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.

Blackpill Men getting raped is WORSE than women getting raped

Deep.Nest

Deep.Nest

El Violador
★★★★★
Joined
Aug 21, 2021
Posts
4,450
Whenever IT makes posts about one of our threads that mention women getting vaginally raped by men, I often see them say things like "well what if a man violently raped YOUR asshole?" as if this situation is even remotely comparable.

A man getting anally raped is 50 times worse than nearly every vaginal rape of a woman. The vast majority of women will likely consent potentially thousands of times to vaginal penetration in her life time, Most men, however, would NEVER consent to being sodomized. Women simply dislike the person attached to the penis that is fucking her, men dislike the activity all together. Rape is much more traumatic and humiliating for men than it is for women. Anal penetration is inherently more violent, painful, and degenerate. Vaginal rape is nowhere close to as dehumanizing.

What they're trying to do, is set up a false equivalency by simply using the same terms. If vaginal and anal rape are both equally considered rape, then they can casually switch the situations in response to one of them. "oh you said something about vaginal rape, well what if a man ANALLY raped you, huh?" By using the all encompassing word of "rape", this seems like an appropriate response to them, you know, a rape for a rape, but if we inspect what they actually mean, the rape they are proposing is magnitudes worse than anything we originally stated. Women getting vaginally raped really isn't that big of a deal compared to what men experience.

I know this is obvious, but feminists really do lack logic. Their cultural indoctrination has blinded them to critical thinking. What prompted me to make this post was all the comments under IT posts made about me. This is the most recent one:

 
Last edited:
What's with your obsession with rape brocel I don't understand
 
What's with your obsession with rape brocel I don't understand
It was the post made by IT that made me want to make the point

It's also just something that annoys me since feminists bitch about it so much
 
sex is rape it's just allowed if she likes you
 
Also, yes I do agree that a man getting raped is worse than a foid getting it. At least what happens to her is evolutionary natural compared to anal rape. (I am not supporting rape, I am just saying that from a biological perspective, so stop falsely accusing me, glowie faggot.)
 
I often see them say things like "well what if a man violently raped YOUR asshole?"
I love fucking love how normie ape inferior retards ALWAYS compare heterosexual rape of a woman to HOMOSEXUAL rape of a MAN. They do the fucking same with prostitution and harassment.
I would not like it, you know little cucked retards, because i am NOT HOMOSEXUAL and you are comparing apples and oranges. You should ask "well why don't you go being paid to have sex with a woman" "What if a woman harasses you, huh?"

RETARDS RETARDS RETARDS.

But it's kinda telling since you can see it's their subconscious mind working here. THEY KNOW men love and crave women but not viceversa so YOU CANNOT just switch the genders and have the same effect. They know the average man is as repulsive to the average heterosexual woman as a gay man is to a straight man. They deny it with words and rationally but when it comes to arguing spontaneously or reacting instinctively they fall back to their subconscious awareness telling them this blackpilled truth.

Of course like the good ape brained cattle they are they are not aware of this process

@GeckoBus @WorthlessSlavicShit
 
I love fucking love how normie ape inferior retards ALWAYS compare heterosexual rape of a woman to HOMOSEXUAL rape of a MAN. They do the fucking same with prostitution and harassment.
I would not like it, you know little cucked retards, because i am NOT HOMOSEXUAL and you are comparing apples and oranges. You should ask "well why don't you go being paid to have sex with a woman" "What if a woman harasses you, huh?"

RETARDS RETARDS RETARDS.

But it's kinda telling since you can see it's their subconscious mind working here. THEY KNOW men love and crave women but not viceversa so YOU CANNOT just switch the genders and have the same effect. They know the average man is as repulsive to the average heterosexual woman as a gay man is to a straight man. They deny it with words and rationally but when it comes to arguing spontaneously or reacting instinctively they fall back to their subconscious awareness telling them this blackpilled truth.

Of course like the good ape brained cattle they are they are not aware of this process

@GeckoBus @WorthlessSlavicShit
Exactly. You've described it better than I could, always grated me whenever people would do that half-complete gender switch, because it's just so painfully obvious once you see this how their minds work and that they know.
 
I love fucking love how normie ape inferior retards ALWAYS compare heterosexual rape of a woman to HOMOSEXUAL rape of a MAN. They do the fucking same with prostitution and harassment.
I would not like it, you know little cucked retards, because i am NOT HOMOSEXUAL and you are comparing apples and oranges. You should ask "well why don't you go being paid to have sex with a woman" "What if a woman harasses you, huh?"

RETARDS RETARDS RETARDS.

But it's kinda telling since you can see it's their subconscious mind working here. THEY KNOW men love and crave women but not viceversa so YOU CANNOT just switch the genders and have the same effect. They know the average man is as repulsive to the average heterosexual woman as a gay man is to a straight man. They deny it with words and rationally but when it comes to arguing spontaneously or reacting instinctively they fall back to their subconscious awareness telling them this blackpilled truth.

Of course like the good ape brained cattle they are they are not aware of this process

@GeckoBus @WorthlessSlavicShit
:bigbrain: :bigbrain: :bigbrain:
Yes, they always do this. As I say, the proof is always in the pudding. When you dissect their claims, it always comes down to misandry and foid worship. Just ask them what a woman is and what a man is. Or what masculinity is. They will always give you some version of "a man is someone who serves women." Even christians do that. I thought a man is someone who loves God with all his might, heart and soul? Where in the bible does it say a man is someone who protects his wife and constantly brawls with other men to get pussy and female attention?

Does it not say in the OT somewhere, talking about a fallen nation, "and women and children will rule over you?"
Any time they say shit like "men are biologically disposable," they are doing two things:

1. they are subconsciously voicing their own internalized misandry
2. they are literally repeating feminist rhetoric from the 70s without realizing:

According to Carol Mukhopadhyay and Patricia Higgins, the concept of male expendability was first described by fellow anthropologist Ernestine Friedl in 1975,[1]

It is a classic case where people just accept some idea simply because it seems plausible on the face of it. And it seems plausible because they hate men without realizing. Just like in that study I showed, where they found people are way less critical of negative claims about men than positive ones.


But when you think about it, reducing the male population to a significant degree would probably just collapse a society instantly. Men are needed for basic infrastructure tasks, raising children (women are horrible at it, as we now know from single mom stats), and having only a few men breed with all women would lead to massive incest.

The reason why the "men are disposable" trope is so commonly accepted is because people are inherently misandrist, so they just accept claims that shit on men with very little thought. Just recently someone here made a large thread where he repeated that claim, that men are just "inherently less valuable because 1 man can knock up 10 women."

No justification was given, neither a counter-perspective provided. They never ask themselves, does this even make sense? Do we have any examples in nature of this? Has there ever been an animal population reduced to 10% of its male population size, and did that animal population recover?

Where did this idea of male "biological disposability" come from? As I quoted above, it is just a flimsy theoretical construct created by some foid in the 70s with very little validity.

In reality the roles are probably inverted. Pregnant women are useless. If the male population was reduced to nothing, then every woman would have to be pregnant 24/7 to make up for lost children. This would fuck up these women, as pregnant women are susceptible to death in childbirth and also can't work as hard since they are pregnant. It would probably lead to a general population collapse with giga high child mortality, as mothers would die, leaving nobody to provide, pushing the burden to take care of all these kids on the remaining men and women.

In the end, everyone would just fucking die, leaving only a tiny group of men and women, probably in a rough 50/50 gender ratio, as always.
If you have a jenga tower with 100 pieces, you can't just remove 30% of pieces and expect the tower to remain stable. Systems are interdependent, can't delete 30% or more of any system without massive fallout.

This goes back into what you always point out, this crazy schizo-mindset society has: Society simultaneously downplays the role of men, saying they are useless, but also pushes hyper-agency on men, implying men are overly important.

Feminists express this by openly calling for male genocide, while also claiming men rule the world somehow. So men are useless and to be disposed of, but also vital to the functioning of the system?

Right wingers do it by saying men are biologically disposable, weak, effeminate, but also the backbone of society and therefore have a duty to keep up the system. As you said in another post, they say the system is rigged but then shame you for not participating in the system. It makes no sense.

Here is an example of an orthodox christian first admitting that men are obsessed with women and even die for them, but then blatantly lying about what the bible says on this.
At timestamp 32:43 in this video.


View: https://youtu.be/48naDt7xqz8?t=1963


TL;DR: He mentions a book from the 70s called "sexual suicide" by George Gilder. He says Gilders main argument was that men literally die for foids, their entire life is based on pleasing foids. He then lays out how Gilder also pointed out that women basically control men and society.
But then the orthodox dude begins lying (33:16). He claims "and this is what men are called to do" by citing Ephesians 5 in the Bible.
This is what he cites:

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her,

BUT THIS OMITTS THE WHOLE PARAGRAPH WHICH LITERALLY STARTS WITH "WIVES, SUBMIT TO YOUR HUSBANDS" LMFAO:
FULL CONTEXT:

Marriage—Christ and the Church​

22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.
23 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.
24 Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her,
26 that He might [g]sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word,
27 that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish.
28 So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself.
This clearly states that husband and wive should be equally dedicated to each other. Yet the dude in the video twists this most famous of passages into supporting his weird fetish of men as the sacrifical lamb for the foid.

They deny it with words and rationally but when it comes to arguing spontaneously or reacting instinctively they fall back to their subconscious awareness telling them this blackpilled truth.
They also always intantly go for your looks, which is hilarious. Like, if a guy says anything they dont like, they say you look like a pedo, school shooter, you are ugly, short or whatever.
And it's always shit you can't change too.

They also resort to calling you gay as a man. But the same insult is never used on women.
"Ugh, look at that bitch, she is probably a lesbian!:feelsugh::feelsugh::feelsugh:"
"Ugh, shes so, ... emasculated... barf! :feelspuke::feelspuke::feelspuke:"

This is another big tell always - the entire discussion is always about men being broken and needing to change. They never even bring up women in a proactive sense.

Before this gets too long, here is another example. These right-wing podcasts like "whatever" are just advetisements for OF whores. Women know this. One whore said she made 80k just by going on. That's why these women PAY to get on these podcasts. The people running the podcasts know that. It's like a pyramid scheme. Both the male grifters and the whores are fleecing desparte men. That's why most foids that come on these podcasts say nothing and just sit there. It's a billboard. They know just sitting there, guys will leech and drool and look them up.

In this clip, a foid literally admits it (16:34):


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mygPV1gtbw&t=994s


All these "muh strong trad male" guys watch these podcasts and then jump straight over to OF to subscribe to these girls :lul::lul::lul:.
As always, the failure of the "the nuclear family" or any of that is not mens fault. Men are still 100% willing to marry women and have kids. It is women that are blocking mens attempts do that. We know that from what I just laid out. The girl can be a total whore, admit it on a public podcast and still have guys simp. We know it from juggernaut law threads like these two:

  • For men, the results show that being unattractive decreases the likelihood of finding a partner, of finding a partner with a university degree, and of finding a partner with a higher educational level.
  • For women, physical attractiveness does not affect the likelihood of any of those events occurring.
  • Among women, physical attractiveness did not matter when it came to mating.
  • The results for women indicate that attractiveness did not matter.

Yet the orthodox dude in the video blames MEN and says, because women are whores now, men do not want to comitt to them, and so this is the issue. No. Men still want to comitt, but they are now called simps for doing that. So if a man is comitted to a foid you are both simp and trad male. More on that down below, because it perfectly overlaps. You can't win. You simp for trad-wife = based. You simp for whore = cuck. It makes no sense. Simping is simping.

The entire fall of traditionalism is not mens fault. Men just follow whatever women do. If women choose prostitution as the baseline for what a relationship is now (OF, buxxing etc), then men will just accept that as the new status quo. There is no difference between OF and a trad marriage. It's just the regular wealth and energy transfer from men to women, just in digital form. You still don't get sex and validation from her and you still give all your money and attention to her.

It is hilarious how people point out the cult like nature of these interactions (men literally buying foids poop and bathwater), but fail to point out the exact same dynamics in regular relationships.


View: https://odysee.com/@colttaine:d/Communism-For-Two:3


Anyway, enough. Thx for tagging me, always appreciate it! :feelsokman::feelsokman::feelsokman:
 
Last edited:
Exactly. You've described it better than I could, always grated me whenever people would do that half-complete gender switch, because it's just so painfully obvious once you see this how their minds work and that they know.
Their subconscious KNOWS while their rational mind schizofrenically denies that
 
The reason why the "men are disposable" trope is so commonly accepted is because people are inherently misandrist, so they just accept claims that shit on men with very little thought. Just recently someone here made a large thread where he repeated that claim, that men are just "inherently less valuable because 1 man can knock up 10 women."

No justification was given, neither a counter-perspective provided. They never ask themselves, does this even make sense? Do we have any examples in nature of this? Has there ever been an animal population reduced to 10% of its male population size, and did that animal population recover?

Where did this idea of male "biological disposability" come from? As I quoted above, it is just a flimsy theoretical construct created by some foid in the 70s with very little validity.
Men are made disposable by their looks. The only real problem is men do not dominate sexually and the best looking of the men still would struggle having the same sex appeal of a ugly foid.
Sexual dimorphism made men more sexually mature hence less pleasing lookwise. It's kinda funny since without sexual maturation men would generally look better than foids ("beautiful women syndrome" for a reason).

The amount of misandry based on mens looks is crazy. The amount of depth it subconsciously goes it's even crazier. You have Christians and conservatives simping for foids for what? At the end of the day if you go to the common denominator is their looks compared to male looks.

Male lower neoteny (it's just a little layer of lower neoteny not even that big but still enough to change the whole perception of a person) deem them to hyper accountability: you have people blaming young guys to not be able to have relationship both because they harrass foids too much and because they allegedly just play videogames and are closet asexual or faggots. AT THE SAME TIME. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, damned if you do but in the wrong way.
 
Exactly. You've described it better than I could, always grated me whenever people would do that half-complete gender switch, because it's just so painfully obvious once you see this how their minds work and that they know.
"if prostitution is not that bad for you why won't you go fuck some pussy or touching some boobs or sucking some girls feet for 200 bucks, huh? Chessmate!"

Their subconscious mind KNOWS fucking KNOWS just how brutally obvious the answer to this would be...
 
"if prostitution is not that bad for you why won't you go fuck some pussy or touching some boobs or sucking some girls feet for 200 bucks, huh? Chessmate!"

Their subconscious mind KNOWS fucking KNOWS just how brutally obvious the answer to this would be...
EXACTLY:feelshaha::feelsokman::feelshmm:!
 
If vaginal and anal rape are both equally considered rape, then they can casually switch the situations in response to one of them.
Agree. But I think that doesn't mean that it's "men getting raped VS women getting raped", but vaginal rape VS anal rape.

On a pure physical level I know I would enjoy being raped by a woman who forced me to have "normal" sex with her. And there are also statistics that women feel the same for "normal" rape. It's just that there are virtually no female rapists so when you think of a typical man getting raped, you think of horrible sex while if you think of a typical woman getting raped, you think of normal-ish sex.

What is definitely women's fault though is that they intentionally want to muddy the water between actually awful rape and ex they just didn't like so that it is more difficult to speak of actually traumatizing experiences.
 
But it's kinda telling since you can see it's their subconscious mind working here. THEY KNOW men love and crave women but not viceversa so YOU CANNOT just switch the genders and have the same effect. They know the average man is as repulsive to the average heterosexual woman as a gay man is to a straight man. They deny it with words and rationally but when it comes to arguing spontaneously or reacting instinctively they fall back to their subconscious awareness telling them this blackpilled truth.
Correct, if they were to be honest with their supposed mirroring of rape towards men their flawed "logic" would be clear. They don't try to put rape in some loosely equivalent terms for an average man to understand, but just to leave you with some vaguely defined "vibe" of something horribly wrong so that you subconsciously connected the dots and made a proper association. They don't give this idea a proper thought and simply default to it.
 

This perpetual CuckTear topic is so pathetic. The notorious Fschmidt has written quite a bit on said topic, his wife is aware of his views on the pertinent issue and this has never ruined their long and happy tradcuck marriage.
 
very true. sad how common sodomizing is in eastern european culture. this is why the ukranians/russians blow their brains out before capture, because they know they will get raped.
 

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top