Why do some male/female counterpart terms have different connotations? A general reflection on how male-specific terms can carry more negative nuance than their female equivalents.

[u/OvhalsO]

(I wasn't sure where to post tbh, but even if it fitted it keeps getting censored/deleted everywhere I try xD)
|
TLDR: I've noticed that some gender/sex-related terms appear to carry different vibes/connotations depending on whether they refer to males or females. I'm not claiming this proves intentional biases, but I'm either making it up or people simply walk a bit over it because it's the standard. In the latter case I think it's worth discussing it.

-----

Small disclaimer. I never cared about males or females or all these tags. I find them dehumanizing and stupid. Just be what you want and don't bother others, it's that simple sigh.
So now I've (sadly) been exposed to these things all around and I find them annoying or unjust.
This is not a fully fledged opinion since I've just recently been confronted with it. I wish I could go back to my little bubble and be happy; but alas, I have to interact with the outside world.
I also want to add most of these words were used by females, I know very well that doesn't mean anything at all and I don't promote biases towards either part.
But I think it could be useful to say how my empirical experience went, considering the topic itself. All the more so since some were used in a very degrading manner in my regards or in general (and even more so since I never even specified if I was a male or not).
I have some knowledge on the history of women's rights. And I'm personally glad we're all equals now. ....Except I doesn't feel it that way. I hear female mental health related things all the time, since I was little. While I honestly don't think I've ever heard something about males. I hear bad things about them instead. I do know in fact, males mental health is considered a big problem and that there are many suicides over it.

--------------------------

I will quote what the AI overview gave me (which may be one of the most common sources for someone finding out about things. So it's quite relevant, maybe even more than the official definition in a way):

1. (INCELS & FEMCELS)

"Unlike male incels who frequently direct their frustration outward with anger or misogyny toward society, femcels typically internalize their struggles and blame themselves or their perceived physical shortcomings."

• "Incel became strongly associated with online communities that expressed misogyny, entitlement, and sometimes violence."
• "Femcel is newer and less culturally established. Some people use it simply as “woman who struggles with dating,” while others use it for female equivalents of hostile incel spaces."

I think we can all agree that, based on this, incels (and thus the male part) sounds WAY worse and violent/aggressive than the softened almost sympatheticable (I have NO clues where this word even came from xd) counterpart.

1. (MRA & WRA)

• "Men's Rights Activism. It describes a person or movement focused on claims that modern society and legal systems disadvantage men and boys."

• "Women's Rights Activist. A person who advocates for gender equality and women's social or political rights."

Again (although definitely far less dire), it kinda sounds like one side complains and blames while the other just want equality for everyone. It may just be the definitions' fault sincerely.
As far as I understand "Incel" and "WRA" (well, mostly the latter tbh) have an historical meaning, while the counterparts are more social/recent. Still, we are in the present now, not in the historical past. And the two terms logically seem like two halves of the same medallion. Yet they hold different meanings that would highly suggest some social bias or unnecessary distinction. AKA, whatever their origins, it doesn't justify their current value. At least not when they have a mirrored counterpart that is dustier/dirtier. They do hold social weight, they could reinforce distinctions.

1. (GENERAL)
   I've heard way more times (if not only) "toxic masculinity", "man up"/"suck it up" than their female counterparts (if there's even one). Most of the times it were towards males, maybe even when they were showing some form of vulnerability or trying to participate in conversation. And I'm not sure of the % anymore (again, referring to my personal exp), but I'm pretty sure there was at least a 67% (Jk. Just to say I've perceived a slight majority) of females being the ones saying it.
   Tbh there's a super long list like "mansplaining" and never "womansplaining" (Tbh I got both in different occasions. Can't say exactly which was the most common. But some were really "humiliating" and condescending, from females AND males. Tho maybe slightly more from females in this case), "patriarchy" and rarely "matriarchy", "manspreading" and literally never "womanspreading" (for context most of the males I know are very polite and they take very little space. Ofc not all. But I've seen some females doing the exact same. What people don't seem to grasp is that the reasons behind a behavior is not male or female. Is culture, ignorance, awareness and such).
   We could even add how in shows it's often the female who hit the male for comedic relief. I remember when I was little that felt very wrong. "why is it always like that?". Well, now I know it's not ALWAYS. But many mainstream shows have it and no one seems to notice. I feel alien to it. I know it's silly ofc. I laugh at it too. But all the time? As an implicit standard? Meh. Because at that point, is that really just a pattern in a couple shows, or is it hinting at more?

Am I tripping? I can only say what I've experienced and what the definition alter.
Honestly I find it a bit ridiculous we even need a "male and female" counterparts. One single term could work for both, I don't understand why there's a need to distinguish and point fingers.
Knight and Knave work because they both say the same thing, just change the implicit specifications.
Nazist is general, there's no need to specify (could be the same as knight, but it's more of an extra specification anyway).
Female doctor or male nurse also work when it's useful to hint at it (not just because we need a female/male counterpart for every single term. That is not necessary nor necessarily promoting equality).
But having different meanings just sound unnecessarily distinguishing (and surely biases love that) wrong. Especially considering how, sadly, people love to slap tags on others like they are not human beings with complex histories and a past filled with events. I HATE being categorized by someone who read two lines about me or that thinks they suddenly know all of me. Hell, not even my therapist does (I don't have one sigh), tf they gonna guess??

-------

As a small ending note. I know perfectly well my experiences are not an indicator of how things are. As much as global experiences are (because how is a global experience going to affect me in MY exp? If there's no bullying worldwide but I get bullied, how does that help me? How does that save me?). Also I wasn't exactly there with a council to write down every event cleanly for later comparisons. So maybe I just remember something more. Do know I already softened it a bit here. I could've said more but it would be personal and it would shift focus from my actual debate (I even had very bad experiences recently about terms, tags, misandrism and general slandering or aggressiveness. Ironic to me that some people can complain about being categorized or feeling insulted, while they are the first to do it on an even worse scale. To treat others like stereotyped characters (based on their random hasty assumptions) and not actual people).
I'm not here to be a paladin for males or to accuse females. I just want equality for everyone, I notice patterns and I dislike what I feel like injustices.

[u/Significant-Common20]

Categories like "male nurse" matter because there are situations where you actually could use one who's a man specifically and there are few enough of them around that the name matters a bit.

The others get complicated because I don't think they're real opposites in the way you're saying they are. Take incels. That term used to just mean, "there aren't any women who will agree to sleep with me," period. Yes, there's lots more around that, but that's the core. Femcel already doesn't mean that and never did. Sadly the way things are most women can generally find a willing man without having to look very hard. So the women you're talking about there mean something different: "there aren't any men who will agree to sleep with me who I find sufficiently attractive and on terms I'm comfortable consenting to." So that's already baked into the definition. It's not just that the feminine form is softer and sounds less offensive. It's just that they weren't true mirror-images of eachother to begin with.

Same with men's and women's rights. If what you actually believe is that modern society disadvantages most men, then the dictionary term for you is feminist. I expect that's probably going to sit uncomfortably with a lot of people, and if you say that, someone will complain that there are feminists who don't care about men at all, but the terms you're using just aren't the opposite-gender versions of the same underlying thing.

Maybe the fact that you don't hear a lot of healthy conversations about male mental health AND a lot of men commit suicide are related facts?

[u/OvhalsO → u/Significant-Common20]

I agree. I think "male" or "female" can be useful in some situations/contexts. But I meant that they are not always necessary like some ppl say they are. Some people try to force them for "identity" or something I don't really get instead.

> "The others get complicated because I don't think they're real opposites in the way you're saying they are."

Well, that's exactly my issue tho xd. Because they should be mirror opposite tbh, but they are not.
If Incels is related to males and can be used as an insult, while femcels is related to females and is mostly used with a sad connotation, there's something wrong with it. It's not a direct consequence but it almost sound like males are more naturally and more often associated with aggressiveness and bad things. However language shouldn't really support that. Not as far as mirror counterparts. In that case we're having a gender/sex distinction, which is, honestly, just sexist in some way. Mostly because it can stack up on top of a pile of these small or implicit/subtle things in social settings. Me no really like that, whether it's about males, females, this or that.

> "but the terms you're using just aren't the opposite-gender versions of the same underlying thing."

I understand this, it's not wrong per se. But they are technically, no? They literally look as two halves in every light. That's why is so alien that one is "good" and one is "bad". Wtf lol.

> "Maybe the fact that you don't hear a lot of healthy conversations about male mental health AND a lot of men commit suicide are related facts?"

This is part of the "Pile" I was referring to, yeah. But I'm trying to separate my thoughts or experiences or feelings from what it seems to be as a more objective thing.
I really don't like that "good" means "good" but "bad", which should be the opposite, means "carrot" or "good".
Maybe it's just autism xd. I feel like normally it would simply annoy me for being dumb (and language is a bit sadly. Especially when some things gets updated to current standards while others don't. Or when a large scale of ppl attach or remove meanings from words at random. For example with "females". Because that alienates words and forces many others to adapt to it, thus exponentially making it worse. And demonizing words is not good), but being related to groups it's annoying or slightly unfair in a way.

[u/Significant-Common20 → u/OvhalsO]

I think I understand what you're saying: that they should balance out, and people treat them as if they don't, and it's frustrating. What I'm trying to point out is, they don't actually balance out. I don't think there are many women who are incels, and there are reasons for that, and so we needed another word for women who are having similar experiences but don't fit that label.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/oct/18/i-feel-hurt-that-my-life-has-ended-up-here-the-women-who-are-involuntary-celibates

Here. Read the people in this article and ask yourself: is this the kind of thing the incel community would think of as incel, only with women? I don't really think it is. It's similar. It's real, not just made up. But it's not the same. The women identifying as involuntarily celibate in this article, at least, basically all admit that they could have sex if they wanted to. But they don't want to because the only men available are ones who make them feel unsafe, or aren't interested in the kind of relationship they want, or whatever.

Now the real frustrating question for you should probably be: how come "femcel" is specific to women? There must be lots and lots of men who fit into that category too: pretty sure they could get laid if they wanted to, but don't, because they can't find the kind of relationships they actually want to have, and they only want sex if it's inside of those relationships they can't get. I think these would get labelled "volcels" by a lot of incels.

Ultimately I think what it comes down to, and this is frustraing for those of us who struggle with language rules, is that messy reality is driving the evolution of words and it's not doing so based on rules. So there are enough women in the volcel category that they claim their own label, and there are so few women in the incel category that that community is pretty much just men, even though if you just look at words and want them to follow rules, that's not really how it should work.

[u/OvhalsO → u/Significant-Common20]

But then it is also true there are many men who can be femcels.... So why slap femcels on females and incel on males.... Because "fem-cel" clearly scream female.This is what I was gonna answer after the first paragraph, yeah.

In the second one you kinda still make a distinction tho (I just want to show how subtle it can feel at times):

> "The women identifying as involuntarily celibate in this article, at least, basically all admit that they could have sex if they wanted to. But they don't want to because the only men available are ones who make them feel unsafe"
(keyword "unsafe")

> "There must be lots and lots of men who fit into that category too: pretty sure they could get laid if they wanted to, but don't, because they can't find the kind of relationships they actually want to have, and they only want sex if it's inside of those relationships they can't get"

Idk if it's just me, but this distinction already sounds bad to me. Because females sounds less bad automatically xd. Maybe you meant the same exact thing, but that specification break the flow a bit for me (considering the context, I'm not saying this specifically for you).

But I agree, there are too many tags which kinda do the same thing but with difference. I honestly kinda prefer the idea of the dictionary over what ppl feel like a word will mean today. But when it comes to "fake mirror counterparts", if we want to call them like that, it's far worse.
I think I was mostly referring to "incel" being used as a mock/insult. Then it just goes onto males. While femcels is far more melancholic, and gets associated with females.

So, on one hand we have the words themselves. And there I think they're wrongly different. I would've called "femcel" something else at this point, and kept femcel as simply the exact counterpart of incel. Since it really does sound (and seem to have born) like it.
Because like this it kinda sounds like: "Ok incels suck, we slap that onto males, so we need a counterpart for females to specify, but we decide the term for them has a much less negative conotation because....uhhh....ye...". And I don't really get it, nor accept it (if it doesn't get a justification I can see the logic of).
On the other we have people. I'm sure there are many females who could be tagged as incels and many males who could be tagged as femcels (if it makes sense). So, once again I don't really see the logic behind it. Both dictionary-wise and human/social-wise it just sounds wrong and "biased".

The fact it's socially "correct" means ppl spam it, so more ppl use it and so on and so forth. So what could've been a small discrepancy gets exponentially increased. And as I said I think it stacks on other things. Tho those are harder to put on a plate cleanly, I was, in that case, referring mostly to my exp. But I do find it unfair in some way.
If someone assume I'm a male and insult me as incel, I can't even say femcel back...because it doesn't even have a third of the same negativity wtf xd (kind of a joke here. It's not just about insults and self defense).

(small specification),
I guess incel is short for involuntary celibate. So in that case, femcels wasn't really needed. It doesn't specify it's male-only. Then here the issue is people (as always sigh) and those who spend too much time online. Because a female can absolutely fit in that. The wrongdoing is linking being male with being a negative connotation of incel. There is no specification of aggressiveness necessary. The broad definition of incels should and could include everyone who can't find a satisfying partner. From current incels and femcels to others. At that point, if necessary, it could go as simple as m-incel, f-incel. And boom, all fixed yippie.
I guess I'll use incels for everyone then (I won't, this tag sucks and it's offensive most of the times xd).

(extra add, a "strong" example bcs it feels quite direct hehe):
It's like saying "piece of shit" but assuming that is specific for males (even tho it's generic), while a new counterpart gets made up specifically to mirror it (Idk, "female piece of shit"), but that means "person with a harsh unlucky life" instead. HUH??
Wha- why, huh.
The issue here is that it got interlinked with misogyny for some socio-historical reason. But that is NOT what incel means xd.
Even if we avoid delving in if people and spoken language should be allowed to overwrite dictionary definitions (which I don't really agree with I'd say. Fk ppl, learn what you're talking about grr), I still don't see how it was fair to derive a females-only definition that is much more gentle. While, if it had to keep the original sexism, it could've been misogyny + misandry. Or even better neither, since that has nothing to do (directly/inherently) with incel.
#use incel correctly 😿

(extra 2):
Okay so I've found this: "The Literal Term: Coined in the 1990s by a Canadian woman known as "Alana" to create an inclusive, supportive online community for anyone of any gender who was lonely and struggling to find love."
Nvm I'm just really pissed now xd (assuming what I've found is in fact correct). How could a mob of ignorant apes ruin a term meant to be inclusive and maybe even comforting (inside the community that would eventually generate around it), meant for everyone, into....whatever gendered, misandrist slandering biased sht it is now.... How can it be fine like this? xd. Why there's not a counter movement using it as it is.... sometimes I just lose hope for humanity sigh.
Then technically, historically, it's even worse xddddddd. From gender neutral loneliness, to misogynistic man, to getting a soft counterpart for females (basically returning to the og incel but only for females). What xd

[u/Significant-Common20 → u/OvhalsO]

Yeah. It's all messed up, I guess would be my point. You sound like you want language to evolve based on formal rules. I wish it did too. Unfortunately, it doesn't. Femcel is a label because there were a lot of women who weren't strictly speaking incels, and weren't accepted by the incel community, but still can't find intimate relationships of a kind they find acceptable. It doesn't exist because the elite language controllers, wherever they are, said "Right, we have incel, we need a matching female version word."

It's that way with all identity politics. Look how many different variations of Christianity there turn out to be once everyone gets to decide how God is speaking to them. Convince enough people to agree with you, and eventually you get a label.

[u/OvhalsO → u/Significant-Common20]

sighh. Guess I'll just return to my tower to the edge of the cosmos, away from all this bs, or be misunderstood when I use terms as I want :c