As this is a demonstration it is 100% acceptable to post on this site and not a promotion.
Ladies and gents i present to you this one comment from other incel sites.
Last edited:
(Demonstration) Ladies and gents, I present to you Vitae the bluepilled coper of Basedspace.club
As this is a demonstration it is 100% acceptable to post on this site and not a promotion.
Ladies and gents i present to you this one comment from other incel sites.
Being ugly is not an indicator of bad genes
Wtf is basedspace club
An incelforum, once good now infested with idiots like Monkcel, Kobo And vitae.
You’ll get banned for ‘promoting’ another site
Not promoting, They asked what site it was and i replied with what it was, IF i was promoting it then id add something positive, Demonstration is 100% legal, This isnt the first time ive exposed bluepillers but this was too hilarious not to post.
It's not. Female preferance evolved while fighting for survival in the jungle, the savanna, the frozen wastes. It wasn't guided by some benevolent will, it followed no real maxim, no goal. All that happened was that of those things that create more copies of themselves, there will be more of in the future. That is the limit of planning and foresight which went into evolving these female preferances.
As a species, we can now murder the entire planet if we so choose. The game has changed, the rules have changed, and what managed to maximize itself in the past might only lead to humanity's extinction in the future.
But even beyond that, good is an ill-defined term. Good exists relative to a value system, which exists based on some set of values to maximize, on a goal to strive towards.
Many get lost on the way and adopt a perspective that judges every goal we could choose to be arbitrary and ultimately meaningless.
Which is based on not defining meaning, much like the previous mistake was not defining good carefully.
Good, in the utilitarian view, is rooted in the non-arbitrary observation that there is such a thing as qualia and that some experiences are pleasent while others are painful. This gives us a value to maximize and one to minimize and allows us to formulate goals that are based on some shared piece of reality we can all test for ourselves just by looking inward.
The real struggle is that, in a world as the on we evolved in, there was no logical reason for the individual to care about the pain and happyness of others at scale. Only ever isolated about people close to himself, and only because those people or the perception of those people affected the individual personally.
If you want to see the extent to which that one holds true, imagine the following: If there were hundred millions of worlds already consumed by a misaligned AI in which concious beings were constantly tortured with no hope of escape or mercy, would you be able to tell? It might or might not be happening right now, somewhere out there in the universe, but you couldn't tell the difference.
Which is good, because life is overall a net negative and we would all go insane if we shared in every bit of suffering of every single concious being, but also bad, because it prevents us to coordinate at scale. And coordination at scale is what we need. Humanity is now capable of suicide and of conquering the galaxy, and the traits that once served some ape in the wild are no longer fit for purpose.
What facial structure women get horny for or what behavior they find more or less attractive is in no way relevant to what I consider to be good or bad genes, desirable or undesirable traits, acceptable or unacceptable ways to conduct yourself. If anything, by what I have seen of female sexual selection, it's a force of evil, increasing selfishness, violence and deception.
Being ugly is an indicator of many things that might not be desirable, either to the individual carrying the genes or to the society he resides in, or both. But not always. Being good looking within the female frame on the other hand is leaning more towards being a bad person than a good one, from what I can tell.
I have at least as much right as the females of my species to make that judgement call, and while they are making it based on animalistic instinct, I have a rationale behind my choices.
Our genes are bad in that they cause us to suffer by turning us into undesirable outcasts. I still like myself more than I like 99.9% of normies, and I wish for them to be more like me, not the other way around.
As a species, we can now murder the entire planet if we so choose. The game has changed, the rules have changed, and what managed to maximize itself in the past might only lead to humanity's extinction in the future.
But even beyond that, good is an ill-defined term. Good exists relative to a value system, which exists based on some set of values to maximize, on a goal to strive towards.
Many get lost on the way and adopt a perspective that judges every goal we could choose to be arbitrary and ultimately meaningless.
Which is based on not defining meaning, much like the previous mistake was not defining good carefully.
Good, in the utilitarian view, is rooted in the non-arbitrary observation that there is such a thing as qualia and that some experiences are pleasent while others are painful. This gives us a value to maximize and one to minimize and allows us to formulate goals that are based on some shared piece of reality we can all test for ourselves just by looking inward.
The real struggle is that, in a world as the on we evolved in, there was no logical reason for the individual to care about the pain and happyness of others at scale. Only ever isolated about people close to himself, and only because those people or the perception of those people affected the individual personally.
If you want to see the extent to which that one holds true, imagine the following: If there were hundred millions of worlds already consumed by a misaligned AI in which concious beings were constantly tortured with no hope of escape or mercy, would you be able to tell? It might or might not be happening right now, somewhere out there in the universe, but you couldn't tell the difference.
Which is good, because life is overall a net negative and we would all go insane if we shared in every bit of suffering of every single concious being, but also bad, because it prevents us to coordinate at scale. And coordination at scale is what we need. Humanity is now capable of suicide and of conquering the galaxy, and the traits that once served some ape in the wild are no longer fit for purpose.
What facial structure women get horny for or what behavior they find more or less attractive is in no way relevant to what I consider to be good or bad genes, desirable or undesirable traits, acceptable or unacceptable ways to conduct yourself. If anything, by what I have seen of female sexual selection, it's a force of evil, increasing selfishness, violence and deception.
Being ugly is an indicator of many things that might not be desirable, either to the individual carrying the genes or to the society he resides in, or both. But not always. Being good looking within the female frame on the other hand is leaning more towards being a bad person than a good one, from what I can tell.
I have at least as much right as the females of my species to make that judgement call, and while they are making it based on animalistic instinct, I have a rationale behind my choices.
Our genes are bad in that they cause us to suffer by turning us into undesirable outcasts. I still like myself more than I like 99.9% of normies, and I wish for them to be more like me, not the other way around.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
