I have just published my study about incel ideology, radicalization, and mental health

I have just published my study about incel ideology, radicalization, and mental health

I would like to hear your criticism and feedback.

Attached: sample_9f9fa63c7aee1e8432dbbaaf01c9014e.jpg (850x850, 100.63K)

Other urls found in this thread:

journals.lib.sfu.ca/index.php/jicw/article/view/3817/3354
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

well post the fucking link

journals.lib.sfu.ca/index.php/jicw/article/view/3817/3354

Attached: sample_8a7a0fd7fd4d6310283a10d6012df6ef.jpg (850x1275, 548.34K)

If you aren't gaining any money from it like the leftist LARPers that "investigate" incels then this is a new level of retardation

I can't, bang posting is a bannable offense

shut the fuck up you virgin cunt and choke on these dubs.

Attached: 1643064640490.jpg (480x360, 14.03K)

so far its worded like a hit piece that didnt actually bother researching incels at all
>Incels, a misogynist subculture which exists almost entirely online andthat has been linked to at least four mass murders in North America.
trash "incels are le violent murderers worse than ISIS" yeah like that hasnt been said a million times before. dropped.

What's bang posting?

Page 4
>a largesubset of Incels justify rape (rapecells) and other violence against women as a means of shaping their ideal society(Beauchamp, 2019).
What in the name of fuck is wrong with you?
I'd consider myself a "Jane Goodall" of Incels. Not an Incel, but I spent a good portion of time around them so I'd say my word is quite credible.
Barely any Incels I've ever seen genuinely support raping women. There's a few, but they're generally considered "crazies".
You're a sick fuck for genuinely putting the idea that most people who are lonely men who can't get pussy are rapists. Like a genuine sick, sadistic, mentally ill, twisted fuck. You should be thrown in the darkest corner of a subterranean prison until the day your bones become dust.

Attached: 1242623753566755647762.jpg (275x183, 7.77K)

Sophia Moskalenko is the dumbest motherfucker alive

Attached: Sophia-Moskalenko-How-does-the-sharing-of-images-and-memes-online-contribute-to-radicalisation[1].jpg (1920x1080, 169.53K)

>What's bang posting?

BANG BANG BANG BANG

That's bang posting

Attached: BANG.png (300x300, 130.88K)

check out this ni99a, shes gonna shoot up your mom's house on god

Attached: R[1].png (1920x1080, 1.15M)

Alright, I actually read the goddamn paper and it's some good shit.
You guys should take a look at this too.

Attached: 1256252.png (664x251, 63.23K)

>what is clear from our data is that incels are in dire need of psychological help
implying professional psychological help
which is not clear at all
i personally find as you did too that violence is not in thesis of the incel ideology and i do not consider the (infrequent and fringe) violent discussion as adding any value to incel ideas
yes incels want to fuck and its not happening for them
lots of the nonviolent ideas traded on incel communities are literally normie common knowledge but incels grew up not communicating with normies a whole lot so its newer to them
what could be better for incels than to build a community to discuss the nature of these real world problems they face around communicating with the opposite gender on a level they can understand than subjecting incels to professional help by people who have zero hope of sympathizing or adding to the dynamic incel discussion

Attached: 95442174_p0_master1200.jpg (849x1200, 626.91K)

Read through it.

Overall, it provides a well needed deafferenting opinion on the subject. This paper made me realize how little researchers in this field actually understand the topic they're publishing papers on.

Not going to lie, the abstract and incel subculture was very poorly written, in my opinion. It was plagued by common mischaracterizations and the material that was sourced from other papers was so laughably misguided it read more like uniformed personal opinions. The way these written sections were constructed in the paper, felt to me like I was reading a grade 12 English class final project, where everyone had to do their own part and try to piece something coherent together at the end.

The research portion seems well constructed and well implemented. Didn't have time to look through the explanations for the ideology behind the testing, but based on what I know, the results seem more accurate than what else is out there currently.

Despite it's flaws, I think this will be an important citation in order to provide a more balanced and accurate understanding of incels.

Why don't you pop-Sci journalists and social 'scientists' just interview one of us instead of taking everything for your 'studies' from propoganda and hitpieces made to malign us?
I'm just a very lonely high functioning 32 year old man. I want someone to take care of and to care for me in return. I think rape is wrong because sex is something special to be shared between a man and woman who love each other. How exactly is this misogynist? Even the term incel is an inaccurate description. It began as a tongue in cheek way to refer to oneself. Kind of how guitarfag has no homosexual connotations nor homophobic.
Sex is not the problem with incels. You can't slap a bandaid on this issue by simply visiting a prostitute. The crux of it all is longing for a deep romantic connection with someone. Sex is a crucial part of love, and we live in a world obsessed with sex while also cheapening it and actively discouraging the type of relationship we desire. Naturally this leads to some resentment towards the world but far more common than extremist ideology and lashing out or getting into politics we just detach from the world. I bought a house, I saved and invested, then I quit my job. I don't live on much but at the same time I can't get the only thing I want so it's trivial to live well otherwise off of little.

You don't know fucking shit, retard. You will never understand shit.

Attached: 4225.gif (365x254, 1.21M)

Is there a mistake in Figure 1 on page 12? It seems to state that 2 of every 7 diagnosed autists self-report as non-autistic. The other similar results on that chart seem to imply that the diagnosed group is necessarily a subset of the self-report group but that trend doesn't follow here, which doesn't make immediate sense. Is this explained via the way the data was collected?

>felt to me like I was reading a grade 12 English class final project, where everyone had to do their own part and try to piece something coherent together at the end
welcome to social science academia!

Read through 90% of it, seems to do what it wants to pretty well. You wanted to find the rate of mental illness and radical views among incels and you did.
You could've thrown in a few extra "generally"s to broaden the scope of your definition of incel in and around the abstract and made sure to specify that it is not only sexual but also romantic attraction incels long for, but besides that it seems to do a decent job of describing the community in a way the layman can understand in only a handful of paragraphs.
t. non-"incel" but sperg-esque involuntarily celibate guy who dedicates a great deal of time to observation

Attached: 1591156671833.jpg (1200x1054, 76.16K)

>just interview one of us
The authors literally collected results from a survey of Incels.

Besides, an interview of an Incel? Do you think an Incel would be willing to actually sit down and have a candid conversation about why he is an Incel and not get choked up by depressive thoughts or anxiety?