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 Consent theory is misandrist mate supression

cathuluelitist

cathuluelitist

Thoughtform Philanderer
★★
Joined
Mar 9, 2026
Posts
3,114
Online time
6d 20h
Throughout the world there are a bunch of laws regulating the age at which a female can legally make the decision to have sex. The age is entirely arbitrary, and ranges from as low as 9 to as high as 21 depending on the location. Generally in the developed world, 16 is the accepted norm.

The fact that it fluctuates so much between locations goes to prove that it is without any biological basis. It is visibly evident that there is no biological difference between a girl of 15 years and 11 months and a girl of 16 years.

Making the situation even more ridiculous is the fact that a girl is indeed legally allowed to have sex with boys her own age or younger before she reaches the magic number. Thus it is that she is considered to be entirely capable of issuing consent to a man, it is simply that she is not capable of issuing consent to an older man.

The final layer of absurdity is that it is not the girl who is punished for engaging in the illicit act, but the man whom she has targeted to loose her wiles upon, this is obviously misandrist and what this creates is a situation where a girl can target a man for seduction, lie about her age, and get him locked up. Furthermore, governments can potentially entrap a man with a fully developed girl of 15 years and eleven months, sending her to seduce him and then arresting him on crimes against consent as we saw with the Epstein blackmail scheme.

What exactly is this “consent,” which has been used as this arbitrary bureaucratic artifice?

The legal definition of the term is this:

Voluntary Acquiescence to the proposal of another; the act or result of reaching an accord; a concurrence of minds; actual willingness that an act or an infringement of an interest shall occur.

So, in theory, a woman is incapable of acquiescing to a proposal of sex from a man but only an older man until she reaches the mature age of 16 (or whatever the age might be in your region).

The frightening thing is that the concept of “age of consent” assumes that there is ever any age at which a woman is capable of making informed and responsible decisions about something as serious as sexual activity.

However, in the West, most adult women are fat. This means that as adults, they are incapable of making proper decisions about what they eat. But somehow we have reached the conclusion that they are capable of making decisions about their reproductive behaviors? This is of course absurd on the face of it.

As such, it is my view that the concept of consent must be abolished entirely, and women must be disallowed by law from engaging in sexual activity without the permission of a male relative or, if no male relative exists, the state.

The fact that we have the concept of an age of consent in our society means that it is acknowledged by society that there is a state in which a biologically fully developed female is incapable of deciding who she has sex with. And I am not aware of a single my body my choice feminist who takes issue with this.

In other words, we must all agree that a woman under the age of 16 is utterly infantile to the point of needing her biological functions restricted by men with guns. There is zero evidence that a woman ever exits this infantile state. In fact, women become less capable of managing their lives as they age. A high school girl is generally much better behaved than a college girl, and a female who has graduated college is radically irresponsible. Women are so completely infantile that they will forego their childbearing potential by spending all of their most fertile years drinking, doing drugs and having “consensual” sex with stampede of different men. When the woman reaches 30, and her looks have faded and she is alone, she will enter a quandary and begin blaming others for her unfortunate predicament. Women in their 40s and 50s will then get divorces and utterly destroy the lives of every member of their families in order to pursue some type of vague “personal happiness” agenda. Women in their 50s and 60s begin engaging in bizarre and anti-social political activism which serves the sole purpose of harming society at large. It is not until her biology slows down her ability to move freely that a woman ever becomes less dangerous and destructive, less of an existential threat to society at large, less of a public nuisance, than she was at the age of 16.

With so-called “consent,” we have created a system where the completely unregulated primitive sexual desires of women completely control all aspects of society. Women are able to give or deny consent on an industrial scale, and use this mechanism to completely control the behavior of men. They use this power granted them by the state to transform society into something which they apparently believe benefits them, but which does not bring a single objectively good thing to the people. Every outcome we have seen from giving women consent has been negative. We have only barren wombs, sexless men and broken families to show for embracing the fatuous concept that a woman is capable of making responsible and informed sexual decisions.

Society does not benefit from women of any age being given sexual consent rights. Men do not benefit from it. Not even the women themselves benefit from it. Nothing good has come from giving women consent rights. The application of Consent Theory was frankly absurd and blatant elitist mate supression.

All female “rights” are given to them by men, as is clear by the simple fact that women are not capable of surviving without men, nor are they capable of physically overpowering men. Consent was a privilege given to women by men and it can and must be taken away just as easily. Applied consent theory is totally unsustainable due to the anti-natal results, and will eventually lead to a birthrate of zero and population collapse. We cannot afford to continue to play this ridiculous game.

We need to replace the consent system with a system of strict regulation where the concept of consent is no longer considered. We can call this “no consent at any age.”

Furthermore, it is the woman who chooses to have sex, not the man. A man, particularly a young man, is virtually incapable of resisting sexual urges if a woman throws herself at him. So, it is the woman who should be punished for violating “no consent at any age” laws. Women who violate these rules and engage in unregulated sex need to be punished severely with lashings. A woman who repeatedly breaks consent laws and consents to unregulated sex must be branded on her hand or face with a purple tellus of Venus so that all of society can see her disgusting and anti-social sex crimes.

This is the only way we are going to successfully create a functional society where all stability is not solely dependent on the unbridled sexual desires of the infantile brain content of women, who universally map at a level two on the integral decile scale of consciousness.
 
Last edited:
Women just need to be institutionalized honestly.
 
Great thread :feelzez:.
 
As such, it is my view that the concept of consent must be abolished entirely, and women must be disallowed by law from engaging in sexual activity without the permission of a male relative or, if no male relative exists, the state.


The State is not our friend. These laws came from it. It would be hard to break the agecuck lobby now, they dominate all the discourse the State uses to oppress us. The agecuck narrative is both on left and right wings of the political spectrum, and even nazis (who supposedly would be outside of this spectrum) adopts it.
 
It'll be onerous to legislate on it for sure.
 
The man would be punished here BTW.

 
94356.jpg
 
JACOBIN REPRISAL TRUKE.
 
@BRZionist Thoughts?
 
We need to replace the consent system with a system of strict regulation where the concept of consent is no longer considered. We can call this “no consent at any age.”
@Sir Silentium
 
I'd be content if G20 governments honored all other country's marriages, that way voters can still pretend they're still protecting their daughters but child brides from Afghanistan or wherever would be legit.
 
@Sir Silentium
Even with the consent laws, nobody follows it - young teenagers are still having intimate relationships with other young teenagers.
The only way to mitigate this would be to enforce severe penalties - as well as to change it to not revolve around age.

By enforcing strict laws of fornication (not waiting until marriage), it will be much easier to select and punish individuals that do so.
 
Consent is a woke term that has completely lost it's meaning now.

If we take it into a biblical perspective - a women shall submit to the man - and a women shall not deprive the man of an action.

Ephesians 5:22 "wives, submit to your own husbands"
1 Corinthians 7:5 "Do not deprive each other"

This should be the consent rule
- to make severe punishments for fornication.
- for wives to submit to the husband
- for no depravity is to occur


So the whole term of "consent" should be completely removed.
 
Occidental sharia too. We should enforce the pardah.
Even with the consent laws, nobody follows it - young teenagers are still having intimate relationships with other young teenagers.
The only way to mitigate this would be to enforce severe penalties - as well as to change it to not revolve around age.

By enforcing strict laws of fornication (not waiting until marriage), it will be much easier to select and punish individuals that do so.
 
Consent is a woke term that has completely lost it's meaning now.

If we take it into a biblical perspective - a women shall submit to the man - and a women shall not deprive the man of an action.

Ephesians 5:22 "wives, submit to your own husbands"
1 Corinthians 7:5 "Do not deprive each other"

This should be the consent rule
- to make severe punishments for fornication.
- for wives to submit to the husband
- for no depravity is to occur


So the whole term of "consent" should be completely removed.
I might make a thread on it
 
@BRZionist Thoughts?
I'm glad you asked, imo the age of marriage for women should be 16, or even younger if the family agrees with it, as for sexual consent, the father should take the role of patriarch and decide when his daughter will have sex or not, In this case I also think that sex should be only allowed after marriage, because before marriage sex is a big problem, even though many here would like to have a harem and fuck a bunch of women, I don't think that is good for society at large, with all that being said, I think there is no saving for this world, honestly I'm just waiting for the end at this point, women are corrupted, men are corrupted, there's no going back. This world needs a reset, we all need Jesus, and his forgiveness.
 
I'm glad you asked, imo the age of marriage for women should be 16, or even younger if the family agrees with it, as for sexual consent, the father should take the role of patriarch and decide when his daughter will have sex or not, In this case I also think that sex should be only allowed after marriage, because before marriage sex is a big problem, even though many here would like to have a harem and fuck a bunch of women, I don't think that is good for society at large, with all that being said, I think there is no saving for this world, honestly I'm just waiting for the end at this point, women are corrupted, men are corrupted, there's no going back. This world needs a reset, we all need Jesus, and his forgiveness.
I'm not entirely opposed to state arranged marriages even. Ideally, the family patriarch should decide.
 
Following a consistent logical line, the age of consent should either be abolished or risen to 26.
I would have it like you said, where the state can only arrange a marriage once she's 16 and the family patriarch even lower.
 
I'm not entirely opposed to state arranged marriages even. Ideally, the family patriarch should decide.
Also laws need to change, no fault divorce should be revoked, it's so many things dude, thus I think there's no saving at all, so many things need to change, and even if these changes happen, we might not be able to benefit from it, only future generations will reap the benefits, its a wrap for gen z and even gen alpha.
 
I would have it like you said, where the state can only arrange a marriage once she's 16 and the family patriarch even lower.
The globalists don't want families, they don't want women having kids strong families, they want to reduce the world's population, that's their plan, and it's working, we are truly caught in the devil's bargain, I assume the globalists will push female robots in the next few years to appease men, because men are getting frustrated and only men can really make noise and expose them.
 
Also laws need to change, no fault divorce should be revoked, it's so many things dude, thus I think there's no saving at all, so many things need to change, and even if these changes happen, we might not be able to benefit from it, only future generations will reap the benefits, its a wrap for gen z and even gen alpha.
Yeah, I predict a revolution in four years and then at least a 50 year interval of Caesarianism.
 
Yeah, I predict a revolution in four years and then at least a 50 year interval of Caesarianism.
(I predicted Kirk's assassination and the Iran war)
 
(I predicted Kirk's assassination and the Iran war)
I also predicted Trump's assassination and I don't have any homicidal tendencies for Trump but I was a little disappointed he didn't die because my prediction would've be absolute if he did.
 
I also predicted Trump's assassination and I don't have any homicidal tendencies for Trump but I was a little disappointed he didn't die because my prediction would've be absolute if he did.
If trump died, we'd all be in Jail rn
 
If trump died, we'd all be in Jail rn
True, I was simultaneously disappointed and grateful he didn't die. My prediction still stands though since it still normalized political assassinations and the FBI's handling of it was horrible. We are in Zivilisation atp.
 
True, I was simultaneously disappointed and grateful he didn't die. My prediction still stands though since it still normalized political assassinations and the FBI's handling of it was horrible. We are in Zivilisation atp.
If you didn't know, Zivilisation is the final stage of civilization before collapse.
 
True, I was simultaneously disappointed and grateful he didn't die. My prediction still stands though since it still normalized political assassinations and the FBI's handling of it was horrible. We are in Zivilisation atp.
Trump doesn't care about our speech, and as of now he is protecting free speech, whenever a Democrat gets in office (probably in the next election) Gavin Newsom will put us all behind bars, claiming we are a national threat.
 
If you didn't know, Zivilisation is the final stage of civilization before collapse.
George Orwell predicted it all, think he had inside info or something, or he was a freemason tho.
 
True, I was simultaneously disappointed and grateful he didn't die. My prediction still stands though since it still normalized political assassinations and the FBI's handling of it was horrible. We are in Zivilisation atp.
The FBI might be behind this lol, the FBI has many branches
 
George Orwell predicted it all, think he had inside info or something, or he was a freemason tho.
Probably obtained the gnosis of 3rd degree masonry.
 
Probably obtained the gnosis of 3rd degree masonry.
Even though I am a jew, I have to give credit to nazis for one thing, persecuting and killing freemasons, that was a great move, freemasonry is behind every single evil thing happening in this world.
 
And the Amish, yeah.
 
The Mormons and Amish own all the banks and are trying to destroy the West
The Amish and Mormons are equivalent to rich jews lol, they might have shares in the NWO for sure, all elites are bad whether they are "jewish", "christian", "muslim", the elites live off of our labor (not trying to sound communist here) but that's a fact.
 
The Amish and Mormons are equivalent to rich jews lol, they might have shares in the NWO for sure, all elites are bad whether they are "jewish", "christian", "muslim", the elites live off of our labor (not trying to sound communist here) but that's a fact.
Yeah, there is no difference between a deethnicized WASP elite and a Jewish elite.
 
ATP, we need to assemble the gendarme and turn women access into a Spanish property right.
 
 
have you read my mathematical proof of consent and consent flow charts:


 
have you read my mathematical proof of consent and consent flow charts:


Lolcano
 

Similar threads

FastBlast
Replies
17
Views
1K
DCI Gene Hunt
DCI Gene Hunt
Sir Silentium
Replies
20
Views
932
cathuluelitist
cathuluelitist
RobertGarnicasAPedo
Replies
6
Views
849
esdeathlover
esdeathlover
RobertGarnicasAPedo
Replies
12
Views
1K
ANTAGONIST
ANTAGONIST
cathuluelitist
Replies
1
Views
597
AutistSupremacist
AutistSupremacist

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top