Wikipediocracy

Casliber wrote:

Kelly Martin wrote:I actually think it's appropriate for Wikipedia to have content about the "incel" phenomenon. Not content justifying the incel theory itself; that's obvious hogwash. Rather, the article should be about the trend in the United States for men to whine incessantly about their inability to get dates (which is in no way a new phenomenon) and to blame that failure not simply on being insufficiently attractive or sexy (as was the case in years gone by) but on a conspiracy to deny them sex, or some other external, often malevolent, force, with which they have no hope to compete and which they must therefore eliminate through force. It's this phenomenon, and the violence that proceeds from it, that is notable.

In which case the whole area would be covered under different articles with different names.

MisterTester wrote:And that they are being prevented from this goal by conspiracy, from the people they desire.

Which is why mental health is the answer here.

spartaz wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ecember_21
...... and its back...... What a surprise.....

Its appears our hero has an objection to the article being at its natural home and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ion/Incels

Tarc wrote:

spartaz wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ecember_21
...... and its back...... What a surprise.....

Its appears our hero has an objection to the article being at its natural home and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ion/Incels

This is one of the only times I wish I was overtly back at the Wikipedia, to vote down this nonsense. Valoem is a twit, and despite the doth-protest-to-much act, is very much a nutjob incel advocate.

MisterTester wrote:

Tarc wrote:

spartaz wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ecember_21
...... and its back...... What a surprise.....

Its appears our hero has an objection to the article being at its natural home and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ion/Incels

This is one of the only times I wish I was overtly back at the Wikipedia, to vote down this nonsense. Valoem is a twit, and despite the doth-protest-to-much act, is very much a nutjob incel advocate.

The editor that calls himself Valoem, among other aliases, is telling his gamer friends to go and vote to keep the article. He is also using other Wikipedia accounts and posting as an ip to avoid scrutiny. He is obsessed with that article.

Moral Hazard wrote:Merge to human-size dolls with orifices (T-H-L).

But I suppose it exist. The question if it is notable for more people than an half dozen of forums.

Johnny Au wrote:Large enough body pillows (those at least five feet long and be well-stuffed) can be used for "male personal bedtime activities" as well without others becoming suspicious of one's "nighttime habit." Yes, body pillows are not just for pregnant women.

Vigilant wrote:

Johnny Au wrote:Large enough body pillows (those at least five feet long and be well-stuffed) can be used for "male personal bedtime activities" as well without others becoming suspicious of one's "nighttime habit." Yes, body pillows are not just for pregnant women.

For the record, I don't want to know how you know that.

Poetlister wrote:

Vigilant wrote:

Johnny Au wrote:Large enough body pillows (those at least five feet long and be well-stuffed) can be used for "male personal bedtime activities" as well without others becoming suspicious of one's "nighttime habit." Yes, body pillows are not just for pregnant women.

For the record, I don't want to know how you know that.

I assume there's an article on Wikipedia about it.

Moral Hazard wrote:

Cla68 wrote:I thought that a simple concept like involuntary celibacy wouldn't be that controversial. There have been actual academic studies into the phenomenon. However, apparently on Wikipedia, it is highly suspect.

I think there are a couple of reasons why Wikipedians view the topic with distrust. One, is that the related "incels" meme is used on 4chan and the Reddit "Men's Rights" sub-forums, and anything those people accept must be denigrated by the current house POV in WP. More than that, however, is that I think the topic hits a little close to home for a lot of Wikipedians. I suspect a lack of success in mating strategy is a common problem with Wikipedia's regulars. Therefore, an article treating it as some kind of disease must make them a little uncomfortable.

Larkin wrote:There's a Commons image here which gives you handy tips on how to use the latter (so-called "incel inside" position).

Poetlister wrote:

Larkin wrote:There's a Commons image here which gives you handy tips on how to use the latter (so-called "incel inside" position).

I don't see how that photo has a GFDL licence. It is taken off the photographer's personal site, but not by the photographer. If the photographer uploaded it to Wikipedia and then someone else moved it to Commons, shouldn't it say so?

The link actually points to a different picture.

Poetlister wrote:

Larkin wrote:There's a Commons image here which gives you handy tips on how to use the latter (so-called "incel inside" position).

I don't see how that photo has a GFDL licence. It is taken off the photographer's personal site, but not by the photographer. If the photographer uploaded it to Wikipedia and then someone else moved it to Commons, shouldn't it say so?

The link actually points to a different picture.

According to Swedish government statistics, as of the end of November, 71 percent of all applicants for asylum to Sweden in 2015 were male. More than 21 percent of all migrants to Sweden were classified as unaccompanied minors, representing more than half of all minor migrants to the country. For accompanied minors, the sex ratio was about 1.16 boys for every one girl. But for unaccompanied minors, the ratio was 11.3 boys for every one girl. In other words, the Swedish case confirms IOM’s statistic that more than 90 percent of unaccompanied minors are male. Indeed, on average, approximately 90 unaccompanied boys entered Sweden every single day in 2015, compared with eight unaccompanied girls.

Those numbers are a recipe for striking imbalances within Sweden. Consider that more than half of these unaccompanied minors entering Sweden are 16 or 17 years old, or at least claim to be. (There are no medical checks of age for Swedish asylum-seekers, and applicants who say they’re under 18 receive special consideration in the asylum process.) In this age group more than three-quarters are unaccompanied, meaning they are overwhelmingly male. According to calculations based on the Swedish government’s figures, a total of 18,615 males aged 16 and 17 entered Sweden over the course of the past year, compared with 2,555 females of the same age. Sure enough, when those figures are added to the existing counts of 16- and 17-year-old boys and girls in Sweden—103,299 and 96,524, respectively, according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s International Database—you end up with a total of 121,914 males in Sweden aged 16 or 17 and 99,079 females of the same age. The resulting ratio is astonishing: These calculations suggest that as of the end of 2015, there were 123 16- and 17-year-old boys in Sweden for every 100 girls of that age.

66.26 percent of adult migrants registered through Italy and Greece over the past year were male, according to the International Organization of Migration.

more than 20 percent of migrants are minors below the age of 18, and the IOM estimates that more than half of those minors traveling to Europe are traveling as unaccompanied minors—90 percent of whom are males. This heavily male subset is all but guaranteed asylum because of their status as unaccompanied minors, but they get no special dispensation to bring spouses, especially since the European Court of Human Rights recently ruled that European Union countries are not required to recognize the legality of child marriages among migrants.

Europe’s Man Problem: Migrants to Europe skew heavily male—and that’s dangerous.
By Valerie Hudson
1/05/2016

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... men-213500