suddenly the gallant knights of the Beauty Salon rode across this middling thread, attempting to raze it to the ground.
The point of my sperging is this, safe places for one, means safe places for all, any logic otherwise is hypocritical. While I am fine with debating opposing view points, I challenge the Beauty Salon crowd to either: allow the same shitposting that they are perpetrating here on their threads; or, return to your safe spaces and seethe about threads like this in parts of the site that cater to you. I have to repeat myself: this is a challenge and not a demand, please don't misunderstand.
This is the "Mass
Debates" forum, though, so.
And also - apples and oranges.
@Lidl Drip didnt post in the Mass Debates forum. And the OP explicitly asked for debate; her thread did not. I deliberately asked the OP if he wanted debate, or a safe space, because within his first 3 posts he said both. He proceeded to debate.
And I shouldn't and won't speak for anyone else, but I would bet a dollar that, rather than seething, a majority of the other women reading this are just as amused as I am at the spatting (though a little bored at the lack of rigor so far, maybe). Though I may be alone in also caring that young men don't fall down the easy doom-holes.
How is it not true? Do you have any data to back up your claims like I do?

Where was that? Assertions are not data.
in traditional society, people did not have kids out of wedlock; they could not raise
You sweet summer child.
the 1960s sexual revolution caused incels that simple
Dude, your
parents probably weren't even born in the 60s. Tf do you know?
And tbh neither was I, but I was born a lot closer to them than you, and yet I never encountered one single "incel" (by label or warped, ahistoric, unscientific, unreal perspective) until a something over a decade ago. Aka, at that point 40 years after the end of the 60s. Change is not equal to inevitable slide, and effective reaction to and incorporation of change (adaptability) is a primary marker of survival.
Again, I get it: these ideas are pasted together with what sounds at first blush, if you don't actually know anything, like cogent links and analysis. They appeal to common concerns and offer an off-the-shelf, "simple" synthesis. And the more you hear it repeated, and the more people in your circle who find mental salvation in it, the more it sounds legit. But they are laaaaahhhs. Lies by people who gave up, give up, and want someone to blame for their own failure to thrive - as well as a whole bunch of junior recruits to keep the circle-jerk going.
It's unfortunate that there are so many who mistake an awkward phase, or some hyper-calculated measurement that literally no one else analyzes, for destiny; I agree that that mindset and susceptibility is a problem that needs a solution (and the solution lies within).
I'd urge you to see past the bullshit, though the one thing I've observed in a long time of observing and interacting with self-described "incels" (by which I mean those subscribing to this nonsense you've spat out, not simply romantically lonely or struggling people) is an astounding dogmatic clutching on to these "incel /pilled" ideas that render them/others in similar or or "lesser" situations as (in their minds and, eventually, their lives) forever alone and forever losers. That's the one thing I can't figure out: it's like a fetish, almost, that their very existence (philosophically/ mentally, not physically, though maybe that, too) depends on these 9th-grade-level manifestos being incontrovertibly true. It's a weirdly willful drive toward eternal misery (and fantasized "revolution"). And incels seem compelled, intensely and relentlessly, to be willing to die on that hill, every time. You can do better.
It breaks my heart knowing I missed the boat on her, but life goes on.
Werther, stahp. If you have your personal shit together more or less, you'll have many, many opportunities with women.
And you can't go back and find her? Either way, as
@Osama Bin Laden said, there are plenty of fish in the sea.