(for dnrcels): Foids lack several cognitive traits which distinguish humans from animals, such as introspection and rational thinking. Therefore, whilst being biologically humans, their cognitive deficiencies are such that they can be justifiably classified as blurring the lines between human and animal.
In my opinion there are several cognitive traits which separate humans from animals, some of the main ones being introspection and rational, long-term, non-impulsive thinking.
I believe that, biologically, foids are just as human as us. Cognitively, however, they (particularly modern day foids) tend to be bordering the line between human and animal. They seem to be driven solely by impulse and primitive, lowly desires and needs - such as the desire for material gain, attention etc. As a result of this, they view the world through the lens of perpetual material acquisition. They do not care about empathy, compassion, or kindness towards others, - hence why they are so exclusively chad only, and why they treat sub5 males like literal garbage. They are simply mentally incapable of rationally thinking about males (and, by extension, considering the option of showing empathy and kindness towards men). Instead, they see men as nothing more than objects of material value - either for looks (chad), money, status, or some other metric. Is this purely materialistic, impulsive attitude not reminiscent of the behaviours of an animal? This is also behind the reason why foids tend to be more manipulative, abusive, disloyal, and cruel - virtue and empathy simply isn't something within the scope of their cognition.
Earlier I emphasised "modern day foids". This is due to the fact that I believe epigenetics plays a huge role in this. The fact that foids have been put on a pedestal since birth has made them even more naturally entitled and ignorant of the wellbeing of others, thus further amplifying their barbaric, impulsive, cruel nature.
So far I've established that they lack empathy and are cruel by nature - cruel in the same way animals (even non-competing and non-predatory) act harmfully towards each other in nature. I believe that parallels between them and animals can be further drawn once you consider the fact that they act irrationally in any situation which requires any degree of rational, logical thinking. Notice how they always resort to screaming, bickering, whining, pointing fingers, and looking for the nearest male to remedy any negative situation. These behaviours are not reminiscent of something a rational, logical, thinking human would do. These behaviours are reminiscent of something an animal in distress would do - behaviours that signal emotion rather than work to resolve anything.
I believe that, taking all the evidence into consideration, it is safe to conclude that foids (cognitively) blur the line between human and animal.
In my opinion there are several cognitive traits which separate humans from animals, some of the main ones being introspection and rational, long-term, non-impulsive thinking.
I believe that, biologically, foids are just as human as us. Cognitively, however, they (particularly modern day foids) tend to be bordering the line between human and animal. They seem to be driven solely by impulse and primitive, lowly desires and needs - such as the desire for material gain, attention etc. As a result of this, they view the world through the lens of perpetual material acquisition. They do not care about empathy, compassion, or kindness towards others, - hence why they are so exclusively chad only, and why they treat sub5 males like literal garbage. They are simply mentally incapable of rationally thinking about males (and, by extension, considering the option of showing empathy and kindness towards men). Instead, they see men as nothing more than objects of material value - either for looks (chad), money, status, or some other metric. Is this purely materialistic, impulsive attitude not reminiscent of the behaviours of an animal? This is also behind the reason why foids tend to be more manipulative, abusive, disloyal, and cruel - virtue and empathy simply isn't something within the scope of their cognition.
Earlier I emphasised "modern day foids". This is due to the fact that I believe epigenetics plays a huge role in this. The fact that foids have been put on a pedestal since birth has made them even more naturally entitled and ignorant of the wellbeing of others, thus further amplifying their barbaric, impulsive, cruel nature.
So far I've established that they lack empathy and are cruel by nature - cruel in the same way animals (even non-competing and non-predatory) act harmfully towards each other in nature. I believe that parallels between them and animals can be further drawn once you consider the fact that they act irrationally in any situation which requires any degree of rational, logical thinking. Notice how they always resort to screaming, bickering, whining, pointing fingers, and looking for the nearest male to remedy any negative situation. These behaviours are not reminiscent of something a rational, logical, thinking human would do. These behaviours are reminiscent of something an animal in distress would do - behaviours that signal emotion rather than work to resolve anything.
I believe that, taking all the evidence into consideration, it is safe to conclude that foids (cognitively) blur the line between human and animal.
Last edited:
