Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Hey, adherers of racism and sexism, can you unpack this?

NorthernWind

NorthernWind

Paragon
★★★★★
Joined
Feb 13, 2021
Posts
15,812
'Associate professors Andrew Timming FCAHR and Chris Baumann, and senior professor of management Paul Gollan have found that appearance-based bias - known within the world of recruitment - also dictates whether or not employees will be listened to by their managers...

"[In our research] attractiveness is measured against a database of faces with some basic demographic information, then each face is rated by 2,600 other respondents on a scale," says Timming...Participants made of 289 managers, were shown the faces of people aged 20-30. Older faces were excluded as age is negatively correlated with attractiveness, according to the report.

Managers were then presented with scenarios like: "Imagine an employee walks into your office and makes a suggestion about how an operational process could be improved. How likely would you be to take their advice?". They were then shown two faces, one attractive and one less attractive, with a variety in gender and race.
Managers were then asked, on a scale of 1-7, how likely they'd be to act on employee's suggestion: 1 being not likely, 7 being extremely likely.

Surprisingly, female voices were listened to more than male voices, and there was no difference between white and non-white employees.
It was only when the introduction of an attractive variable was introduced that Timming and his team noticed a difference...

Interestingly, the gender of the managers played no part in their decision ; female and male managers were equally as likely to ignore less attractive employees."


Https://www.hrmonline.com.au/research/unattractive-people-ignored-work-research/
 
Makes sense to me. But also something to note, men are seen as the unattractive gender. The average woman is seen as more attractive than the average man, therefore women are listened to more. Women are extremely entitled though so they don't get it.

And to be honest I see this everywhere. Feminism is something that is promoted all the time. Even when men have real grievances like suicide, addiction and homelessness, nobody cares about them. Because they aren't attractive. Male rights activism is seen as pointless, because the unattractive gender doesn't matter.

The only way for a woman to have the 'male experience' is for her to be extremely ugly. Then she'll get treated like a male.

All in all there's this feeling that ugly people feel all the time but can't put it into words. And the feeling is basically, that if you're born as ugly, you deserve less, whether its romance, companionship, good jobs, favors from people, respect. You matter less. Your needs aren't as important as the needs of attractive people. But you're not allowed to point this out in any way, because then it comes off as complaining, and you aren't supposed to complain about the hierarchy.

Basically only valuable genes are valuable. Your value is set by your looks, your genes. Ugly genes get thrown out, genes that come in an attractive package get preserved and they are worshipped by other people.
 
Makes sense to me. But also something to note, men are seen as the unattractive gender. The average woman is seen as more attractive than the average man, therefore women are listened to more. Women are extremely entitled though so they don't get it.

And to be honest I see this everywhere. Feminism is something that is promoted all the time. Even when men have real grievances like suicide, addiction and homelessness, nobody cares about them. Because they aren't attractive. Male rights activism is seen as pointless, because the unattractive gender doesn't matter.

The only way for a woman to have the 'male experience' is for her to be extremely ugly. Then she'll get treated like a male.

All in all there's this feeling that ugly people feel all the time but can't put it into words. And the feeling is basically, that if you're born as ugly, you deserve less, whether its romance, companionship, good jobs, favors from people, respect. You matter less. Your needs aren't as important as the needs of attractive people. But you're not allowed to point this out in any way, because then it comes off as complaining, and you aren't supposed to complain about the hierarchy.

Basically only valuable genes are valuable. Your value is set by your looks, your genes. Ugly genes get thrown out, genes that come in an attractive package get preserved and they are worshipped by other people.
If you're ugly, then you are treated like complete vermin and you most gladly accept the abuse ( according to normgroids ).
At best you're destined to serve genetically superior. I wouldn't even call this existence 'life'. It's anti-life.
 
'Associate professors Andrew Timming FCAHR and Chris Baumann, and senior professor of management Paul Gollan have found that appearance-based bias - known within the world of recruitment - also dictates whether or not employees will be listened to by their managers...

"[In our research] attractiveness is measured against a database of faces with some basic demographic information, then each face is rated by 2,600 other respondents on a scale," says Timming...Participants made of 289 managers, were shown the faces of people aged 20-30. Older faces were excluded as age is negatively correlated with attractiveness, according to the report.

Managers were then presented with scenarios like: "Imagine an employee walks into your office and makes a suggestion about how an operational process could be improved. How likely would you be to take their advice?". They were then shown two faces, one attractive and one less attractive, with a variety in gender and race.
Managers were then asked, on a scale of 1-7, how likely they'd be to act on employee's suggestion: 1 being not likely, 7 being extremely likely.

Surprisingly, female voices were listened to more than male voices, and there was no difference between white and non-white employees.
It was only when the introduction of an attractive variable was introduced that Timming and his team noticed a difference...

Interestingly, the gender of the managers played no part in their decision ; female and male managers were equally as likely to ignore less attractive employees."


Https://www.hrmonline.com.au/research/unattractive-people-ignored-work-research/
bump, really good thread, deserves more attention :feelsokman::feelsokman::feelsokman:
 
Interestingly, the gender of the managers played no part in their decision ; female and male managers were equally as likely to ignore less attractive employees.
Finally. So can we shut the case on attractive foids struggling in the job market with foid recruiters?
Surprisingly, female voices were listened to more than male voices, and there was no difference between white and non-white employees.
So much for muh 'bro culture' they never stop complaining about.
 
So much for muh 'bro culture' they never stop complaining about.
all this fucking talk about how women's opinion are ignored in the work place and shit
complete opposite
people love listening to women and submitting to female leadership
which makes sense if you look at most relationships, the dude submits to the foid, so why would he act different at the workplace
 
'Associate professors Andrew Timming FCAHR and Chris Baumann, and senior professor of management Paul Gollan have found that appearance-based bias - known within the world of recruitment - also dictates whether or not employees will be listened to by their managers...

"[In our research] attractiveness is measured against a database of faces with some basic demographic information, then each face is rated by 2,600 other respondents on a scale," says Timming...Participants made of 289 managers, were shown the faces of people aged 20-30. Older faces were excluded as age is negatively correlated with attractiveness, according to the report.

Managers were then presented with scenarios like: "Imagine an employee walks into your office and makes a suggestion about how an operational process could be improved. How likely would you be to take their advice?". They were then shown two faces, one attractive and one less attractive, with a variety in gender and race.
Managers were then asked, on a scale of 1-7, how likely they'd be to act on employee's suggestion: 1 being not likely, 7 being extremely likely.

Surprisingly, female voices were listened to more than male voices, and there was no difference between white and non-white employees.
It was only when the introduction of an attractive variable was introduced that Timming and his team noticed a difference...

Interestingly, the gender of the managers played no part in their decision ; female and male managers were equally as likely to ignore less attractive employees."


Https://www.hrmonline.com.au/research/unattractive-people-ignored-work-research/
I didn't read but you are Russian so you are okay in my book. Certain Tribes like niggers and Jews wish ill on our tribes hence we must wage war against them.
 
all this fucking talk about how women's opinion are ignored in the work place and shit
complete opposite
people love listening to women and submitting to female leadership
which makes sense if you look at most relationships, the dude submits to the foid, so why would he act different at the workplace
Muh agreeable foids. In the latest whatifalthist video, he says foids are agreeable. Next sentence, I kid you not, we are scared of even hurting foids' feelings. It's like I'm surrounded by only insane npcs. People just keep deciding on arbitrary boundaries to justify their arguments. Like someone explain to me, how does one get to be called 'agreeable' when they are so outraged at the slight opinion of a guy?
 
Muh agreeable foids. In the latest whatifalthist video, he says foids are agreeable. Next sentence, I kid you not, we are scared of even hurting foids' feelings. It's like I'm surrounded by only insane npcs. People just keep deciding on arbitrary boundaries to justify their arguments. Like someone explain to me, how does one get to be called 'agreeable' when they are so outraged at the slight opinion of a guy?
At the risk of sounding :soy: , that's the opposite of how it works. Agreeable doesn't mean that you are open to listening let alone agree with an opinion. Agreeable just means that you hold views that most of society supports. Period. Women are agreeable because women + simps are the majority.
I don't have much to say about the topic tbh I lack real world experience. I just wanted to help a brocel elucidate a concept.
 
At the risk of sounding :soy: , that's the opposite of how it works. Agreeable doesn't mean that you are open to listening let alone agree with an opinion. Agreeable just means that you hold views that most of society supports. Period. Women are agreeable because women + simps are the majority.
I don't have much to say about the topic tbh I lack real world experience. I just wanted to help a brocel elucidate a concept.
I know. That's why I said arbitrary boundaries. That'd make tyrants agreeable as well. People (purposefully) mix up the cause and effect to keep this narrative going.

Edit: Also, I think you took my "slight opinion of a guy" literally. I meant political opinion of a guy MEN agree with. So, you debunked it yourself. BTW, simps are agreeable because of pussy-power. It'd be same as foids appearing agreeable under Taliban.
 
Last edited:
Muh agreeable foids. In the latest whatifalthist video, he says foids are agreeable. Next sentence, I kid you not, we are scared of even hurting foids' feelings. It's like I'm surrounded by only insane npcs. People just keep deciding on arbitrary boundaries to justify their arguments. Like someone explain to me, how does one get to be called 'agreeable' when they are so outraged at the slight opinion of a guy?
100% agree
they claim men are the dominant gender and shit, yet they obsess over foids the entire time. If you are dominant, then why are they living in your head rent free?
Imagine it was 2 guys, and 1 guy was terrified of the other guy just giving him a dirty look or something.
You would be so confused, like wtf why are you afraid of this dude?

But with the genders we see this constant schizophrenic flip-flopping between calling women assertive, weak, strong, conflict avoidant, overbearing etc
and the same for men "men are turning soy" and one sentence later "men worship women too much" - So which one is it? Are men too sexual or are they loosing their "manilness?"

It makes no sense.
@Cybersex is our hope is a great user to talk to about this.
He pointed out to me before how these people tell you the game is rigged, and then tell you to participate anyway.
Like, recently I saw this dude talk about all the advantages women have and then he said something like "if you dont do at least 200 daytime cold approaches you are not a man."

First off, the fact alone that you have to take that much risk and effort, just to have a chance, it indicative of your status being garbage.
Which implies, whether you get accepted or not by the foid is up to her, not you, meaning you are basing your "masculinity" on female approval. Women dominate men, not the other way around.

And that is exactly what I described in my "masculinity is an actual social construct" thread. Most men can not even define what masculinity is outside of what women want. Women define gender roles, not men. They are the dominant gender. Hence, you can loose the man-card, but not the female card. Nobody accuses women of "no being real women." Or being immature, or having a loose pussy or whatever.
All the insults directed at men are based on not being desirable to women.

@WorthlessSlavicShit also has talked about this stuff here a bit:


Even on this forum, there is blatant misandry. Note, I don't want a totalitarian dictatorship. But its so obvious when you see users and the mods being fine with lesbian content and porn, but hyper aggressive against anything to do with gay males. Like, even just making jokes about gay shit gets you banned or put on ignore. Meanwhile there are entire threads worshipping lesbians.

I made a thread on this but it got moved to the sewers:


All porn btw is primarily about the female body. There is almost no porn focusing on the male body at all. The man is just a screwdriver. You see his hand and dick maybe, but the entire focus is always on women. This pattern is everywhere in society. Everything is about women. Female pleasure is the most important thing about porn. Her vocalizations of pleasure, expressions.

Porn Sex = Fantasy for men where they please a foid. It's like watching a video of a slave building a pyramid and cooming to the Pharao gloating at how much progress the slave made.

Most incels fail to realize just how deeply ingrained misandry is and where it comes from. Most of our views on gender actually are created and reinforced by women, not men.
Look at this for example:


This also explains why women are more likely to think gender is a social construct.
When people make claims - don't just dismiss it for being illogical, consider that it may seem true from their perspective.
From a woman's view, men are not dominant. They do what she says. They give her 900€ for a sniff of her foot. They buy her trinkets, vacations.
From a womans perspective, they define gender roles by controlling men and indoctrinating children. So why would they not believe gender is a construct?

All of this points to the same conclusions: Women are socially dominant, guys cuck to women, people pretends its the over way around though. This goes so deep that even on this forum, people constantly demonstrate they are not even aware that they are just acting out pre-programmed misandry they were imbued with as children by their mom, and later by foids in their teens and adulthood.
 
Last edited:
100% agree
they claim men are the dominant gender and shit, yet they obsess over foids the entire time. If you are dominant, then why are they living in your head rent free?
Imagine it was 2 guys, and 1 guy was terrified of the other guy just giving him a dirty look or something.
You would be so confused, like wtf why are you afraid of this dude?

But with the genders we see this constant schizophrenic flip-flopping between calling women assertive, weak, strong, conflict avoidant, overbearing etc
and the same for men "men are turning soy" and one sentence later "men worship women too much" - So which one is it? Are men too sexual or are they loosing their "manilness?"

It makes no sense.
@Cybersex is our hope is a great user to talk to about this.
He pointed out to me before how these people tell you the game is rigged, and then tell you to participate anyway.
Like, recently I saw this dude talk about all the advantages women have and then he said something like "if you dont do at least 200 daytime cold approaches you are not a man."

First off, the fact alone that you have to take that much risk and effort, just to have a chance, it indicative of your status being garbage.
Which implies, whether you get accepted or not by the foid is up to her, not you, meaning you are basing your "masculinity" on female approval. Women dominate men, not the other way around.

And that is exactly what I described in my "masculinity is an actual social construct" thread. Most men can not even define what masculinity is outside of what women want. Women define gender roles, not men. They are the dominant gender. Hence, you can loose the man-card, but not the female card. Nobody accuses women of "no being real women." Or being immature, or having a loose pussy or whatever.
All the insults directed at men are based on not being desirable to women.

@WorthlessSlavicShit also has talked about this stuff here a bit:


Even on this forum, there is blatant misandry. Note, I don't want a totalitarian dictatorship. But its so obvious when you see users and the mods being fine with lesbian content and porn, but hyper aggressive against anything to do with gay males. Like, even just making jokes about gay shit gets you banned or put on ignore. Meanwhile there are entire threads worshipping lesbians.

I made a thread on this but it got moved to the sewers:


All porn btw is primarily about the female body. There is almost no porn focusing on the male body at all. The man is just a screwdriver. You see his hand and dick maybe, but the entire focus is always on women. This pattern is everywhere in society. Everything is about women. Female pleasure is the most important thing about porn. Her vocalizations of pleasure, expressions.

Porn Sex = Fantasy for men where they please a foid. It's like watching a video of a slave building a pyramid and cooming to the Pharao gloating at how much progress the slave made.

Most incels fail to realize just how deeply ingrained misandry is and where it comes from. Most of our views on gender actually are created and reinforced by women, not men.
Look at this for example:


This also explains why women are more likely to think gender is a social construct.
When people make claims - don't just dismiss it for being illogical, consider that it may seem true from their perspective.
From a woman's view, men are not dominant. They do what she says. They give her 900€ for a sniff of her foot. They buy her trinkets, vacations.
From a womans perspective, they define gender roles by controlling men and indoctrinating children. So why would they not believe gender is a construct?

All of this points to the same conclusions: Women are socially dominant, guys cuck to women, people pretends its the over way around though. This goes so deep that even on this forum, people constantly demonstrate they are not even aware that they are just acting out pre-programmed misandry they were imbued with as children by their mom, and later by foids in their teens and adulthood.
:yes::yes::yes::yes:

If I remember right, you even once posted a study about how male behaviour could be predicted from female behaviour, but not the other way around. As in, women can get men to do what they want, while men can't. Really shows you who has the real power in society:waitwhat::feelsjuice:.
 
:yes::yes::yes::yes:

If I remember right, you even once posted a study about how male behaviour could be predicted from female behaviour, but not the other way around. As in, women can get men to do what they want, while men can't. Really shows you who has the real power in society:waitwhat::feelsjuice:.
yeah I quote it here:

 
Even on this forum, there is blatant misandry. Note, I don't want a totalitarian dictatorship. But its so obvious when you see users and the mods being fine with lesbian content and porn, but hyper aggressive against anything to do with gay males. Like, even just making jokes about gay shit gets you banned or put on ignore. Meanwhile there are entire threads worshipping lesbians.
Incels aren't really that different from normie men. I call it 'chad-fantasy'. It encapsulates the fact that most incels aren't mad at gynocracy and feminism, rather the fact that they are not chads. They don't give a fuck if society discriminate against men, divorce-grape them, and cripple them in various other ways. As a chad, a guy would likely avoid those things.

They complain about men turning feminine but don't actually realise how. Never in human history have men been so obsessed with their looks. Even in the hay-days of body-building, men were very much comfortable in their own skins Oh! How much they like to purport like alpha-morons 'men are disagreeable'. Then why the fuck are men allowing themselves to be butt-fucked in divorce-court? The divorce-laws are as fascist as things can get. Why the fuck do men allow foid-only this, foid-only that?

And don't even get me started on foid disagreeableness. TERF, open hatred of ethnics, bullshit equal pay. There's a reason small businesses don't hire foids. They are a big fucking liability. I'd argue with how much office perks foids demand, Corporates would never disclose that shit. Because it's not about money unlike how men believe.

What they mean by foid agreeableness is their agreeableness amongst themselves. That aligns very much with their in-group bias. They don't need to take care of any conflicts arising from their decisions. In that case, they would just go back to being demure and spreading their legs for men, so they would deal with the mess. For example, making their husbands pay for their student-loans.

There's also the cucked biological studies on Incels.wiki. Every one of those biological studies that I go through is just a justification for bottomless-hypergamy. Ironically, with how much emphasis people put on foids being naturally social, these studies that perpetuate the rampant hypergamy never take the social aspect into account.
All of this points to the same conclusions: Women are socially dominant, guys cuck to women, people pretends its the over way around though. This goes so deep that even on this forum, people constantly demonstrate they are not even aware that they are just acting out pre-programmed misandry they were imbued with as children by their mom, and later by foids in their teens and adulthood.
Yes, and yes. We men mistake repeating some newly found knowledge a thousand times for intellectual discourse instead of mentally evolving. All while foids keep evolving and finding new ways to gaslight and manipulate men in silence.
 
Incels aren't really that different from normie men. I call it 'chad-fantasy'. It encapsulates the fact that most incels aren't mad at gynocracy and feminism, rather the fact that they are not chads. They don't give a fuck if society discriminate against men, divorce-grape them, and cripple them in various other ways. As a chad, a guy would likely avoid those things.

They complain about men turning feminine but don't actually realise how. Never in human history have men been so obsessed with their looks. Even in the hay-days of body-building, men were very much comfortable in their own skins Oh! How much they like to purport like alpha-morons 'men are disagreeable'. Then why the fuck are men allowing themselves to be butt-fucked in divorce-court? The divorce-laws are as fascist as things can get. Why the fuck do men allow foid-only this, foid-only that?
High IQ Observation - men are like dogs. They just take it. It's actually women that never take no for an answer. It's funny that normies don't realize this - women having the last word in everything is common knowledge.

"[Women] are quite without that dog-like fidelity to duty which is one of the shining marks of men. They never summon up a high pride in doing what is inherently disagreeable; they always go to the galleys under protest, and with vows of sabotage."
-H.L. Mencken
And don't even get me started on foid disagreeableness. TERF, open hatred of ethnics, bullshit equal pay. There's a reason small businesses don't hire foids. They are a big fucking liability. I'd argue with how much office perks foids demand, Corporates would never disclose that shit. Because it's not about money unlike how men believe.
They take every option they can. Maternity leave, they call in sick all the time, they leech of multiple men at once. They dominate HR departments and other low-effort shit jobs. If you have ever depended on a woman you know they are sick like every week. There was also a case a few years ago where this foid started a company with only foids.

She later gave a public speech saying it was a failure because the women were constantly fighting, leaving early etc. She said, for some reason men always put in extra effort, stay late etc.

This attitude of course translates into relationships. Men commit to things much more so than women. A man will be ready to stick to a relationship, even if he looses feelings and such. Women treat relationships like they treat their jobs. If something goes against their will, they either get their way or the relationship ends.

What they mean by foid agreeableness is their agreeableness amongst themselves. That aligns very much with their in-group bias. They don't need to take care of any conflicts arising from their decisions. In that case, they would just go back to being demure and spreading their legs for men, so they would deal with the mess. For example, making their husbands pay for their student-loans.
Yes exactly, they unconditionally support each other and that's about it. Both genders unconditionally support women, nobody supports men.

There's also the cucked biological studies on Incels.wiki. Every one of those biological studies that I go through is just a justification for bottomless-hypergamy. Ironically, with how much emphasis people put on foids being naturally social, these studies that perpetuate the rampant hypergamy never take the social aspect into account.
Many of these studies are shit yeah. Like they make weird arguments from evolutionary psychology and so on. It's often nothing but thinly veiled misandry.
Yes, and yes. We men mistake repeating some newly found knowledge a thousand times for intellectual discourse instead of mentally evolving. All while foids keep evolving and finding new ways to gaslight and manipulate men in silence.
We are seeing it rn.
People forget that foids were full time employed in the 1800s, then fought tooth and nail to become housewifes. Employment rates for women dropped from like 70% to like 3% in 1900. Just two generations later the same bitches complained to get back into the workforce.

What I am implying is - social change is female change. Women dominate the markets and culture. Male culture is based on impressing women and competing with men, which again is just about getting women.

Call me crazy but, we may return to a sort of 50s housewife larp shit in the future. I am not saying that without evidence. They did it in the 1800s, they can do it again. It may take 2 generations like back then, but it can happen. This may be the silent response by the female hivemind you are looking for.

 
Let's put it this way, men are so disagreeable that they can't even browse Incels.is in public. Forget that, not even some vanilla red-pill shit. I'm really starting to think "Blackpill" shit is just another controlled opposition. They know instead of using "pill" knowledge to combat femi-fascism men would SEAmax, moneymax, escortmax, eugenicsmax, and what else.

Call me crazy but, we may return to a sort of 50s housewife larp shit in the future. I am not saying that without evidence. They did it in the 1800s, they can do it again. It may take 2 generations like back then, but it can happen. This may be the silent response by the female hivemind you are looking for.
The only way I'm going back to 50s housewife shit if the housewife is an AI-Waifu. Foids are free to be housewife in Chad's harem or single household.
 
All of this points to the same conclusions: Women are socially dominant, guys cuck to women, people pretends its the over way around though. This goes so deep that even on this forum, people constantly demonstrate they are not even aware that they are just acting out pre-programmed misandry they were imbued with as children by their mom, and later by foids in their teens and adulthood.
and when you point this out they call you gay on this forum or a incel loser blablablabla (basically showing foid worship) or go on with autistic pre made sentences
 
Let's put it this way, men are so disagreeable that they can't even browse Incels.is in public.
I did with foids around during my whole internship. Let's say i am so detached from normies opinions that even if they somehow get angry at me i just see that as dogs barking
 
Basically only valuable genes are valuable. Your value is set by your looks, your genes. Ugly genes get thrown out, genes that come in an attractive package get preserved and they are worshipped by other people.
Then why do ugly women get to reproduce?
 
It encapsulates the fact that most incels aren't mad at gynocracy and feminism, rather the fact that they are not chads.
It's like when communists do not despise capitalists because of their degeneracy and lack of human virtues but because it's not them being capitalists. This was the main critic moved by Evola against the proletarians. That's why he said military life was the antithesis of capitalism, not proletarians

It all comes down to how much your morality is abstract. The more abstract morality the more you despise something ideally more than pragmatically or out of envy (foids, for example, are pure group materialist morality)
 
He pointed out to me before how these people tell you the game is rigged, and then tell you to participate anyway.
Like, recently I saw this dude talk about all the advantages women have and then he said something like "if you dont do at least 200 daytime cold approaches you are not a man."
JFL "The system is controlled by evil freemason oh by the way you are a entitled lazy millennial if you do not want to work hence contributing to the same system i just called evil and freemason one minute ago" JFL JFL JFL :feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek:
 
It's like when communists do not despise capitalists because of their degeneracy and lack of human virtues but because it's not them being capitalists. This was the main critic moved by Evola against the proletarians. That's why he said military life was the antithesis of capitalism, not proletarians

It all comes down to how much your morality is abstract. The more abstract morality the more you despise something ideally more than pragmatically or out of envy (foids, for example, are pure group materialist morality)
I read somewhere that apparently during the USSR era, all the communists wanted to be an officer and not do actual work. JFL.
 
Makes perfect sense. It's all about genetics. Good genes/valuable genes get pushed up the hirachy ladder, bad genes get pushed down no matter what. Everything else doesn't matter.
 
Makes perfect sense. It's all about genetics. Good genes/valuable genes get pushed up the hirachy ladder, bad genes get pushed down no matter what. Everything else doesn't matter.
Good-looking people usually don't realise their privilege. They think others value them because of their achievements or personality but then old age strikes and they often find themselves lonely and bitter.
 
Good-looking people usually don't realise their privilege. They think others value them because of their achievements or personality but then old age strikes and they often find themselves lonely and bitter.
I think they are far more aware these days. People are just fucking savages irl these days, ready to exploit anything and everything.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top