The only statement of these that we believe, or even come close to believing, is the last one.
The reason for this is that your toxic subculture most definitively does not speak for the majority of those of us who are unhappily single - I myself am single, have been single my entire life, am definitively not happy about it, have been far less happy about it in the past, and have many stereotypical incel traits, yet even in the bleakest-seeming moments, I have never been at threat to fall prey to the incel mindset, which is alien and abhorrend to me.
Even you* do not actually believe that “incel” just means “involuntary virgin”. We are just your motte to the bailey of “truecel” - a status that you do not even extend to the entire community. regularly denounicing each other as “volcels” or “fakecels” for proving the accuser’s pet theory of inceldom wrong.
And this brings us to the reason why the other statements are strawmen:
Unlike you, we are not making an absolute, black-and-white claim.
Women, being individuals, have different tastes, and consequently, some women have really bad and even self-destructive tastes in men. Furthermore, despite all the progress Feminism has achieved, there is sadly still enough patriarchal inertia left that it is more acceptable for men to be arseholes, and for women to often be primed to fall victim to abusive relationships - although hopefully, your community and the blatant subtext of sexual frustration in alt-right prose is a sign that this is fading and that the David J. Stewarts and Daryush Valizadehs of this or coming generations will remain forever alone like they should be.
Thus, any amount of shallow, materialistic, relationship-dysfunctional and/or treacherous women does not falsify our worldview.
Notably, this is in marked contrast with incel dogma, which, as you never tire to stress, says that ALL women ONLY want “Chad”, when they go for non-“Chads”, that is ALWAYS for ulterior reasons, and even then, those relationships are ALWAYS doomed, NO EXCEPTIONS! Because of the absolute nature of the claim, just one example of a short, unattractive, non-rich non-famous man in a happy monogamous relationship is enough to prove you wrong. This is, of course, where you employ the escape hatch of “she must be secretly cucking him anyways” (and if it is the wife herself who is presenting the example, she is obviously lying). And of course, with this, incel “theories” become unfalsifiable and thus classical pseudoscience.
One aspect that may be noted that, even when men with those traits end up in relationships, these tend to be dysfunctional - often in ways that you romanticise.
* In this text, I am using “you” in the sense of second person plural rather than singular, addressing the incel community in general rather than the individual incel.
