Information icon.png
--News: 04/07/21--   Anon editing has been turned on after being off for 7 months.
You can also create an account here to bypass moderation entirely.

Donnelly Study

From, the largest incel encyclopedia

The Donnelly Study[1] also known as Involuntary celibacy: a life course analysis is the first academic study to take the concept of involuntary celibacy seriously as only a life circumstance and not a subculture. It was cited dozens of times by academic literature, including peer-reviewed academic research. The study itself was also peer-reviewed and published in The Journal of Sex Research (2001).[1] This study was the beginning of the use of the word incel as an academic sociological term. Alana’s incel mailing list was coordinating with a professor of sociology named, “Denise Donnelly”, and a team of Georgia State University researchers to use her community as a beginning for research on the causes of involuntary celibacy in early 1999. The study was co-authored by sociologist and professor Elizabeth Burgess who, as late as 2014, had described incel forums as “valuable.”

Popularizing Involuntary Celibacy in Academia and Solid Formation of Definition[edit]

“Involuntarily celibate” is a valid academic sociological term coined by Antoine Banier and abbreviated by Alana and subsequently popularized in Donnelly’s study, referring to people who would like to have a sexual or romantic partner but can’t find one for six months or more. The date may seem arbitrary, but there had to be a cutoff point, and Denise Donnelly chose six months as that factored in that some sexually active people go weeks without sex, and people start to worry about their sex lives after a certain period longer than that period.

The Study[edit]

The questionnaire for the study was filled out by 60 men and 22 women who identified as involuntarily celibate. Findings showed that involuntary celibates may come from broad sexual and personal backgrounds. Three categories were developed: virgins were those who had never had sex, singles had sex in the past but were unable to establish current sexual relationships, and those with romantic partners, but were currently in sexless relationships (which included 28% of respondents).

Of the virgin involuntary celibates, 76% were male, and 24% were female. Men in the study reported they felt trapped by being stuck in the role of the initiator of dates, while the women in the study reported that they felt like they should not initiate romantic or sexual encounters.

Overall, 35% of respondents felt dissatisfied, frustrated, or angry about their lack of sexual relationships regardless of their current partnership status. Most involuntary celibates appeared to feel despair, depression, frustration and a loss of confidence.

The study also found grounding for a common incel concern – that as sexual and relationship milestones are missed, it becomes harder and harder to achieve normality going forward. Many felt that their sexual development had somehow stalled in an earlier stage of life, leading them to feel different from their peers and like they will never catch up.

Incel is Now a Valid Academic Sociological Term[edit]

Donnelly’s study, while the sample size was small, has been cited 62 times in scholarly literature, including an encyclopedia about family life, a peer-reviewed sociology journal, and various books by accredited sociologists and an accredited anthropologist, giving the term, “involuntary celibacy”, academic legitimacy, at least as a sociological term describing a real-life circumstance.

External Links[edit]

click here for a link to the full text of the study

archive of the link above

click here for a link to the Journal of Sexology Paywalled Abstract

WebMD article on involuntary celibacy


See also[edit]

This page probably contains text from an editor (Altmark) who wanted his text released under CC-BY-4.0. This template is automatically applied to every page we think he ever touched, no matter how minor the edit, even if just a period. Even though he mainly edited the “Scientific Blackpill” page, in order to reduce complexity, William also releases his text on this page under the same license, and so this whole page is CC-BY-4.0. If using the whole page you may credit it as: William, Altmark et al, unless otherwise stated to not credit William, in which case to just credit: Altmark et al. Most other pages on this wiki we declare as unlicensed to re-use outside of here unless expressely stated by email and under the conditions listed in the email.