[ overboard / cytube] [ leftypol / b / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime ] [ meta ] [ GET / ref]

/b/ - Random

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)
[ Return / Go to bottom ]

File: 1613865255748.png (464.18 KB, 787x1000, Berniecat Blackpills.png)

 No.12979[Last 50 Posts]

Can someone better versed in anthropology / psychology / whatever-field-this-is than me is weigh in on the incel blackpill? It all seems worryingly plausible from a materialist perspective.

Part 1
>Success in dating and sex, or lack thereof, is based almost entirely on physical appearance
>For men, the most important factors influencing your attractiveness, such as height, frame, jawline / face, etc. are inherent to your genetics and can't be changed
>Personality only matters so far as you can land the first date, but even then personality flaws will be excused due to the "halo effect" if you're hot enough, and vice versa

As a man that's near the bottom of the barrel in terms of looks, I've always believed in part 1 to an extent, although I didn't realize until now just how statistically literally not fucked I am. However, I always consoled myself with the thought that even if 95% of women admit they'd reject me on my stats alone, if I go for that last 5% of ugly girls, I'll eventually find romantic success. This view, that all men are able to find love if they lower their standards and find their "looksmatch", is challenged by part 2 of the incel blackpill. This is the part that I'm most disconcerted by:

Part 2
>Due to the long and historically dangerous process of childbirth, females inherently have much higher standards for sexual partners than males
>One male can potentially impregnate 10+ females in the time it takes to bring one baby to term
>Female sexual instincts evolved to seek big, strong males ready to commit acts of violence on her behalf and pass this physique on to her children
>As a result of this, in prehistoric humanity as well as the animal kingdom, 95% of females successfully reproduced while only 25% or so of males did
>For most of human civilization, women's "hypergamous" nature was kept in check by patriarchal institutions and ideology, which forced women to settle for less attractive men in order to secure economic resources
>Today, however, with women no longer dependent on men to survive, most would rather endlessly chase Chad rather than settle for a man they don't find physically attractive
>As a result, a growing number of men are doomed to be involuntarily celibate through no fault of their own.
>This is supported by studies showing a sharp increase in sexless men in the past 15 years, with no corresponding increase for sexless women
>>

 No.12986

Stop relying on "stats" and probability to find women, that's annoying as shit and only makes you undesirable
>5% of ugly girls
Why do you think only "ugly girls" would "be left" for someone like you? What a dumbass, already giving up before it has even started.
Do you seriously believe all this bullshit applies perfectly in real life and people are completely dominated by animal instincts? If you want to have sex so bad then fight to end liberalism because most of the shit incels worry about is caused or exacerbated by it. Why are first worlders like this
>>

 No.12989

>>12986
>Stop relying on "stats" and probability to find women, that's annoying as shit and only makes you undesirable
I don't whine about this shit in public, and I haven't "given up". Saying "ugly girls" is a bit harsh, I do actually find 3/10 girls attractive. The problem is that they don't think I am. Dating is hell for a turbomanlet. The stats I'm talking about are here: https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#Height

>If you want to have sex so bad then fight to end liberalism because most of the shit incels worry about is caused or exacerbated by it.
The incel blackpill argues the exact opposite: liberating women from economic subjection frees them to only chase the top quartile of attractive males. Under socialism even more men would be doomed to involuntary celibacy because transactional relationships trading sex for housing, etc. would be abolished.
>>

 No.12997

>>12989
>turbomanlet
What are you, a midget?
>>

 No.12999

>>12997
I'm 5'5" (165cm for non-burgers). I don't want this thread to be about me though, I want it to be about the actual claims I advanced. I'm not deeply immersed on the incel subculture or anything, I just stumbled upon the "scientific blackpill" page a few weeks ago after someone on this board called Lenin a "baldcel".
>>

 No.13002

>>12989
>Under socialism even more men would be doomed to involuntary celibacy because transactional relationships trading sex for housing, etc. would be abolished.
okay let me see if I can translate this from incel into english
<Under socialism, no woman would ever need to have sex with someone in order to earn the right to sleep in a house.
>>

 No.13003

File: 1613874898565.png (807.27 KB, 1440x1712, cope.png)

>>13002
stop being so brutal to kids going through puberty. you know it's just a phase
>>

 No.13007

>>13002
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. "Transactional relationships" was my way of saying that economic coercion for sex is bad. My central claim here that I desperately want to be disproven is that without the economic coercion, a significant portion of men are too ugly for any woman to desire, for reasons listed in the core post.
>>13003
Not sure what you're trying to say here.
>>

 No.13008

>>13007
all I can really say is, 87% of all statistics are invented on the spot. you said a bunch of things which might be true to an extent, but you guessed pretty broadly about what that extent might be. I think that, although attraction is a bigger determinant of who fucks more (if not, of who has better relationships), it's also far more individually variant than your model suggests. some things are hot to most people, but almost everything is hot to somebody,
>>

 No.13009

>>12999
That height is barely anything to worry about.

This "scientific" blackpill shit makes a lot of assumptions based on some statistical data. For example, why would women on average preferring taller and stronger men (than you) mean that you have to abandon all hope of ever having sex or finding an attractive partner? It doesn't, so why is it a "blackpill"? Don't women have very diverse tastes and priorities just like men? Yes, they do. What men and women find attractive in the opposite sex varies a lot, and is no doubt also influenced by propaganda/advertising to an extent. Not to mention that different societies have and have had different beauty standards (both for men and women).

And why do they compare prehistoric times to modern times? Back then, humans struggled to survive. That's why the females had to have as many children as they could, since mortality rates were much higher. Do you think this is comparable to today, where women (and men) have to think very seriously about having even just one child, and sex isn't tied only to reproduction anymore? I think this point isn't very relevant. It's basically saying that since prehistoric women had lots of children (because of high mortality and survival of the species) whilst men had to compete to pass on their genes, everybody is motivated by the same reasons now, despite being in a different system. It's the same kind of reasoning "race realists" use to justify themselves.

Randomly calling people "ugly" or "3/10" is absolutely retarded too. According to whose standards? It's all almost entirely subjective. But according to incels, these are objective, unchanging standards by which the fate of their virginity and/or loneliness is decided. That's why, to them, these statistics are a "blackpill", to them you must accept their assumptions as "facts" and lose all hope of ever being happy with your sexual and romantic life. Why should you become like them? You would practically be reducing your chances to 0 with that attitude.
>>

 No.13010

>>13007
what I'm trying to say is, you are at the doorstep of psychosis. you are actively seeking made up statistics and narratives that further strengthens your despair and feeling vindicated in the process that you finally found a reason why your life is shit. It's unhealthy, unproductive, juvenile and uncritical.
>>

 No.13011

>>13007
>too ugly for any woman to desire
That's bullshit and you know it, so stop talking like you believe it. Those statistics merely mean that there will be less women attracted to you than a model or to any man who is more conventionally attractive or closer to average. It doesn't mean that no woman is going to ever love you, far from it.

And also, I get that being shorter than most other guys can be difficult, especially if you live in a society that is used to mocking short guys in a degrading manner or only talk to people who use terms like "manlet". And it's not the only thing that's made fun of in guys (baldness or receding hairline are another example, as well as small penises). That's not your fault as it can definitely destroy your self-esteem and confidence, and make you believe that you're totally hopeless. But where I live none of those two traits are a problem as far as I know, so maybe your statistics are skewed and making you believe fake shit. Are those statistics based on a worldwide average or a specific country?
>>

 No.13012

>>13010
And also this. You're not identifying a reason, you're searching for (other people's) excuses.
>>

 No.13014

>>13009
>Don't women have very diverse tastes and priorities just like men? Yes, they do… Not to mention that different societies have and have had different beauty standards (both for men and women).
I think it's far more plausible that beauty standards are rooted in sexual instinct honed over millions of years, not contemporary trends. Overwhelmingly, women prefer tall strong men that will make her feel "safe", and overwhelmingly, men prefer youthful women with wide hips that can push out babies without birth defects. Most of the changes in beauty standards through history have been signifiers of wealth (pale skin, etc.) rather than inversions of this core paradigm.

>>13010
>It's unhealthy, unproductive…
I'll give you that
>juvenile and uncritical.
How is this narrative juvenile and uncritical? The statistics and studies I referenced aren't "made up", they're published in respected journals. Statistically speaking, a 6'4" man with a chiselled face is playing on easy mode, and someone like me is playing on Halo 2 Legendary.

>>13011
>It doesn't mean that no woman is going to ever love you, far from it.
That's what I'm trying to tell myself here. I didn't just instantly believe this incel shit was plausible, it's been honed by years of rejection, often super apologetic rejection ("I'm not feeling it, but you're a great guy, I'm sure you'll find someone"). I'm pretty sure that the only dates I've gotten have been pity dates.
>>

 No.13015

Based Zizek sticking up for brocels in the face of woke hysterics about depressed wage cucks
https://youtu.be/Qe-ZAILJnuU
>>

 No.13016

>>13014
just because career researcher managed to publish their dogshit philosophy on circlejerk journal does not automatically ascend it into axiomatic truth of universe. I know this as I worked in physics lab. even 'hard' scientists are corrupt beyond belief. god only knows what happens behind the scene of sociology or economics journals' citing league don't give academia or statistics too much credit unless they pass test of time through debates and progresses that are being made as we are shitposting.

Now on the uncritical part, let's apply some elementary game theoretic principle. For the sake of argument, let's assume women are indeed receptive breeding machines that only wants to fornicate with domineering figures lot of women are instantly offended and turned off by chads btw . Then, what is stopping lesser males from learning to fake manly traits to trick females? this is an actual mating strategy of some species as you may already know Incel ideology is inconsistent from its very foundation as it needs to depict women as an entity that is both lesser and superior being that can be predicted yet cannot be manipulated.

if pity sex is all we can get, wtf is wrong with that anyway? silver back gorillas don't get to monopolize gene pool, they end up wasting too much energy maintaining societal status and unwittingly allow lesser males to pass their genes discretely
>>

 No.13017

File: 1613879467761.png (661.59 KB, 800x1084, 3782c45e06e9f1357988782238….png)

I don't think it's fair to assume that inceldom will increase under socialist mode of production. We might know the statistical causes of inceldom but I have yet to fully understand the cause of those causes, and I am always skeptical of claims that "human nature" is to blame for such and such problems.
My main problem with incel ideology is just that even if everything they say is right, their reaction is pathological. If the incel's situation truly is hopeless then the best path for them is to accept it and move on - take the whitepill. Incel communities do nothing to help incels in this regard.
Still, I have big problems with people who simply dismiss, minimize, or mock the predicament that incels find themselves in. At worst, you are bullying the mentally ill. At best, you have done nothing productive. People are not merely "crazy", a lot of pathological behaviour is rooted in social/environmental factors and it's depressing to see supposed "leftists" conviniently ignore this when it comes to dealing with a perceived enemy.
>>

 No.13019

>>13016
> For the sake of argument, let's assume women are indeed receptive breeding machines that only wants to fornicate with domineering figures (lot of women are instantly offended and turned off by chads btw). Then, what is stopping lesser males from learning to fake manly traits to trick females?
This is the core of the original TheRedPill ideology: act like a stereotypical "alpha male" and manipulate women into sleeping with you. The incel "black pill" spawned out of this after they found Red Pill tactics didn't work: women don't inherently want someone who treats them like a disposable part of his harem, they just put up with it because he's physically attractive. Faking manly traits in this case would only be possible with massive amounts of plastic surgery.
>if pity sex is all we can get, wtf is wrong with that anyway?
The pity dates never got the point of pity sex, but no, pity sex is barely better than "why not pay for prostitutes?" Your dire need for emotional intimacy is not being fulfilled. To paraphrase a popular incel slogan, "nobody will ever love you because you're missing a few millimeters of bone".
>>

 No.13020

>>13017
> People are not merely "crazy", a lot of pathological behaviour is rooted in social/environmental factors and it's depressing to see supposed "leftists" conviniently ignore this when it comes to dealing with a perceived enemy
Many leftists, yes, including so-called Marxists and Leninists, are truly liberals to their core
>>

 No.13023

>>13019
I'm glad that we are engaging in good faith but I'm bit sad you are keep returning to your original position without synthesizing something more spicy.

>act like chad to trick girls
>women don't inherently want someone who treats them like a disposable part of his harem
by manly trait, I was not implying that being aggressive badger is viable dating strategy for beta males. homo sapiens sapiens are not monkes or penguins, obviously women wants something more complicated than mere snobby attitude. The fundamental problem I have with incels I engaged with so far is that they act like they got it all figured out. They know what women wants exactly in psychological / economical / sociological / sex department but refuse to utilize their knowledge by either overblowing factors that they cannot control wear a fucking hill then or starts reinventing entirely new schizophrenic framework that conveniently defines their new predicament position. Again, I blame this to their lack of experience which is not entirely their fault but they still get to be blamed for refusing to push their ideas to their limit and constrain themselves for the sake of lazily feeling sorry for themselves.

>own chads by making him raise your kids!
<but she didn't love me more than violent monke
???
>>

 No.13029

>>13014
>I think it's far more plausible that beauty standards are rooted in sexual instinct honed over millions of years, not contemporary trends.
I didn't say anything that contradicts that. Even if beauty standards come from instinct, propaganda/ads/societal attitudes reinforce those beauty standards, and so they might seem even more prevalent than they actually are.
>it's been honed by years of rejection, often super apologetic rejection ("I'm not feeling it, but you're a great guy, I'm sure you'll find someone").
I don't see what's so unique about that. You're pretty young and love or whatever it is you're after doesn't normally come immediately for most people. Everyone has a chance to be rejected, even those who are considered attractive can face rejection many times in their lives, for different reasons. Many self-described incels are fairly good-looking and they still think they can't fuck because they're physically deformed.
You acknowledge that looks aren't the sole determining factor in dating. What's stopping you from having something else to compensate for your lack of height? Even just giving it a rest and not reading anything related to incels or dating for a while so that you stop obsessing over it might do wonders.
>>

 No.13030

>>13019
What he means by faking manly traits is that you should get a less boring personality and act like a normal person
>>

 No.13035

>>13016
>You're pretty young
I never once mentioned my age. I've graduated college, now wagecucking from home in a "respectable" occupation.
>Many self-described incels are fairly good-looking and they still think they can't fuck because they're physically deformed.
The disproportionate attention that "fakecels" get inadvertently reinforces incel ideology: people notice the small minority of decent-looking men and tell them "you're not ugly, you don't belong here!" while ignoring the majority of men who do fit the descriptor. As for myself, I have a babyface (think Kyle Kulinski but worse) but not hideous, I'd be probably be OK if not for height.
>You acknowledge that looks aren't the sole determining factor in dating.
No I didn't, that's the point of this post
>What's stopping you from having something else to compensate for your lack of height?
I like to think I already do. I have some interesting hobbies, my knowledge of marxist theory and history is extensive, I'm told that I'm an excellent public speaker. I also have an "active lifestyle" body and used to go to the gym semi-regularly before the pandemic.
>Even just giving it a rest and not reading anything related to incels or dating for a while so that you stop obsessing over it might do wonders.
That was every day before I stumbled onto the Scientific Blackpill page like I mentioned, I only discovered incel ideology fairly recently.

>>13030
Funny, the last advice I got was to act less normal and sperg out about my interests more openly. Neither approach seems to work.
>>

 No.13039

File: 1613891982752-0.gif (3.05 MB, 640x436, sides orbit.gif)

File: 1613891982752-1.gif (1.96 MB, 615x413, sides orbit 1.gif)

>>12999 (chek'd, nice trips)
>I just stumbled upon the "scientific blackpill" page a few weeks ago after someone on this board called Lenin a "baldcel".
My sides are in orbit.
>>

 No.13048

IMO all of these are secondary rationalizations. Have you ever fallen in love with somebody? I have a feeling incels have this abstract desire for relationships or sex which sends them on a general hunt where anyone would do (or anyone matching some abstract standard like the x/10 scale) - which thus prevents them from falling in love with a concrete individual in their singularity. They approach other people mechanically, performing an algorithm of social interaction, instead of losing themselves in the individual's concrete presence and otherness. That's why other people never build a genuine connection with them either, because the whole interaction is like between two NPCs.

I'm genuinely interested if this makes any sense to you OP?
>>

 No.13049

File: 1613913870152.png (821.46 KB, 1444x1728, 1d04beb8e794b807bdddfa4b1d….png)

>>13007
BASED socialism will abolish sex, and all those who cry about it, for good
>>

 No.13050

File: 1613914963261.jpg (168.59 KB, 886x1166, 121386101_3847886651907938….jpg)

>>13014
>I think it's far more plausible that beauty standards are rooted in sexual instinct honed over millions of years, not contemporary trends. Overwhelmingly, women prefer tall strong men that will make her feel "safe", and overwhelmingly, men prefer youthful women with wide hips that can push out babies without birth defects. Most of the changes in beauty standards through history have been signifiers of wealth (pale skin, etc.) rather than inversions of this core paradigm.
Alright dude it's time to stop reading wikipedia and pick up Lacan. Dude there are fucking foot fags on this planet. There are people who wanna be tied up inside a toilet. There are people who wanna literally be killed for sexual gratification. And you wanna sit here and tell us that sexuality is biological?

The feeling of safeness doesn't come from height. When you are embracing with a woman and she feels safe 9/10 times you're laying in bed. Height doesn't matter it's the IDEA of safeness. this desire is a human desire, it is a reaction to the world we live in where men frequently leave women to fend for themselves. All you need to do is be kinda buff and confident to give off the idea of 'safety', both things that are not biological but social (and therefore: can be changed).
>rather than inversions of this core paradigm.
Huh? Idk look up kpop they all have tiny hips and are skinny as fuck. An example that red pilled me is the Japanese black teeth trend. Like it seems so revolting and something that logically we should 'naturally' be averse to "grug don't fuck her she got disease mouth ugg" yet it exists. These biological factors aro barely existent compared to the extreme social ones. I think a lot of the biologoical essentialism comes from a lack of basic empathy over the lives of women and seeing the shit they have to put up with in our society.

>>13048
Based post comrade.
>>

 No.13051

>>13049
So does that mean sexhavers finally get the wall?
Based, fuck these degenerates
>>

 No.13052

>>13051
You're a lovehaver as well tho, right comrade…?
>>

 No.13063

>>13007
Ugly musicians and artists, swim in pussy. Even the ones who are not famous at least get laid. If instead you are looking for "the one," don't try. All that is about is finding someone who will put up with your bullshit and who has bullshit that you are willing to put up with.
>>

 No.13064

>>13035
>That was every day before I stumbled onto the Scientific Blackpill page like I mentioned, I only discovered incel ideology fairly recently.
Have you found any of the really funny aspects of incel ideology yet? Sometimes I read their stuff just for laughs.

https://incels.wiki/w/Dogpill
https://incels.wiki/w/Voicemogger
https://incels.wiki/w/Creepiness
>>

 No.13065

incels are not real anon wtf do you really believe there are people out there on the current year who can't get laid??? don't be ridiculous, anons are just baiting no one ABSOLUTELLY NO ONE can be so pathetic
>>

 No.13068

>>13067
incels can't love like humans do, they can only worship and hate the object of desire you must remember love is recognition and acceptance between ecquals so the only way to love and be loved is to stop being an incel
>>

 No.13069

>>13064
Kek
>Femoids have a special language to describe intimacy with dogs. For example, intercourse with dogs many femoids call "knotting". This refers to an Canid phallus containing a "knot" i.e., the "bulbis glandis" at the base, which inflates when the beast is sexually aroused, causing it to become locked or "tied" to a female canid (or female human zoophile) thus ensuring the proper deposition of semen into the vagina. Most women will get aroused reading this.
>Some dogpill theorists have also maintained that women or girls who have decorated themselves with dogs' paw tattoos use it as a secret code to communicate their perversions to fellow zoophiles (similar to the "ace of spades" brand used by coalburners.)
>It could be argued that the first dogpill theorist was the Ancient Greek historian Herodotus
yfw the author of this is dead serious
>>

 No.13070

File: 1613938761402.png (240.77 KB, 770x638, Dogpill.png)

A CONSCIOUS HUMAN MADE THIS AND TITLED IT Dogpill.png
>>

 No.13085

File: 1613939163486.png (144.71 KB, 1203x562, retardpill.png)

I'm down the birdpill rabbit hole
>>

 No.13087

>>13065
h-haha yeah…
>>

 No.13088

Someone link the east germany article about women wanting men to actually be interesting to date rather than just > have money

It's literally ogre if you are still an incel communism lol. Consider suicide.
>>

 No.13089

>>13064
(fuck it I'm pumping the PPH)
I am finding the simple ones funnier
https://incels.wiki/w/Boobs
>>

 No.13090

File: 1613940796812-0.png (705.61 KB, 654x1078, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1613940796812-1.png (327.86 KB, 553x549, ClipboardImage.png)

roh roh raggy, back to the cukshed
>>

 No.13092

>>13068
Man you anti-incel niggas really do sound like hardcore Twitter libs lmao
Imagine being this mad because some dudes on the internet mocked women that don’t care about you anyway lmao imagine caring about this 😂😂😂
>>

 No.13093

>>13092
Reddit is that way friend, you seem lost. Can you explain how he is wrong? The incel relation to women is pretty much what he described by definition. A man who just doesn't have sex and doesn't give a shit isn't an incel in this sense. Inceldom is an ideology that comes from the creation of the 'otherness' of the woman.
>>

 No.13094

File: 1613941333691.png (234.29 KB, 2404x1442, ClipboardImage.png)

>To voicemog someone is to have a better voice than them… Notable male voicemoggers are David Attenborough and Jeremy Irons.

This is some serious scientific shit. Why isn't Bill Nye picking up on this????? (probably 'cause he's t.a.l.l.)
>>

 No.13095

>>13093
>What is this actual faggotry I am confronted with
>>

 No.13097

>>13094
>Limerence is the best word they could come up with
>>

 No.13098

>>13097
So why do you have the Zizek flag if Zizek doesn’t side with anti-incel lib faggotry?
>>

 No.13099

>>13098
Read the thread and ask a real question retard. What does 'anti incel' even mean?
>>13093 This is a very unemotional post that is extremely staight forward. I'm barely taking a position but holding yous hand through the definitions and their consequences.
>Not crying over incels all day is lib
ok redditor
>>

 No.13100

>>13093
>Le reddit
I didn’t even make this thread you fucking faggot dog, have you lost the plot sitting on leftypol all day you fucking loser?
>>

 No.13101

>>13098
if he knew what incel ideology is, he would 100% be against it. besides being retarded, what makes you think he wouldn't? This is a prime example of "pure ideology".
>>

 No.13102

>>13093
>Inceldom is an ideology that comes from the creation of the 'otherness' of the woman.
I would disagree here. The woman is an other. The problem with the incel is that he fears this otherness, he wants to remain secure and in control, and thus can't form a relationship.

>>13098
Yes, Zizek is right in criticizing the burger PC culture where flirting with women is considered harassment. Actually PC culture is as much afraid of the otherness as incel. The incel seeks a tried and tested procedure, and the burger lib wants a contract. Both are afraid of being seduced by the other.
>>

 No.13103

>>13101
Incel is only an ideology to liberals
To a true Marxist it is a social condition
Liberalism is believing in inherent evil in individuals to explain either their individual failure to succeed in capitalism or for their mental conditions generally
You are a liberal my friend
>>

 No.13104

>>13100
Take the meds and go back
>>13102
He's clearly mentally ill so I wasn't super specific. We could discuss this for hours but the point is the incel creates an idea of a woman that itself prevents them from experiencing love.
>>13103
Literally no one is saying incels are 'evil'. Take the noose pill. And yes it is an ideology in the context we are discussing. It is a set of beliefs that combine to create a basis for life decisions and so on. Simply not having sex isn't sufficient. Incel is a set of ideas, not a material state of no sex.
>>

 No.13105

>>13103
>Incel is only an ideology to liberals
what the fuck is this entire website about then: https://incels.wiki/
>To a true Marxist
how would you know lol.
>you think incels are evil
boring.
>thinking mental condition affects people's ability to succeed in capitalism is liberalism
ok then I'm a liberal, you got me. Let me just tell the down syndrome population to pull themselves up by their boot straps and get jobs as CEOs
>>

 No.13106

>>13104
TL;DR
Let me respond to your liberal brainrot
I already know I do not need to read it
IF YOU ANSWER FOR WHAT INCELDOM IS AND WHERE IT COMES FROM CENTERS AROUND THE EVILS OF INCEL “IDEOLOGY” OR HOW THEY ARE THEMSELVES EVIL BROKEN PEOPLE, RATHER THAN DOWNWARD ECONOMIC MOBILITY EXPERIENCED BY MALE WORKERS FOLLOWING THE NEOLIBERAL COUNTERREVOLUTION, YOU ARE A LIBERAL ENGAGING IN IDEALIST ANALYSIS
/thread
>>

 No.13107

>>13106
no one has said incels are evil. take your meds.
>incels are broken individuals
anon, this is an objective fact
>it's caused by economic mobility bla bla bla
ok, and? what does that have to do with "incel ideology" being real? no one is denying incels exist. If we were criticizing white supremacist ideology instead, you'd be saying shit like "white supremacy ""ideology"" isn't real, that's liberal ideology, it's caused by economic bla bla bla".
>>

 No.13108

>>13106
I have made not a single claim to the origins of incels. Merely their current state and EXTREMELY basic consequences of this fact.

Seriously please take the meds, and don't return to stupidpol, your grasp of this chain of thought is worryingly bot-like
>>

 No.13109

File: 1613943202203.jpeg (91.54 KB, 499x750, 6E73F4FC-BAD3-4C39-A506-F….jpeg)

>>13108
Then what exactly do you want to discuss?
Why are you here?
Are you just shitposting and have nothing of value to add?
Hey buddy, there’s a way you can journey to a magical world, picrel
>>

 No.13110

File: 1613943380943.png (198.3 KB, 644x800, soy217.png)

>Boobs, or boobies, titties etc. refer to a frontal sexual display on the human female chest. They provide females with a fairly socially acceptable, subtle and thus convenient means of whoring.
>One of the most unknown (and outlandish) methods of increasing one's size is going gay. Some studies have shown that gay men tend to have a penis that is one third of an inch larger than hetero penises.[1] The most probable reason for this discrepancy is that gay anal sex tends to engorge the glans of the penis for the bottom partner. This in turn may increase skin tissue surrounding the penis, hence why homosexual men have bigger penises than their straight counterparts.
>NOOO WHY ARE YOU CRITIQUING ME ITS SOCIETY'S FAULT NOOOOOO
>>

 No.13111

>>13110
>If you don’t go on a liberal moralist crusade online you necessarily agree with all the squirrely bullshit incels write
Lmao
>>

 No.13113

>>13109
Here is a very very very simple idea: read my posts and respond to them. It's that simple! In fact that's the reason I am here, to contribute to the discussion. feel free to reply to me with your thoughts (I know it'll be hard but I believe in you)
>>13111
I only did thirs when you arrived and started seething uncontrolably. Just so you know, this isn't reddit, you have to scroll up to read the thread.
>>

 No.13114

File: 1613943631430.jpg (16.39 KB, 256x271, soy238.JPG)

>Boobs are preferred by men today to be round, firm and shaky, in fact firmness is more important than size.[2]
>>

 No.13115

File: 1613943675169.png (239.1 KB, 2400x800, ClipboardImage.png)

>>13111
take the reverse dogpill, anon
>>

 No.13116

File: 1613943932947.png (123.41 KB, 1328x500, ClipboardImage.png)

ø_ø
>>

 No.13126

>>13106
You're right, but inceldom is still an ideology whose job is to neatly explain away the problem, just like in antisemitism it is the figure of the jew who is behind everything. It is the ideology that we are attacking, not the existence of the problem.

And the problem is not directly connected to the ideology either. The problem first forms a pathology in the subject, and only then does this pathology produce the incel ideology. But this whole process is not predetermined or independent from other factors. There are sexless people who do not subscribe to the incel ideology, and there are males in the same downward mobile condition who do not form such pathologies and do have sex and relationships. And no, I'm not blaming the incels for being evil, I agree they have been broken by their social condition.

We need to explain how this social condition produces the pathology (e.g. inability to properly socialize). And why does this pathology makes sense of itself in the form of incel ideology.

IMO the second question isn't interesting at all, it's the same shit as any other "redpill" theory that neatly explains away the problem with some hidden truth, this time relying on evolutionary psychology bullshit.

The first question is more interesting. Why are some downwardly mobile males unable to socialize with women (or other people generally)? Is it because of their loss of secure future that they're so anxious or closed-off? What specifically makes some of them more prone to this and not others?
>>

 No.13130

>>13126
I mean, I fundamentally don’t believe in a biological/evolutionary cause for inceldom, the dude that was arguing with me is just some annoying faggot and I’m not OP either
I 100% believe it cannot be a coincidence that the term “incel” was coined when the neoliberal counterrevolution was underway and that the amount of men ascribing to the condition greatly accelerated right around the time of the 2008 Capitalist Crisis
>>

 No.13131

>>13126
No one denies incels are the result of conditions (jesus I actually have to say this on a Marxist website), while incels are very sad creatures, one must draw a line when it comes to communism (which axiomatically combines theory and practice) of who to give a shit about. The problem is less that incels exist, the OP and first half of the thread was constructive, but when incels feel they deserve respect frou Marxists or communists, when they feel they are the proles of the sex market. Not only is it wrong and reeks of self pity (an attitude no great communist has), it is at direct contradiction to the plight of female comrades.

Note how this guy didn't actually respond to any points. He just wanted to declare war, call people libs and so on because we don't care about his problems. This is the heart of the incel ideology, it is entirely arrogant and self reflective, these things do not mix with revolution. The fact of the matter is my family have toiled their whole lives, exploited and downtrodden. What radicalised these mfs? No pussy.
Here is an exert from the incel wiki. These are the first two things written regarding 'foids'.
>Femoid or foid (short for female humanoid) refers to sneaky herd animals who have either bullied or ignored you your entire life. That is unless they were somehow making money off you as a teacher or counselor or hairdresser or wife.
>Popular femoid hobbies include twerking, fakeup as well as feminism, the process by which women seize the means of reproduction to liberate themselves from ugly beta providers. Another popular femoid hobby is encouraging vicious male competition and toxic masculinity through their mere sexual desires.

You can see it reading the wiki, it is devoid of any scientific anlysis. It's like children playing doctor or something, they quote single stats and call it a day. Not to mention there are typos and spelling errors all over. The same attitude is shown by this poster, zero regard for analysis or following logical statements to their conclusion. It is masturabtion at it's highest, at the expense of half the population, half the proles. This is why they have so little respect from communists, they are reactionary. Nazis are created from material conditions too, and I feel for those who never stood a chance, born into nazi families and so on. However they are reactionaries nonitheless.
>>

 No.13133

>>13089
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_physics
https://incels.wiki/w/Twerk
God, these are just priceless.
>>

 No.13134

https://youtu.be/5tuf59ex-U0
Thoughts on this classic by Eggy?
>>

 No.13136

>>13133
https://incels.wiki/w/Hoejabi
>Of course I read theory
>>

 No.13138

>>13131
>one must draw a line when it comes to communism (which axiomatically combines theory and practice) of who to give a shit about
Sure, yet we're both here wasting our time in this thread about incels on /b/. I'm actually interested in how the social ineptitude is produced, I don't really give a shit about all this bullshit incel ideology which is merely a reactionary byproduct. Why are some people unable to have sex or relationships these days? What would Zizek or Lacan say about this?
>>

 No.13139

File: 1613947757625.png (558.15 KB, 2000x2200, reddit suicidewatch.png)

>>13048
>>13068
No, I haven't fallen in love. That's exactly my point, you have to land the first date for your other personal qualities to even be considered, and landing the first date depends on meeting a certain standard of physical attractiveness. I suspect that the few dates I have gotten have been pity dates, IE social justice types who abstractly recognize that short men have it rough and feel compelled to give me a chance despite little physical attraction.

>>13050
>There are people who wanna be tied up inside a toilet. There are people who wanna literally be killed for sexual gratification. And you wanna sit here and tell us that sexuality is biological?
They want to be tied up inside a toilet and killed by physically attractive men. The difference between a hot rape fantasy and actually being raped comes down to a few millimeters of bone in his face.

>Height doesn't matter it's the IDEA of safeness.
Height matters a fuckton in the hand to hand combat that honed sexual instincts.
>it is a reaction to the world we live in where men frequently leave women to fend for themselves.
The world we live in leaves men to fend for themselves. Pic related. There's a reason why there are 4-5 times as many homeless men as homeless women, most women can exchange sex for housing.
>All you need to do is be kinda buff and confident to give off the idea of 'safety', both things that are not biological but social (and therefore: can be changed).
I wasn't "buff" by my physique was better than 90% of burgers my age, and I think I put on a good enough imitation of "confidence".
>>

 No.13141

>>13138
Zizek flagfag is just some moralizing faggot who wants leftypol to be anti-fun and can’t comprehend why somebody wouldn’t hate a largely irrelevant subculture of primarily suicidal people
>>

 No.13142

>>13139
> most women can exchange sex for housing.
Kek that’s not a good thing bro
>>

 No.13144

>>13142
Nowhere did I imply that was good thing, but it's the reason why homelessness is such a male problem
>>

 No.13146

File: 1613949019622.jpg (670.78 KB, 853x1280, 1581252254202.jpg)

>>13139
Don't you see how you brainwash yourself with fake images like the one you attach? You reaffirm your pathology with literal fiction that supports your views. Although thanks for the response.

>They want to be tied up inside a toilet and killed by physically attractive men.
I was talking about both genders. The point isn't the attractiveness but that human sexuality is defined by things outside of the 'natural' reproduction. Pure sex is the most banal shit ever, this is why fetishes exists, humans must fill this void with the excess.
>Unironic few mm of 🅱️one meme
Come on lad you can do better. Attractive people obviously can have sex more but the physical part is not nearly as important as incels believe. The main point that I'm making is the idea that these things are alll biological, the reduction of sex to a scientific act, is the thing that castrates the incels. Sex is simply more complicated than that, and by viewing women as animals they forgo their possibility of falling in love. >>13138 This I would suggest a solution to your quesion. neoliberalism, biological essentialism and so on are extremely prevalent in our society right now. Don't forget muh monke. If you read all my posts you will see how much they rely on pseudo science and studies to justify their beliefs to themselves.

>Height matters a fuckton in the hand to hand combat that honed sexual instincts.
Already debunked, humans are not dogs (as much as that would turn incels on).
>Pic related.
Fake picture that doesn't even show upload time, this point is majorly retarded.
>There's a reason why there are 4-5 times as many homeless men as homeless women, most women can exchange sex for housing.
Or women get killed more, stay in abusive relations more because of their dependence on men, or women are smarter than men and just get off the streets quicker lol. What you're doing isn't science, it's simply retarded.
>I wasn't "buff" by my physique was better than 90% of burgers my age
Again, appeal to statistics to justify one's position, making bullshit conclusions. This I would link to the autistic nature of most incels, the desire for order and understanding (which ironically can be an extremely attractive trait).
I'm not talking about how buff you are mate I'm talking about the features of 'safety' that women feel. You haven't made a woman feel safe because you likely have not been there to care for a women when she is upset, or embraced her in bed, or kept her warm and so on. It's not because you're not tall.

>>13140
Based
>>13141
>Samefagging this hard
MAJOR weirdchamp bro
>>

 No.13147

File: 1613949171974.png (48.31 KB, 1145x233, exposed.png)

>>13138
Imagine coping this hard.
Keep dilating trannymaxxer
>>

 No.13148

>>13147
Why aren't you using the jungle theme, anon?
>>

 No.13149

>>13147
I honestly don’t care mate
>>

 No.13150

>>13149
Looks like it mate
>>

 No.13151

>>13150
Lmao not really, but you’re the one trying to track me through every thread I post in you fucking faggot, can’t you at least put a name so I can filter you and never speak to you for the rest of my life?
>>

 No.13153

>>13151
There are dozens of posts in this thread of seething, hiding your flag, crying and calling me a faggot. Like, seriously, 100% honest with you, you desperately, and I mean this bro, need to have sex as soon as possible.
>>

 No.13155

>>13153
Ngl bro
I literally have never wanted to interact with you, ever, in my life
I actually enjoyed this site until you began speaking to me
Can you kindly fuck off?
>>

 No.13156

>>13153
>>13155
just fuck already
>>

 No.13157

>>13155
>Hiding flag when it's obvious the retard has logged on
PLEASE HAVE SEX I'm on my knees bre please I am begging just do it please I can't stand you dilating in every thread PLEEEASSE
>>

 No.13159

>>13146
>The main point that I'm making is the idea that these things are alll biological, the reduction of sex to a scientific act, is the thing that castrates the incels. Sex is simply more complicated than that, and by viewing women as animals they forgo their possibility of falling in love.
You're forgetting that I've spent years trying to find love with no success until I stumbled upon the incel blackpill a few years ago. I'm romantic as fuck, even the sexual fantasies I jerk off to are lovey-dovey shit.
>Already debunked, humans are not dogs (as much as that would turn incels on).
OK, what study debunks height being important to fighting ability then? It seems blatantly obvious for sheer mass if nothing else.
>Fake picture that doesn't even show upload time, this point is majorly retarded.
Fine, touche
>women are smarter than men and just get off the streets quicker lol.
This is eminently plausible, definitely not magical thinking
>You haven't made a woman feel safe because you likely have not been there to care for a women when she is upset, or embraced her in bed, or kept her warm and so on. It's not because you're not tall.
I desperately want to do all those things, but no woman is willing to do them will me because of my appearance.

So far in this thread I haven't found much of any scientific evidence that debunks incel ideology, mostly just attacks on the messenger. "Work on your personality" reminds me of the same platitudes that apologize for capitalism: "work on fixing that bad attitude and pull yourself up by your bootstraps, nobody owes you anything, look at [outlier] that rose from rags to riches".
>>

 No.13161

>>13139
>No, I haven't fallen in love. That's exactly my point, you have to land the first date for your other personal qualities to even be considered, and landing the first date depends on meeting a certain standard of physical attractiveness.
How do you meet women in the first place and when do you decide to invite them to a date? The way you describe it it's like you're going on dates with strangers just for the sake of having a date, which to me sounds more like a job interview. Most people meet others organically and go on a date only after they've already become somewhat attracted to each other.
Btw I'm short as well and I had a gf who would affectionately call me "small", so height is definitely not a barrier like you think it is. I don't have chad appearance or energy either.
>>

 No.13162

>>13159
It's not that simple. It's not that incels don't like 'love'. It's that they are incapable (in the incel state) of loving another individual. I would really recommend reading Zizek (duh) and Lacan because I think it could help you change the way you see your own mind (for the better).
>OK, what study
I'm stopping you right there, read my post.
>It seems obvious
Dude this is agony. You need to read more, if you're a Commie then read some Marx and Engels. You need to develop your understanding of evolution and scientific method A LOT.
>This is eminently plausible, definitely not magical thinking
Exactly, this is why these studies are stupid. To base your whole ideology around these things is completely rediculous.
>I desperately want to do all those things, but no woman is willing to do them will me because of my appearance.
It really isn't just about your appearance. We don't need 'scientific evidence' to prove women will fuck some ugly dudes. It's obvious.

>"Work on your personality" reminds me of the same platitudes that apologize for capitalism: "work on fixing that bad attitude and pull yourself up by your bootstraps, nobody owes you anything, look at [outlier] that rose from rags to riches".
From my earlier post
>No one denies incels are the result of conditions (jesus I actually have to say this on a Marxist website), while incels are very sad creatures, one must draw a line when it comes to communism (which axiomatically combines theory and practice) of who to give a shit about. The problem is less that incels exist, the OP and first half of the thread was constructive, but when incels feel they deserve respect frou Marxists or communists, when they feel they are the proles of the sex market. Not only is it wrong and reeks of self pity (an attitude no great communist has), it is at direct contradiction to the plight of female comrades.
You aren't owed sex by anyone. Proles are owed the value of their labor since they produced it. This entitled behaviour is why you get 'attacked' (you aren't the 'messenger' you're a vector of the ideology spreading). In the same way children born into nazi families do, like I feel for you, but your ideas are reactionary and must be challenged.

How much do you agree with this definition? be honest
>Femoid or foid (short for female humanoid) refers to sneaky herd animals who have either bullied or ignored you your entire life. That is unless they were somehow making money off you as a teacher or counselor or hairdresser or wife.
>Popular femoid hobbies include twerking, fakeup as well as feminism, the process by which women seize the means of reproduction to liberate themselves from ugly beta providers. Another popular femoid hobby is encouraging vicious male competition and toxic masculinity through their mere sexual desires.
>>

 No.13163

>>13162
>I would really recommend reading Zizek (duh) and Lacan because I think it could help you change the way you see your own mind (for the better).
Not OP, but do you really think theory can help here? Doesn't Zizek argue that people can consciously know what's going on but do the same shit regardless?

OP, here's Zizek's How to Read Lacan book, it's very readable:
https://www.lacan.com/essays/
>>

 No.13164

File: 1613954250371.jpg (293.92 KB, 614x850, August_Bebel_c1900.jpg)

>>13161
Predominately I try to chat them up in and before college class, and either ask them on a date directly or try to build more rapport by forming study groups for tests and the like first. Most of the time I'm rejected, but that was how I got the one date with the girl I most felt for. In 2019 I tried more consciously to lose my virginity with online dating and some "cold approaches", I eventually got two dates (both never asked my height) that went nowhere. Online dating is blackpilling as fuck. I once made a fake profile of August Babel as a joke and suddenly had several women listen intently as I talked about socialism.

>>13162
I've said a zillion times that I didn't believe in blackpill / redpill / PUA ideology until very recently, it didn't help.

>Dude this is agony. You need to read more, if you're a Commie then read some Marx and Engels. You need to develop your understanding of evolution and scientific method A LOT.
I've read all of Marx and Engels' major works aside from Vol II and III. I understand historical materialism and why gender roles are antiquated under modern material conditions. My point is that despite this, sexual instinct remains in prehistoric times - because I can't beat up prehistoric Chad, my chances of finding love are drastically decreased if not impossible.
> Exactly, this is why these studies are stupid. To base your whole ideology around these things is completely rediculous.
Here you are claiming, without evidence, that women are inherently smarter than men to explain away the predominately male crisis of homelessness

>How much do you agree with this definition? be honest
I disagree with it. Rhetoric like that is exactly what scared me away from incel ideology for so long, despite literally being incel myself. What I'm referring to here are the peer-reviewed psychology / anthropology studies that make up the "scientific blackpill". See here: https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill
>>

 No.13165

>>13164
Dude, Zizek poster is gonna bullshit you, trust me
I know from experience that women almost entirely like me for my looks
He just wants to bully you fam, he won’t give any life changing advice
>>

 No.13166

>>13163
Yes definitely. To be honest I think any respected theory can help cure the incel ideology somewhat just because it breaks them away from pseudoscience. This is why I recommended Marx too. Zizek/modern-psychoanalysis I think is particuarly useful though because it directly goes against the biological essentialism which is the very foundation of incel ideology. At least it helped me a lot personally as a STEM fag to not be autistic about muh objective reality and objective answers and facts and shit. You know, the Bill Nye I FUCKJING LOVE SCIENCE ideology. Which bleeds into scientific racism and justification for racism and sexism
>women like tall big hunter man to rape her
and so on and so on. (Zizek and Lacan explicitly decry this: even if the science turns out to be true the racism and sexism is by no means justified).

The incels cannot actually see the social context of sex in this way, it has to be reduced to a hard science, something that they can try understand (as this comrade points out >>13161), but what happens is those who fail in the social dimension naturally feed into a bitter pseud cycle, where as those intelligent enough to actually DO science normally go beyond the girls-don't-like-me-stage. This leaves us with the incel science we can see on the wiki which fuels itself (see the paranoid pics posted here >>13139 >>13070)

>>13165
Dude it's really obvious by your posting style who you are. I'm cringing really hard that you want to lurk here and derail while adding nothing. You change your flag and try to hide on an ANONYMOUS imageboard like the most pathetic creature imaginable. You really need a weeks ban to stop dilating. I admit I should have ignored your retardation at the beginning but this is really, really pathetic. Mods stop playing coy, this thread was positive until he started wrecking.
>>

 No.13168

File: 1613955866455.jpg (36.72 KB, 640x427, zizek-love.jpg)

>>13164
Yeah online dating is awful, don't blame you there. It is pure commodification of sex/love. However this doesn't reflect the wishes of a majority of the people. Are you still at uni? If so there's plenty of time mate. I had many friends in uni who were virgins into their final year (male and female), it's more normal than you think, dating online would probably give a warped view of how common it is. Women are based they love socialism.
>ecause I can't beat up prehistoric Chad, my chances of finding love are drastically decreased if not impossible.
This is a schizo sentence. How can it be possible? there are many small guys here who have partners. Your short, but fit, and have hobbies. How could it ever be impossible?

>Here you are claiming, without evidence, that women are inherently smarter than men to explain away the predominately male crisis of homelessness
This is where your theory fails you. I suggested these solutions as arbitrary solutions to the data trend you suggested. I don't claim they are the case, I was displaying how unscientific the incel science is. Let me be clear: I don't deny these statistics were created. However this is half the battle of science, a hypothesis needs to be created and tested to cancel out interfering variables. You can't just take online dating data, or 'how many women fucked dogs in the 60s' and conclude that women are animals seeking only tall strong alpha giga chad. This is not just unscientific: you don't need to be a genius to see this. It is simply logically wrong.

Let me be EXTREMELYYYYYY CLEAR. You say statistic. You say 'this shows women are sluts' (or words to that affect). I say 'or women are x'. It doesn't matter what x is. Just because the data says something by no means implies you can just reach whatever conclusion comes to your mind first. Don't make me cite the monty hall problem on ya!

>scientific blackpill
This is a massive data dump and would take a long time to go through. Many of citations i've looked at though through the wiki have been obviously bad though (they actually mixed up the citations in one paragraph, so this isn't exactly highly rigorous), I can go through and explain why (this is my field of expertise) but I've already displayed what is wrong with incel science. it is ideology forced onto random statistics, that the reseachers would object to INTENSELY because they know how nuanced these kinds of studies are and how little you can actuall jump to conclusions.

Also Zizek FUCKS. Not because he is a giga chad caveman who tears his virgin enemies limb from limb, but because he is based. (he fucked before he was 'famous' so don't try anything sneaky).
>>

 No.13170

>>13092
bruh no one is even talking about w*men stfu retard
>>

 No.13171

>>13098
he prolly knows incels are not actually real
>>

 No.13172

>>13170
>>13171
I know this guy is a major retard but he's taken up too much discussion time, just let him trannymax and dilate for the time being
>>

 No.13173

File: 1613956114833.jpg (109.88 KB, 960x925, breee.jpg)

>>13139
you can't have a date because you are a subhuman like just stop being a subhuman bro like wtf just beee come yourself
>>

 No.13174

>>13164
What about going out drinking with your friends? I guarantee you you'll have much better chances finding someone in a relaxed and fun environment where people just generally want to hang out with other people. Although that depends on where you live, and then there's lockdown.

>>13166
>what happens is those who fail in the social dimension naturally feed into a bitter pseud cycle, where as those intelligent enough to actually DO science normally go beyond the girls-don't-like-me-stage
I definitely agree one can escape the incel ideology by reading theory or just thinking critically, but I'm not sure about escaping one's social failure itself. I mean, not just Lacanian theory but even his idea of treatment is not that ambitious, according to Zizek:
>Lacan’s main critique of other psychoanalytic orientations concerns their clinical orientation: for Lacan, the goal of psychoanalytic treatment is not the patient’s well-being or successful social life or personal self-fulfilment, but to bring the patient to confront the elementary coordinates and deadlocks of his or her desire.
That kinda implies some people are just social cripples and they have no choice but to accept their condition.
>>

 No.13175

>>13106
if incels weren't evil they wouldn't be incels in the first place
>>

 No.13176

>>13174
Interesting points. I disagree what you say that quote implies, here Lacan is staying true to the axiom of psychoanalysis: to let your patient say whatever they want. The problem with some other psychoanalysts, and historically psychology as a field, is that they are fixated on these goals
>the patient’s well-being or successful social life or personal self-fulfilment
Or as Marxists, how to get the squeaky wheel back to work! Lacan rejects this.

I'm not really saying incels should undergo Lacanian analysis, merely that I think his ideas are very freeing and valuable in today's world.
>>

 No.13177

>>13168
>Are you still at uni?
No, as I mentioned above, I graduated a little over a year ago and am now an office wagecuck working from home
>Women are based they love socialism.
Not to discount the women that do love socialism, but all radical left parties are extremely male dominated. Even electorally revleft parties historically have had a deficit of women voters. If I want to find a commie girlfriend (preferred but by no means a requirement) I'll have to compete with 8 other guys who look better than me.
>Also Zizek FUCKS. Not because he is a giga chad caveman who tears his virgin enemies limb from limb, but because he is based.
Zizek was quite decent looking when he was young, and he appears to be average height. Not much of a surprise there.
>>13174
>What about going out drinking with your friends? I guarantee you you'll have much better chances finding someone in a relaxed and fun environment where people just generally want to hang out with other people.
I have a pathological fear of intoxication and losing self-control that has kept me away from bar culture. Maybe I should try to overcome this fear by starting to drink home alone, but I think that could be a bad idea with the state of my mental health right now.
>>

 No.13180

Incels are funny and pathetic, but at least they're not feminists.
>>

 No.13181

>>13177
> I have a pathological fear of intoxication and losing self-control that has kept me away from bar culture. Maybe I should try to overcome this fear by starting to drink home alone, but I think that could be a bad idea with the state of my mental health right now.
Smoke weed
Weed is arguably how I lost my virginity and is probably responsible for most of my sexual encounters
>>

 No.13183

>>13181
I'm scared of being intoxicated by weed too, and tbh I don't know how I'd procure some. Since you mention it, the first girl I mentioned I was infatuated with ended up with a smelly stoner dude who made zero effort in class, but was 6'2".
>>

 No.13185

>>13183
I mean, weed intoxication is fucking great, God, I remember my first time getting high, I saw my best friend and told him he looked like fucking Megamind then fell on the floor laughing my ass off. I remember when I was still new to weed, there was another time I laughed so hard I started crying just from hearing Christmas music.
Honestly you should try it out dude, just one hit off a joint and you’ll probably have the time of your life.
>>

 No.13191

>>13183
Weed is nothing to be afraid of. Well, there is one scary thing about it, namely if you get really into it makes you stop caring about pretty much everything. Just remember that it is perfectly fine to get stoned, but nobody likes a stoner. Keep it to a social activity, and you will be fine.
>>

 No.13192

>>13185
In my case weed just made me more paranoid and also see myself as a total cringe loser in others eyes, even if I was alone. I had a few episodes when it was really bad, with insane amounts of dread and anxiety, feeling physically sick. Even when I happened to be relaxed enough to laugh at things I was kinda cringing at myself. Only a slight buzz is kinda enjoyable to me, but I haven't smoked for a few years.
>>

 No.13194

>>13192
ooof same. I'm well adjusted socially though. Weed sometimes puts me in a bad place so I don't smoke, except special occasions and I take it very slow. I did a brownie like a month ago, long story why, I had a lot of bad thoughts like the ones you describe going around my head, overall had a mediocre time :/
>>

 No.13195

>>13191
Hey fam
Weed is my cope
No need to be a dick about it
I’ve actually quit weed for a month and didn’t do shit anyway, it’s not weed that stops you from living, it’s you that does that
>>

 No.13196

>>13192
Weed can be pretty bad if you smoke too much, I’ve done acid as well and the only genuine hallucination I’ve ever experienced was on a really bad weed trip
>>

 No.13209

>>13196
>the only genuine hallucination I’ve ever experienced was on a really bad weed trip
you sure that shit wasn't laced homie?
>>

 No.13217

>>13209
Not him but I once bought weed at a concert and the shit was either very laced or very strong, and I hallucinated people calling out to me. Worst trip I've ever had.
>>

 No.13224

>>13209
It wasn’t laced, it was a full on wax brownie made out of dabs instead of normal weed
>>

 No.13253

>>13139
OP what are your thoughts on this >>13134 ?
>>

 No.13254

>>13139
>The difference between a hot rape fantasy and actually being raped comes down to a few millimeters of bone in his face.
It's no wonder that you're not getting laid if that is your attitude about rape. You are a creep and that has nothing to do with your looks.
>>

 No.13255

You can learn a lot about the subconscious/non-stated ideology of neoliberalism by studying incel ideology. It's as if it grabs all the features of neoliberal post-modernity and just turns them up to 11.
>>

 No.13258

>>13183
nerd
>>

 No.13268

>>13139
>you have to land the first date for your other personal qualities to even be considered
Have you ever thought about not seeking dates at all? Like, becoming friends with women because you appreciate them as people in a platonic way, and them appreciating you back?
>millimeters of bone in your face
Imagine actually believing this. Why do you have to complicate everything so much? It's clear that you're just socially incompetent and seeking a partner among women that probably aren't compatible with you (because of interests, goals, etc.). Just stop trying and stop worrying about it and you'll see how you'll stop putting everyone around you off.

Also, it makes no difference whether you're raped (actually raped against your will, not just roleplaying) by someone attractive or "ugly" in real life. Looks don't cancel out absolutely everything else about a person and your relation to them, and your belief in the opposite means that you fail to understand women as people, therefore you're unsurprisingly single and unloved. Your theory that appearance is everything and that you're doomed to be alone because of it and not due to your obvious social incompetence and attitude is completely flawed and dependant upon virtually baseless assumptions.
>>

 No.13271

>>13159
>I'm romantic as fuck, even the sexual fantasies I jerk off to are lovey-dovey shit.
Sexual fantasies mean almost nothing in real life. It sounds like you just want someone to live your fantasies (of cuddling and having sex/a girlfriend) when most people want to be loved for who they are and not for what you can get from them. It comes off as desperate and even more so when your priorities (sex and romantic love) don't line up with those of other people (friendship).
>>13146
>the desire for order and understanding (which ironically can be an extremely attractive trait)
That's true, as long as this desire for order doesn't manifest as obsessive self-pity, which is what defines incels.
>>13035
>I never once mentioned my age. I've graduated college, now wagecucking from home in a "respectable" occupation.
That's what I mean by young. It's not rare to see virgins (of both sexes) in their 20s, not like the average young adult prole has much time to think about a boyfriend or girlfriend, much less marriage, under neoliberalism.
>>

 No.13272

>>13254
The rape analogy was extreme and I regretted it immediately after posting, I apologize. I condemn acts of rape and other forms of sexual exploitation (for example, when the leaders of Trot/ML cults exploit their authority to sleep with student recruits). Here's what I was trying to say with a better analogy: the only difference between flirting and sexual harassment is whether she likes it, and that usually comes down to a few millimeters of bone. I've seen it myself, literally 20 times more women appreciate when I "be myself" next to a picture of August Babel rather than my real face.

>>13268
>Have you ever thought about not seeking dates at all? Like, becoming friends with women because you appreciate them as people in a platonic way, and them appreciating you back?
I've had a few female friends I met through the aforementioned study groups I organized. The closest female friend continued to meet up with me once a week in the library after the class was finished to chat and help each other with essays, etc. (same major). She was in a relationship the whole time and now lives in another state, however she's the only one who still messages me every once in a while (mostly for recommendations on cars to buy and shit like that, but it's something).

>It's clear that you're just socially incompetent and seeking a partner among women that probably aren't compatible with you (because of interests, goals, etc.). Just stop trying and stop worrying about it and you'll see how you'll stop putting everyone around you off.
My attempted college dates all had shared interests in social science and still all rejected me. 2019 was more what you're describing when I tried to get any romantic experience at all using online dating and the like, still no success. It's depressing as hell when I know that ugly girls can make an online profile and arrange a date with an ugly guy within week tops, they just choose to swipe them away.
>Just stop trying and stop worrying about it and you'll see how you'll stop putting everyone around you off.
"Just relax and let things happen" was my strategy in high school and people were just as put off.

>your obvious social incompetence and attitude
Tell me, what makes you think I'm "obviously socially incompetent". As I've said, I didn't believe in any of this incel shit until very recently. I did and still believe that gender stereotypes are harmful to males and females. The central claim of incel ideology, born out by large swaths of statistics, is that sexual instinct continues to dominate dating despite radically different circumstances.
>>

 No.13337

File: 1614059709523.jpg (46.03 KB, 500x282, card_schopenhauer_1852.jpg)

Waaaaaah I can't coom in females to continue the cycle of meaningless human suffering. Get a fucking grip.
>>

 No.13349

>>13271
>It sounds like you just want someone to live your fantasies (of cuddling and having sex/a girlfriend) when most people want to be loved for who they are and not for what you can get from them. It comes off as desperate and even more so when your priorities (sex and romantic love) don't line up with those of other people (friendship).
I'm not trying to hoist this on you specifically, but reading this shook me to my very core. If gun prices weren't so inflated last year, I'm not sure I'd still be alive. The brutal realization is that maybe my personality is indeed what is holding me back, but I'm unable to change that either. The last factor in my life that I haven't mentioned yet is that I have an Autism diagnosis - the complete package, not just a childhood obsession with trains but sensory disorders / stimming and total blindness to nonverbal cues. I've always been skeptical of "biomedical" psychiatry's claims that all human behavior has its roots in genetics (to be "cured" with neuroleptic drugs, or, at an earlier time, eugenic sterilizations), but all my attempts to act less autistic have failed. If my looks mean I'm playing on Legendary difficulty, being autistic is where the Halo 2 jackal snipers come in. Here are some stats: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5789215/ Note that the average age of participants was almost 36 and that the data is skewed by including gay couples (especially common for autistics), not to mention Chads.

>most people want to be loved for who they are and not for what you can get from them.
That's exactly what I'm searching for myself, someone who cares about my feelings beyond some direct or indirect monetary transaction. The thing that's in doubt now is if I can possibly fulfill my partner's emotional needs if I'm almost completely blind to nonverbal communication. Without any good looks to save me, I'm not sure that anyone would accept my true self without the NT mask on. Before you suggest dating autistic women, the sphere is just as male dominated as all my other interests and hobbies, (competition from better looking men) and data shows that autistic women can date through the normal channels without much of a deficit anyway.

>obsessive self-pity
Christ, I just wanted to vent my fears and doubts just once on an anonymous albanian civil defense enthusiast board.
>>

 No.13350

File: 1614067822950-0.webm (1.08 MB, 648x576, 1610258160938.webm)

File: 1614067822950-1.png (582.7 KB, 596x531, 1610258342507.png)

can't let this thread pass without my favorite incel
>>

 No.13366

File: 1614071341222.gif (8.82 MB, 720x404, 5F4BFAF0-2D8A-4E45-9652-2F….gif)

>>13349
> Christ, I just wanted to vent my fears and doubts just once on an anonymous albanian civil defense enthusiast board.
That’s what you get for interacting with feminist cunts
Just give into your hatred and anger bro, what are you waiting for?
>>

 No.13394

I never bought into incel ideas, I also had a gf in the past, but I do feel you OP.

My problem is that I have severe social anxiety to the point that it's physically painful to be around other people. I tried pushing myself through the pain and lead a normal life but I ended up so burned out and suicidal that I closed myself off from the world instead, no friends, no job, no plans, no life at all. I still regularly think about killing myself, but I can't do that to my mom who is also very unhappy with her life and relies on me for mental support. So I'm kinda trapped and just trying to mentally survive until my mom dies, but it's getting harder each year. Everything becomes pointless very quickly when you can't relate it to the rest of the world, society, future, etc.

I don't know if it's current society that produces these pathologies, or if we come into the world already broken, but I'm pretty sure you can't escape this condition once you're already in it, it's irreversible. Now either you accept that and become completely numb like a zombie, or you don't and feel at least somewhat alive merely because of the pain produced by the conflict with reality. I'm always oscillating between the two approaches, you can't mentally survive for long with only one of them.

As for incel stupidity (sorry), I went for a completely different ideological cope: radical political philosophy. It has provided me with a justification for not engaging with the world, kinda like the Hegelian "beautiful soul". But in the end it has only dug my hole deeper because it made me complacent.
>>

 No.13395

>>13366
Maybe OP actually doesn't want to hate women?
>>

 No.13418

File: 1614108595477.png (411.27 KB, 1600x900, ClipboardImage.png)

>>13350
Sauce on the big Booba girl in the white shirt and necklace from the 2nd pic Please
>>

 No.13420

>>13394
It's totally reversible my dude. One of the things that has helped me a lot is to identify self-hatred because of not doing x or y. It's hard to explain, but it really took a lot of stress and anxiety when I started accepting I'm maybe weird and don't do "succesful" things, whatever that might mean.
>>13349
It is not normal to desire "having sex" to the degree incels have. I have virgin friends who have otherwise normal social lives who don't enter these spirals of self-hatred, and objectification of women. I don't think your personality is unfixable. Your problem is probably that you don't have a good social life and in consequence, you don't relate with women frequently, which makes you look at them as foreign entities and you don't know how to deal with them. If you would have had a good social life, you'd probably wouldn't fall into an incel spiral, even if you were sexless.
>>

 No.13431

>>13395
If OP is also non-white women already hate him sadly
>>

 No.13432

>>13418
Fucking idiot coomer.
>>

 No.13455

>>13420
>It is not normal to desire "having sex" to the degree incels have.
I've already dealt with this, the thing I really want is emotional intimacy.
>I have virgin friends who have otherwise normal social lives who don't enter these spirals of self-hatred, and objectification of women.
They very well might be, you just wouldn't know. No one would ever risk putting the "incel" label next to their legal name. hell, I'm concerned it will poison my anon posts on /leftypol/ because people will recognize my writing style
>Your problem is probably that you don't have a good social life and in consequence, you don't relate with women frequently, which makes you look at them as foreign entities and you don't know how to deal with them. If you would have had a good social life, you'd probably wouldn't fall into an incel spiral, even if you were sexless.
I don't think you realize how much this hurts to me, because autism is precisely a disorder that cripples your socialization skills. All my "friends" live out of state now, and I noticed that I was always the one to initiate contact with them, so I stopped - complete silence from all but one. The unfortunate fact is that when you crunch the numbers on height and autism alone, to say nothing of my 4/10 face and so-so income, it's statistically probable that I will die alone despite my best efforts. I'm not ready to get off the self-improvement treadmill just yet, but I don't think I'll ever again be optimistic about my prospects.
>>

 No.13456

File: 1614128967314.mp4 (2.45 MB, 960x720, Grub Hub_s Delivery Dance_….mp4)

>>13455
Forgot webm:
>>

 No.13459

>>13432
Low Test. Consider TRT

>>13350
Seconding. Sauce on girl from 2nd pic?
>>

 No.13665

>>13432
based
>>

 No.13666

>>13349
>The last factor in my life that I haven't mentioned yet is that I have an Autism diagnosis - the complete package, not just a childhood obsession with trains but sensory disorders / stimming and total blindness to nonverbal cues.
Man, you should've mentioned that from the very beginning. And still, in my opinion, it's possible for you to learn how to interact more fluently with women. The fact that you've had female friends and in particular that one, shows that you're already able to form a friendship with them.
I know just reading this isn't gonna do much to change what you truly want, but what's wrong with being really close friends with people? Isn't that a form of affection and intimacy too? It can also lead to something more romantic and sexual, but even if it doesn't, you'll have a good friend that you can rely on and vice versa. If you believe you're incapable of finding a romantic partner, why not at least fill the void with best friends? Being lonely isn't just about lacking a partner but also friends and family. They all support you.

>>13350
What are the leaves supposed to mean?
>>

 No.13681

>>13666 (ominous trip)
>I know just reading this isn't gonna do much to change what you truly want, but what's wrong with being really close friends with people? Isn't that a form of affection and intimacy too? It can also lead to something more romantic and sexual, but even if it doesn't, you'll have a good friend that you can rely on and vice versa.
I'm not sure if this is possible either. That's why the comment above (>>13271) hit me so hard: I took it to mean I was seen as some soulless automaton who isn't capable of fulfilling other people's emotional needs. Being autistic means I'm incapable of reading peoples' emotions to begin with, no matter how much I tell myself I'd like to help. As I mentioned before, just about all of my few "friendships" have completely dissolved when I stopped sending the first message - even my childhood best friend (not reciprocal obv), the only person I've been close enough to share my fears and doubts with, completely disappeared. I don't offer anything of value beyond my specialist knowledge of various interests and hobbies.

It's politically incorrect to say, but my belief in the core tenets of incel ideology (human sexual desire is inherently polygenous, the end of patriarchal control of economic resources will doom the worst looking men to inceldom) has only been solidified by this thread. I was reminded of a quote I read from Paul Lafargue a few years ago:

>But if it is possible to catch a glimpse of the end of female servitude and of the antagonism of the sexes and to conceive for the human species an era of incomparable bodily and mental progress, brought about by women and men of a high development in muscle and brain, it is impossible to foresee the sexual relations of free and equal women and men who will not be united nor separated by sordid material interests and by the gross ethics engendered by such interests. But if we may judge by the present and the past, men, in whom the genetic passion is more violent and more continuous than in women – the same phenomenon is observed in the males and females of the whole animal series – will be obliged to exhibit their physical and intellectual qualities to win their sweethearts. Sexual selection, which, as Darwin has shown, fulfilled an important role in the development of the animal species and which, with rare exceptions, has ceased to play this part in the Indo-European races for about three thousand years, will again become one of the most active factors in the perfecting of the human race.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lafargue/1904/xx/woman.htm

This seems to have predicted the rise of inceldom (and statistically speaking, today nearly 1 in 3 het men are literal incels and the rate is increasing quickly) over 100 years ago. The return of sexual selection is taken to be a good thing for its eugenic potential - maybe a few centuries into global socialism, autism will have been eradicated and gigachads will walk the earth. How to address the emotional needs of the men rejected by sexual selection is a political question with no easy answer.
>>

 No.13682

>>13681
Can't you join some autist org and find autistic girls, where both of you expect as little social understanding as possible?

Stop mixing terms. Incel is the ideology, just 'not having sex' does not count, therefore 1 in 3 men are not incels.
If the price for the end of female servitude is a couple niggas not getting any pussy so be it. The easy answer is they join a local club or just deal with it, or VR headsets will replace all this stuff in a couple decades.

>men, in whom the genetic passion is more violent and more continuous than in women – the same phenomenon is observed in the males and females of the whole animal series
Holy shit brainlet moment.
>>

 No.13683

>>13682
>Can't you join some autist org and find autistic girls, where both of you expect as little social understanding as possible?
Autistic women are quite rare, officially the rate of diagnosis is 1:4. Furthermore, autistic women don't have anywhere near the same difficulty dating through the normal channels. I should probably try joining some autistic dating group, but chances are the competition will have much better looks than me.

>top mixing terms. Incel is the ideology, just 'not having sex' does not count, therefore 1 in 3 men are not incels.
Incel is short for "involuntary celibacy", therefore people that don't have sex despite trying are literal incels. If I haven't said it before I condemn all the hateful shit that goes down on most self proclaimed incel sites, but the ideology at its core is statistically very compelling.
>If the price for the end of female servitude is a couple niggas not getting any pussy so be it. The easy answer is they join a local club or just deal with it, or VR headsets will replace all this stuff in a couple decades.
It's not just a "couple niggas", if statistical trends persist it could be half the heterosexual male population that's unable to find female companionship, and I don't think even the most advanced VR waifus will be able to fulfill that sexual and emotional need.
>>

 No.13684

>>13683
>1:4
Interesting. Yeah I get you, I suppose women are more forced to be social by society when most autistic men are just left to play with trains and so on.
>Looks
Trust me autistic girls aren't trying to find the best male to breed with, they probably just want a dude he isn't a total manipulative cunt that will take advantage of her lack of social understanding/skills.

>Incel is short for "involuntary celibacy", therefore people that don't have sex despite trying are literal incels.
There is a clear distinction. This thread in general does not agree with this definition if you read it. If we go with this definition then we need to define a new term 'mean-incel' or something. 'cope-incel'. Idk but it's stupid. I've said it before, people who just 'don't have sex' AREN'T incels. Literally. They don't identify as celibate normally, they just live their lives, however the incel ideology is what creates incels from similar circumstances.
>It's not just a "couple niggas", if statistical trends persist it could be half the heterosexual male population
Again the 1 in 3 thing is false. Therefore you can't extrapolate this trend to 1 in 2 men lol. Honestly this idea is so retardedly laughable, but hey that's incel-data-science.

Even if we assume 50% of men 'unable to get laid' whatever the fuck that means, as if it's some linear trend, that's the price of 100% of women being free from servitude. Is that not worth it?
>>

 No.13688

File: 1614247971329.png (351.81 KB, 1016x1094, dd773e4e4e6bb16b04f3e36575….png)

Thread hijack, but why is it seemingly so hard for so many young men to find a partner now? Being a virgin at 25 puts me in like, 5% of all males in the ENTIRE western world who have never had sex. I feel like there should be some kind of system in place to make sure people don't come out so poorly adjusted they don't/can't even perform one of the most basic functions of an adult human being (from an evolutionary standpoint).

I don't subscribe to any kind of incel shit because I don't think it's the answer and just makes my situation even more depressing but damn dude this shit ain't right
>>

 No.13690

I must remind OP once again that his claim that inceldom will rise under socialist MOP is based on the uncritical acceptance of multiple assumptions, chiefly that hypergamy is "human nature", but also that the economic subordination of women is the only way to end hypergamy.

>>13688
Online dating is absurdly fucked, I've seen some shit fam. Buddy and his sister will be in the same room swiping in opposite directions nearly hundreds of times within minutes, they'll barely look at the first picture and swipe. People don't take it seriously at all, women are hyper judgemental and men have zero standards, almost all men get shafted and women are swamped with messages. Even my best buddy who's a 7/10, with a good career and badass aesthetics and a great personality struggles on it and hes gotten tons of matches. My most successful time on Tinder was when I made a joke account pretending to be Karl Marx. It can still work sometimes of course but for the most part it's intentionally designed to be little more than a mind numbing, predatory time sink that encourages you to waste money.
On the other hand IRL dating sucks too, always has but moreso now. Ultimately, without the ability to network and jump from friend group to friend group, you will usually struggle to find a partner. This is why so many people suggest doing activities to organically meet people, even if you aren't dating you're making friends and that's where the real dating opportunities arise.
>>

 No.13692

>>13688
>>13690
Hot take: Capitalism is responsible for incels due to industrial society inventing plastic and BPAs and polluting the food supply with them. This leads to lack of testosterone, which even for women is a sex drive hormone, leading newer generations to be less sexual on average, which of course results in less sex. This is also increasing androgenization which is why nonbinary and other gender nonconforming ideas are on the rise.
>>

 No.13694

File: 1614259073013.jpg (37.43 KB, 712x673, hardol.jpg)

>>13688
I was 26 by the time I "lost" mine.

I wanted it to be unique and with someone I cared about.
My only education was movies and anecdotes.

Then I compromised and said just someone I liked and maybe slightly tipsy.
My only education was watching friends succeed messily.

By the end, I just bought a chick a milkshake, hit it then quit it (which I regret, she was a nice person y'know).
My only education was just giving up, being shamed by one girl I nearly got it on with but couldn't get hard, she gave me another chance, couldn't get it up again, and I could see the sexual interest evaporate and her realise that I had just fluked it thanks to some advice from GLL.

Then I did some "redpilled" shit that destroyed not one, not two, but three relationships simultaneously.
My only education was toxic stuff that made it feel impossible to navigate the world while trying to stay balance my quiotic upbringing.

And now I haven't felt the romantic or sexual embrace of a woman for two and a half years. Again.
My only education, nothing. I truly treat women as a person I would chat to day to day, and even if they were to show signs I'm just over the balancing act. You want to fuck or nah? You want to go on a date or nah? You want to gf or nah? Please Christ, lord almighty above, I just want to be hugged with the intimacy that can only occur when someone finds you attractive and you them.

I guess the good thing is that our brains never became addicted, I see the poon hounds my age gagging for even a crumb of pussy, willing to go to almost any length. And it's just so… Why? So much risk, so much hurt for women. The filters and defences which are vital just seem to mean the most mean and ruthless guys force their way through and nothing seems to come about of it.

/rant
>>

 No.13704

>>13694
> I guess the good thing is that our brains never became addicted, I see the poon hounds my age gagging for even a crumb of pussy, willing to go to almost any length. And it's just so… Why?
The secret is poon hounds don’t actually have standards and fuck anything that moves
>>

 No.13706

>>13688
just have sex lmao
>>

 No.13708

>>13706
Ngl but whenever some chanfag says this I imagine them being publicly castrated
>>

 No.13857

File: 1614326353942-0.png (67.1 KB, 1406x844, sexless stats.PNG)

File: 1614326353942-1.jpeg (52.64 KB, 1128x858, young male virginity.jpeg)

File: 1614326353942-2.jpg (119.7 KB, 640x1370, finland sexless stats.jpg)

>>13684
>Again the 1 in 3 thing is false. Therefore you can't extrapolate this trend to 1 in 2 men lol.
You never disproved it to begin with. My claim that nearly one in three men were literal incels comes from the 2018 General Social Survey in the US for people aged 18-30. 1 in 3 isn't too far from the mark given that men are inclined to exaggerate their sexual conquests and vice-versa. The stats for other countries are broken down on the "Demographics of Inceldom" page - across pretty much all of them, the rate of literal involuntary celibacy is rising for men much faster than women. See https://incels.wiki/w/Demographics_of_inceldom

>Even if we assume 50% of men 'unable to get laid' whatever the fuck that means, as if it's some linear trend, that's the price of 100% of women being free from servitude. Is that not worth it?
Ideally a socialist society would find some new synthesis that satisfies the sexual and emotional needs of both men and women. It's a good thing that sexual relationships are no longer "legal prostitution under the guise of marriage" (Saint-Simon), where women are forced to trade sex for economic resources. I don't want its replacement to be "legal prostitution under the guise of Onlyfans" though, where ugly men are forced to trade economic resources to get any form of female affection.

>I must remind OP once again that his claim that inceldom will rise under socialist MOP is based on the uncritical acceptance of multiple assumptions, chiefly that hypergamy is "human nature", but also that the economic subordination of women is the only way to end hypergamy.
How do you think that a socialist society would be able to end hypergamy? I'm skeptical of arguments based in "human nature" too, if you can advance a more compelling materialist analysis of the incel question I'm all ears.
>>

 No.13858

>>13690
>>13857
Forgot the trip response
>>

 No.13865

>>13857
>>13858
>How do you think that a socialist society would be able to end hypergamy?
I never claimed this. My point is that neither know the causes of hypergamy, let alone whether or not it exists beyond some very limited statistics. So to make the assumptions you do is at this point in time flawed.
>>

 No.13866

>>13865
*neither of us
fuck im tired
>>

 No.13874

it's always the least competent and involved in sex that have the loudest opinions on related issues
>look at these graphs
>dude trust me bro
go suck dick and calm your shit
>>

 No.13875

>>13857
You really think women like sharing men son?
>>

 No.13876

>>13875
Yes
My question is, if you admit that the self-interests of the sexes are fundamentally opposed, why shouldn’t men look out for their own self-interest? If women are expected to be ruthlessly self-interested why shouldn’t men? What, fucking morals? Who gives a shit? You think I’m a socialist out of moral reasoning and not solely because I’m a prole?
>>

 No.13877

>>13876
For the sake of argument let us assume your characterisation of women as given, as such why would such a being wish to share affection instead of having it to themselves and their offspring?
>>

 No.13882

>>13857
>It's a good thing that sexual relationships are no longer "legal prostitution under the guise of marriage" (Saint-Simon), where women are forced to trade sex for economic resources.
The quality of male-female relationships has objectively gotten worse since then. The appeal of this change is fundamentally rooted in modern morality.
>How do you think that a socialist society would be able to end hypergamy?
The only conceivable solution to lessen the damage hypergamy does to a modern society is by removing access to birth control and abortion.
>>

 No.13885

>>13874
not OP but good argument
this kind of garbage responses and hostility is part of what fuels the worst of incels' frustrations in the first place
there's no "incel ideology", incel dark humor is literally a cope in the first place, almost nobody is taking those extreme statements seriously, except actual mentally deranged people like Elliot Rodger. is there is any "ideology" it's this link and nothing else : https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill

if you really, seriously hate incels and want them to shut up, prove this wrong. go ahead.

inceldom is an attitude, and basically depression, it's not a strict ideology in any way, everybody's always shitting on everybody else on these communities 4chan-style, calling each other "fakecels" because they haven't tried enough.
inceldom is reading this : https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill and feeling bad about it. that's it.
if this entire page is untrue, fucking prove it. make a counter-page with a billion links.
>>

 No.13889

>>13885
It’s lowkey frustrating how people act like incels discourage each other from trying, they really don’t
These are all the men considered “fakecels”
>Fat dudes who refuse to lose weight
>Skinny dudes who refuse to bulk up
>Dudes who never actually approach girls
>Dudes who get attention but not from women they want
>White dudes who exclude women based on race
>Non-whites who exclude based on race/solely go for white girls
>>

 No.13890

>>13885
In that case I'm an incel.
Honestly, if anything that page just makes me less sympathetic towards incels, because there's no need to disprove that page. One can accept everything on it and still not come to the Incel's conclusion.
Even if everything on that page is true, why? It's not a meaningless question, in fact answering it has significant effects. What causes all this statistical evidence to exist? Truthfully, I don't know, but incels are so intelligent that they've discovered the answer already.
Here's my guess: uncels are so content with uncritically blaming "human nature" and individual choices because it's the only way they can justify their hatred of women. If this was mostly a social or psychological problem, then the blame is diffused, and that's an uncomfortable fact for a woman-hater. Do you disagree?
>>

 No.13891

>>13890
If you agree it’s a social problem, why would you feel less like shit? You think incels believe that Japan is the incel country because they genuinely think all Japanese men are ugly? They regularly acknowledge inceldom as a social and not individual issue, hence why they always say more and more guys are becoming incels.

And if you feel like, based on the page you’re an incel, then you are one. Your problem is that you desperately need inceldom to be an ideology and also pure evil, idk why either, since, fuck, most dudes get bitter over a simple dry spell. Just because most adult virgin men are bitter doesn’t make bitterness a requirement for being an incel, you think the dudes on reddit who are 30 year old virgins that spend hours every single day cataloging incel posts to whine about them are better or more appealing to women?
>>

 No.13893

>>13890
>uncels are so content with uncritically blaming "human nature" and individual choices because it's the only way they can justify their hatred of women
This doesn't make any sense, because you can't reasonably hate someone for following their natural instincts with which they were born or the choices thereof. Discontent is a more accurate description.
>>

 No.13894

>>13893
>you can't reasonably hate someone for following their natural instincts with which they were born or the choices thereof
Of course you can: Those dirty juden control everything, always lie and steal from the good and kindhearted german people. But it's their nature, so we can't change them. Therefore only solution is to exterminate them all.
>>

 No.13895

>>13894
Bruh
It’s a fair bit much to say self-identified incels want to exterminate women lmao
Why do radlibs insist on the
>Every incel is literally Elliot Roger
Take?
Is every man in a relationship a rapist then nigga? After all, it’s mostly sexhavers that commit sexual assaults.
>>

 No.13896

>>13891
>If you agree it’s a social problem, why would you feel less like shit?
Changing biology on a massive scale is much harder to change than institutions and laws, and if it's solely instinctual causes, then my only way to realistically change it is through brute force and subordination.
>Your problem is that you desperately need inceldom to be an ideology and also pure evil
Fuck off. This statement and everything that follows is pure assumptions on your part. I've already stated ITT that people who bully incels are part of the problem and get little respect for me.
>>

 No.13897

>>13895
Great job completely ignoring my point.
>>

 No.13899

>>13894
>Those dirty juden control everything, always lie and steal from the good and kindhearted german people. But it's their nature, so we can't change them. Therefore only solution is to exterminate them all.
(Assuming for the sake of argument that the premise is true) the solution of extermination stems from stoic pragmatism. Hate must be more visceral.
>>

 No.13901

>>13899
That's the exact opposite of the truth. Considering extermination to be a solution is only possible if one isn't being stoic and pragmatic, because it isn't a real solution to begin with. The whole point is that getting rid of the jews solves nothing, it's only in the Nazi's head that it's a solution, and it's in the Nazi's head because of their hatred to begin with. Their hatred is pathological.
>>

 No.13902

>>13889
>Fat dudes who refuse to lose weight
"Fatcels are volcels" - every incel forum
>>

 No.13903

>>13899
>>13901 (me)
I worded that poorly so let me clarify: would a stoic and pragmatic person really start such a train of thought by thinking that jews are dirty and evil?

When we act or feel or even just observe something strange or uncomfortable, and don't already have a good explanation for why it's happening, the brain cooks up a convincing story for us that fits with our understanding of the world in order to explain it.
>>

 No.13904

>>13901
>it's only in the Nazi's head that it's a solution, and it's in the Nazi's head because of their hatred to begin with. Their hatred is pathological.
Nazis think that a) jews inevitably cause problem X and b) we need to kill or otherwise get rid of jews to solve problem X
It's wrong, but neither believing in a) or it's logical conclusion b) requires you to be a hateful person.
>>

 No.13905

>>13904
Where does their thinking that the jews inevitably cause problem X arise from?

Are you trying to tell me that the jews really are judeobolshevik illuminati bankers?
>>

 No.13906

>>13905
>Where does their thinking that the jews inevitably cause problem X arise from?
Something may be true, misleading or simply used as an looked for an excuse to rationalize their prejudice. Nonetheless you don't necessarily need to be hateful to say 'jews cause problem X', 'women are sluts/hypergamous/etc', 'Y is in X's nature'. It may, or may not be the motivation.
>>

 No.13908

>>13889
all incels are fakecels or volcels
>>

 No.13909

>>13906
>Something may be true, misleading or simply used as an looked for an excuse to rationalize their prejudice.
This is my central point, and what I claim incels are doing. I think it's safe to assume that causes the prejudice - it can be anything really, even just anger or sadness - is the incel's experience with women.
All of this is to say that these real experiences and the incel's emotional response is the point of origin where the incel ideology arises. This is where I am most sympathetic to incels, but also where the most intervention is needed. All of the assumptions that follow from incel's logic are part of a story that incels create to describe their otherwise very real condition.
>Nonetheless you don't necessarily need to be hateful
I concede this, my assumption that hate required is false.
>>

 No.13911

>>13909
>incel ideology
In order to be clear, my last (and first) post was >>13885
There is no "incel ideology".
This is SJW liberal made-up horseshit.
Yes, they might be bitter. Bitterness is not an ideology, and it doesn't mean you're Hitler and have literal plans for genocide.
>>

 No.13912

>>13911
>There is no "incel ideology".
Please respond to my arguments then, because I think I made a somewhat compelling case for why there is one.
>>

 No.13914

>>13911
BRUH. What the fuck is the incel wiki about then.
>>

 No.13918

>>13911
>>13912 (me)
I should mention that an ideology does not imply violence, although it is often used to justify violence. Maybe I shouldn't have used Nazi ideology as an example, I just thought it was a good one because the extremeness made it easy to point out the flaws. I'm not saying "incels are literally hitler!!!11!!11one!!", but I am saying that praying before a superbowl game will not increase your team's chances of winning. Understand now?
Of course bitterness is not an ideology, but bitterness can be part of why someone believes in an ideology.
>>

 No.13922

File: 1614376928466.png (24.57 KB, 1047x441, ClipboardImage.png)

>>13911
Agreed, it's really weird how US politics has exported this IDPOL bullshit about angry virgins seething for the demise of your culture.
This is is straight up "they hate our freedums" through the lens of old school tumblrinas.

Actually since we are going full radlib feminist, why don't we discuss the oppression caused by paraphilias like foot fetishism?
I'm sure there is some cunt sweating over how mundane acts of hers may be arousing to someone else outside of her control. Really when you look at it paraphilias are just a scheme of seething
loser virgins to extract sexual gratification outside their station, without consent one may say. I mean look at all those places where weirdos lust over fully clothed women's feet. In public settings! It needs to stop.

How do we rehabilitate footfags? Do they deserve it? Aren't they subhuman scum to begin with? Share your stories sisters and soyboys!
>>

 No.13934

>>13922
Feet fetish is just footfag nature, it's in their DNA. We can't let them breed…we have no choice but to genocide the footfags.
>>

 No.13936

>Read a Fucking Book
Make me. That's right, you can't. HAH!
>>

 No.13948

File: 1614390413355.png (656.75 KB, 960x730, ClipboardImage.png)

>>

 No.13949

>why do people call my out on my bullshit?
maybe stop posting it? if some "chad" came here and posted about his rape, do you think people wouldn't call him out?
maybe try folic acid, cause you're seriously retarded.
>>

 No.13950

>>13911
One last time and I'm done. I regret to inform you that the "scientific blackpill" isn't scientific, nor should it be a blackpill.

IIRC from my psych textbook (I don't have sauce sorry, you'll have to trust my anus for now) there was an experiment done where a group of people who were speed-dating were asked to avoid cultural norms, and as a result the women approached men at nearly equal rates. This was not the case with the control group, which was more like 80/20. Even if underlying cause of the control group's results was human nature, it isn't very important because the of the simple fact that it was changed by a minor alteration to social conditions. This isn't to say that something being socially/psychologically determined means you have the power to change it or that it's easy to change, but just that solutions are possible and worth pursuing.

Let's go back to hypergamy again for the thousandth time. As I've said before, the claim that women are hypergamous by nature is unfounded. Isn't it possible that hypergamy is a result of psychological and/or social conditions, even if just partially? If so, then why resign to hopelessness and resentment towards women? Let's not forget that it hasn't been proven that hypergamy is actually wrong or unjust, or that inceldom is actually caused by hypergamy, or even that hypergamy really exists beyond some very limited (and potentially spurious) statistical correlation. All of these are just more things incels take for granted to be true because it sounds like it's true. It's nonscience.

So I'll repeat myself: why resign to hopelessness and resentment? Pushback is fine but at a certain point, being this uncritical, I can only assume it's because you've just gotten used to it. So why bother helping you? At no point have I denied that incels are going through an experience that is unfair and emotionally damaging, and I sympathize with a lot that incels go through. All I am asking for is that incels be just the SLIGHTEST BIT CRITICAL of their own beliefs. I've had this exact same discussion before on bunkerchan and it was the same bullshit accusing me of hating incels and being idpozzed, ignoring all of my arguments to just wag their finger at me. One guy even said that asking them to be critical was me "trying to convert them" - as if inceldom is some sort of fucking religion. If ALL YOU CAN DO is plug your ears and moralize everything away then why the fuck should anyone bother engaging in good faith?

Imagine if liberals were also this uncritical of their beliefs and experiences and kept saying "just take a shower" or "just exercise" or "just get laid lol" all the time. Crazy, right?
>>

 No.13951

>>13949
>Bruh the world is good because the world is nice :)
This is all you people ever say with regards to incels
The second someone says dating in this decade and the last one was utter fucking shit, especially if you’re a young man, you people turn into actual fucking liberals
I hate you
>>

 No.13952

>>13948
Yea well dude the internet dude is misogynistic the rapist isn’t silly

Unique IPs: 40
[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / cytube] [ leftypol / b / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime ] [ meta ] [ GET / ref]
[ Return / Go to top /