It is over.
You're expecting a community upholded website to describe us in any positive way?
Though I can agree, foids writing about incels don't in any way actually understand what incels are.
Though I can agree, foids writing about incels don't in any way actually understand what incels are.
T
These beautiful young women write articles about how we are evil ogres and we, of course, are not allowed to contribute. Things like this really remind just how subhuman I am. I am just a monster in the eyes of regular people. A deformed freak.
E
Confidence is a meme anyways
In reality, the complete opposite is true
I know Gorilla Warfare reads this thread.
The mostly white thing in the wiki doesn't offend me, but it's pretty ridiculous, as almost all the mods of the forum are non-white, and half of this forum is non-white.
The wiki is really just a big long piece using this forum and Elliot Rodger as the centerpiece and is more biased than the encyclopedia dramatica article, which is crazy.
It has little to no focus on the values/culture of the other 24/7 active forums like Reddit's braincels and Facebook's incelistan, both of which have different cultures and moderating policy and potential for sockpuppeting/bad-actors. Which really means it's a big long article getting offended about 4chan and r9k as this forum is just a 2nd degree extension of that. 4chan's original purpose was to merely provoke so the editors are just being provoked I guess. They also don't care about historical forums even if properly cited by the same sources they are currently using... They sort of have a history section but remove any history about love-shy.com, which is weird because that forum was like the #1 incel forum for longer than any other forum I know of, had a doc made about it's users and was the origination of a lot of stuff.
Because the sources are mostly tabloidy crap as very little actual research has been done on involuntary celibacy and the editors wouldn't use such stuff even if it was done, it's just a feedback machine into old-media pseudo-editorialists who lazily use wikipedia and 1st result google as a starting point.
They also remove stuff detailed about Sodini maybe because he never used the word 'incel', but then again neither did Cruz or Harper-Mercer. It's really weird because he is clearly the first mass incel shooter in the USA of the last hundred years or so. American history isn't littered with guys going on mass shootings and making public blogs about their lack of sexual success being the primary reason, Sodini is the first American I know to do that. The french college shooter didn't even make inceldom an explicit primary reason like Sodini did. Or maybe they edit him out because Sodini never used an incel forum, but neither did Rodger. Anyone that read the articles about Sodini knew that they all took the time to look at his online blog which was all about him not being able to get laid, and they almost all labeled him involuntarily celibate and that being the primary reason for his attack.
The editors obviously have a political motive, as they only complain about involuntary celibacy not being a notable thing after a mass shooting and then stuff a dramatically re-written article full of stuff referencing the last murderer.
I blame the users of this forum almost as much as I do the editors. The users of this forum are giving the editors license to say just about anything about us.
We really need our own wiki, I'm so impatient about @Master s plan to create one
The mostly white thing in the wiki doesn't offend me, but it's pretty ridiculous, as almost all the mods of the forum are non-white, and half of this forum is non-white.
The wiki is really just a big long piece using this forum and Elliot Rodger as the centerpiece and is more biased than the encyclopedia dramatica article, which is crazy.
It has little to no focus on the values/culture of the other 24/7 active forums like Reddit's braincels and Facebook's incelistan, both of which have different cultures and moderating policy and potential for sockpuppeting/bad-actors. Which really means it's a big long article getting offended about 4chan and r9k as this forum is just a 2nd degree extension of that. 4chan's original purpose was to merely provoke so the editors are just being provoked I guess. They also don't care about historical forums even if properly cited by the same sources they are currently using... They sort of have a history section but remove any history about love-shy.com, which is weird because that forum was like the #1 incel forum for longer than any other forum I know of, had a doc made about it's users and was the origination of a lot of stuff.
Because the sources are mostly tabloidy crap as very little actual research has been done on involuntary celibacy and the editors wouldn't use such stuff even if it was done, it's just a feedback machine into old-media pseudo-editorialists who lazily use wikipedia and 1st result google as a starting point.
They also remove stuff detailed about Sodini maybe because he never used the word 'incel', but then again neither did Cruz or Harper-Mercer. It's really weird because he is clearly the first mass incel shooter in the USA of the last hundred years or so. American history isn't littered with guys going on mass shootings and making public blogs about their lack of sexual success being the primary reason, Sodini is the first American I know to do that. The french college shooter didn't even make inceldom an explicit primary reason like Sodini did. Or maybe they edit him out because Sodini never used an incel forum, but neither did Rodger. Anyone that read the articles about Sodini knew that they all took the time to look at his online blog which was all about him not being able to get laid, and they almost all labeled him involuntarily celibate and that being the primary reason for his attack.
The editors obviously have a political motive, as they only complain about involuntary celibacy not being a notable thing after a mass shooting and then stuff a dramatically re-written article full of stuff referencing the last murderer.
I blame the users of this forum almost as much as I do the editors. The users of this forum are giving the editors license to say just about anything about us.
We really need our own wiki, I'm so impatient about @Master s plan to create one
Last edited:
Anyone who thinks critically and reads in the 1st paragraph that the Southern Poverty Law Center is THE authority on "hate groups" smells the bullshit from a mile away.
Most of the references are news reports.
This is why nobody takes wikipedia seriously.
This is why nobody takes wikipedia seriously.
The SPLC is indeed a joke now and they worded it like incels were this terrorist group on their official list of hate groups instead of just 'male supremacists' in general.
This forum IS hateful, and if it's has been informed by Stormfront and their brand of neo-Nazism. Either from infiltrators here or at least through this forum being a distant proxy of 4chan and it picking up cultural proxies of that forum. Especially with this forums obsession with promicuity, cultural decline, and validating and sometimes encouraging suicide of 'genetic inferiors'.
But what 'hate watch' group is worth being an authority on anything? Everyone hates everyone else nowadays and nearly every opinionated website has some hateful agenda, some more explicit that others.
Last edited:
E
How the fuck forum for involuntary celibates could be hateful? Use your brain.
Alana's board, and Incelsupport in the late 90s, and periods of love-shy.com never got near the level of open hatred on this forum
Would rather the users redirect their raw hatred into direct (non-violent) action instead of catering to the culture that emerges when you mix 4chan+Stormfront: neo-nazi sociopathy and obsession with validating and sometimes encouraging suicide of 'genetic inferiors'.
People who rate her higher than a 5 are delusional.
E
Everything filled with femoids is supposed to have strict rules, as femshits are incredible sensetive creatures. This forum has freedom of speech, while many other places don't, so people are free to go edgy if they have a feel to it.
Nobody is actually encouraging suicide here, again, depressive users are always free to vent. Genetic inferiority is very real thing, i don't understand the purpose of quotation marks on them, you spew bluepill agenda.
ED at least exists specifically to offend everyone.
Contrary to what the media says, there is no cohesive incel ideology. We're a rag tag amalgamation of political interests, philosophies, racial, ethnic and religious groups loosely bound together by shared experiences of rejection due to ugliness.
T
This forum is probably less racist than 4chan (BTW, 4chan /pol/ hates incels because they view us as whiny losers, just like everyone else). A lot of people in the incel community openly admit to being ethnic, as they believe this is one of the causes of their involuntary celibacy. In fact, numerous users were banned from this very forum for "race baiting".
As for talk of inferior genetics, that's kind of at the heart of the idea of being incel. I'm sure no one here really wants to be a "subhuman". I'm sure no one here wants to hate themselves. The reason why we speak of genetic inferiority is because of what we know about the process of natural selection. Genes that propagate are obviously superior to genes that do not. Incels cannot find a partner because of their looks, therefore, we must conclude their genes are inferior. It is a conclusion we come to based on how society treats us. None of us want to be inferior but it is the only conclusion we can draw based on our place in the social hierarchy.
I noticed this myself. When I went before it was about how men growing up without sexual development often displayed certain traits (I read one is incessantly bringing up sex inappropiately).
Now it's about Aleks and ER and the 'community'. There's nothing scientific about it at all; it's basically just regurgitation's of all those shitty news articles that came out a month ago.
Now it's about Aleks and ER and the 'community'. There's nothing scientific about it at all; it's basically just regurgitation's of all those shitty news articles that came out a month ago.
Women shouldn't have rights
T
Very typical propaganda technique. Dehumanize your enemy so that your troops have no reservations about destroying them.
Just because *women* conclude your genes are inferior due to tingles from natural selection doesn't *mean* your genes are inferior. What makes primal hypergamy an effective sorting mechanism of male genes?? Because it worked so far? Civlization and the industrial era has changed what makes someone a benefit to human survival and women's sexual choices haven't kept up. And this is all assuming we even *care* about our genes being good for future generations as opposed to being dysgenic, and I see no reason why we should given most of us aren't planning on having kids as we got so fucking up from being incel.
Hope she gets murdered
Everything is subjective, right? To qualify anything as good or bad, you have to establish criteria first. If the criteria is to attract girls, then it's easy to say that incels have shit genetics.
T
Yes, by definition they are inferior. If women don't want to be with me, my genes are inferior. Nature doesn't care. You can be the most outstanding person ever (I'm not though) but if you fail to reproduce, it does not matter. Your genes were selected against, period.
Anyway, I don't really care about the intellectual games and debates. Maybe the younger guys on here do but I really really do not care. I don't care if I am superior, inferior, whatever. All I care about is that I'm dying alone and it feels bad. I think many people talk about "subhumanity" and genetic inferiority in jest anyway.
That's incorrect, venting about suicide isn't the same as sending someone a GIF telling them to end it, which is the one of the first things I got when I posted here. Now I have a thick skin, but I think even the mods are getting sick from the culture here as master keeps PMing me about his suicidal thoughts
If pointing out that users on here are cowtowing old Stormfront obsession with genetic cleansing is 'bluepill' then you are just playing politics and not thinking about what 'bluepill' means
I put genetic inferiority in quotations because you accepting women's decision about our 'genetic inferiority' is 'bluepill' as fuck
Why do people keep confusing *are* entitled to sex, and *should be* entitled to sex? The former makes no sense, there is nothing that entitles us to sex in law or in the social contract (in the USA at least) except in marriage in a few southern states. The latter shouldn't be a problem though.
Last edited:
All this fucking fesnail whoreaship.
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
