I didn't read this, but, I'm becoming a bit of a psychopath myself. Which is interesting (and sad), because I used to be a diehard moralist. I also used to get hurt a lot. I enjoy my current life better.
High value post. Some specious reasoning, but even then there's just too much here, and in life, to corroborate the title. Stellar work.
Will save it to read later, great work
Based.
Perfume is based off Dead animal cells.
i may or may not be a sociopath and its why i instantly figured out since the age of 6 that most if all women are psychopaths/narcissists
@GeckoBus
Your thread ignores how women are sweet, loving and submissive to attractive men. How do you explain that? Also, some mothers can be very affectionate and loving towards their kids. They also get stuck in absuive relationships. If what you are saying is true, women should be a lot more powerful. Also, read like lovestories and the strong emotional attachment and reactions they have towards the men they are dating and attracted to.
Your thread ignores how women are sweet, loving and submissive to attractive men. How do you explain that? Also, some mothers can be very affectionate and loving towards their kids. They also get stuck in absuive relationships. If what you are saying is true, women should be a lot more powerful. Also, read like lovestories and the strong emotional attachment and reactions they have towards the men they are dating and attracted to.
Last edited:
B
This picture perfectly sums up why more women will go to hell according to some religions.
1. Acting conditionally how the target individual expects the perfect version of you to act, in order to keep control of the asset in question, is not genuine affection. This also switches if its a average or below average man wooing a woman. He will alter his own behavior, appearance etc to suit her demands and keep her around. Suffice to say, this can not be called genuine either. It is a relationship founded on desperation and deceit and a desire to elevate yourself using the other person. Basically just being a sycophant.
2. Women being loving to kids is not the norm or single mother statistics would not be so fucking horrible. The single mother issue can also not be reduced to economic conditions of single-moms being poor somehow, since divorce affects all strata of society. The existence and prevalence of divorce rates in addition to the fact that women initiate most divorces, demonstrates a trend where women prioritize themselves over their children. Nobody in their right mind denies that an intact family mogs a divorced one. Women know this too. Yet they still do it.
Neither gender seems to have has an instinctual instruction manual for raising children beyond maybe basic infancy, i.e. breastfeeding. And even here we see that most kids are not even breastfed for six months, the minimum prescribed time by the WHO.
2. Women being loving to kids is not the norm or single mother statistics would not be so fucking horrible. The single mother issue can also not be reduced to economic conditions of single-moms being poor somehow, since divorce affects all strata of society. The existence and prevalence of divorce rates in addition to the fact that women initiate most divorces, demonstrates a trend where women prioritize themselves over their children. Nobody in their right mind denies that an intact family mogs a divorced one. Women know this too. Yet they still do it.
Neither gender seems to have has an instinctual instruction manual for raising children beyond maybe basic infancy, i.e. breastfeeding. And even here we see that most kids are not even breastfed for six months, the minimum prescribed time by the WHO.
So according to this we have reason to believe that on a global level most mothers wont even breastfeed babies for the minimum recommended time, they just dont give a fuck. The insane irony that emerges form all this inferential information, and there is much more if you bother to look, is that FATHERS not mothers seem to be way more important for a childs development than mothers. Men are the nurturing gender, not women. For instance I have heard that some research shows that shared custody kids have the same outcomes as normal family children. But we already know the negative impact of single mother hood... implication? Obvious - the father is the linchpin to the whole operation. Shared custody = father still in kids life = normal outcome. Single custody dad = fine. Single custody mom = bad.
Scan this database for more info. I will screencap some shit:
Our premise is that men are the caring and nurturing gender that self-sacrifice for their kids more than women.
This is the type of shit we find to support that assumption:
There is more, and yes, I could have cited everyone of these individually with links and shit. But people should do their own research and not suck my dick. If you cant even bother to seek out information that contradicts your own position then you are arguing in bad faith anyway.
incels.is
3. Women do not get stuck in abusive relationships. They can leave at any time, there are way more services going to female victims of violence and abuse than men, even though victimization rates are equal for both genders. The data points to the opposite: Women deliberately seek out violent men, ergo, they love being in abusive relationships. In the final analysis then, "abusive relationship" is a misnomer, as these relationships are merely the type women want anyway, there is nothing abusive about them.
Scan this database for more info. I will screencap some shit:
Our premise is that men are the caring and nurturing gender that self-sacrifice for their kids more than women.
This is the type of shit we find to support that assumption:
There is more, and yes, I could have cited everyone of these individually with links and shit. But people should do their own research and not suck my dick. If you cant even bother to seek out information that contradicts your own position then you are arguing in bad faith anyway.
Mothers Abuse & Kill Children -Mainly Males- More.
It seems the (((media))) consistently likes to feed us stories of fathers abusing their children-obviously to further their own narrative/agenda. However, statistics paint quite a different story in reality. According to these datasets from the US Department of Health & Human Services...
incels.is
3. Women do not get stuck in abusive relationships. They can leave at any time, there are way more services going to female victims of violence and abuse than men, even though victimization rates are equal for both genders. The data points to the opposite: Women deliberately seek out violent men, ergo, they love being in abusive relationships. In the final analysis then, "abusive relationship" is a misnomer, as these relationships are merely the type women want anyway, there is nothing abusive about them.
View: https://youtu.be/37tVzgUkKIA?t=458
Multiple studies show that domestic abusers also commit other crimes, they aren't "hiding it" at all.
"You don't understand inkwell:bluepill::foidSoy::bluepill:, women would happily avoid abusers if they could, it's just that those abusers are so good at hiding their tendencies, they act completely normal until they ensnare a woman and then show their true face:foidSoy::soy:." Nope. Not at all...
incels.is
Last edited:
Where's the evidence they act this way to keep chad in control rather than out of affection?
1. Acting conditionally how the target individual expects the perfect version of you to act, in order to keep control of the asset in question, is not genuine affection. This also switches if its a average or below average man wooing a woman. He will alter his own behavior, appearance etc to suit her demands and keep her around. Suffice to say, this can not be called genuine either. It is a relationship founded on desperation and deceit and a desire to elevate yourself using the other person. Basically just being a sycophant.
2. Women being loving to kids is not the norm or single mother statistics would not be so fucking horrible. The single mother issue can also not be reduced to economic conditions of single-moms being poor somehow, since divorce affects all strata of society. The existence and prevalence of divorce rates in addition to the fact that women initiate most divorces, demonstrates a trend where women prioritize themselves over their children. Nobody in their right mind denies that an intact family mogs a divorced one. Women know this too. Yet they still do it.
Neither gender seems to have has an instinctual instruction manual for raising children beyond maybe basic infancy, i.e. breastfeeding. And even here we see that most kids are not even breastfed for six months, the minimum prescribed time by the WHO.
So according to this we have reason to believe that on a global level most mothers wont even breastfeed babies for the minimum recommended time, they just dont give a fuck. The insane irony that emerges form all this inferential information, and there is much more if you bother to look, is that FATHERS not mothers seem to be way more important for a childs development than mothers. Men are the nurturing gender, not women. For instance I have heard that some research shows that shared custody kids have the same outcomes as normal family children. But we already know the negative impact of single mother hood... implication? Obvious - the father is the linchpin to the whole operation. Shared custody = father still in kids life = normal outcome. Single custody dad = fine. Single custody mom = bad.
Scan this database for more info. I will screencap some shit:
Our premise is that men are the caring and nurturing gender that self-sacrifice for their kids more than women.
This is the type of shit we find to support that assumption:
View attachment 1412229
View attachment 1412233
View attachment 1412232
View attachment 1412234
View attachment 1412235
View attachment 1412236
There is more, and yes, I could have cited everyone of these individually with links and shit. But people should do their own research and not suck my dick. If you cant even bother to seek out information that contradicts your own position then you are arguing in bad faith anyway.
Mothers Abuse & Kill Children -Mainly Males- More.
It seems the (((media))) consistently likes to feed us stories of fathers abusing their children-obviously to further their own narrative/agenda. However, statistics paint quite a different story in reality. According to these datasets from the US Department of Health & Human Services...
3. Women do not get stuck in abusive relationships. They can leave at any time, there are way more services going to female victims of violence and abuse than men, even though victimization rates are equal for both genders. The data points to the opposite: Women deliberately seek out violent men, ergo, they love being in abusive relationships. In the final analysis then, "abusive relationship" is a misnomer, as these relationships are merely the type women want anyway, there is nothing abusive about them.
View attachment 1412240
View attachment 1412218
View: https://youtu.be/37tVzgUkKIA?t=458
Multiple studies show that domestic abusers also commit other crimes, they aren't "hiding it" at all.
"You don't understand inkwell:bluepill::foidSoy::bluepill:, women would happily avoid abusers if they could, it's just that those abusers are so good at hiding their tendencies, they act completely normal until they ensnare a woman and then show their true face:foidSoy::soy:." Nope. Not at all...
Also, very high quality and effort, good work. Are you suggesting women enjoy being physically beaten and verbally abused, just trying to understand why they stick with abusive men and ignore all red flags.
you said this in your own reply.
1. they only act like this for chad (thats a condition). Basically an if-then logic statement. If looks - then be affectionate. There are two options here.
a) the affection is genuine and caused by the looks - this would mean its a reaction that is not by choice, so this would mean they are not loving but merely reacting. So you couldnt say they are loving people, just like you cant say humans love food. "to love" implies choice, it is a verb. If there is no choice, we can not attribute responsibility. It would be like holding someone responsible for feeling hunger or having to pee. Ugh why do you have to pee, disgusting.
b) affection is disingenuous and just an act to attract or maintain relationship with a person they want. Women display this behavior of pretending feelings to extract resources not just with chads but all men. Example would be how women openly admit to using tinder dates for free meals:
Up to 1 in 3 women on online dating sites just want a free meal | Study finds
These numbers are from a study published in 2019 in the Journal of Social Psychological and Personality Science. According to the researchers, between 23 and 33 percent of the women surveyed had deliberately misrepresented their romantic interest in a man in order to dine at his expense...
incels.is
Getting with a chad is also less about the man, and rather about his looks and social status. Just like with men, if women wanted to fuck chads, they could pay for it (call boy). So we can infer that its not about sex alone, just like with incels, it is not about sex, as many incels could just see hookers. It has to be about something more - something like female validation, social status etc.
It is important to note that women do not see men as equal to them. This becomes evident when considering that women 4.5 times the in-group bias that men have, in fact it is even worse actually, men have zero in-group bias for their own gender in studies I think. I collected some of that info here:
It is important to note that women do not see men as equal to them. This becomes evident when considering that women 4.5 times the in-group bias that men have, in fact it is even worse actually, men have zero in-group bias for their own gender in studies I think. I collected some of that info here:
Women Opposed Female Rights, Not Men [Study]
video View: https://youtu.be/WQpC_5Ha7Ng PDF from video is attached here: https://mega.nz/file/8vdG0JqK#0_5wwaI_fB_wgON5h3wwM8utFrk-YwENUoWs7YtlJA4 TLDR - women know their privileges and power. Voting rights for women seemed to take that power from them, and make them equal to men...
incels.is
What this means is that from a womans perspective, all men are viewed like you and me view foreigners, while they view their own gender more like we would see extended family, i.e. aunt, uncle, cousin. They dont see men as individuals. Women also do not make choices on their own but check with their in-group if a man is ok to date. So here again we see men being devalued and seen as a resource to be shared by women, rather than a person. A man is like a car, a bugatti, a status symbol that is decided upon by the hivemind, not a person.
Basically, there is way more reason to believe that women are pretend affectionate for all men, than there is reason to believe they genuinely like a man. Also consider the paradox of options. More options = automatic devaluation of single options. We all do this. Women have infinite options when it comes to men = individual men loose importance = quasi psychopathic behavior towards men.
We are all psychopathic towards thing we take for granted. We throw leftovers in the trash. We never expect to run out of water and skittles, hence we treat them like shit. Thats what having options does to the human mind, it turns you into a remorseless psycho. Even incels acknowledge that this applies to both genders - af/bb right? Alpha fucks beta bux. Chad plowing through women without settling implies that men act exactly like women, if they had the options women have. The second a man has the option to fuck as many women as he likes, he begins devaluing women as a whole and treats them like shit. Same thing women do to men.
From a womans perspective, there is just no economical reason, speaking in terms of basic supply/demand rules, to invest in a single man, or even chad. And I didn't even throw in yet that women as a whole have lesbian tendencies, which further dilutes womens option pool - not only are men competing with other men for female attention, but also women, since women fuck other women way more than people think. Women constantly act gay with each other but we just ignore it.
Basically, there is way more reason to believe that women are pretend affectionate for all men, than there is reason to believe they genuinely like a man. Also consider the paradox of options. More options = automatic devaluation of single options. We all do this. Women have infinite options when it comes to men = individual men loose importance = quasi psychopathic behavior towards men.
We are all psychopathic towards thing we take for granted. We throw leftovers in the trash. We never expect to run out of water and skittles, hence we treat them like shit. Thats what having options does to the human mind, it turns you into a remorseless psycho. Even incels acknowledge that this applies to both genders - af/bb right? Alpha fucks beta bux. Chad plowing through women without settling implies that men act exactly like women, if they had the options women have. The second a man has the option to fuck as many women as he likes, he begins devaluing women as a whole and treats them like shit. Same thing women do to men.
From a womans perspective, there is just no economical reason, speaking in terms of basic supply/demand rules, to invest in a single man, or even chad. And I didn't even throw in yet that women as a whole have lesbian tendencies, which further dilutes womens option pool - not only are men competing with other men for female attention, but also women, since women fuck other women way more than people think. Women constantly act gay with each other but we just ignore it.
You are still projecting hard from a male perspective.
1. these are not red flags for a woman, they are green lights
2. yes women enjoy drama, thats why they consume true crime and drama shows so much
This is counter intuitive to a man, because we try to live peaceful lifes and cant imagine someone deliberately seeking out trouble. For men, the consequences of something like this could be deadly and we are already the vast majority of homicide and violence victims. Remember, women are disproportionally less affected in violence statistics.
What men do when women start fights is to think there must be a real reason why she is mad. Then he tries to problem solve it. But she does not care. Thats why men say, oh women are impossible to understand, oh women are more emotional than men - bullshit. It's just misinterpreting how women think. Women start fights on purpose because its fun to them or to manipulate you into having a meltdown. To that end, they deliberately remember shit that triggers you emotionally and then bring that shit up in the fight. It's not about solving a real problem, its about social dominance.
Thats why these fights never end well for the man. He always sleeps on couch or whatever. He cant win, because its not about logic. Its about power. Over years of torment, the guy ends up learning that he cant win, learned helplessness ensues = the origin of all these boomer jokes about the wife being "the boss" etc.
3. women consume tons of rape porn and other kinky, violent media where women are abused
To answer your question:
Why do women stick to men that abuse them, if they have the option to leave?
Because they want to stay. Occams razor this nigga, it's the straightest answer. It's like, why does fatty keep eating more chocolate. Because Hersheys put crack in the chocolate? Is Hershey emotionally abusing fat fucks into eating chocolate? No, they choose to eat that shit because they like it.
Thats why these fights never end well for the man. He always sleeps on couch or whatever. He cant win, because its not about logic. Its about power. Over years of torment, the guy ends up learning that he cant win, learned helplessness ensues = the origin of all these boomer jokes about the wife being "the boss" etc.
3. women consume tons of rape porn and other kinky, violent media where women are abused
To answer your question:
Why do women stick to men that abuse them, if they have the option to leave?
Because they want to stay. Occams razor this nigga, it's the straightest answer. It's like, why does fatty keep eating more chocolate. Because Hersheys put crack in the chocolate? Is Hershey emotionally abusing fat fucks into eating chocolate? No, they choose to eat that shit because they like it.
Last edited:
Women are inherently psychopathic because their brought up being taught that they shouldn't be held accountable for their bad actions and that they have power over men. You can't raise anyone to believe their inherently better then other segments of the population without breeding psychopathy and sadism
Cope. Women are inherently psychopathic from thousands/millions of years of natural selection under harsh conditions i.e. being physically weaker than men and having higher parental investment. Causing them to be more selfish and subject to base animalistic desires in order to survive.
This is bluepilled and doesn't even make sense. Women historically have been mothers so they are more selfish? Women have gotten their way for the majority of history
Similar threads
yeetbender.koala
Users who are viewing this thread
