Incels are failing because of evolution

[FlorentineDisaster]

Natural selection always takes the best genes in a species and extincts the other genes.

So basically when a woman turns you down , its to resist your genes.

Its all part or nature.
Its our turn to be turned down by evoltution.

I'm not saying I know for sure.
Its just an hypothesis.
It could be social enegineering too that creates incels.
But evolution seems to have the same trait of favorism.

 

[trying to ascend]

No, sexual selection does not always pick the best genes, hence why low IQ men are reproducing more and why it can increase risk of extinction

 

[vermilion]

You're onto something there.

Sexual selection appears to favor desirable genes and reduce or eliminate undesirable genes, although what is desirable to an individual is not always desirable to the main group.

Violent criminals as a case in point: men who harm society but are selected by women for their high testosterone levels and Dark Triad personality traits. They are desirable in a primitive sense (aggressive behavior, dominant social presence, intimidating appearance, and so on) but not in a modern, civilizational sense (self-control, high levels of altruism and conscientiousness, naturally mild in temper, and so on).

Inceldom can definitely be affected by culture, as it's well known that previous generations of men were less susceptible to being single their whole lives due to the fact that promiscuity was repressed and marriages lasted longer. The advent of technology also made things go south, but it was less prevalent decades ago.

 

[FlorentineDisaster]

Yeah but just because they reproduced once doesn't mean their genes will survive they will have incels instead of children eventually the more they reproduce those genes , and those genes will perish.
So you as an incel is the last of those specific genes in your family to survive

 

[FlorentineDisaster]

You're onto something there.

Sexual selection appears to favor desirable genes and reduce or eliminate undesirable genes, although what is desirable to an individual is not always desirable to the main group.

Violent criminals as a case in point: men who harm society but are selected by women for their high testosterone levels and Dark Triad personality traits. They are desirable in a primitive sense (aggressive behavior, dominant social presence, intimidating appearance, and so on) but not in a modern, civilizational sense (self-control, high levels of altruism and conscientiousness, naturally mild in temper, and so on).

Inceldom can definitely be affected by culture, as it's well known that previous generations of men were less susceptible to being single their whole lives due to the fact that promiscuity was repressed and marriages lasted longer. The advent of technology also made things go south, but it was less prevalent decades ago.

There always a precentage that doesn't reproduce
Not everyone is suitable.
Humainity applies evolution and sexual selection on itself to improve.

But also, social engineering changed what is considered attractive, but you can also argue that that is the modern form and the more advanced one of the sexual selection.

 

[ServusLuciferi]

So basically when a woman turns you down , its to resist your genes.

Its all part or nature.
Its our turn to be turned down by evoltution.

I'm not saying I know for sure.
Its just an hypothesis.
It could be social enegineering too that creates incels.
But evolution seems to have the same trait of favorism.

Wrong. What’s favorable for survival in human society now is intelligence. Our biology hasn’t caught up and women still prefer masculine caveman features.

So back then before contraception, slut-shaming, and the fact that women couldn’t work, women had to - out of necessity - compromise their sexual desires pragmatically. They would be fucked if they dated a guy who couldn’t help raise a kid. And that compromise was around their community.

But now, women are virgin shamed, there’s widespread contraception, women can work, and thanks to social media and online dating, women have 30+ miles of geography to fuck.

And it’s pretty clear women hate 80% of men. They hate you, who you are, your masculinity, your personality, your strive for higher ideals, etc. They don’t give a fuck if men are treated like disposable dogshit their entire lives, “not my problem”, they’re pretty happy fucking around and getting pumped and dumped by horny hot guys due to social norms and technology.

If we were more in line with nature, we wouldn’t have the massive hypergamy we have today. Unless you go back to pre-civilization days, where evolution stopped working due to tribal conquest and the conquerors “plundering the booty”. That doesn’t ensure good quality genes necessarily.

 

[FlorentineDisaster]

Wrong. What’s favorable for survival in human society now is intelligence. Our biology hasn’t caught up and women still prefer masculine caveman features.

So back then before contraception, slut-shaming, and the fact that women couldn’t work, women had to - out of necessity - compromise their sexual desires pragmatically. They would be fucked if they dated a guy who couldn’t help raise a kid. And that compromise was around their community.

But now, women are virgin shamed, there’s widespread contraception, women can work, and thanks to social media and online dating, women have 30+ miles of geography to fuck.

And it’s pretty clear women hate 80% of men. They hate you, who you are, your masculinity, your personality, your strive for higher ideals, etc. They don’t give a fuck if men are treated like disposable dogshit their entire lives, “not my problem”, they’re pretty happy fucking around and getting pumped and dumped by horny hot guys due to social norms and technology.

If we were more in line with nature, we wouldn’t have the massive hypergamy we have today. Unless you go back to pre-civilization days, where evolution stopped working due to tribal conquest and the conquerors “plundering the booty”. That doesn’t ensure good quality genes necessarily.

If thats the case then why should we even care

 

[ServusLuciferi]

If thats the case then why should we even care

You're a woman then. Go back to reddit dumb bitch. Don't worry, that dude you are sleeping with but not officially "in a relationship" with, he definitely loves you deep down, he's a good boy deep down lol

 

[FlorentineDisaster]

You're a woman then. Go back to reddit dumb bitch. Don't worry, that dude you are sleeping with but not officially "in a relationship" with, he definitely loves you deep down, he's a good boy deep down lol

Wtf are you talking about?

 

[ServusLuciferi]

Ill put it better. Imagine being told your whole life that women are a prize, that women are these beautiful wonderful people who don't look to what's outside. That women are happily married with "an ugly guy I know" but he makes her laugh and has a great personality. That if you simply take showers, improve your clothes, you'll be a catch for some lucky girl, in a loving marriage. That women don't really like sex and want a deep emotional connection.

And then you find out it's all a lie. That women are actually horrible people that bring nothing to the table but sex, and only sleep around romantically and passionately with the top 20% of men. All the work you put in your life leads you disillusioned.

Don't you think it's a problem that 80% of the male population is gonna be fucking disillusioned and angry at the lies they were told?

 

[Furlossus]

Natural selection=/= sexual selection. Look at peacocks, any predator could fuck them up, yet their tails still getting bigger and bigger

 

[FlorentineDisaster]

Natural selection=/= sexual selection. Look at peacocks, any predator could fuck them up, yet their tails still getting bigger and bigger

Uhh comparing birds to humans is something really dumb.

 

[ServusLuciferi]

Uhh

You're either 10-12 years old or a woman. Not much difference mentally tbh

 

[FlorentineDisaster]

Ill put it better. Imagine being told your whole life that women are a prize, that women are these beautiful wonderful people who don't look to what's outside. That women are happily married with "an ugly guy I know" but he makes her laugh and has a great personality. That if you simply take showers, improve your clothes, you'll be a catch for some lucky girl, in a loving marriage. That women don't really like sex and want a deep emotional connection.

And then you find out it's all a lie. That women are actually horrible people that bring nothing to the table but sex, and only sleep around romantically and passionately with the top 20% of men. All the work you put in your life leads you disillusioned.

Don't you think it's a problem that 80% of the male population is gonna be fucking disillusioned and angry at the lies they were told?

I don't have to imagine that... I live that.
But we cant live in a fantasy, no shit women arent perfect like in disney..
Life isnt fair bro
And not everyone is angry about that.

 

[FlorentineDisaster]

You're either 10-12 years old or a woman. Not much difference mentally tbh

You're a pedo definitely

 

[ServusLuciferi]

I don't have to imagine that... I live that.
But we cant live in a fantasy, no shit women arent perfect like in disney..
Life isnt fair bro
And not everyone is angry about that.

Our media, schools, companies, and academics all teach that women are perfect like in disney due to feminism, and a lot of men are being led along a carrot and a stick until they wake up after experiencing it.

Why do you think men don't commit to bar sluts? And men fucking hate women? Even normies fucking hate women. They pump and dump when they can. Because there's nothing of value in a woman if all she brings to the table is 60 sec emotionless missionary sex once a month that she never wants to do.

 

[Furlossus]

Uhh comparing birds to humans is something really dumb.

Fuck off to reddit you tranny

 

[ServusLuciferi]

You're a pedo definitely

Back to reddit faggot

 

[Oroborus]

Modern society pushes hypergamy and promiscuity to its peak. This and modern female standards are not natural at all

 

[Oroborus]

If we were more in line with nature, we wouldn’t have the massive hypergamy we have today. Unless you go back to pre-civilization days, where evolution stopped working due to tribal conquest and the conquerors “plundering the booty”. That doesn’t ensure good quality genes necessarily

 

[Deleted member 41316]

Women select for big dicks which have no objective evolutionary advantage, and for low IQ violent big men that would be put down in an advanced society. Their selection criteria is far from perfect. Jfl at thinking that foids are perfect flawless eugenicists. Besides as long as subhuman foids keep reproducing incels will exist. You make it seem as if it was only the male gender's fault.

 

[Deleted member 1269]

I don't fucking care

 

[FlorentineDisaster]

I don't fucking care

You are d

 

[SoloAlex]

Natural selection always takes the best genes in a species and extincts the other genes.

So basically when a woman turns you down , its to resist your genes.

Its all part or nature.
Its our turn to be turned down by evoltution.

I'm not saying I know for sure.
Its just an hypothesis.
It could be social enegineering too that creates incels.
But evolution seems to have the same trait of favorism.

hating women is also a part of nature. raping women too.

jfl at these retard threads from greycels almost every day

 

[SoloAlex]

No, sexual selection does not always pick the best genes, hence why low IQ men are reproducing more and why it can increase risk of extinction

 

[Deleted member 1269]

You are d

You're a nature cuck then. Who gives a fuck about "muh evolution"? If you accept that shit you have no dignity like a cuckold faggot

 

[FlorentineDisaster]

You're a nature cuck then. Who gives a fuck about "muh evolution"? If you accept that shit you have no dignity like a cuckold faggot

Says the fakecel

 

[FlorentineDisaster]

Joined Mar 2, 2022

Says the fakecel 2

 

[Deleted member 40767]

Natural selection always takes the best genes in a species and extincts the other genes.

So basically when a woman turns you down , its to resist your genes.

Its all part or nature.
Its our turn to be turned down by evoltution.

I'm not saying I know for sure.
Its just an hypothesis.
It could be social enegineering too that creates incels.
But evolution seems to have the same trait of favorism.

no this is not true

women are picking the hottest men, not the strongest, smartest, healthiest, IQ men just attractive men and that means all the high IQ men will go extinct and so will the human species at some point if we dont solve that problem

 

[MARTYRDOM GOD X]

Natural Selection is working against Incels, but there are also restrictions that serve to close down channels of ascention that would otherwise allow Incels to ascend.

One I can think of is Prostitution being Illegal. Although paid sex is not ascending, its still Sex at the end of the day and a huge upgrade from having nothing

 

[grondilu]

I'm tired of having to rebut the same points time and time again.

r/askwomen has has gone full-blown pro-eugenics.

It is a myth that females have an issue with Red Pill ideas, or more like a half-truth. Women LOVE salivating over high value, self-interested men, shaming losers, and controlling the reigns of natural selection. Women's disagreement with the Red Pill is not that its factually wrong, but that it...

incels.is

We should make a FAQ.

That being said, I suppose every occurrence of the question is an opportunity to refine the answer.

Question : if incels can't reproduce, isn't that an expected consequence of natural selection?

Answer :
In a way it is, though it's more sexual selection than natural selection, and there is a case to make that sexual selection does not really improve our species. That being said, even if we suppose that we're indeed talking about natural and not sexual selection, it is worth noting that a major part of human development during at least historical times was precisely to limit natural selection. Especially in modern times, when most public policies consists in helping the weak and vulnerable, usually to the detriment of the strong and powerful.
Thus, the idea that incels should be left to their deplorable fate is at best hypocritical, and at worst vile. And even if their lack of reproductive success is considered a negligible hurdle when compared to death through poverty or violence, it still, in the eyes of some incels, a reason not to feel sympathetical to the hurdles of sex-havers, and thus a reason to call out at least some forms of public assistance, such as State-founded reproductive healthcare or welfare to single-mothers, which many incels see as a form of institutionalized cuckolding (as in the end incels pay for sex-havers and their offspring).
People who invoke natural selection to justify incels' predicament should expect sex-havers to raise their offspring with their own resources. Also how do these people justify assisted reproductive technology? There are probably other such contradictions, which are conveniently ignored when using that naturalistic argument, which essentially amounts to the appeal-to-nature fallacy.

 

[MentalistKebab]

No, sexual selection does not always pick the best genes, hence why low IQ men are reproducing more and why it can increase risk of extinction

This +hybristophila choose for criminals.

On top of that, for most of the time human civilization existed (farming, pottery, metallurgy etc), females were either in property status or 2. class citizens. So sexual selection is a new thing.

 

[grondilu]

On top of that, for most of the time human civilization existed (farming, pottery, metallurgy etc), females were either in property status or 2. class citizens. So sexual selection is a new thing.

Sexual selection is definitely not a new thing. It was indeed severely constrained during historical times, but historical times represent a relatively short period in our evolutionary history.

We know sexual selection has been very much at play before, because we can see its result in our bodies, more precisely in our secondary sexual characteristics, which are very pronounced when compared to other great apes.

 

[Kamikaze]

Human societies and all the advances of our species stemmed from an organizational social structure that defied primal instinct.
Unless we all suddenly return to monke, I see no reason not to treat female driven genetic determinism as an excusable occurence.
Seems like our forefathers knew exactly how to tackle this issue.

 

[FlorentineDisaster]

ok retard

Fakecel

 

[Ninjanas]

It's not going to change the species that much because condoms / birth control pills exist and I'll also Chad doesn't want to commit

 

[Ninjanas]

Uhh comparing birds to humans is something really dumb.

Exactly bro birds aren't mammals

 

[FlorentineDisaster]

Exactly bro birds aren't mammals

Yeah lol

 

[Deleted member 41988]

No, sexual selection does not always pick the best genes, hence why low IQ men are reproducing more and why it can increase risk of extinction