to my shy and introverted nature. When I was a child, although I was shy and was bullied a lot, I did manage to have friends and I had no problem interacting with girls. Shit, I even had some girls as friends and playmates! As much as I miss those pre-pubescent carefree childhood days of interacting with girls without anxiety, I don’t think that was the main reason why I am what I am now.

I lived in California until I was like 13 years old. By then I started to like girls and I was going through a shy phase, so I never talked to any that I liked and I was also bullied by many girls. Then, my family moved back to Puerto Rico, and in an act of adolescent rebellion, I refused to learn to speak Spanish. Of course, we never moved back, so I eventually picked up the language, but I was so self-conscious about my accent that I didn’t like speaking to others. I still am self-conscious about it.

At best, my peers described me as the shy and quiet kid who never spoke to anybody, except when spoken to, and at worst as haughty and aloof. I remember one particular episode during my high school years, when one of the school guidance counselors, randomly said to me “Sieg Heil” and gave me a Nazi salute. This was before Columbine and certainly before I discovered my love for German rock bands. I suspect that some kids may have thought that I was a racist.

My mother would tell me how a “good woman” would eventually come into my life and that all I had to do was be patient and wait for her. I was skeptical, even back then, but I hoped against hope that this would be true.

Then college came and I noticed that not only was I still incapable of talking to women on a casual level (or anybody for that matter as I didn’t even make friends in college), but that I felt that I was way behind everybody else on the sex and relationships learning curve.
Then I discovered Internet chat rooms, IM applications and Internet forums. I met some girls in those sort of places, but save for a few, I have never met most of them in real life. I eventually went out on a few dates that never led anywhere, due in part to my shyness and in part to the fact that we may have never been compatible anyway. I then discovered Love-Shy.com during an episode of heavy depression that has never really let go and the rest, as they say, is history.

As of this day, I still have never been able to talk to a woman in an informal setting without feeling sick to my stomach, much less have a significant other. I’m still a virgin and I still feel like shit most of the time. But I feel like I have learned from my past mistakes and realized that maybe all I really ever needed was to feel like I could talk to a woman like I used to talk to my girl-friends back when I was a kid. Without pressure. It would be kind of hard though. I don’t even have any close male friends in real life, much less a social circle and I feel like an outsider in what is supposed to be my own culture.

As for sex? I figured that if I reach 39 and I’m still a virgin, then I’ll take up forum member sareias’ offer to visit him in Germany, treat myself to what most people take for granted and hire an escort. I know that some will ask why I don’t just masturbate more or something. But I’m no fool. I’ve been masturbating for most of my life and even I know that it’s not the same as the real thing. I feel like I would have nothing to lose. I don’t think that most women would want to have anything to do with an inexperienced older virgin anyway.

Advertisements

50 thoughts on “Interview With a Love Shy

  1. First of all, I’m not incel. I just describe myself as LS.

    Second, while it would be ridiculous for me to deny ever writing my more controversial thoughts, I don’t see how this is relevant to being Love Shy, as I have never advocated violence towards women.

    • Our apologies; the article has been corrected and you’re no longer named an incel.

      Your “more controversial thoughts” on school shootings may not have much to do with love shyness, but your encouragement of GGG to KILL A LADY constitutes advocating violence against women, and your support of George Sodini implies that you agree with/admire his decision to take violent action against a system that’s working against him and you.
      This not only speaks a lot to your character, but does in fact reflect on the love shy community, as the larger internet is kind of trying to figure out what the deal is. I would not try or want to link this kind of thinking to the community as a whole, but it is notable that there are so many individuals within it that support extremely drastic and immoral action to solve their problem.

      • hi Solomon,

        I’m “Michael” in the film. I wasn’t going to do this but I suppose if you want a “sane” person’s perspective on the issues I could answer some questions for this site.

        As for Ramm, I’m not really sure what to make of his comments, and really only he can answer for them. They make me uncomfortable personally, but in my interactions with him he’s seemed like a decent guy, so I’ve always chalked it up to venting/frustration and gave him some benefit of the doubt. Of course it is irresponsible to say such things, and we would not tolerate that kind of “advice” on the forum today, so long as moderation catches it in time. As you’ve noted, we have a lot of people on the forum with a lot of controversial ideas, it would be hard to censure everybody, but threats of violence are strictly forbidden.

        • Hey Michael. Welcome to our site.

          Obviously, being love-shy is an issue that’s not studied a whole lot, and I would not be surprised if there are reasons behind the many controversial opinions we’ve come across. But I don’t personally feel like any one person can accurately represent an entire community. I think we just felt that it was in the reader’s best interest to disclose stuff for this interview in particular. But I think every comment providing a different perspective broadens our understanding of it.

  2. It is true that I suggested to GGG to go through with his plan. Yes it was a stupid thing to do in retrospect, but at the time I thought it was funny because I figured (correctly) that he would never go through with it. Plus, I thought other people would see humor in it as that is the kind of humor that I and the other writers at The Daily Raider used to deal with. But then again, we always did find the most tasteless satire to be hilarious and we were pretty much writing for ourselves.

    In Sodini’s case, he is more like an “anti-hero” precisely for the reasons you stated in your article. Because he serves as the greatest example of just how far can an incel be driven into madness because he feels that the world has rejected him and CAN be a potential public safety issue.

    Everybody else besides Sodini however. Well let’s just say that when your mass-murderer with no previous criminal history and whom otherwise was probably an all-around nice guy, decides to go postal, there must be a very compelling reason behind it and it’s not because of the narrative that mass media likes to force feed us about how they were just “insane” all along. Whenever a case like Columbine, VT and even the Christopher Dorner shooting spree comes up, I like to go beyond what everybody is saying. The it turns out that these people were being crapped on by the people around them in some way. So they decided to make their own justice. I think that’s admirable, if tragic. But that’s just my opinion and I know that not everyone will agree with it.

  3. Wouldn’t give me a time of the day? This is how you describe an extremely complex story that went on for almost 2 years? Very bad, kid. That girl who “wouldn’t give me the time of the day” was actually the single most aggressive girl in showing she likes me I have ever heard of, let alone met.

    I am asking you to edit this part. Not the part on arrest. I admit I was arrested. But it’s shameful that you could say she “didn’t want to give me a time of the day” before you know the story (it will be on the blog one day). Also, I hardly threatened her because she never saw it but that’s another thing I don’t care how you word that very much.

      • For example anti-black racisl slurs should be censored, right?
        Why?
        Because it constitutes insulting.
        The same should apply to the phrase “a piece of shit”.
        (Some humble opinions)

        • No, slurs are censored because free speech doesn’t protect hate speech. Regular insults are not censored because they are equal opportunity.

          (Also racist stuff isn’t censored all over the Internet, let’s be real here.)

          • Equal opportunity?
            I’m a Christian(Monotheistic Messianic). That’s why I nearly always refuse to insult people.
            So insults are not a form of hate speech, or not?
            By the way, now it is Sabbath in my place.
            (Not a Rabbinical Jew here so I use the internet during the Sabbath)

              • No I’m defending others.
                Rammspieler and GGG have little connections with me.
                We do not always agree with each other.
                Actually as a radical Christian Socialist from a very small Judaized sect of Christianity, I do not agree with racists(but only few white racists exist on LS.com and these days none of them are active), pagans, atheists, agnostics, liberals, right-wingers… but I sometimes help people who may not like me since I serve YHVH.

                Sabbath Shalom!

            • This problem is religious.
              Allowing insults is an attack on YHVH ‘s true faith, Christianity(Not Pagan pseudo-Christianity such as Lutheranism, Catholicism and any other trinitarian churches…..) .
              (By the way, original Christianity was and still is a sect of Judaism.)

          • Insulting is against YHVH so that as His servant I will not let it go.
            Yes. I’m a LS, an Incel as well as an Aspie.
            Just like other Christian Aspies I’m very very firm in religious/moral standards.

            You can insult me and I will not fight back.
            But if you insult others I will not let it go.

            Would you please edit your article? Thank you very much!
            You can disagree with Rammspieler, GGG and others but please cease to do name-calling.
            Thanks!

            Sabbath Shalom!

              • So, as a non-LS/incel/aspie, I STILL find the “piece of shit” part childish and uncalled for. It’s how Solomon talks, and in a conversation it’s different, but as a piece of journalism it comes across as distractingly personal. It’s just childish to call names, right? Also, if these people as Ramm and others point out suffer from depression/etc wouldn’t it be nice if people didn’t call them “pieces of shit” even if that’s how you feel? Is that like fat-shaming or slut-shaming? Rude is rude and I don’t object to rude because he was clearly rude – but “piece of shit” makes a core value judgement that I’m not super comfortable with. What does the phrase “piece of shit” add? Doesn’t it actually take away from the point which is that GGG was rude and Ramm walks the line much better and helps you understand the community more? Is this piece about exploring a culture or exploring Solomon’s opinions about it? Honestly, it isn’t clear. If it’s an opinion piece, fine… I might not like the way it’s dealt with, but fine. However, it isn’t really framed in that way (opinion piece) so it feels rather off to me.

                Also reminds me of this… http://i.imgur.com/ST9E4mk.png (which I got from Ari/Solomon … I’m sure you’ll both recall the incident!)

                • This site isn’t journalism. It is 100% opinion, which I think is very clear.

                  We’re “soliciting your mom for sex” shaming and “murder threat” shaming.

                  • I guess I view interviews as more journalistic in nature is all and that this article is an interview, so comes off that way. Like I said, if you’re gonna call it 100% opinion, then I just take personal issue with it, which is fine. Blogs and media should be controversial.

                    I think that the actions are bad, no argument. Shitty even, but that’s not the point I was making. Calling someone a piece of shit for that is like calling someone who is ostensibly and clearly fat “ugly” or calling someone who sleeps with many people a “slut.” Murder and incest are pretty universally condemned though (by myself too), so then it makes it ok to degrade someone? I don’t really think so.

                    I guess I’m just trying to “understand how, invisibly, it [in this instance, your article] affects … the way we see ourselves and others.”

                    • You guys are both forgetting that GGG blackmailed a woman into having sex with him. Maybe it’s unprofessional to insult someone in an interview piece, but I’m not gonna let anyone make me feel bad for being mean to a rapist.

                    • Solomon: you’re allowed to ‘be mean’ to people I guess. Go on ahead with it, but I feel strongly against that way of thinking and probably will no matter what you say. I still think you’re a super cool person IRL! :P

                  • No, because calling someone fat “ugly” assumes already that being fat is “bad.” Being fat is not, in itself, “bad” and it’s calling someone a name for something they can’t help (that’s why it’s “shaming”). Threatening to kill someone IS bad, and it IS something that someone can keep themselves from doing. These things are not in the same league at all. I don’t understand the connection you’re making (because they’re not related), and I don’t understand your last sentence.

                    • Valid, I guess. I suppose I’m thinking these threats/actions stem from a mental issue and so it’s still kind of derogatory to call someone a name who clearly has some serious issues (like the depression or aspergers talked about here). Attack the actions, not the person. That’s at the crux of what I think and believe, personally. But it’s just that: personal. I’m not saying change it, I’m just saying I don’t like it. You are welcome to disagree.

                      And I’m trying to understand how your words may invisibly/between the lines imply that these people are “pieces of shit” aka worthless aka this is just an article making fun of people. And it could be a really interesting article (and there are many points that are still). As a kid who was repeatedly told that I was a piece of shit by my peers (effectively anyways cause little kids use different words), I probably just have a different perspective and was offended by the superfluous name calling. I still don’t think it adds anything to the piece whether it’s opinion or journalism but makes it sound childish (cause that’s what name calling is).

                    • This isn’t just an article making fun of people. I’m kind of peeved that the actual content has been devolved into talking about this one phrase (which Solomon used to condemn specific piece-of-shit actions, and not to say “haha, look someone is depressed”).

                      The blog’s aim is to unpack culture, media, news, and politics that shape our values. The interview sheds a lot of light on this. In fact, the interview is really good, and I think Rammspieler is a really honest and thoughtful interview. We had to cut a lot of good stuff out because it was over 5000 words long, but what remains is also incredibly interesting.

                      Is it GGG’s condition one that leads him to do these messed up things? I don’t know. I am not a psychologist. But it’s something that we can explore. Nevertheless, doing what he did makes him a jerk, which btw, is just a nicer way of saying “piece of shit” but it’s still an insult on his character for what he did. However, I’m almost positive that if we’d used the word “jerk” this entire conversation wouldn’t have happened (“jerk” would actually be an incredibly understatement in this context), which only goes to show that it’s not the fact that we insulted him, it’s the fact that Solomon used strongly-worded insult that bothers people. This is something that I’m not personally bothered by since, you know, rape and potential murder was kind of in the mix.

                    • Ari: I didn’t say the article wasn’t interesting or have interesting points (in fact, I said the opposite in my very last comment!). However, this was literally something that has bothered me since I read the article last night as posted when their weren’t any comments yet (I have witnesses!). The point I am making is EXACTLY what you’re peeved about: strong inflammatory language takes away from the good work Solomon, Ramm, and BYSU did in this article, and it makes me peeved too.

                    • I can’t respond to your newest comment because WP doesn’t allow for very long threads. However, this is an “I don’t like your tone” argument. Which is a terrible argument. It can be applied to absolutely every post we have here on BYSU. It the tone is established and it’s part of the style guide.. So the tone is not going to be the same, and I think that’s okay. The argument itself is also often used in order to shut a perfectly valid conversation down (which is happening right now).

                      I’ve said it before, but I’ll say it here now too: the site isn’t a journalism site, and it’s not an education site. Considering this: what does it matter the way someone says something if they are right? It matters in an education setting, and it matters in a journalism setting. It actually matters here too at BYSU, but just in a different direction. It’s not worth attacking the tone and not the content. If a reader lets a word (which is not a slur, or hatespeech, or shaming, or anything socially or politically charged) keep them from focusing on actual content, that is the reader’s problem. Because if you look at any of the posts, you can apply this to all of them. You can apply it to the post where I say NPR is goofy (if you are particularly sensitive about NPR). You can apply it to the post where David says Libertarians are children. But if someone were to tell me they took offense to an insult at NPR, I would be loath to changing it. I don’t see a reason to other than that “it’s mean,” which Solomon is obviously aware of, given his comment above, and which was a conscious choice.

                    • Didn’t say you should change it! I really never did, and have stated that at least twice. I don’t read all your articles in their entirety (sorry!) so I didn’t bring it up other times. I’ve also noted that this is a personal issue of mine.

                      Nevertheless, tone and content are related and affect each other and I find that really interesting to look at given my background/field of expertise (dramaturgy: analysis of the written word and its affect on people and the world, however small that person or their world might be). It’s a public post, and I don’t have qualms in discussing details of the post however minute they might be. I won’t bring it up again though since you clearly don’t like to talk about it/think it’s irrelevant, because I respect both of you (lots), and because in the end, I already said I thought it is an interesting article with many good points and insights and I still think that. It’s ok if you don’t agree with me.

                    • Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply you wanted us to change it (rather, I was echoing that other guy’s appeal that we should). It’s up to Solomon anyway. And I don’t think he will because people got sad about his gaming article simply because of the title, and there’s no way he would change the title.

                      Metablog comment: I do agree that tone and content are related in terms of how information is received. I put “confrontational” in the BYSU style guide under the Tone section because that particular tone gets more attention and shares (the same way a “5 Reasons Why” post gets lots of clicks). It was a really conscious decision. If we’re not aiming specifically to educate, I don’t think we’re losing anything. If this were an education blog, it’d take on a REALLY different tone (and it would also be more boring to me).

                      I remember Solly and I having this conversation with Cole not too long ago when we were having a drink at Jupiter. It was all about how a person doesn’t have the responsibility to put something nicely if what they are saying is important. Obviously they can, if they want to be extra nice, or if their goal is to get you on their side. But people use this all the time when they talk about how “angry” say feminists are (when really maybe someone is angry for a reason and the fact that they’re angry is not important as WHY they’re angry?). As far as content goes, it’s the other person’s loss if the focus is on how something is said as opposed to what is said.

                  • SO much scrolling to reply.

                    Metablog: I agree, generally. But when someone confronts me with something that sits really poorly with me, I will react because it in turn makes me angry, you know? I think it stems from my personal experience with this sort of a thing as well as some things I just believe about the world (like being kind is always better… kindness dose not equal agreement or acquiescence or being happy about something). Cole would be the first to tell you that I’m way too nice to people most of the time. Frankly, that’s ok with me if I’m “too nice” – but I suppose it rubs people the wrong way. I think you can be mad but not mean, disagree without insulting, and all I felt was that it crossed the line (for me) in a way that actually made me uncomfortable and made me think about the ways that we judge others and relate to them. Which is what confrontational stuff should do. And in the end, is the purpose of this blog I think.

                    • I mean if this only comes down to whether you and I disagree about calling a potential murderer and rapist a piece of shit, then I guess that’s something we’ll disagree on, and I’m kewl with that.

                  • Then show people that it is morally wrong.
                    Don’t shame people, please.

                    Someone makes a mistake.
                    It is a problem to be solved, not something to be mocked.

                    Would you please edit it?
                    Thank you very much!

                    Sabbath Shalom!

  4. Solomon, could you please explain 1. How I made a murder threat to a girl? 2. How I blackmailed a woman into sex?

    Also, I see you have not removed that “wouldn’t give him the time of the day” thing, though I have never said anything like that about that girl. In fact, it’s not like I said almost anything at all about it. I was arrested 6 times, 4 times for protesting in order to get incel recognized, once naked with a drum

    • Alright dude I think you should know that I did do some research here and so have read the ‘true story’, but I’ll post it here so everyone can see what you consider to be not blackmail.

      “In fact, what happened is that this woman offered sex than changed her mind when I said that it will be weird having sex using condoms because the previous girl I had sex with was on the pill. Not that I wouldn’t have sex with her with a condom, like they claim, only that it will be kinda weird in the start. She immediately said she changed her mind. I then tried to persuade her for 3 hours (which is normal male behavior, not coercion) and when she eventually agreed to do it again she changed her mind once more. You know why? Because I asked her to write “brb” during our Facebook chats. She just said she’s not gonna do it and that I should forget about her.

      What many of you don’t understand is that she wasn’t doing this to Joe Average but to a guy who was incel for 10 years and whose only sexual experience prior to that was having sex with a girl twice for like 30 seconds. I called her on the phone and cried, begging her not to treat me the way she did but she didn’t care about the stress she just put me through at all. So I called her again and insulted her, being rightfully angry. After that I put just one of her pictures on this blog, without her name, location, anything, without calling her and telling her I will remove it if, just deciding to leave it up there out of sheer rage.

      It was her who called me and offered sex to remove it. It was to be just one hour of sex, with no cuddling or kissing, and I was never to call her and contact her again. Of course I had to accept it. Only a person who doesn’t understand incel or a raging feminazi would say it wasn’t right to accept it. I would be insane not accept it.

      Saying I was a creep to accept is brazen hate, not just against incel men or generally lonely men, AGAINST ALL MEN AND THEIR SEXUALITY.”

      The fact that she was the one that offered sex to solve this insane creepy problem doesn’t change anything. You were the one causing the problem, you were the one who accepted this payment instead of being decent and just taking it down. It was blackmail as soon as you accepted the offer. Whatever happened afterward is irrelevant. Doesn’t matter if she liked it, or that she confessed to repeatedly changing her mind just to tease you. Notice also that the comments you present as proof have been removed, presumably by her.

      It honestly doesn’t matter what happened after you blackmailed her to make it alright, because it should never have gotten to that point. The sex shouldn’t have happened.

      What got said in that three hours of begging? Knowing your openness about suicide and the fatal effects of dick-dryness, you probably said something about how you’re an incel and a sustained record of failure could lead you to kill yourself? That IS coercion. After that, tearful phone calls. When she still refused to bone you, you insulted her and threw a tantrum on the internet.

      I know you get this like every day and will just brush it off, but I’ll keep going because you’ve given me an excuse to express my disgust with you.
      Just because you’re incel and have long periods of rejection and no sex, doesn’t mean you get to ignore the rules of engaging with people and of not being a creepy fuck. All that bullshit about “I’m an incel, I haven’t gotten laid in 10 years” doesn’t entitle you to badger a woman for THREE HOURS. It does not make that any less ridiculous. It doesn’t entitle you to extra special understanding or treatment.

      Your assertion that this is normal male behavior is both wrong and disturbing. This is selfish creep behavior. What you think of as normal male behavior is manipulative, coercive, and gross. Forget about what that lady did to you. You are responsible for YOURSELF, and what YOU do. For all your failures, all the women who turned you down for whatever reason, have you ever considered, like, changing yourself in some way? Cause you’ve been maintaining for years a victim complex philosophy about how the government should help you, how wah wah wah women play games, feminists are mean and rude, it is murder that I can’t have sex. Nobody is entitled to sex. A lot of people manage to have it, and you yourself have managed to have a good amount of it, in, I’ll be charitable and assume, a normal, uncoerced fashion. But there is no human right to sex. Your parents are murderers because they won’t introduce your ass to girls? Grow the fuck up. Nobody is responsible for your dick but you.

      And yet that seems to be all I get out of you, that you can do no wrong, you’re just trying to see to your needs, trying to feed the sexual beast that rages within. That the government has a responsibility to help you contain it before it eats you alive. People understand you better than you think. I honestly don’t care that you tried to have sex with your mom. I wouldn’t care if you actually sealed the deal. The reason I mentioned it is to show the crazy lengths you’ll go to to get your nut, how absolutely important that is to you. “I was soooooo horny” isn’t an excuse, it’s part of a profile that depicts you as a self-obsessed, entitled piece of shit.

      • “this insane creepy problem”

        The fact that you use these words for an extremely painful problem that millions of men and women have is very revealing and very, very sad.

        “You were the one causing the problem”

        Incorrect, but understandable that you would make this mistake as I haven’t told the whole story then. Of course I wasn’t the one “causing the problem”, unless you think that reacting that way to a remark that using condoms will feel weird (NOT THAT I DON’T WANT TO USE THEM OR THAT I’M IN ANYWAY UNCOMFORTABLE USING THEM WITH A GIRL WHO WASN’T ON THE PILL). The fact that I asked her to write “brb” when she’d just go away from our Facebook chats for 15 minutes is a good reason? Of course not, unless she is absolutely insane. And she was insane but not that insane. Her insane behavior that day was, as it was later revealed to me, a part of a scheme to fuck me up out of boredom. Of course these two “problems I created” weren’t real problems, they were just excuses to toy with me. She admitted this weeks after, when we were already in a relationship. By that time I was just lucky that I am in a “relationship” (in reality a grueling hell her insanity was putting me through) so I couldn’t do anything after that admission.

        Unsurprisingly, she didn’t suddenly start respecting me after I put her picture on the blog or after we had sex. She was terrible all the way through our relationship and its a crazy creature that shouldn’t be in a relationship with anybody.

        Now, of course, I could be making all that up to make her look bad and myself look good. But I am not. I am no angel. I admit that I would have overtly blackmailed her if I thought it could succeed but I though she wasn’t gonna cave in so I just posted that picture to release some of the frustration.

        On the other hand, if you believe that I was the one that created the problem by putting her pic in the first place didn’t she create a problem for me by teasing me that way, thereby putting me through immense suffering and frustration that day? Because that is what I felt. The fact that you think I should not have been feeling that is irrelevant and stems from your own insanity, because you’re a member or TAC.

        You say “Doesn’t matter that she confessed to repeatedly changing her mind just to tease you.”

        It does matter. It shows that not only there was no problem I created (condoms and brb were just first excuses to be me found, as she herself admitted) but that there was a problem she created for me by her “teasing” (which was more of an emotional massacre for somebody like me). But in order to understand the second clause properly you’d have to understand the kind of deprivation incel creates. I doubt you are able to do that as your mind is corrupted by extreme liberalism, which unfortunately turns human beings into monsters.

        “Notice also that the comments you present as proof have been removed, presumably by her.”

        Incorrect again. You seem to be the one making stuff up here. They are still on my blog, under the username is Anitram.

        http://governmentsgetgirlfriends.wordpress.com/2012/09/30/a-personal-post-on-suicide/

        The rest of your post is just standard liberal blabbering, combined with some good old fashioned hate of incels, solipsism and denial of human nature so I won’t go into it. For example, you even fail to understand that my program isn’t about sex at all when short reading of my program shows otherwise (and is one of the things that gets many people immediately banned on my blog when they say it and rightly so – if somebody can’t bother to read what I actually propose I can’t be bothered to allow them to post).

        And, of course, the idea that I should have rejected her offer or just taken it down is simply hilarious. It is presupposing noncel behavior, and even then many noncels would have reacted the way I did. But that’s something TAC members can hardly understand.

        • Yeah so basically you did exactly what I said and 1. blamed your behavior on her, not yourself, and 2. claimed some special privilege because you are incel.
          The fact that what you did is commmon noncel behavior as well doesn’t make it alright. Noncel people are not necessarily alright. They’re just noncel.

  5. 1. So I am not to be in any way affected by what somebody, anybody does, no matter if it relates to something so important to me that it is number one? That’s silly, boy. 2. No, not at all. If I claimed “privilege” I would have taken steps to enforce that privilege, otherwise it’s not a privilege at all. TAC members use the word privilege all the time and completely incorrectly. There was no way for me to enforce any privilege because it didn’t exist. The fact that I’m incel is important due to point 1- the pain I felt because of this was much larger than that an ordinary noncel would feel. What she did to was extremely painful to me and there’s no getting around that.

    To suggest that I should have rejected the offer would, for example, mean that I was resigning to my only sexual experience up to that date being two intercourses that lasted for about 30 seconds, with a possibility that it might stay that way forever, if not for a very long time. Hell, the first girl I had sex with told me that she was sure that I’ll never bed anybody but her in my lifetime because I’m such a loser. If I rejected that girl whose pic I put up it would be akin to suicide at that time. Only a lunatic would do that in my situation. IN MY SITUATION.

    Anyway, I know all of this won’t dissuade you so unless you have something insightful to say maybe I should end here. I said what happened and I thank you for allowing me that.

  6. Pingback: INCEL / Love-shyness / PUA hate / Celibacy by Proxy: All Explained. | My SEETHINGS

  7. You guys seem like some self- important misters who put themselves to a pedestal and demand a life partner by birthright. Its completely in your responsibility of where you are in your life currently at. And its your responsibiity to make new friends or people into your life. Complaining about something that you only have power over just makes you a complete loser and clown. If you do that you give your power away and that puts you to a role of a victim or boocher.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s