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.

Blackpill Biologism is a subversive ideology that preys on people's low IQ

subhuman

subhuman

Dazed and bedpilled
★★★★★
Joined
Apr 9, 2022
Posts
11,503
It's always kind of cringey to see people attempt to give genetic explanations for things when they otherwise have no knowledge about it except for whatever bs they were fed about evolution in public schools. Usually, they are based on assumptions like "if the parents have it, then the kids will have it" or "if it is selected for, then it possesses some evolutionary advantage". The problem with this is that it's trying to provide a genetic explanation for things that are usually only weakly influenced by genetics and are much more influenced by other factors.

For an example, look at this thread I just found
I am a believer in eugenics, I strongly believe people with bad genes should not have biological children. And my own ideology, even in its most liberal forms, would ban me from reproducing.

So I no longer hate femoids for rejecting me. Because i myself believe people like me should not reproduce. I am objectively an inferior human being, and I deserve every bit of misery that befalls on me.
The fundamental flaw with eugenics is that the correlation between a trait found in parents and a trait found in children is very weak. There was a famous study done on this where a child's height was compared to their parents height. The result wasn't what you'd think, that tall parents had tall kids and short parents had short kids. It was the opposite: the kids of parents of both extremes tended to regress towards the mean (tall parents had shorter kids, short parents had taller kids).
1661665752881

The reason for this regression is that there are a lot of different factors that go into a child's height, like diet for example. NGL it's kind of low IQ to try and infer a child's genes based on what you think the parent's genes are. This is why if you are going to be making these kinds of arguments, it needs to be more than just broscience. So my response to you, @Blackpillapologist is to keep fighting the good fight. Genetic determinism is mostly just a cope.

This also implies that the notion of foids as "selectors" who better the human race with their judgement, is also low IQ garbage. Foids are just prisoners of the moment. They aren't improving shit. When they fuck chad, they still make incel kids. It's the bitter harvest of a dying bloom.
 
You do realize it's the entire basis for the blackpill, right?
My vision for the blackpill is radically different than the normal view of it. My blackpill is founded upon social constructionism and structuralism. And like all good structuralists I will show biological blackpill's flaws by attacking its foundations
This post was basically my manifesto for a modern blackpill
This doesn't prove anything at all.
You got filtered by my thread. The point was just that people are looking at genetics the wrong way, and that a more scientific approach should be taken over the pseud biological determinism. I admitted genetics do play a weak role, but they aren't a determining influence.
Height is a genetically-determined trait
Genetics are an influence, but not a determining influence. The statistics show this. There are other influences as you acknowledged.
I wonder why foids are "prisoners of the moment" and want to "fuck chad" when you've just spent the better of this post arguing that biology shouldn't be relied upon.
They are taught to be like that.
 
Last edited:
Fucking chad betters the odds so it’s still hopeless for us
 
Inteligence is literally just genetics.
Intelligence is Genetic. A Genome-wide study on 78,308 individuals identified new loci and genes influencing human intelligence. The study found a total of 336 SNPs reached genomic wide significance. The study showed substantial genetic correlation for educational attainment.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5665562/

Another longitudinal study found that intelligence accurately predicted academic success, job performance and creativity.

https://my.vanderbilt.edu/smpy/files/2013/02/Kell-Lubinski-Benbow-20131.pdf
 
People never like admitting genetic influences because it implies that our fates are out of our control and preordained which doesn't fly well with the whole "self-improvement" and growth mindset we were all raised under in our culture.
I am personally against self-improvement and growth. So here we may find common ground.
There's no environment that's going to sharpen your jawline
proper tongue posture?
increase your height
proper diet?
lighten your skin
I actually don't believe white skin is more attractive.
The one you cited (if it was credible)
It was a study done by Galton.
I never argued for a strong correlation between your parents heights and your own height. Rather hundreds of your moms and dads genes combine in complex ways to produce your unique phenotype.
This is the problem. There is never just pure genetic influence, it has to be expressed in an environment. The statistics show that there is no determining genetic influence because you cannot isolate the genetic factor. It is just one of many minor influences.
Ok my dude :feelskek::feelskek: they're all taught to like traits that just so happen to line with those that conferred a reproductive advantage thousands of years ago?
Yes. Biologism is an ideology.
By whom? The Jews?
Everything we interact with is shaping us and molding us in different ways. Human nature is malleable. They are taught how to desire, and that leads them to desire tall men.
 
Do you have link to the study? I think they must have kept other factors like race constant.

Because by[UWSL] that logic, people of tall races should have short children and vice versa till average height across all races become the same. [/UWSL]

[UWSL]The idea behind eugenics is to push the mean/average up. Taking IQ as an example, the idea is that people with high IQ genes should reproduce and AMONG THEIR CHILDREN TOO only those will reproduce who inherited those high IQ genes. [/UWSL]

[UWSL]In case you might say "because of regression to the mean high IQ parents can never have high IQ children" the graph itself shows that ON AVERAGE high IQ parents will have moderate IQ children, not always. Because if that was the case darwinian evolution wouldn't be possible. [/UWSL]
 
an escortmaxxer coping, nothing new
 
Gigachad can have ugly kids and low normie can have Chad brother. Therefore genetics doesn't matter.

This is so wrong. Your genetics are vital, but your parents genetics are not important, albeit Chads and Stacies tend to have more handsome children than average.
 
Gigachad can have ugly kids and low normie can have Chad brother. Therefore genetics doesn't matter.

This is so wrong. Your genetics are vital, but your parents genetics are not important, albeit Chads and Stacies tend to have more handsome children than average.
all birth is a roll of the dice
but what is written on the dice is your genetics
 

Similar threads

Foremostfiend
Replies
1
Views
131
lazy_gamer_423
lazy_gamer_423
Lurkercel0
Replies
2
Views
113
Lurkercel0
Lurkercel0
NotTheElliot
SuicideFuel Albert Fish
Replies
1
Views
126
SteelCentaur
SteelCentaur
H
Replies
10
Views
424
HBDEnjoyer
H

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top