u/curadeio

I currently make $27k and am essentially on call 24/7. I work in the travel industry, and I’ve developed significantly since I started. I manage client accounts, handle travel arrangements, and have specialized knowledge of our group/tour business that I’ve spent years developing.

The new owners have previously discussed increasing our salaries, giving us a portion of the commissions we generate, or giving us a portion of the revenue from the tour groups we put together. None of those conversations have gone anywhere or resulted in any changes.

Recently, a new employee no-called/no-showed for an entire week and was let go. My boss reposted the position (which is essentially the same position I currently hold) for $38k–$50k.

I make $27k.

I genuinely don't know how to process that. A potential new hire could walk into essentially my position making up to $23k more than I currently make, despite me having over two years of experience with the company and extensive knowledge of our systems, clients, and group business.

I know I'm not perfect and I don't think I'm irreplaceable, but I do believe I bring significant value to this company and have taken on responsibilities well beyond what I was doing when I started.

What would you do in my position? Would you use this job posting as leverage to negotiate a significant raise, or would you take it as a sign that it's time to start looking elsewhere?

Part of me feels guilty about leaving because I've invested so much time here and have built relationships with clients, but another part of me feels like I can't justify staying at $27k when the company itself is advertising my position at $38k–$50k.

27F if that is relevant.

I’m brand new to this but a veteran friend of mine has noticed the same exact thing. It really blew my mind yesterday bc it said 5mi for something and when I saw the neighborhood, I know for a fact that’s a 25+ minute drive with traffic? I’ve been noticing this a lot I wonder what is going on

I am so deeply embarrassed I am in this situation, I feel sick every moment and it just happened. My friend was too drunk to drive home from Philly to Allentown and I felt better so I drove. Stupid fucking mistake. When I got 5 minutes away from her house, I nearly missed a turn and swerved and sped up a hill boom cop lights.

I blew a .125, I truly did not feel like that. Got booked by Lehigh County, I was cooperative the whole time and even got the cops to laugh at a few jokes, they even drove my car for me so it wouldn't be towed. After processing about 25 minutes later blood was drawn and I blew a .098.

They then put me in a holding cell for about 30 minutes before they let my friends pick me up.

I don't have the BAC yet... but I am spiraling. I've never gotten in trouble, I've never gotten arrested or put in handcuffs!! I am in shock and I will never let myself go through this again, but what now?

I cannot possible afford a lawyer or attorney, I can't afford a 10k fine!! (I understand don't do the crime if you can't do the time) but I fucked up and I can't take the heat in my own kitchen. I need my car to make money in the first place.

I am begging on my hands and knees for anyone reading this to help me or offer any guidance or advice or let me know any of your knowledge.

Like I don’t see this anywhere as often as I see it specifically with love island fans, my uncles used to say this in the early 2000’s and I haven’t heard this in years….why are we bringing back this sort of terminology?

Okay so first, I want to clarify what I am not arguing.

I am not claiming lonely men do not exist and I am not claiming some men do not struggle romantically or sexually. Obviously they do. I am also not claiming that dating is equally easy for everyone.

What I am arguing is that the online concept of the “incel” especially the blackpill idea that certain men are fundamentally doomed and incapable of attracting anyone, always becomes logically inconsistent under its own standards.

Here’s why:

A major argument often made by incels and people defending the concept is that women cannot truly be “femcels” or atleast, relate to or understand the concept of the incel because women can always obtain sex if they want it. The reasoning is usually that men are willing to lower their standards for casual sex much more than women are.

But if that standard is true, then most incels are not actually incels either.

Because many self described incels could likely still find some woman willing to date or sleep with them, especially women considered unattractive, overweight, socially awkward, isolated, or undesirable by mainstream beauty standards. The issue is that many incels do not consider these women acceptable options.

And this? This is where the logic starts collapsing.

Incels often describe themselves as rejected by society due to physical appearance, social status, awkwardness, height, lack of wealth etc. But many of these same men openly mock or dismiss women they perceive as ugly or fat. In other words, they acknowledge attractiveness is hierarchical while simultaneously refusing to date within the same hierarchy they claim victimizes them.

So the problem incels have is no longer “I am incapable of attracting anyone.” it becomes: “I cannot attract the people I personally want.”

But that is not unique to incels. That is simply a human dating frustration.

Another contradiction is that incel ideology often depends on genetic determinism: the idea that attraction is objective and some people are permanently excluded from romance due to immutable traits....But attraction is clearly subjective to a significant degree.

People constantly date others that wider society considers unattractive. People have wildly different preferences. Some people prefer overweight partners, awkward partners, older partners, taller women, shorter men, unconventional appearances and so on

If attraction is subjective, then the idea that most incels are universally doomed starts falling apart.

And if attraction is not subjective, then many incels contradict themselves by expecting attractive women to overlook their flaws while refusing to overlook flaws in women they deem unattractive.

Another issue is that discussions around incels often quietly switch definitions whenever you dig deeper on these types. 

At first “incel” means: “someone unable to find love, intimacy, or connection.”

But when people argue women cannot be incels, the definition suddenly becomes:
“someone who literally cannot obtain sex under any circumstance.”

Those are completely different standards.

If the metric is simply:
“Could someone somewhere theoretically have sex with you?”

then the concept of the incel almost completely breaks down.

Because there are many lonely, isolated, unattractive, socially rejected women who would likely date or sleep with lonely, isolated, unattractive men. The reason many incels reject this comparison is because they often do not count those women as desirable or even as meaningful options.

so then the issue is not involuntary celibacy itself. It is selectiveness.

And then once we reduce the argument to raw sexual availability, things become even more incoherent.

People will argue women are never truly involuntarily celibate because men are sexually indiscriminate and will sleep with almost anything. But this does not actually prove women are universally desired in a meaningful romantic sense. It only just proves that some men are willing to pursue detached sexual gratification with very low standards.

That is not the same thing as intimacy, mutual attraction, love, or relational success.

Ironically, if anything, women may actually have a harder time “dating up” physically than men do. Society routinely shows examples of wealthy or higher status unattractive men dating beautiful women.

The reverse is much less common, a rich unattractive woman does not automatically gain access to attractive men in the same way. So if incels define themselves through inability to obtain desired partners, women could arguably experience similar frustrations.

this went on longer than I expected but all in all, I think the incel identity is less about literal impossibility and more about a mix of:

social isolation

insecurity

resentment

unrealistic standards

self-sabotage

online echo chambers reinforcing hopelessness

This does not mean these people are not suffering, however I do think the ideology becomes logically inconsistent once you examine the standards it uses to define who counts as “truly” involuntarily celibate.

Writers have been using literally hyperbolically for over a century, which means you are arguing with both modern linguistics and Charles Dickens

Prescriptivists, are you not tired after over 100 years of crying ?

But will this provide any actual lesson in placing these islanders on pedestals and blindly supporting success because we enjoyed them for a few weeks on realty tv?