A FAMOUS GROUSE
ANOTHER day, another outrage — and another nightmarish neologism with which the commentariat may drive us batty. This time it’s “incel”, which gained traction following the Toronto van attack in which nutjob Alek Minassian killed ten people and injured 15 others in Canada’s worst mass killing in almost 30 years.
Incel comes from “involuntarily celibate”, which is how the 25-year-old Minassian has described himself, this being the golden age of identity politics. Naturally, there’s a “community” out there that is almost exclusively male and deeply frustrated by the dormancy in the trouser department.
Should we feel their pain? It’s a provocation that economist Robin Hanson, who teaches at George Mason University in Virginia, raises in his blog, Overcoming Bias: namely, how is it that we concern ourselves with a more equitable distribution of wealth, yet we regard the desire for a sort of sexual redistribution as being, if I may, utterly bonkers?
“One might plausibly argue,” Hanson wrote, “that those with much less access to sex suffer to a similar degree as those with low income, and might similarly hope to gain from organizing around this identity, to lobby for redistribution along this axis and to at least implicitly threaten violence if their demands are not met.
“As with income inequality, most folks concerned about sex inequality might explicitly reject violence as a method, at least for now, and yet still be encouraged privately when the possibility of violence helps move others to support their policies.”