This article details my thoughts on incels. I discuss the social phenomenon of incels, and the broader phenomenon of young men who are considered unattractive. I further make the argument that the way society treats these men is unacceptable. Finally, I will discuss my personal experience and philosophy on living a good life, in spite of these issues.

The word “Incel” refers to two related but distinct groups.

On the one hand, “Incel” is a portmanteau of the words “involuntarily celibate”. In the most literal definition of the term, this a person who desires sex, but is unable to have it. However, generally “celibate” is defined loosely - we really mean intimate romantic relationships, whether it is sexual or not. Let's be clear - everyone who desires this but hasn't had it is an incel, by definition.

On the other hand, “Incel” also refers to a group of men defined by a set of general ideologies, as well as the circumstance of being involuntarily celibate. There is no book of incel-dom, nor is there any real cultural focal point for them. This can really be attributed to the fact that the culture of incels has been formed online, which is by nature democratic, and is the manifestation of many people's personal interpretations of their life merged into one.

The relationship between the two “Incel”s is the same as the relationship between a people group and their culture. For example, “African-American” clearly refers to a people group that is defined by some unifying factors - people who are black and who live in America. However, there is also a culture that is unique to African-Americans. Like incels, there is no word for a person who is a part of “African-American Culture”¹⁾, despite the fact that there are African-Americans that do not.

For the purposes of this article, I will call people who part of the distinct group of men “cultural incels”, and I will call people who are just involuntarily celibate just “incels”.

Why are there so many male incels? Let me be very clear - there is such a thing as a female incel. This might seem strange to the seasoned internet veteran, but consider, for example, the body positivity movement. To a certain extent, isn't this movement a movement of women who are trying to build confidence in their bodies, due to a perceived lack of interest from men? Despite this, the data is clear - there's a ton of men that are not in a relationship.

To answer this, we must consider the nature of the sexual dyad and it's significance. Male sex cells, sperm, are very inexpensive and can be produced quickly. Female sex cells, eggs, however, are much more expensive, as they contain not only genetic information but also nourishment for the resulting embryo. This is true of all dyadic animals, though for mammals it requires even more of a time investment, because the embryo must be grown within the animal.

Now, the ultimate goal of both male and female is to produce as many offspring as possible. Therefore, the optimal male strategy is to impregnate as many females as possible without taking care of the baby. This is clearly a raw deal for the female, however, and the female therefore has the impetus to choose the mate with the highest fitness (to ensure a baby that can survive and reproduce) and who is most able to provide for the baby.

Now, what I have described is not a series of conscious decisions being made by Machiavellian actors but rather an evolutionary game stretching back eons over millions of generations. Different animals have different sexual behaviors that seem to be loosely connected to their biology. Some animals, like walruses, have a harem structure. Other animals, like birds, are monogamous. Humans are mostly monogamous, as is evidenced by the emotional bond made between man and woman, through the chemical oxytocin.

Monogamy is an excellent way to produce a lot of offspring. Male and Female are given a division of labor in the reproductive process. Males are providers, and Females nurture the young. It is feasible for the male to provide everything for his dependents, allowing the females to focus their energy on their young. This is essential because human babies come out of the womb with absolutely no way to take care of themselves, due to the fact that our brains prioritize learning ²⁾. We also are born with massive brains that require taking a huge amount of energy from other parts of the body that would be used for survival purposes.

The traditional gender role that society ascribed to women in the past was similar to the evolutionary role that I ascribed above, and for pretty good reason. For most of history, “work” entailed physical labor, which slotted nicely into the role men already had as providers. For example, farming was backbreaking labor, and mostly relegated to men. As a result, women had little chance of survival outside of marriage.

However, as technology progressed, the role of the manual laborer became less relevant. Instead, “work” might mean sitting in an office crunching numbers, or writing reports, or even running businesses. All of these things are things that women are just as suited to as men are, so it didn't make sense to exclude women from work. Because of this, women are now able to provide for themselves, meaning that marriage is no longer strictly necessary for survival.

With this newfound freedom came a shift in what women found to be important and valuable. No longer did they fantasize about having a family or impressing a man, they instead fantasizing on their potential as members of society, in the same way that men do. They wanted to be doctors, scientists, businesswomen – and they could!