Sans
Overlord
★★★★★
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2019
- Posts
- 9,977
The bluepill doctrine has changed yet again! After being told that looks don’t matter for many years, we are treated to this gem from everyone’s favorite vaginal capitalist:
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/10d63c2/how_did_this_chinless_frog_looking_fucker_ever/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Immediately off to a great start, mocking Andrew Tate’s looks by calling him a “chinless frog looking fucker.” The soys are attracted to it like flies are to shit, judging by the 300+ soy points. One of the top comments is comparing him to “the anchovies from SpongeBob”.
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/10d63c2/how_did_this_chinless_frog_looking_fucker_ever/j4k6fgg/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
One user calls OP out on his bullshit, and gets fiercely downvoted.
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/10d63c2/how_did_this_chinless_frog_looking_fucker_ever/j4jympf/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
Funny, the bluepill doctrine has stated that looks don’t matter for all these years, and now it changes for Tate? Funny how the goalposts move like that.
Self-admitted “old roastie landwhale” u/Syntania chimes in with her own take:
You know, you understand things more if you don't think in absolutes.
Self-admitted “old roastie landwhale” u/Syntania chimes in with her own valued input:
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/10d63c2/how_did_this_chinless_frog_looking_fucker_ever/j4kaqzf/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
This comment, replying to the “I thought looks didn’t matter” comment, is interesting to me.
Yes, persoynality matters somewhat if your intention is to attract a lifelong partner as opposed to a one night stand. However, the part about ugly people appearing more attractive if they have a charming persoynality is not true. As much as I wish the world worked that way, in my experience, it doesn’t. While that statement makes sense, the fact is that many ugly people aren’t given the chance to show their persoynality in the first place to a potential partner because the initial attraction isn’t there.
Also, the last line is pretty funny. “Tate’s ugly because he acts ugly.”
Let’s say that once (if) he gets out of the concentration camp, he’ll do a complete 180 and began being bluepilled, treating woman like queens, drinking a gallon of soy a day, and posting on Inceltear regularly. That would make him have a good persoynality, but it won’t magically change his facial bone structure. He’ll still look like the “chinless frog” that the soys love to make fun of.
Meanwhile, imagine if a 10/10 model chad created an account on this forum and started posting. Sure, he’d be “acting ugly”, but that’s not going to turn his face into an Incel-tier face.
Many insects and spiders are good for the environment, yet many people still are scared of them or think they’re ugly. Does that mean that they “act ugly”?
Finally, to end things on a lighter note, this comment is based, and it somehow got upvoted:
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/10d63c2/how_did_this_chinless_frog_looking_fucker_ever/j4k8zjd/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
I’m not sure whether or not being based was their intention, but it’s a reference to 1984, when Winston is told by O’Brien that sometimes two plus two is four, but sometimes it is five, sometimes it is three, sometimes it is three, four, and five all at once - referring to how just like the narrative of Oceania in 1984 is constantly changing, so is the narrative of the bluepill doctrine.
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/10d63c2/how_did_this_chinless_frog_looking_fucker_ever/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Immediately off to a great start, mocking Andrew Tate’s looks by calling him a “chinless frog looking fucker.” The soys are attracted to it like flies are to shit, judging by the 300+ soy points. One of the top comments is comparing him to “the anchovies from SpongeBob”.
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/10d63c2/how_did_this_chinless_frog_looking_fucker_ever/j4k6fgg/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
One user calls OP out on his bullshit, and gets fiercely downvoted.
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/10d63c2/how_did_this_chinless_frog_looking_fucker_ever/j4jympf/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
Funny, the bluepill doctrine has stated that looks don’t matter for all these years, and now it changes for Tate? Funny how the goalposts move like that.
Self-admitted “old roastie landwhale” u/Syntania chimes in with her own take:
You know, you understand things more if you don't think in absolutes.
Self-admitted “old roastie landwhale” u/Syntania chimes in with her own valued input:
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/10d63c2/how_did_this_chinless_frog_looking_fucker_ever/j4kaqzf/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
This comment, replying to the “I thought looks didn’t matter” comment, is interesting to me.
Yes, persoynality matters somewhat if your intention is to attract a lifelong partner as opposed to a one night stand. However, the part about ugly people appearing more attractive if they have a charming persoynality is not true. As much as I wish the world worked that way, in my experience, it doesn’t. While that statement makes sense, the fact is that many ugly people aren’t given the chance to show their persoynality in the first place to a potential partner because the initial attraction isn’t there.
Also, the last line is pretty funny. “Tate’s ugly because he acts ugly.”
Let’s say that once (if) he gets out of the concentration camp, he’ll do a complete 180 and began being bluepilled, treating woman like queens, drinking a gallon of soy a day, and posting on Inceltear regularly. That would make him have a good persoynality, but it won’t magically change his facial bone structure. He’ll still look like the “chinless frog” that the soys love to make fun of.
Meanwhile, imagine if a 10/10 model chad created an account on this forum and started posting. Sure, he’d be “acting ugly”, but that’s not going to turn his face into an Incel-tier face.
Many insects and spiders are good for the environment, yet many people still are scared of them or think they’re ugly. Does that mean that they “act ugly”?
Finally, to end things on a lighter note, this comment is based, and it somehow got upvoted:
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/10d63c2/how_did_this_chinless_frog_looking_fucker_ever/j4k8zjd/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
I’m not sure whether or not being based was their intention, but it’s a reference to 1984, when Winston is told by O’Brien that sometimes two plus two is four, but sometimes it is five, sometimes it is three, sometimes it is three, four, and five all at once - referring to how just like the narrative of Oceania in 1984 is constantly changing, so is the narrative of the bluepill doctrine.