UK web traffic to websites promoting ‘incel’ culture has increased six-fold, according to a new analysis.
The Center for Countering Digital Hate found that UK web traffic data to three of the largest “incel” sites increased from 114,420 monthly visits to 638,505, over the period March to November 2021.
The Times reported that users of the sites called Plymouth mass shooter Jake Davison a hero and called for “all women to be raped at least once.”
Davison, 22, killed his mother, Maxine Davison, 51, after an argument and then shot dead four more in a 12-minute attack.
Her use of social media suggested an obsession with the unintentionally celibate “incel” culture that promotes the idea that society is defined by physical appearance.
In December 2021, the Law Commission recommended that existing hate crime legislation be extended to cover hatred based on sex or gender when it comes to “incitement” or incitement.
“We are talking about threatening or abusive material that incites and glorifies violence, including sexual violence, against women and girls, and praises men who murder women,” the Law Commission said.
Imran Ahmed, director general of CCDH, told The Times: “Make no mistake, incel communities are bound by an ideology that preaches hatred of women and has inspired deadly attacks in the real world.
“Web hosting services and other companies that allow incels must stop doing business with filthy hate groups – or regulators, law enforcement and lawmakers must and will step in to protect the public.” “
In December 2021, a parliamentary report recommended that the government’s online security bill be beefed up, with paid advertising, cyber flash, content promoting self-harm, and the deliberate sending of self-harm. flashing images to people with photosensitive epilepsy added to the scope of the bill.
He also said that the proposed regulator, Ofcom, should have more powers to audit and impose fines on companies that violate the mandatory codes of conduct that should be introduced, with senior executives named as “security controllers”, who could be held responsible if their company failed to protect users.