"Involuntary celibacy"

Post Reply New Topic

Is apparently a thing according to Wikipedia.

Not sure if this is funny, depressing, or both.

Why would involuntary celibacy be funny at all? And yes, it is a "thing" - a real condition. It is very difficult to deal with and nothing to poke fun of. It also does not make one any less of a man.

No one is entitled to partnered sex, a lack of willing sex partners isn't a condition it's a circumstance.
It's not like missing an arm, it's like not having a bracelet. I don't see how incel is any different from not having other things you may want.
Celibacy doesn't make anyone any less of a man or less of a woman or a whatever.

Indeed. It's not like if you don't use it, you'll lose it

That Wikipedia page sort of describes my life. The only difference is that I have turned down several sexual opportunities because the circumstances were not right.

while noone is entitled to a partner or sex it is something that is often used to denote categories of people (you know, alphas, betas, omegas). It can also give future prospects the wrong idea about you, especially at older ages.

Plus, not being entitled to something does not mean a person will not suffer some distress in its absence.

Your second sentence is true. Not being able to have partnered sex if you want to,does suck, and that's one of the ways it can suck. But it's still not some kind of condition or injustice.
It's not having someone to play tennis with, the longer it goes on, the more difficult it'll be to have a chance at Wimbledon. Might that be distressing? yes. Does that make it a "thing"? no.

I don't believe it's used to categorize people in any direct way in the real world. And the alpha/beta talk is really not very common (and in some opinions, not accurate)

No one is entitled to friends. No one is entitled to be liked by, or to enjoy the company of, others. Does that mean that loneliness does not exist?

Being celibate isnt going to be like a timebomb, its just like a ding on a car. Noticeable to some, might put some off buying it, but theres still plenty of good chances.

and yes, in the real world there are categories. They just dont follow structured names we use in this forum. And yes they apply to both genders, though usually they are to dismiss people from the same gender as threats.

No, loneliness is a feeling.
Incel is not a feeling. It's being a virgin (or having a dry spell I guess). Might you have feelings about it, yes. Those feelings (which may even include loneliness) are things.

Okay, better example. No one is entitled to money. Does that mean that poverty is not a thing? I mean, poverty is not a feeling. It is a circumstance that might cause certain feelings.

There are many negative circumstances a person might find themselves in. Many of them have names. I just don't see why you seem to take issue with this particular circumstance also having a name.

^^^ i think that would be parallel if it was called "involuntary poverty".

when you use the word "poverty", it is understood that there are all sorts of factors involved, some of which are within the power of an individual to change. but the word "involuntary" implies that a person was thrust into a situation without having any hand in it whatsoever. that happens in some cases, but certainly not all of them. perhaps "reluctant celibacy" would be a better term, meaning that the person does not want it to be that way, but for one or many reasons it is the case.

I think the "involuntary" part is merely meant to distinguish them from those who choose to be celibate, like asexual people, or certain clergy members. I can see the point you're making, but I think that changing an already accepted term from "involuntary" to "reluctant" is a bit nit-picky.

I agree that there are many factors affecting a person's ability to find sex, some of which are under the person's control. Some, however, are not. A person cannot control their physical appearance for instance (or at least can only do so to a limited degree), nor can they always control the fact that they may live in an area with a skewed gender ratio, nor can they control the fact that they may have a mental condition that causes them great difficulty in forming the connections with others that lead to sexual opportunities. Any one of these things can prevent a person from having sex, or at least cause them to have far more time in between sexual experiences.

I think maybe that there is fear that those who are in that circumstance will start using it as an excuse to blame others for their problem. That fear is not entirely groundless. But they're already doing that, regardless of whether or not that circumstance has a name.

It's a depressing article. I've read it in the past, as it was brought up several times before. In a way, it's like hunger and war. It's depressing, but it happens, and it happens for a reason. Where war settles conflicts between political, economic, religious, cultural or ethnic groups, and hunger without intervention allows a population to decline to a natural level in relation to food supply, involuntary celibacy seems to stop those who aren't deemed attractive enough as reproductive partners from reproducing.

of course - i did say there are SOME factors that can cause someone to be partnerless. but many have factors under their control that they could change, but choose not to. i would call that "voluntary celibacy", but they do not.