JFL Cunts are now arguing for nature to justify their shitty hypergamous behavior.

[Looksmaxxcel]

First it was, "Nah, you all just need to take showers lol." Now, it's "DURR STOP WHINING NATURAL SELECTION DURR HURR NATURE HURR DURR."

The true colors of the fem*le gender are starting to reveal themselves as more and more people stop buying their bullshit. But what do they have to show for it? Nothing, except for blame shifting and justifying their shit like they always do. No apology, nothing, just sucking up to the concept that women are somehow the sole gatekeepers and end-all be-all to natural selection.

It's astounding how self-absorbed and conceited the female gender is, but at the same time, not surprising. It just goes to show that, no matter what they do, they will always invent an excuse for their behavior and see themselves as righteous. In other words, no matter what they do, they will still point the finger at men.

If we were to argue completely in favor for nature, then it could be argued that rape is also "not such a bad thing", since rape enables for the proliferation of genes of strong men capable of forcing themselves on women. Not only would rape ensure that men keep their masculine dimorphic characteristics, it would also create more men capable of defending their society from Intruders due to more masculinity.

And while we're at it, we could argue for removing social security from older people, due to them being a burden on society and just letting them die.

What's that? You don't want these things? That's exactly what I thought, now shut the fuck up you stupid vapid cunt. Get back in the kitchen and stop pretending like Darwin had a dumb bitch like you in mind when he theorized how natural selection worked.

Fucking women, always thinking everything revolves around them.

 

[speedtypingincel]

First it was, "Nah, you all just need to take showers lol." Now, it's "DURR STOP WHINING NATURAL SELECTION DURR HURR NATURE HURR DURR."

Is it?

 

[Personalityinkwell]

It's especially stupid because when they're fornicating with Chads they're using birth control. If we're talking about reproducing with the best genes, then you should actually be trying to reproduce, not let Chad use you as a fleshlight.

 

[Looksmaxxcel]

It's especially stupid because when they're fornicating with Chads they're using birth control. If we're talking about reproducing with the best genes, then you should actually be trying to reproduce, not let Chad use you as a fleshlight.

It's funny, because they're trying to imply that women are somehow improving the gene pool by having more sexual freedom, when it's actually quite the opposite. They're arguing that extreme hypergamy within a matriarchy is beneficial when they actually don't know what the fuck they're talking about. In reality, they're just trying to suck Darwin's dick to justify being hedonistic whores and only thinking with their vaginal tingles.

If they actually though things through, they would realize that bringing back nature and going off instincts would be far from a walk in the park for them. But in reality, I think they want things to be completely one sided and only want unrestricted freedom for their gender, which is nothing new at all.

 

[ManletHalfCurry]

, I think they want things to be completely one sided and only want unrestricted freedom for their gender, which is nothing new at all.

They don't want things to be one sided, things already are one sided, society encourages females to embrace their nature and actively celebrates and protects them whilst doing so, while it demonises and punishes male nature (Killing, rape etc).

 

[BlackPill Scholar]

Women's hypergamy is natural. However the way modern society is set up just amplifies it.

Great explanation:

If you were an alpha male in let's say the 19th century, before modern technology like air travel, internet, facebook, smartphones etc, you likely only monopolized the hottest girls in your village and it's nearest vicinity.

Nowadays, if you're a professional athlete, model, artist or actor etc you can fly around the world and have harems of the hottest girls in several cities at the same time. Other factors such as celebrity culture also facilitates this.

I know of a male model who regularly flies all around the world for jobs and vacations. He's banged over 1500 girls, and I'm pretty sure the vast majority of them are very beautiful too. That is 1500 guys who doesn't get laid only "because" of him. No wonder it's getting harder for the average guy who doesn't realy know what he's doing.

Women can be as choosy as they like because of the internet and the fact highly good looking men can have sex with hundreds of women in a single week. Males reproductive organs were literally designed in a way that allowed them to be used indefinatly. Couple that with mens higher sex drives and you have the top 20% of the men getting all the women and leaving most men with NOTHING. Plenty of studies back this up, most men NEVER mated throughout human history.

Through most of evolutionary history women had to be choosy to ensure survival or atleast 'social survival' by mating with good looking men. Risking death for 9 months to deliver a baby with 'bad' genetics is not evolutionarily successful.

Edit:
Rape is also natural and was often used by unsuccessful males to ensure that they atleast got to pass on their genes.

 

[Sparrow's Song]

I like how none of them argue the point that 80% of femoids are genetic trash that are unfit to pass on their genes as well. If they want to use sexual genocide as a means to "improve the human gene pool" they are going to have to commit that sexual genocide against men and femasites equally...

Funny how a lot of incel traits are inherited from the mother.
Selfish hypocrites.

 

[Looksmaxxcel]

They've always flip flopped between both of those, whatever is convenient at that particular time.

Of course. They're don't have a consistent narrative or argument. Actually, they don't have either of these things at all, they're just cry-bullies who switch on their victim mentality whenever it suits them best. They're high and mighty and willing to embrace whatever makes them feel good, but whenever you turn the tables on them, they switch to "woe is me, men are evil bullies" in order to paint us as the bad guys when they are usually the ones to attack first. In other words, they never grew up past middle school.

 

[ironmanlet321]

Cuckmerica almost worships bitches anymore

 

[ionlycopenow]

It's especially stupid because when they're fornicating with Chads they're using birth control. If we're talking about reproducing with the best genes, then you should actually be trying to reproduce, not let Chad use you as a fleshlight.

They need that dopamine hit of Chad semen without the side effects

 

[Gymcelled]

Ugly women still reproduce. Short women still reproduce. Women with severe genetic disorders still reproduce. Balding can only be transmitted to a man through his mom (balding genes are in the X chromosome)

The eugenics argument is bullshit.

 

[Deleted member 18214]

Natural selection yet nobody is having children? Makes a lot of sense... LOL

 

[Looksmaxxcel]

I see that a lot of guests are viewing my thread.

It warms my heart knowing I've rustled some jimmies with this thread. May you man-hating wastes of oxygen burn in hell.

 

[Ap0calypse]

They've always flip flopped between both of those, whatever is convenient at that particular time.

Depends if you are talking to a radfem or a soy. radfems are more likely to be honest (just look at r/FDS lol). Radfems can also be dishonest, since it supports the idea of female moral superiority.

 

[Looksmaxxcel]

Depends if you are talking to a radfem or a soy. radfems are more likely to be honest (just look at r/FDS lol). Radfems can also be dishonest, since it supports the idea of female moral superiority.

Radfems are brutally honest because they're highly butthurt that Chad doesn't want them and only men of their lane want them. People tend to be more honest when you piss them off.

Ugly women still reproduce. Short women still reproduce. Women with severe genetic disorders still reproduce. Balding can only be transmitted to a man through his mom (balding genes are in the X chromosome)

The eugenics argument is bullshit.

Yeah. They think that extreme hypergamy is beneficial, when it's actually extremely damaging. The quickest way to ensure your society becomes too weak to defend itself and gets killed by a stronger one is to empower women and allow them to have sexual freedom. All the great progress we've made technologically could all be lost due to our society becoming too effeminate and weak to fight back.

Women's hypergamy is natural. However the way modern society is set up just amplifies it.

Great explanation:



Women can be as choosy as they like because of the internet and the fact highly good looking men can have sex with hundreds of women in a single week. Males reproductive organs were literally designed in a way that allowed them to be used indefinatly. Couple that with mens higher sex drives and you have the top 20% of the men getting all the women and leaving most men with NOTHING. Plenty of studies back this up, most men NEVER mated throughout human history.

Through most of evolutionary history women had to be choosy to ensure survival or atleast 'social survival' by mating with good looking men. Risking death for 9 months to deliver a baby with 'bad' genetics is not evolutionarily successful.

Edit:
Rape is also natural and was often used by unsuccessful males to ensure that they atleast got to pass on their genes.

I think the reason for such a low figure regarding the amount of men who actually passed on their genes is because of the fact that men dropped like flies in the past when violence and death was highly prevailing. That left much fewer men around to mate with women, however, these men were strong enough to survive in the face of adversary.

Also, I feel like women's "choosiness" is a relatively new thing that's the product of human society and human self-domestication. Before advanced society and laws, women didn't choose, men did. However, the catch was that you had to be in such a position to do the choosing. The ones doing the choosing were the ones who were the strongest and most masculine.

I disagree though with the notion that rape was used by "unsuccessful males". Sexual consent is just a human invented concept, and a new one at that. Animals, in the absence of social order and society, are most likely to survive and reproduce if they are fittest for reproduction. Before we decided to cooperate and tame ourselves to make life easier, all men had to do to be "successful" was be most capable of bestowing his own will. Men with the most brute strength and formidability were the most "successful males", and women's' choice and needing to look pretty need not apply during such a brutal existence.

You see, it's not that, a long long time ago, we didn't all get to mate with women because we just for whatever reason decided to let women pick their choices. It was actually because everyone, but mostly men, brutally died at the hands of themselves or by nature (getting eaten by a lion, dying from a virus, etc). That left a few men who were tough enough to survive to impregnate women, consentual or not. And I doubt it was, considering anyone with sanity would never sign up for carrying another human inside of them for 9 months and possibly dying horribly after the fact.

Women being able to select for the hottest men is not "natural" and not a product of nature, it's a product of civilization, society, and men's submission and subordinance to it. Because we are completely free of the constant onslaught of violence and are now able to just simply exist, everyone survives. Women don't have to worry about being forcibly taken and ravaged by the most masculine man, and they are free to pick whatever man they want due to the way society (men) puts them in that position of power.

Also, humans are losing their sexual dimorphism and distinction between men and women is lessening as we domesticate ourselves further and further, creating a scenario where we will become like bonobos where the only thing that matters anymore is looking the most pretty. We will feminize ourselves further and further, until men are women, and women are men, and we are no more than a bunch of bisexual, weak, sophisticated dick-to-dick rubbing bonobos.

The few surviving men were actually the ones who were the gatekeepers of sex, not women. The modern day sexually successful man, which we all know to be a Chad, is also the true gatekeeper of sex, he just isn't exactly always aware of it and stupidly settles for less. But before society even existed, we as men created our own problem by selecting for more neotenic/feminine women, progressively feminizing and neotenizing ourselves more and more over many generations and setting the stage for selt-domestication, and eventually the development of human society. And finally, the predicament we have ourselves in now, where women have way too much power in society.

 

[HappilySingle]

All natural selection arguments are invalidated when you consider most first world countries aren't able to replace their populations though births.

 

[Looksmaxxcel]

All natural selection arguments are invalidated when you consider most first world countries aren't able to replace their populations though births.

A matriarchal society isn't sustainable, and allowing women to have as much sexual freedom as they want does not generate a sustainable birth rate. It causes that society to degenerate and eventually die off or get conquered. It's already happening to most European societies on a massive scale.

Saying that women having this level of sexual power within a matriarchal society is good for "natural selection" has got to be the stupidest fucking thing ever. The next roastcunt that says that dumb shit needs a firm and thorough spanking, with a scalding hot branding iron right where the sun don't shine.

 

[Gone Coping]

Ugly women still reproduce. Short women still reproduce. Women with severe genetic disorders still reproduce. Balding can only be transmitted to a man through his mom (balding genes are in the X chromosome)

The eugenics argument is bullshit.

this is the real issue, if the genetic garbage on the female side didn't get to reproduce i think i could deal with it fine

 

[Looksmaxxcel]

this is the real issue, if the genetic garbage on the female side didn't get to reproduce i think i could deal with it fine

Yeah, there isn't a net increase in genetic quality when you have the she-ogres fucking the high tier normies and the plain janes fucking the gigachads. You actually get a scenario where there are less and less high quality men being produced, while more and more women carry those bad genes. It all accumulates until everyone is a weak, ugly stupid fuck and your society is doomed.

 

[Monk of Failure]

If they care about natural selection/sexual selection, then they should tell ugly and physically unfit females not to reproduce either because a child inherits 50% of DNA from his mother. So if the father is fit but the mother is unfit, the child will inherit defects from his mother.

 

[Looksmaxxcel]

If they care about natural selection/sexual selection, then they should tell ugly and physically unfit females not to reproduce either because a child inherits 50% of DNA from his mother. So if the father is fit but the mother is unfit, the child will inherit defects from his mother.

The thing is, they actually don't. They only care about justifying their reprehensible actions and behavior by making it sound like they're doing humanity a service, when in reality it's only reflective on how they're conning and evil. You know who else argued for eugenics and natural selection? The Nazis, Zionist Jews, and KKK members.

They aren't fucking eugenicists, they're evil and demented creatures.

 

[A_Broken_Person]

Natural selection also doesn't apply here because looks would have been the best option for more primitive societies but in the modern world, given that it's no longer survival of the fittest, the best would be something like intelligence or stability. But we see dumb, abusive, criminal chads getting pussy all the time so it's not about nature at all, since these are obviously not suitable mates or father figures, moreso just complete and utter degeneracy and shallow depravity

 

[Gymcelled]

this is the real issue, if the genetic garbage on the female side didn't get to reproduce i think i could deal with it fine

Yeah it's hypocritical to use the eugenic argument.

Plus it's just so frustrating when you get NOTHING in life when it comes to dating or sex. But women who have terrible genetics and who would be incels if they were men have a normal dating/sex life, if not often better than that of high tier normies.

 

[BlackPill Scholar]

I think the reason for such a low figure regarding the amount of men who actually passed on their genes is because of the fact that men dropped like flies in the past when violence and death was highly prevailing. That left much fewer men around to mate with women, however, these men were strong enough to survive in the face of adversary.

You see, it's not that, a long long time ago, we didn't all get to mate with women because we just for whatever reason decided to let women pick their choices. It was actually because everyone, but mostly men, brutally died at the hands of themselves or by nature (getting eaten by a lion, dying from a virus, etc). That left a few men who were tough enough to survive to impregnate women, consentual or not. And I doubt it was, considering anyone with sanity would never sign up for carrying another human inside of them for 9 months and possibly dying horribly after the fact.

Nature already dealt with this to a large extent by gender birth ratios: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46597323
More boys are born every year than girls. Life was brutal for the majority of human history, that is true. But it would have been as brutal for both men and women, would it not? Males have slightly weaker immune systems on average and are more aggressive, thus more likely to die from diseases and confrontations. But both men and women had hard lives presumably, as many men died hunting as women did during childbirth. Nature wanted to ensure an equal gender ratio because males are both psychologically and physically better hunters, it is naturally beneficial to have an equal gender ratio. This naturally ensured that an equal number of males and females made it to sexual maturity.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/sep/24/women-men-dna-human-gene-pool
This phenomena explains so many modern behavioural patterns in both men and women, it's why i ascribe to it so much.

Also, I feel like women's "choosiness" is a relatively new thing that's the product of human society and human self-domestication. Before advanced society and laws, women didn't choose, men did. However, the catch was that you had to be in such a position to do the choosing. The ones doing the choosing were the ones who were the strongest and most masculine.

Women being able to select for the hottest men is not "natural" and not a product of nature, it's a product of civilization, society, and men's submission and subordinance to it. Because we are completely free of the constant onslaught of violence and are now able to just simply exist, everyone survives. Women don't have to worry about being forcibly taken and ravaged by the most masculine man, and they are free to pick whatever man they want due to the way society (men) puts them in that position of power.

Also, humans are losing their sexual dimorphism and distinction between men and women is lessening as we domesticate ourselves further and further, creating a scenario where we will become like bonobos where the only thing that matters anymore is looking the most pretty. We will feminize ourselves further and further, until men are women, and women are men, and we are no more than a bunch of bisexual, weak, sophisticated dick-to-dick rubbing bonobos.

If this supposedly is the case, where does beauty even come from? It is not just a concept thrown up out of nowhere. It is clearly an evolved part of the human psyche. To have evolved it means there must have been some sort of selection mechanism for it, at least initially.

Part of the human 'feminization' is due to males selecting females with more feminine traits, at least the males who were reproductively successful and thus more likely to be choosy. However a large part of this was also the continuing evolution of human tribes and socialisation, which in many cases favoured people who were not overly agressive. As well as the fact that women needed to balance having a child with a man who was not overly masculine nor overly feminine. An ideal man was not so masculine that he would be aggressive towards the mother and child, and eventually leave them. But at the same time not so feminized that he would not be able to hunt effectively.

Much of the rest of this could be put at the hands of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisherian_runaway

I think in the early advents of society, men would have been able to control the population and organise things that were to the most powerful mens advantage. I think this article: https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success largely explains this effect. At the advent of agriculture and organised society, the most powerful men who controlled all the crops were able to control the population and thus had mating rights with all the women. This is not womens choosing obviously. I think this is where both of our disagreements are coming from. Men got to select in these times when they held a lot of power, but for most of human evolution it was at the hands of female selection.

 

[thebuddhacel]

All natural selection arguments are invalidated when you consider most first world countries aren't able to replace their populations though births.

Also natural selection and monogamy can't coexists. So if they got cucked they can't complain.

 

[VictoryOrDeath]

I like how none of them argue the point that 80% of femoids are genetic trash that are unfit to pass on their genes as well. If they want to use sexual genocide as a means to "improve the human gene pool" they are going to have to commit that sexual genocide against men and femasites equally...

Funny how a lot of incel traits are inherited from the mother.
Selfish hypocrites.

Could not agree more.

 

[Deleted member 14218]

How dare u talk about my kweenzzz u dirty inkwell

 

[Deleted member 23656]

Foids will come up with any excuse.

 

[GeneticDysfunction]

They don't want things to be one sided, things already are one sided, society encourages females to embrace their nature and actively celebrates and protects them whilst doing so, while it demonises and punishes male nature (Killing, rape etc).

If rape was legal this forum wouldn't exist. But because society is ran by cucks we are all forced to fap until we die