Blackpill [Hard To Swallow Edition] People (Especially Incels) Moralize Attraction To Physical Traits (Looks) & Vilify Attraction To External Traits (Wealth)

[BlkPillPres]

You will often hear people (even incels) say things like - "she's only with you for your money, don't you want something real" (especially when it comes to prostitution)

What they don't realize is that they are starting off with a false premise, they've created a strawman

That premise being that attraction to looks is in some way "moral" or less shallow than attraction to wealth, status, etc, WHEN BOTH OF THEM ARE JUST AS "FAKE" AND SHALLOW

The false premise that attraction to looks can somehow be classified as "real" whereas attraction to wealth is "fake", WHEN ATTRACTION BASED ON BOTH OF THESE FACTORS TO BEGIN WITH IS SOMETHING VERY "FAKE" AS IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PERSONS PERSONALITY (WHO THEY ACTUALLY ARE)

There is nothing moral, or pure, or "real"about a woman being attracted to you being over 6ft, its just as bad as her being attracted to you having millions of dollars

Everything in life can be quantified to have monetary value, so looks is no different than having an asset in your portfolio that has monetary worth, at the end of the day an assessment of worth and an exchange of resources is taking place

I find it weird how incels of all people, men who use terms like SMV (Sexual Market Vallue) seem to arbitrarily disconnect their acknowledgement of even attraction being a resource whenever its convenient to them, and they often speak about getting attraction based on looks as though its some kind of "holy" or "pure" form of attraction, they literally make it sound as if its moral

So stop it with this nonsense, there is nothing better about a woman being attracted to your looks over your money, because ironically you had to work to get your money, but you were just born with your looks. So the form of attraction you are vilifying is ironically the one CLOSEST to being a more justifiable form of attraction as effort was required to gain it rather (in most cases)

 

[dirtykombatcel]

Another lesson from the lord.

 

[Robtical]

I do the opposite of what the title says. I hate chads who get things easy with their looks in this cucked soyciety, I have a lot more respect for those who get sex with their money and brains.

 

[Deleted member 8353]

The false premise that attraction to looks can somehow be classified as "real" whereas attraction to wealth is "fake", WHEN ATTRACTION BASED ON BOTH OF THESE FACTORS TO BEGIN WITH IS SOMETHING VERY "FAKE" AS IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PERSONS PERSONALITY (WHO THEY ACTUALLY ARE)

High IQ.

This thread should be pinned tbh.

 

[Personalityinkwell]

If a woman is attracted to your looks, she will fuck you with passion.

If she's with you for your money, you'll get starfish sex.

 

[NEETard]

I hate anyone who gets sex. For free or paid you are sex haver and need to be banned

 

[Dregster]

If a woman is attracted to your looks, she will fuck you with passion.

If she's with you for your money, you'll get starfish sex.

Cope

 

[SirIncel]

If a woman is attracted to your looks, she will fuck you with passion.

 

[Deleted member 20207]

If a woman is attracted to your looks, she will fuck you with passion.

If she's with you for your money, you'll get starfish sex.

Also, if a female wants to be with you only because of your money, she will most likely expect you to pay for everything, while simultaneously cheat with Chad for free.

 

[universallyabhorred]

Money is harder to acquire, while looks are more intrinsic to who you are, since it's based more on your genetics (just like personality). So it's actually less shallow, since the woman is attracted to something that's part of you, rather than something you have to work hard to gain.

 

[NormScum]

You will often hear people (even incels) say things like - "she's only with you for your money, don't you want something real" (especially when it comes to prostitution)

What they don't realize is that they are starting off with a false premise, they've created a strawman

That premise being that attraction to looks is in some way "moral" or less shallow than attraction to wealth, status, etc, WHEN BOTH OF THEM ARE JUST AS "FAKE" AND SHALLOW

The false premise that attraction to looks can somehow be classified as "real" whereas attraction to wealth is "fake", WHEN ATTRACTION BASED ON BOTH OF THESE FACTORS TO BEGIN WITH IS SOMETHING VERY "FAKE" AS IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PERSONS PERSONALITY (WHO THEY ACTUALLY ARE)

There is nothing moral, or pure, or "real"about a woman being attracted to you being over 6ft, its just as bad as her being attracted to you having millions of dollars

Everything in life can be quantified to have monetary value, so looks is no different than having an asset in your portfolio that has monetary worth, at the end of the day an assessment of worth and an exchange of resources is taking place

I find it weird how incels of all people, men who use terms like SMV (Sexual Market Vallue) seem to arbitrarily disconnect their acknowledgement of even attraction being a resource whenever its convenient to them, and they often speak about getting attraction based on looks as though its some kind of "holy" or "pure" form of attraction, they literally make it sound as if its moral

So stop it with this nonsense, there is nothing better about a woman being attracted to your looks over your money, because ironically you had to work to get your money, but you were just born with your looks. So the form of attraction you are vilifying is ironically the one CLOSEST to being a more justifiable form of attraction as effort was required to gain it rather (in most cases)

Females only want a Chad who has money though. Most of the time they just aren't able to secure Chad so they settle for less. Still won't fuck an incel though.

So in the end it still is all about looks.

I agree though. Every form of genuine attraction is shallow. But there is nothing we can do about it, it's biology. At least we are honest to admit it.

 

[BlkPillPres]

while looks are more intrinsic to who you are

They aren't, your face has nothing to do with who you are as a person, Jeffrey Dahmer is a good example, please understand that you are sounding like a parody of the "personality detector" meme

since it's based more on your genetics (just like personality)

Personality has more to do with nurture rather than nature, try again, you take a black boy and raise him in a hood and he'll take on an aggressive thug like personality, take that same black boy and adopt him into an upper middle class white family, and he becomes the guy that gets called an "oreo" by other black people and speaks proper english and likes anime lol

So it's actually less shallow, since the woman is attracted to something that's part of you, rather than something you have to work hard to gain.

This is one of the most retarded lines I've read on this site, you only need to read it once to see how false it is, but you may need to read it like ten times seeing as you thought it up

Also how is money harder to acquire than look?

Looks is literally a roll of the dice, a random chance, money is something that you can steal, you can get a low level job, you can start a business, etc, money is way easier to get than looks, if you want to get taller you have to break your legs, if you want your face to look better you have to alter the bones on your face and cut it up, how the hell is that easier than just getting a job?

Also, if a female wants to be with you only because of your money, she will most likely expect you to pay for everything, while simultaneously cheat with Chad for free.

That has nothing to do with the thread though, the point is both criteria are shallow in nature, yet one is treated as though its moral and the other as if its immoral, they are both immoral as they have nothing to do with who the person actually is

 

[Made in Heaven]

I've always believed this too. This is why in islam, you are allowed to marry a person based on either their looks, wealth, status, or lineage, or some combination of that.

So in a sense, I don't care if a foid deciedes to marry a man ONLY for his money. The problem is then, is she sexually attracted to him? Will she fulfill his needs? Will she be faithful, or will she cuck him? THAT'S where the problem lies, not the attraction to his wealth

 

[BlkPillPres]

The problem is then, is she sexually attracted to him? Will she fulfill his needs? Will she be faithful, or will she cuck him? THAT'S where the problem lies, not the attraction to his wealth

Exactly, the thing is most incels are just ego obsessed, and if a woman isn't attracted to them physically they don't want her attracted to them period, that is not an exaggeration, these men will reject sex if a woman is open about just wanting an easy life where she can have children that are safe, well taken care of and receive the best in education

Incels who are still blue pilled still believe in "sacred things"

Incels who are black pilled understand that everything in life is an exchange of resources, everything in life is a deal or bargain

Lowering your standards in looks is a deal you make with yourself, its an "intrapersonal bargain", everything we do is a deal when you think about it

These guys are just unwilling to accept that

 

[Pareg]

Nice thread with these habitual caps and red text.

Jokes aside, high IQ as always. Pretty much everything can be perceived as a ressource in some way, so is attraction (be it for your looks or anything else).

Your last paragraph is particularly wise:

So stop it with this nonsense, there is nothing better about a woman being attracted to your looks over your money, because ironically you had to work to get your money, but you were just born with your looks. So the form of attraction you are vilifying is ironically the one CLOSEST to being a more justifiable form of attraction as effort was required to gain it rather (in most cases)

We are always pointing out the truth about how looks are unfair because of their random aspect (genetics...). Working hard to get your money and attracting foids is far better if we had to look at these things from a "moral" perspective (which is not really rational but you get what I mean).

 

[Made in Heaven]

these men will reject sex if a woman is open about just wanting an easy life where she can have children that are safe, well taken care of and receive the best in education

Agree with your whole post, but in regards to this point in particular, this is how it was always been for most of humanity. most betas and incels that reproduced in the past knew, consciously or subconsciously, that they were a meal ticket for their wife. And as a man, that is something most simply need to accept. Even myself, I would not mind being a betabuxx, since that is the ultimate, unchangeable fate of 80% of men. I don't give a fuck if my would be wife found me good looking, just as long as she didn't cuck me and kept my dick wet.

Hell, look at Weinstein. You think he didn't know those actress whores he fucked were disgusted by him? He didn't give a shit.

 

[AlexanderTheGreat11]

Only looks can create attraction

 

[BlkPillPres]

I would not mind being a betabuxx, since that is the ultimate, unchangeable fate of 80% of men. I don't give a fuck if my would be wife found me good looking, just as long as she didn't cuck me and kept my dick wet.

Exactly, the reason I would never get married is not because "muh betabuxx" its because in this era your wifes commitment is no longer guaranteed, in fact its almost guaranteed you will be cheated on

If things were not like that, I know what choice I would make because I'm a realist, I'm a deal maker, she has something I want, I have something she wants, its all fair trade to me, and when you both have children your connection actually becomes stronger because you've created something together that you both want and cherish, this is why you'll often hear people say they stayed together because of their children, children become the extra "binding" that holds "rocky" relationships together

Hell, look at Weinstein. You think he didn't know those actress whores he fucked were disgusted by him? He didn't give a shit.

Exactly

Pretty much everything can be perceived as a ressource in some way, so is attraction (be it for your looks or anything else).

Every Interaction Is A Transaction Of Resources

The way I look at it, everything is a resource, even looks, money is just the modern common unit of resource representation. Think of looks as a currency (L) and money also as a currency ($), L is just a currency that is worth more, but that's because its a very scarce resource that cannot be...

incels.is

 

[GoffSystemQB]

I think it's more of a descriptor of reality to differentiate the two rather than moral judgement. Anybody that doesn't think both are shallow is beyond retarded.

The thing is that having money means very little in the first-world unless it's like millions. Most young women outearn men. The only reason that "switches" later in life is because they have families and become more stressed. Who knows if that will even happen nowadays since it seems like many are keen on not having children whatsoever.

Really you need to change countries before wealth even comes to play (unless you get absurdly rich of course).

 

[IncelKing]

i also find it very ironic that incels on this forum believe that "love" is real. You'll notice all these low T cucked incels crying about missing out on "muhhhhh teen love" and endlessly yearning to be "loved" by women.

Its contradictory for a blackpiller to basically admit that women are primarily attracted to a man's PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTES (looks/resources) yet on the other hand simultaneously believe that women are capable of being attracted to men on a deep EMOTIONAL LEVEL (love).

Women don't "love" chad (emotional attraction), they "lust" for chad (physical attraction).

Likewise women dont "love" their betabuxxer, they need his resources for physical fulfillment (survival and living in comfort/luxury).

As you've pointed out, all thats taking place between the sexes is a transaction of resources: genetic resources and/or material resources in exchange for sexual/reproductive resources.

Yet people label this REAL "transaction" using the VIRTUAL label of "love" just to stroke their egos.

The fact that women are (by nature) SUPERFICIAL (giving importance to LOOKS) and MATERIALISTIC (giving importance to WEALTH), is a pill which is too "hard to swallow" for most people.

It makes no difference whether a woman is materialistic or superficial. BOTH ARE JUST AS SHALLOW

 

[iTheorize]

The fact that women are (by nature) SUPERFICIAL (giving importance to LOOKS) and MATERIALISTIC (giving importance to WEALTH), is a pill which is too "hard to swallow" for most people.

This .

 

[real truecel]

if you look good they are attracted to your looks
if you have a lot of money they are not attracted to your anything, they just want your resources and they will fuck some chad behind your back

 

[Deleted member 26923]

High IQ as usual,honestly i think that if OP were given the chance to spread the blackpill in some popular TV channel he would be hunted down by the FBI on the spot due to how well spoken and organized his ideas are.
This is just the truth,EVERYTHING in life is an exchange,claiming to be blackpilled and still crave for ''love'' is a massive contradiction and a pretty big sign of weakness.
I don´t want to be ''loved'' or cherished, i just want to get my dick sucked wherever i want and to not get cucked. Not because i like her or even consider her as my equal but for the sole fact that being cucked would tarnish my honor and nothing is worse for a man than being known as a submissive cuck without honor and self respect.

 

[PPEcel]

This is more of a normie trait than an incel trait, there are a lot of us here who agree with you 100%.

Relationships between "gold diggers" and wealthy men are vilified and made fun of, as if such a relationship is somehow less morally legitimate than one between a couple who are mutually attracted to each other.

I'd go further and say that whether a relationship or person is "shallow" can't be defined in an objective context at all.

 

[BlkPillPres]

This is more of a normie trait than an incel trait

Dude you'd be surprised, it goes double for incels, especially when it comes to prostitution, as many refuse to pay for sex because - "it isn't real attraction", you'll see this statement over and over, but they don't seem to get that her liking you because the bones of your face are shaped a certain way (indicator of high genetic quality) is just as fake as her liking you because you have a rolex watch on your wrist (indicator of high financial success)

You put a rolex on a wristcel or a Chad, its still a rolex lol

TBH you can bait women into fucking you if you present yourself to be rich enough and just pull a hit and run

That's something I'd like to try once, like rent a lambo and go to some area known for loose women trying to "bag a rich guy" and just hit and run bitches for a week lol

if you have a lot of money they are not attracted to your anything, they just want your resources and they will fuck some chad behind your back

The same can be said about looks, you just aren't thinking about looks as abstractly as you think about money

"if you have a lot of looks they aren't attracted to your anything, they just want your good genes for their offspring"

You are doing exactly what I said in the thread, you are moralizing looks as a resource as though its "real attraction", when all attraction is fake and whats really attractive is WHAT IS IMPLIED by the indicator

Women don't just like a man for his looks either, its what the looks IMPLIES that they like, that pairing up with this man and reproducing means you'll produce a child with high genetic quality

SAME WITH MONEY, women aren't attracted to the money itself, but what the money IMPLIES, that pairing up with this man ensures that they and their child will be safe, have vast resources, and their child will have the best in education and financial opportunities

 

[PPEcel]

Dude you'd be surprised, it goes double for incels, especially when it comes to prostitution, as many refuse to pay for sex because - "it isn't real attraction", you'll see this statement over and over, but they don't seem to get that her liking you because the bones of your face are shaped a certain way (indicator of high genetic quality) is just as fake as her liking you because you have a rolex watch on your wrist (indicator of high financial success)

You put a rolex on a wristcel or a Chad, its still a rolex lol

TBH you can bait women into fucking you if you present yourself to be rich enough and just pull a hit and run

"if you have a lot of looks they aren't attracted to your anything, they just want your good genes for their offspring"

You are doing exactly what I said in the thread, you are moralizing looks as a resource and you aren't looking at it abstractly in the same way that you do money

Women don't just like a man for his looks either, its what the looks implies that they like, that pairing up with this man and reproducing means you'll produce a child with high genetic quality

SAME WITH MONEY, women aren't attracted to the money itself, but what the money implies, that pairing up with this man ensures that their child will be safe, have vast resources, and will have the best in education and financial opportunities

I'm really getting sick and tired of those users, they can't seriously believe that attraction to Chad is somehow more legitimate than being attracted to an ugly hedge fund manager, and still be blackpilled. Prostitution needs to be distinguished from sugar babying/trophy mistresses, though, the former is paying for sex and maybe some adjacent social activities, the latter implies all the bells and whistles of a relationship.

Just wanted to point most Rolexes look like shit on wristletcels like me, esp the Submariner and Daytona lines. The clunky build just illustrates the fact that I have the wrists of a 5'4 femoid. I'd wear something less sporty and something more classical, like the Cellini, though if I had the ability to spend some serious cash on a watch, I'd go for a Patek or an A Lange & Sohne instead.

 

[BlkPillPres]

Just wanted to point most Rolexes look like shit on wristletcels like me, esp the Submariner and Daytona lines. The clunky build just illustrates the fact that I have the wrists of a 5'4 femoid. I'd wear something less sporty and something more classical, like the Cellini, though if I had the ability to spend some serious cash on a watch, I'd go for a Patek or an A Lange & Sohne instead.

The only watch I'm going to buy is a GOER brand just as a form of an ironic "inside joke" thing that I can flaunt in normies faces while they are completely oblivious, it will be hard to hold back my smile

Normie: "Nice watch, why do you like the brand"

Me: "These watches are of supreme quality and are a perfect fit for any gentleman"

 

[IncelKing]

Normie: "Nice watch, why do you like the brand"

Me: "These watches are of supreme quality and are a perfect fit for any gentleman"

 

[PPEcel]

The only watch I'm going to buy is a GOER brand just as a form of an ironic "inside joke" thing that I can flaunt in normies faces while they are completely oblivious, it will be hard to hold back my smile

Normie: "Nice watch, why do you like the brand"

Me: "These watches are of supreme quality and are a perfect fit for any gentleman"

 

[⠀⠀⠀]

I think when most people, including myself, mention we want something real, what we mean is when a women is attracted to you. Whether she's attracted simply because of your looks is irrelevant, her attraction to you is real.

Escorts are not attracted to you they're just there for the money.

 

[BlkPillPres]

I think when most people, including myself, mention we want something real, what we mean is when a women is attracted to you

What makes you YOU isn't just the bones in your face though or the bones in your legs that make you tall, when you guys make these kinds of arguments, you ironically justify the whole "personality detector" thing that we make fun of as a meme, because you've reduced everything that makes you YOU to your physical form

So no, a woman liking you because you look good, doesn't mean she likes you, it means she likes your genes, its not the same thing, just like when a woman who likes you for money doesn't like you, she likes the idea of what you can do for her

Escorts are not attracted to you they're just there for the money.

The same can be said about looks, you just aren't thinking about looks as abstractly as you think about money

"if you have a lot of looks they aren't attracted to your anything, they just want your good genes for their offspring"

You are doing exactly what I said in the thread, you are moralizing looks as a resource as though its "real attraction", when all attraction is fake and whats really attractive is WHAT IS IMPLIED by the indicator

Women don't just like a man for his looks either, its what the looks IMPLIES that they like, that pairing up with this man and reproducing means you'll produce a child with high genetic quality

SAME WITH MONEY, women aren't attracted to the money itself, but what the money IMPLIES, that pairing up with this man ensures that they and their child will be safe, have vast resources, and their child will have the best in education and financial opportunities

 

[⠀⠀⠀]

What makes you YOU isn't just the bones in your face though or the bones in your legs that make you tall, when you guys make these kinds of arguments, you ironically justify the whole "personality detector" thing that we make fun of as a meme, because you've reduced everything that makes you YOU to your physical form So no, a woman liking you because you look good, doesn't mean she likes you, it means she likes your genes, its not the same thing, just like when a woman who likes you for money doesn't like you, she likes the idea of what you can do for her

I'm not the one reducing everything to looks, it's the women. I don't get to choose what makes women attracted to someone.

I'm not interested in a philosophical debate about what makes you you. What matters is what makes a woman find a man attractive; it's mainly looks, period. When a women likes your looks, she's attracted to you. Simple as that.

 

[BlkPillPres]

When a women likes your looks, she's attracted to you

No she's attracted to your genes, you seem to be arguing that things artificial to your natural self are separate from YOU

By that logic men aren't attracted to most women because most women wear makeup, its the illusion the makeup creates that they are attracted to

What about facial reconstruction surgery, by your logic, they aren't attracted to you since those alterations are artificial

If YOU is only your innate looks, then MOST people aren't attracted to eachother at all

 

[⠀⠀⠀]

No she's attracted to your genes you seem to be arguing that things artificial to your natural self are separate from you, by that logic men aren't attracted to most women because most women wear makeup, its the illusion the makeup creates that they are attracted to

What about facial reconstruction surgery, by your logic, they aren't attracted to you since those alterations are artificial

If you is only your innate looks, then most people aren't attracted to eachother at all

That doesn't make any sense. So you're telling me a chad can't feel any genuine love from his gf because it's all genes. If we are not our genes then thoughts and logic are illusory.

When a women likes your looks, she's attracted to you

lol keep trying to debunk this simple statement which basically everyone knows to be true.

 

[watcher]

Brad Pitt couldn't keep his LTR

Johnny Depp couldn't keep his LTR

And we have incels in this website who dream about keeping their perfect virgin loving gf, JFL
Not even giga-Chads can keep a woman, sure they can fuck women for free, but there is nothing "deep" about it.

 

[BlkPillPres]

So you're telling me a chad can't feel any genuine love from his gf because it's all genes

1. I'm saying love isn't genuine period, as there is no such thing

2. Again, everything that you are saying about looks can be applied to money, but you have conceptualized attraction based on looks as something "moral" and basically "good", as its "real" and you don't seem to get its no different than attraction based on resources, its all shallow

I could reword your sentence into:
"So you're telling me a millionaire can't feel any genuine love from his gf because its all wealth"

Who are you to say he doesn't feel like the love is "genuine"

Either way there is no such thing, the criteria you are using for "genuine" is subjective

If we are not our genes then thoughts and logic are illusory

Your name has nothing to do with your genes, the beliefs you have in life have nothing to do with your genes, nurture always takes precedence over nature, do you think there is a Christian or Muslim gene?, most of what humans do and think is learnt behavior

lol keep trying to debunk this simple statement which basically everyone knows to be true.

1. I don't have to try and debunk anything, its demonstrably false

2. Appeal to majority is not an argument, try again

 

[watcher]

If a woman is attracted to your looks, she will fuck you with passion.

If she's with you for your money, you'll get starfish sex.

This sort of language sounds kind of passive, like you are the one getting fucked.

"she will fuck you with passion"

All I want is a hot woman to have a nice ass, a healthy pair of tits and a thin waist, her "performance" does not matter

 

[Deleted member 8353]

That doesn't make any sense. So you're telling me a chad can't feel any genuine love from his gf because it's all genes. If we are not our genes then thoughts and logic are illusory.



lol keep trying to debunk this simple statement which basically everyone knows to be true.

Loving a person's appearance and the idea you've created about them in your own head isn't the same as actually loving them. Although actually loving another person is probably impossible. Saying that your face is you makes about as much sense as saying that you are your arm, or your stomach. Sure you have possession over these things, but they aren't really you.

When I look in the mirror I don't see myself, it's not me. How others see me isn't me.

 

[BlkPillPres]

sure they can fuck women for free, but there is nothing "deep" about it.

My point exactly, but many incels (blue pilled people in general) basically mystify and moralize physical attraction as some kind of deep meaningful thing, this is why they refer to attraction based on those traits as "genuine" or "real", when its just as "fake" as being attracted to external factors like wealth and status

I don't understand why @⠀⠀⠀ can't understand that

Loving a person's appearance and the idea you've created about them in your own head isn't the same as actually loving them. Although actually loving another person is probably impossible. Saying that your face is you makes about as much sense as saying that you are your arm, or your stomach. Sure you have possession over these things, but they aren't really you.

When I look in the mirror I don't see myself, it's not me. How others see me isn't me.

This, why are so many users struggling to comprehend something this simple, what makes you YOU isn't just your body, so saying women "love" Chad is a misunderstanding, they don't love the person that he is at all, hence why they have no problem being in an abusive relationship

But again, many people mystify and moralize looks as though its sacred so they just can't view it abstractly as a resource

 

[Personalityinkwell]

This sort of language sounds kind of passive, like you are the one getting fucked.

"she will fuck you with passion"

All I want is a hot woman to have a nice ass, a healthy pair of tits and a thin waist, her "performance" does not matter

i understand what you mean.

but the sex chad gets and the sex a betabuxxer gets are not the same

 

[⠀⠀⠀]

Good lord talk about moving the goalpost. My argument was so simple. Of course the love chad gets from his various gf is genuine lol.

Anyways the thing to remember from this:

When a women likes your looks, she's attracted to you.

its demonstrably false

 

[watcher]

i also find it very ironic that incels on this forum believe that "love" is real. You'll notice all these low T cucked incels crying about missing out on "muhhhhh teen love" and endlessly yearning to be "loved" by women.

Its contradictory for a blackpiller to basically admit that women are primarily attracted to a man's PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTES (looks/resources) yet on the other hand simultaneously believe that women are capable of being attracted to men on a deep EMOTIONAL LEVEL (love).

Women don't "love" chad (emotional attraction), they "lust" for chad (physical attraction).

Likewise women dont "love" their betabuxxer, they need his resources for physical fulfillment (survival and living in comfort/luxury).

As you've pointed out, all thats taking place between the sexes is a transaction of resources: genetic resources and/or material resources in exchange for sexual/reproductive resources.

Yet people label this REAL "transaction" using the VIRTUAL label of "love" just to stroke their egos.

The fact that women are (by nature) SUPERFICIAL (giving importance to LOOKS) and MATERIALISTIC (giving importance to WEALTH), is a pill which is too "hard to swallow" for most people.

It makes no difference whether a woman is materialistic or superficial. BOTH ARE JUST AS SHALLOW

Women are perfectly capable of love... at young age, in her teenage years, long before being jaded by 500 Tyrone cocks

i understand what you mean.

but the sex chad gets and the sex a betabuxxer gets are not the same

I see the quality of sex as more based on your desire and her appearance than what she does during sex. But hey I am a sexless inexperienced incel so what do I know...

 

[BlkPillPres]

Women are perfectly capable of love... at young age, in her teenage years, long before being jaded by 500 Tyrone cocks

The point is "love" as its culturally depicted (a deep meaningful thing) doesn't exist, so that young teenage girl isn't experiencing "love" either, its just that her standards are limited by her experience and knowledge

Have you ever looked at a woman's face and thought introspectively about it, ask yourself why that specific shape, and that specific arrangement of parts (eye's, nose, lips) makes you feel a certain way and its all automatic

There's nothing special about your feelings, people who are introspective and self aware never fall prey to any emotional influence because they are completely aware of the effects certain stimuli has on them

Every time I feel attraction towards a woman I find it something interesting, I never get "caught up" in the experience and tell myself its "real" or "beautiful" or "meaningful", because it always sends my mind racing about this very fact, the nature of how and why my brain functions as it does

Why is it that a face that looks like that makes me feel this way?

Can ones mind be altered so that even an ugly face makes your heart race with excitement?

Etc

I'm always looking at things from an outside looking in perspective even whilst I myself am experiencing them (that's how one remains objective)

 

[Personalityinkwell]

oh and i'm not against escortcelling, done it myself.

 

[BlkPillPres]

Good lord talk about moving the goalpost. My argument was so simple. Of course the love chad gets from his various gf is genuine lol.

Nobody moved the goal post, you are just refusing to accept reality, your argument makes as much sense as saying what makes you YOU is your stomach or your gallbladder JFL (like @LiterallyASoyboy said), your body parts aren't what make you you, they aren't who you are as a person, and someone being attracted TO YOUR BODY PARTS is not the same as them being attracted TO YOU

That's the point you keep trying to avoid as though you are obsessed with mystifying physical attraction as something deep and meaningful

 

[watcher]

The point is "love" as its culturally depicted (a deep meaningful thing) doesn't exist, so that young teenage girl isn't experiencing "love" either, its just that her standards are limited by her experience and knowledge

Have you ever looked at a woman's face and thought introspectively about it, ask yourself why that specific shape, and that specific arrangement of parts (eye's, nose, lips) makes you feel a certain way and its all automatic

There's nothing special about your feelings, people who are introspective and self aware never fall prey to any emotional influence because they are completely aware of the effects certain stimuli has on them

Every time I feel attraction towards a woman I find it something interesting, I never get "caught up" in the experience and tell myself its "real" or "beautiful" or "meaningful", because it always sends my mind racing about this very fact, the nature of how and why my brain functions as it does

Why is it that a face that looks like that makes me feel this way?

Can ones mind be altered so that even an ugly face makes your heart race with excitement?

Etc

I'm always looking at things from an outside looking in perspective even whilst I myself am experiencing them (that's how one remains objective)

Knowing its all biology and chemicals in your brain does not change the fact you are feeling it. Women will fall in love at a young age, sometimes with men they don't even know IRL. But after having tons of sex the feelings go down because their brain get used to the oxytocin.

Sure people who think love is "deep", "meaningful", etc are fooling themselves.

I think I only fell in love once... I wanted her so much... I didn't even felt lust, I didn't even fap to her or anything, but of course it was not really her personality in the end, her beautiful face was the reason I felt that way, and also being bluepilled enough to believe she might like me back. Once I realized it was all an illusion and I was nothing to her (she didn't even know my name) then the fantasy stopped.

It was weird because normally when I obsess over a girl its purely physical and I only wanted to fuck them like animals but this one girl felt different.

 

[BlkPillPres]

Knowing its all biology and chemicals in your brain does not change the fact you are feeling it

Obviously but it changes how you percieve it, you don't mystify and deify the experience if you acknowledge that its all in your head, you don't treat it like something special

 

[Pareg]

My point exactly, but many incels (blue pilled people in general) basically mystify and moralize physical attraction as some kind of deep meaningful thing, this is why they refer to attraction based on those traits as "genuine" or "real", when its just as "fake" as being attracted to external factors like wealth and status

This. If attraction to your looks is something """genuine""", if """love""" exists, and if a foid being attracted to "you" and not your genes (what the fuck does that mean seriously) is so moral, why would they cheat on you the second she sees a better-looking male?

 

[Reddit_is_for_cucks]

When a girl is attracted to you she’ll enjoy your company and would actually want to be with you and her emotions are more real because she is designed to submit to genetics

when it comes to money sure she will be with you but it’s all fake. She does not feel that connected to you, you are just her provider. She does not want to be seen with you or want you to meet her family And doesn’t want you to be involved in her life. She’d rather you just sent her a check monthly, but since that is not possible, they have to fake their attractions.

 

[BlkPillPres]

her emotions are more real because she is designed to submit to genetics

Yes and based on how the human brain is designed, if I use a psychedelic drug, I'll start "seeing shit", so by your logic, all the crazy shit I see is "real", you are falsely using the term "real", also emotions are the least dependable thing ever for asserting that anything is "real", its not objective

I wish you guys would just be honest and admit you are just egotisitcally obsessed with the idea of a woman being attracted to you, and if you can't get to stroke your ego like that you want nothing to do with intimacy with women

when it comes to money sure she will be with you but it’s all fake

Its no more fake than being attracted to physical traits, if attraction isn't based on personage, its fake period