Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Are incels a normal thing that was temporarily removed by civilization and we simply reverted to the regular order, or is this a new phenomenon?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 7448
  • Start date
Deleted member 7448

Deleted member 7448

Name is Abdu, live in Laos, born on 24.08.1992.
-
Joined
May 16, 2018
Posts
7,127
There were incels in the past, sure, but was the problem ever as bad as now? If the theories that said that one in, idk, ~27 or however much it was, 1 in 27 males reproduced, then maybe the situation that we have now hasn't yet reached its peak. Things could get as bad as they are for us for a lot of other males.
 
Last edited:
Cope but it's over for drugcels anyway.
 
If i had the possibility to get drugs i would definitely do them. I always wanted to try heroin. It's supposed to be the best feeling you can ever have,
 
Yeah, smokin all day stuff is hella good idea, takin LSD, be in your own colorful world looks good
 
I think incels were always around, but very few men were incels, only the bottom of the shit barrel. Now, men who aren't in the top 5% of physical attractiveness can be incel.
 
There were incels in the past, sure, but was the problem ever as bad as now? If the theories that said that one in, idk, ~27 or however much it was, 1 in 27 males reproduced, then maybe the situation that we have now hasn't yet reached its peak. Things could get as bad as they are for us for a lot of other males.
It was 17 females for every 1 male I think. A literal 95/5 rule.
 
It's supposed to be the best feeling you can ever have,
No man that's an exaggeration put forth by movies and tv to make drug/ crime stories more dramatic. I imagine it feels not that much different from waking up from surgery at the hospital. I think people take it to ignore pain and/or emotional trauma, not to have the best feeling in the world.
 
I think incels were always around, but very few men were incels, only the bottom of the shit barrel. Now, men who aren't in the top 5% of physical attractiveness can be incel.
It was A LOT harder for foids to be this picky in the past, modern communications is 99% to be blamed.
 
No man that's an exaggeration put forth by movies and tv to make drug/ crime stories more dramatic. I imagine it feels not that much different from waking up from surgery at the hospital. I think people take it to ignore pain and/or emotional trauma, not to have the best feeling in the world.
I still would like to try it though. To make sure for myself.
 
Alright. but to state the obvious: try not to get addicted.
I probably won't ever be able to get my hands on it. But if i do and it really feels that good, i don't mind getting addicted.
 
I probably won't ever be able to get my hands on it. But if i do and it really feels that good, i don't mind getting addicted.
You will when you start throwing up all over yourself when you run out of it and have to suck Tyrone's bbc in the ghetto in order to avoid getting violently sick.
 
You will when you start throwing up all over yourself when you run out of it and have to suck Tyrone's bbc in the ghetto in order to avoid getting violently sick.
Seems to extreme. If it makes me feel too bad i can always take the easy way out.
 
Inceldom used to be a thing when we were less advanced
Then when mankind made the “great leap” and developed a high IQ (however that happened), incels started going ER on their own tribes
Then when the wise men of the tribes saw what was happening and realised the problem, they invented religion
Religion controlled foids and chads alike
Human degeneracy was tamed
Then when humans abandoned religion, degeneracy started creeping back
And we are now here today, in the same situation we were in 10,000 years ago
 
It is absolutely new phenomenon and the most important

Believe me i know things that others dont
 
There were incels in the past, sure, but was the problem ever as bad as now? If the theories that said that one in, idk, ~27 or however much it was, 1 in 27 males reproduced, then maybe the situation that we have now hasn't yet reached its peak. Things could get as bad as they are for us for a lot of other males.
It wasnt as bad before because incels were sent to die while chad was the NCO,the officer and the general who was in no danger of dying and who could slay, now there has been no great war for incels to do something, and we are only growing in number every day, soon my brother, soon.
 
Ok what are your facts then, Mr. Genius. 1 to 17 ratio was a thing thousands of years ago.

What are your facts on this?

Also for what reason are you implying it was true

If you are implying it was like this because of "muh hypergamy" to make the argument that what is happening today is normal, I call BS, if you attribute the ratio to the high mortality rates of the past, and men being more likely to be killed, then it would make sense

Its not like there were jails for rapists, and if a rapist impregnate a woman there weren't any safe abortion clinics around, so she pretty much in most cases had to carry the child to term, so 1 in 17 for reasons of hypergamy doesn't make sense at all, women didn't choose anything, they had no choices, they merely submitted
 
What are your facts on this?

Also for what reason are you implying it was true

If you are implying it was like this because of "muh hypergamy" to make the argument that what is happening today is normal, I call BS, if you attribute the ratio to the high mortality rates of the past, and men being more likely to be killed, then it would make sense

Its not like there were jails for rapists, and if a rapist impregnate a woman there weren't any safe abortion clinics around, so she pretty much in most cases had to carry the child to term, so 1 in 17 for reasons of hypergamy doesn't make sense at all, women didn't choose anything, they had no choices, they merely submitted
I'm talking about this: https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success. I thought you were saying 1/17 never existed.
 
There were incels in the past, sure, but was the problem ever as bad as now? If the theories that said that one in, idk, ~27 or however much it was, 1 in 27 males reproduced, then maybe the situation that we have now hasn't yet reached its peak. Things could get as bad as they are for us for a lot of other males.
Yes, I agree. In the past the order kept balance among the factions, so no one category stood out as gigachad or incel. In our times, that balance has been greatly eroded, mostly due to the work of feminism, and thus the beastly nature of man and especially women, that has been kept in check for all these past millennia, has been allowed to run amok.
 
I'm talking about this: https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success. I thought you were saying 1/17 never existed.

I guess I am saying it never existed, because based on the the words of this article:

"It wasn't like there was a mass death of males. They were there, so what were they doing?"

They are arguing it had nothing to do with men dying

If the men were there, there was nothing stopping these men from simply raping a woman and impregnating her, so they are basically arguing 16 men for every 17 men just accepted their fate and did not try to rape, or pillage, etc, sorry I call BS on that, especially for those times
 
I guess I am saying it never existed, because based on the the words of this article:

"It wasn't like there was a mass death of males. They were there, so what were they doing?"

They are arguing it had nothing to do with men dying

If the men were there, there was nothing stopping these men from simply raping a woman and impregnating her, so they are basically arguing 16 men for every 17 men just accepted their fate and did not try to rape, or pillage, etc, sorry I call BS on that, especially for those times
Brutal. Thats even worse than the 1/17 rule. Only less than 5%, maybe 3% of men were desirable.

It never began :feelsrope:
 
I'm talking about this: https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success. I thought you were saying 1/17 never existed.

The biologist Alan Rogers, Gregory Cochran, and others have criticized the statements made by the obscure female biologist quoted in that article. The research does not prove that there was ever a time when only 5 or 10% of males fathered kids in a given generation. It's plausible that some prehistorical "Genghis Khan" type leader, taking advantage of the new Iron Age weaponry, slaughtered large numbers of men belonging to less technologically advanced tribes and enslaved their women. But the percentage of men who passed their genes was never that low in any given generation and there is no evidence that the men of these vanquished tribes were kept alive after their women were taken from them.
 
Last edited:
The biologist Alan Rogers, Gregory Cochran, and others have criticized the statements made by the obscure female biologist quoted in that article

The entire theory at face value really doesn't make any sense, it just seems like some kind of cuck fetish being projected onto the interpretation of data, there's no way so many men just sat around and gave up and didn't go out and murder and rape in those times
 

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top