There is a general narrative about incels that goes like this:
Monogamous marriage is sexual socialism, everyone gets a wife, this is how it was before 1960. After the sexual revolution, women chose to get into harems with high-status men and thus incels were born. We can best return to near 0% inceldom by reinstituting traditional patriarchy and traditional gender roles.
Obviously there is an element of truth to this, in that women were given a choice to have sex with incels, and by 2020 they have not chosen that. It does not logically follow that high-status men deciding who women mate with would benefit incels. Tradcons don’t usually bring up pre-1900 stats about inceldom with regards to their, “utopias”. After asking for a lengthy period of patriarchy in which there were 0 to few incels, one tradcon incel I argued with recently insisted monogamy in medieval times was his perfect patriarchal monogamous utopia. I pointed out to him that 20% of men during that time were barred from monogamous contracts (which Lords made) due to being homeless and destitute because of the male Lords themselves. And this is the living paupers, not everyone else who died young or were non-pauper incels. His response:
don’t worry we will handle it right next time
And you know what? I don’t trust him. Muslim, classical patriarchies today don’t “have it right” either. These types of tradcon incels do not have “helping incels” as a first goal, but rather defending 4chan culture and tradcon values, masculinism and Gavin Mcciness-tier arguments about politics. Men have an outgroup preference to women in general, assuming that men in general would help incels is ridiculous, same as arguing that women in general would.
Maybe advocates of patriarchy don’t actually mean classic patriarchy but are just talking about the 1940s-1950s? That period was the baby boom , not an expression of patriarchy. Of course incels benefited from that intial surge of economic prosperity. It was not however anything inherent to patriarchy, and the 1940s and 1950s hardly even qualify as a patriarchy, as marriages weren’t arranged, divorces were legal and easy, and it was just one 20 year blip in time.
How about we examine the 19th century then? As it has possibly the most recent stats on monogamy enforcement. It turns out that during 1850 for example, when only about 3 per 1000 couples were divorced, 77% of men below age 25 in 1850 were unmarried in the United States in 1850, and about 68% in 1870. So probably a lot of incels back when monogamy was “enforced”. source This debunks the claim that “enforced monogamy”, necessarily “encourages”, marriage and thus sex.
So then the tradcons start advocating for some Marxist revolution of the incelgeouis, with that being their perfect patriarchy. Well I still don’t trust that patriarchy would help incels. Most self-described incels are extremely selfish and do not adopt the male virtue of generosity.
If tradcons want a patriarchal order that will work for incels outside of a baby boom:
- it would look nothing like the past, except some small religious cults
- monogamy alone, as well as harems do not get rid of inceldom, and harems exacerbate it,thus Randian incels would not make effective leaders