Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate

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.

TeeHee Netflix’s “Love Is Blind” Shows Why So Many Men Are Single Today

Schizoidcel

Schizoidcel

     
★★★★★
Joined
Feb 11, 2018
Posts
4,498
Online
21d 33m

"Almost the entire male cast are walking red flags​

1*yv1DlvnEXrLwdlSohhjF2g.jpeg


Men are lonelier than ever.
Men in their 20s aren’t having sex. Men are not okay. More and more men identify as ‘incels’ — which stands for ‘involuntarily celibate.’


You’ve probably been hearing things along these lines in the last few months, maybe even longer.
But if you look at the statistics on heterosexual male sexlessness, relationship status trends, incel forums participation, etc., it all checks out.

And as with any social phenomenon, there are all sorts of theories as to why there’s a rise of single, lonely men — especially young — who, even though they want to be in a relationship, can’t seem to succeed in doing so.
(Some of which point the finger at women or feminism. Surprise, surprise.)

I’ve recently watched the latest season of Netflix’s show ‘Love Is Blind,’ and besides reminding me of my own horrible dating experiences from a few years ago — I’m now happily in a relationship —I think it also offers some explanation as to why that’s the case.
More specifically, the behaviour of the male cast does.

Love is probably not so blind​

‘Love is Blind’ is your typical dating reality television series, apart from one detail. In the initial phase of the show, the participants — a handful of single, heterosexual men and women — go on dates in purpose-built pods where they can talk through a speaker but not see each other.

They eventually meet in person, and then they have a few weeks to decide if they want to marry each other.
And this is usually when shit really hits the fan.

Although there are three seasons of the show to date — and I did watch them all — the last one definitely takes the cake in terms of the most unhinged casting. Because while most female participants seem to be genuinely looking for love and marriage, and they’re ready for it, the male participants are not.
The worst of them all is probably Cole.

He’s a 27-year-old realtor, devout Christian, and just a giant, walking red flag. Almost everything he says and does is inappropriate, childish or a combination of the two.
His relationship with the woman he proposed to, Zanab, outside the pods essentially starts with him freely admitting to her and everyone else that he doesn’t find her that physically attractive.
But he also admits he finds two other women in the show more attractive than her. When Zanab confronts him about that, he immediately lashes out and implies she should be grateful because ‘she’s a 9/10, and he usually gives women 7s.’
How lovely.

Apart from that, the couple also constantly clashes over the issue of Cole’s maturity. Or rather, lack thereof.
He lives in a filthy, fly-infested apartment that doesn’t look like it’s been clean since the day he moved in. He doesn’t know how to cook, clean and take care for himself. And even when he tries to make dinner, he quickly lets Zanab take over and then disappears into their flat to look for his… toy gun. Right.
Oh, and he later on accuses his fiancée of being ‘bipolar’ in the middle of an argument about him essentially behaving like a child.

There’s also Bartise, another 27-year-old who’s upset that the woman he chose isn’t a tall, blond fitness model.
Just like Cole, he can’t seem to shut up about it to his fiancée, Nancy. He also freely admits that another woman in the show, Raven, is ‘hot as shit’ and a ‘smoke show’, unlike her.
And when Bartise isn’t busy manipulating her into thinking she’s not enough, he’s gaslighting her, getting angry that she wants to be hugged, policing women’s right to choose — because women can only apparently get ‘one free pass’ to have an abortion — and being really emotionally immature.
But hey, at least his demeanour slightly changed once he realised Nancy’s wealth and successful real estate portfolio.

There’s also Matt, a 28-year-old sales executive whose red flag isn’t just the usual toxic red — it’s dangerously red.
He can’t seem to have one conversation with his fiancée, Colleen, without raising his voice, swearing and behaving like an angry toddler that just had his favourite toy taken away from him.
There is literally no communication, and he goes from zero to 100 within seconds.

No, the man-child syndrome really isn’t cute​

It was difficult to watch all that male entitlement mixed with a complete lack of self-awareness and overly inflated egos with a sprinkle of misogyny and sexism on top.

Most of the men on ‘Love Is Blind’ latest season — a total of five made it out of the pods — need a therapist, not a wife. (Some of them, like Matt, probably shouldn’t even be allowed around women.)
But I’d be lying if I said I’ve never met guys like Cole, Bartise or Matt in real life. I did. And many, at that. Hell, I even dated — briefly, but still — men just like them.
And I usually classified them as ‘men-children.’
The man-child behavioural pattern, also known as the ‘Peter Pan syndrome,’ was first described by psychologist Dan Kiley in his 1983 book ‘Peter Pan Syndrome: Men Who Have Never Grown Up.’
It isn’t a formal diagnosis or a mental health condition but more of an informal term used by some psychologists to describe boys who refuse to become men.

And according to Kiley, here are some of their characteristics:
  • They refuse to accept adult responsibility, like domestic labour
  • They avoid taking accountability for their mistakes and may frequently blame others
  • They behave irresponsibly and may display narcissistic personality traits
  • They have difficulty expressing emotions, especially in appropriate ways
  • They treat romantic partners as ‘mother figures’
In short, a man-child is socially and emotionally immature, unreliable, struggles to form meaningful relationships, and will essentially ‘mommy-zone’ their partner.
Well. It does sound awfully like the guys from ‘Love is Blind’, doesn’t it?

Although there isn’t much research on what causes it, some experts say that it might be a consequence of boys being coddled by their parents or raised in environments with strict gender roles. I have a hunch that the ‘boys will be boys’ and ‘boys mature slower than girls’ mentality has something to do with it as well.

And while I know that some women might find it ‘cute’ when men are ‘in need of a woman’ because they can’t cook, clean, do laundry, express their emotions or handle most of the other adult responsibilities, is it really tough?
Sure, maybe in the short-term, if you’ve also been socialised to believe that it’s a woman’s job to become the mother of the man you’re dating.
But in the long term, I hardly think so.
Being a man’s parent, personal assistant, maid, cook, cheerleader, side-kick, pornstar, therapist and whatever else is incredibly draining.
It’s why women still do most of the housework, even if they’re the primary breadwinner. And the reason women have, on average, 40 minutes a day less leisure time than their partners.

And according to some studies, it’s also why women sometimes experience lower sexual desire than their partners.

Women shouldn’t be expected to want to babysit adult men​

Women are in a very different place today — and in many parts of the world, not just the West — than they were a mere couple of decades ago.

More and more women get higher education. In the UK, women are 35% more likely to go to university than men. In the US, the situation is very similar. And globally, more women are now with a higher education degree than men.
More and more women are also thriving professionally and are fully financially independent. Millennial women are now set to become the most economically independent generation in history.
In other words, women no longer need a man to make a living, or even to have kids.

Of course, that doesn’t mean that we don’t want to be in relationships, but that the things we look for in potential partners have undoubtedly changed in the past few decades.

In particular, because many Gen Z’ers and Millenials like myself grew up watching our mothers essentially being single mothers, even if they were married. And, not surprisingly, the appeal of the man-child for many — if not most — of us is long gone.
(Besides, if we really want something to take care of, we can always buy a plant or adopt a pet, not date a man who believes he doesn’t have to grow up.)

But it’s not like men can’t possibly know now what women are looking for in a relationship, either. It’s not some great mystery buried deep in the file cabinets on Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘Paedophile Island.’
Women have been repeating time and time that they want a man who is empathetic, emotionally intelligent, kind, compassionate, and understanding. Not a needy, self-centred man-child who has zero regulation of his emotions, throws tantrums when things don’t go his way and only pays attention to our physical appearance.

Of course, that’s not to say that all men are like that. Or that the only reason so many men are lonely, single and sexless is that they refuse to grow up.
But it definitely is one of them.
Because I sincerely doubt that any woman in the right state of mind would want to babysit a fully grown-ass man.

In the end, most ‘Love is Blind’ couples didn’t go through with the marriages. How very shocking, isn’t it?
But some people are now speculating that perhaps the producers intentionally cast such childish men because they knew that would make the viewers’ blood boil.
Maybe that’s true, maybe not.

Still, this latest season illustrates the broader problem women often face in heterosexual relationships: having to essentially ‘mother’ their partners.
And I really can’t help but feel like the female participants deserved better than those men.
Just like many other women today.

If you like my work and want to support it, buy me a cup of coffee! For more of my content, subscribe to my Substack newsletter or check out my other social media platforms."

:foidSoy::foidSoy:
 
Last edited:
LeFrenchCel

LeFrenchCel

My postcount = your oneitis' bodycount
★★★★★
Joined
Apr 29, 2020
Posts
8,462
Online
66d 6h 58m
Jfl at jewnalists considering that some arrogant sex-haver normies are incels :feelskek:
 
Schizoidcel

Schizoidcel

     
★★★★★
Joined
Feb 11, 2018
Posts
4,498
Online
21d 33m
Jfl at jewnalists considering that some arrogant sex-haver normies are incels :feelskek:
The male feminists commenting on the article have the typical fat soy betabuxxer look :soy: Gotta defend milady, maybe one day she will give me starfish sex :feelsUgh:
 
LeFrenchCel

LeFrenchCel

My postcount = your oneitis' bodycount
★★★★★
Joined
Apr 29, 2020
Posts
8,462
Online
66d 6h 58m
The male feminists commenting on the article have the typical fat soy betabuxxer look :soy: Gotta defend milady, maybe one day she will give me starfish sex :feelsUgh:
That's pathetic fr
 
night-20

night-20

Recruit
★★
Joined
May 23, 2022
Posts
180
Online
48d 21h 15m
Feminists are completely clueless. Most lonely men aren't like this.
 
Last edited:
I.N.C.E.L.S. Boss

I.N.C.E.L.S. Boss

Kept you waitin, huh
★★
Joined
Mar 15, 2020
Posts
3,145
Online
43d 12h 41m
I won't donate a cup of coffee :feelsUgh:
 
tankcel

tankcel

Spergcel
Joined
Jun 29, 2022
Posts
62
Online
6d 1h 26m
teaching holes to read and write was clearly a mistake
 
Orzmund

Orzmund

Veteran
★★★★
Joined
Aug 31, 2022
Posts
1,317
Online
17d 12h 6m

No, the man-child syndrome really isn’t cute​

It was difficult to watch all that male entitlement mixed with a complete lack of self-awareness and overly inflated egos with a sprinkle of misogyny and sexism on top.

This whole "man-child" concept is such a ruse organized by this modern reinterpretation of antiquarian Ideas and philosophies. Men have always been arrogant and confined to their egoism, but there have also been meek and guillible men as well. It is obvious that this is merely a little wile to decieve men who have been unfairly treated into capitulation to what benefits society and not the allegedly "petulant" men.

This perversion of Carl Jung's Puer Aeternus is a pathological misunderstanding of its fundamental doctrines.

A bitch once called me Peter Pan as an insult to my character (if you know, you know). I just responded by saying Pan is the God of all and that I am the life-force bringing structure to the universe. Normal people don't understand this stuff. :feelsjuice:
 
Last edited:
IncelKing

IncelKing

Chaos is a laddER
★★★★★
Joined
Jan 7, 2019
Posts
5,544
Online
134d 8h 22m
I regret reading this, this woman shows a complete lack of Understanding of the problems average/below average men are facing in todays world

she instead paints women as the victims and blames it on men being “immature” and “man-children”, what she thinks is Completely opposite to how things are in reality because In the whole history of humanity, this is the best era to exist as a female (and conversely the worst era to exist as a male).

it’s actually women who are in a position of privilege whereas it’s low-tier males who are the true victims, and low tier males are not victims due to immaturity or some bullshit like that, they are victims because patriarchal societies have been abolished and replaced by gynocentric/feminist societies which give the upper hand to the men who are part of the genetic elite and/or the economic upper class, so the average looking guy with an average salary (who could find a partner easily in the past), will be invisible to women and if he is even noticed, he will be ignored and Rejected as women look for a much higher quality partner.

This woman writes in such a way as if she thinks she is really smart, when she is actually dumb as fuck and couldn’t be further away from the Truth.
 
Last edited:
B

BarrelStuffer

Captain
★★★★★
Joined
Sep 20, 2021
Posts
1,991
Online
134d 4m
Jfl, they call everything man child behavior. Anything I don’t like is incel/nazi/childish/etc.
Men don’t express emotions because you get shit on if you do and women lose attraction to you. Being narcissistic is actually a positive trait in attracting women as shown in studies.
Young women are more economically successful than young men because 90% of decent jobs that pay well are gifted to these young attractive women with useless degrees and zero skills.

None of these men in the show are even incel. Every foid seems to have stories about men with shit behaviours and then they project those behaviours onto lonely men that are virgins and don’t even get a chance to date lmao.
 
Orzmund

Orzmund

Veteran
★★★★
Joined
Aug 31, 2022
Posts
1,317
Online
17d 12h 6m
I regret reading this, this woman shows a complete lack of Understanding of the problems average/below average men are facing in todays world

she instead paints women as the victims and blames it on men being “immature” and “man-children”, what she thinks is Completely opposite to how things are in reality because In the whole history of humanity, this is the best era to exist as a female (and conversely the worst era to exist as a male).

it’s actually women who are in a position of privilege whereas it’s low-tier males who are the true victims, and low tier males are not victims due to immaturity or some bullshit like that, they are victims because patriarchal societies have been abolished and replaced by gynocentric/feminist societies which give the upper hand to the men who are part of the genetic elite and/or the economic upper class, so the average looking guy with an average salary (who could find a partner easily in the past), will be invisible to women and if he is even noticed, he will be ignored and Rejected as women look for a much higher quality partner.

This woman writes in such a way as if she thinks she is really smart, when she is actually dumb as fuck and couldn’t be further away from the Truth.
Women are incapable of understanding truths. Their art is the lie.
 
IncelKing

IncelKing

Chaos is a laddER
★★★★★
Joined
Jan 7, 2019
Posts
5,544
Online
134d 8h 22m
Women are incapable of understanding truths. Their art is the lie.

They are brainless low iq animals who only have the intelligence necessary to open their legs to get fucked, or to suck some cock.
 
night-20

night-20

Recruit
★★
Joined
May 23, 2022
Posts
180
Online
48d 21h 15m
None of these men in the show are even incel. Every foid seems to have stories about men with shit behaviours and then they project those behaviours onto lonely men that are virgins and don’t even get a chance to date lmao.
This.
 
Orzmund

Orzmund

Veteran
★★★★
Joined
Aug 31, 2022
Posts
1,317
Online
17d 12h 6m
They are brainless low iq animals who only have the intelligence necessary to open their legs to get fucked, or to suck some cock.
Nope. I will not deny women the intelligence necessary to recognize the distinction between good and bad; unlike Schopenhauer who falsely claims women are only capable of mediating the present and are practically "big children" who reach the superlative of their intellectual growth at the age of 18 years, I think women are efficacious both morally and intellectually. This way women can be held accountable for their wrongdoings with an unbiased perspective.
 
BornToLose

BornToLose

Oops!... I lost again
★★★★
Joined
Jun 10, 2021
Posts
4,858
Online
70d 19h 38m
Almost her entire text is a giant red flag.
 
Amir

Amir

KHHV
★★★★
Joined
Nov 14, 2022
Posts
311
Online
2d 9h 25m
Retards think that most single guys are chads with "red flags"
 
C

Cope or die

Officer
★★★★
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
887
Online
14d 22h 17m
Is anybody really surprised that she got it completely wrong?
 
Simulacrasimulation

Simulacrasimulation

Legend
Joined
Dec 25, 2019
Posts
3,530
Online
128d 20h 39m

"Almost the entire male cast are walking red flags​

1*yv1DlvnEXrLwdlSohhjF2g.jpeg


Men are lonelier than ever.
Men in their 20s aren’t having sex. Men are not okay. More and more men identify as ‘incels’ — which stands for ‘involuntarily celibate.’


You’ve probably been hearing things along these lines in the last few months, maybe even longer.
But if you look at the statistics on heterosexual male sexlessness, relationship status trends, incel forums participation, etc., it all checks out.

And as with any social phenomenon, there are all sorts of theories as to why there’s a rise of single, lonely men — especially young — who, even though they want to be in a relationship, can’t seem to succeed in doing so.
(Some of which point the finger at women or feminism. Surprise, surprise.)

I’ve recently watched the latest season of Netflix’s show ‘Love Is Blind,’ and besides reminding me of my own horrible dating experiences from a few years ago — I’m now happily in a relationship —I think it also offers some explanation as to why that’s the case.
More specifically, the behaviour of the male cast does.

Love is probably not so blind​

‘Love is Blind’ is your typical dating reality television series, apart from one detail. In the initial phase of the show, the participants — a handful of single, heterosexual men and women — go on dates in purpose-built pods where they can talk through a speaker but not see each other.

They eventually meet in person, and then they have a few weeks to decide if they want to marry each other.
And this is usually when shit really hits the fan.

Although there are three seasons of the show to date — and I did watch them all — the last one definitely takes the cake in terms of the most unhinged casting. Because while most female participants seem to be genuinely looking for love and marriage, and they’re ready for it, the male participants are not.
The worst of them all is probably Cole.

He’s a 27-year-old realtor, devout Christian, and just a giant, walking red flag. Almost everything he says and does is inappropriate, childish or a combination of the two.
His relationship with the woman he proposed to, Zanab, outside the pods essentially starts with him freely admitting to her and everyone else that he doesn’t find her that physically attractive.
But he also admits he finds two other women in the show more attractive than her. When Zanab confronts him about that, he immediately lashes out and implies she should be grateful because ‘she’s a 9/10, and he usually gives women 7s.’
How lovely.

Apart from that, the couple also constantly clashes over the issue of Cole’s maturity. Or rather, lack thereof.
He lives in a filthy, fly-infested apartment that doesn’t look like it’s been clean since the day he moved in. He doesn’t know how to cook, clean and take care for himself. And even when he tries to make dinner, he quickly lets Zanab take over and then disappears into their flat to look for his… toy gun. Right.
Oh, and he later on accuses his fiancée of being ‘bipolar’ in the middle of an argument about him essentially behaving like a child.

There’s also Bartise, another 27-year-old who’s upset that the woman he chose isn’t a tall, blond fitness model.
Just like Cole, he can’t seem to shut up about it to his fiancée, Nancy. He also freely admits that another woman in the show, Raven, is ‘hot as shit’ and a ‘smoke show’, unlike her.
And when Bartise isn’t busy manipulating her into thinking she’s not enough, he’s gaslighting her, getting angry that she wants to be hugged, policing women’s right to choose — because women can only apparently get ‘one free pass’ to have an abortion — and being really emotionally immature.
But hey, at least his demeanour slightly changed once he realised Nancy’s wealth and successful real estate portfolio.

There’s also Matt, a 28-year-old sales executive whose red flag isn’t just the usual toxic red — it’s dangerously red.
He can’t seem to have one conversation with his fiancée, Colleen, without raising his voice, swearing and behaving like an angry toddler that just had his favourite toy taken away from him.
There is literally no communication, and he goes from zero to 100 within seconds.

No, the man-child syndrome really isn’t cute​

It was difficult to watch all that male entitlement mixed with a complete lack of self-awareness and overly inflated egos with a sprinkle of misogyny and sexism on top.

Most of the men on ‘Love Is Blind’ latest season — a total of five made it out of the pods — need a therapist, not a wife. (Some of them, like Matt, probably shouldn’t even be allowed around women.)
But I’d be lying if I said I’ve never met guys like Cole, Bartise or Matt in real life. I did. And many, at that. Hell, I even dated — briefly, but still — men just like them.
And I usually classified them as ‘men-children.’
The man-child behavioural pattern, also known as the ‘Peter Pan syndrome,’ was first described by psychologist Dan Kiley in his 1983 book ‘Peter Pan Syndrome: Men Who Have Never Grown Up.’
It isn’t a formal diagnosis or a mental health condition but more of an informal term used by some psychologists to describe boys who refuse to become men.

And according to Kiley, here are some of their characteristics:
  • They refuse to accept adult responsibility, like domestic labour
  • They avoid taking accountability for their mistakes and may frequently blame others
  • They behave irresponsibly and may display narcissistic personality traits
  • They have difficulty expressing emotions, especially in appropriate ways
  • They treat romantic partners as ‘mother figures’
In short, a man-child is socially and emotionally immature, unreliable, struggles to form meaningful relationships, and will essentially ‘mommy-zone’ their partner.
Well. It does sound awfully like the guys from ‘Love is Blind’, doesn’t it?

Although there isn’t much research on what causes it, some experts say that it might be a consequence of boys being coddled by their parents or raised in environments with strict gender roles. I have a hunch that the ‘boys will be boys’ and ‘boys mature slower than girls’ mentality has something to do with it as well.

And while I know that some women might find it ‘cute’ when men are ‘in need of a woman’ because they can’t cook, clean, do laundry, express their emotions or handle most of the other adult responsibilities, is it really tough?
Sure, maybe in the short-term, if you’ve also been socialised to believe that it’s a woman’s job to become the mother of the man you’re dating.
But in the long term, I hardly think so.
Being a man’s parent, personal assistant, maid, cook, cheerleader, side-kick, pornstar, therapist and whatever else is incredibly draining.
It’s why women still do most of the housework, even if they’re the primary breadwinner. And the reason women have, on average, 40 minutes a day less leisure time than their partners.

And according to some studies, it’s also why women sometimes experience lower sexual desire than their partners.

Women shouldn’t be expected to want to babysit adult men​

Women are in a very different place today — and in many parts of the world, not just the West — than they were a mere couple of decades ago.

More and more women get higher education. In the UK, women are 35% more likely to go to university than men. In the US, the situation is very similar. And globally, more women are now with a higher education degree than men.
More and more women are also thriving professionally and are fully financially independent. Millennial women are now set to become the most economically independent generation in history.
In other words, women no longer need a man to make a living, or even to have kids.

Of course, that doesn’t mean that we don’t want to be in relationships, but that the things we look for in potential partners have undoubtedly changed in the past few decades.

In particular, because many Gen Z’ers and Millenials like myself grew up watching our mothers essentially being single mothers, even if they were married. And, not surprisingly, the appeal of the man-child for many — if not most — of us is long gone.
(Besides, if we really want something to take care of, we can always buy a plant or adopt a pet, not date a man who believes he doesn’t have to grow up.)

But it’s not like men can’t possibly know now what women are looking for in a relationship, either. It’s not some great mystery buried deep in the file cabinets on Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘Paedophile Island.’
Women have been repeating time and time that they want a man who is empathetic, emotionally intelligent, kind, compassionate, and understanding. Not a needy, self-centred man-child who has zero regulation of his emotions, throws tantrums when things don’t go his way and only pays attention to our physical appearance.

Of course, that’s not to say that all men are like that. Or that the only reason so many men are lonely, single and sexless is that they refuse to grow up.
But it definitely is one of them.
Because I sincerely doubt that any woman in the right state of mind would want to babysit a fully grown-ass man.

In the end, most ‘Love is Blind’ couples didn’t go through with the marriages. How very shocking, isn’t it?
But some people are now speculating that perhaps the producers intentionally cast such childish men because they knew that would make the viewers’ blood boil.
Maybe that’s true, maybe not.

Still, this latest season illustrates the broader problem women often face in heterosexual relationships: having to essentially ‘mother’ their partners.
And I really can’t help but feel like the female participants deserved better than those men.
Just like many other women today.

If you like my work and want to support it, buy me a cup of coffee! For more of my content, subscribe to my Substack newsletter or check out my other social media platforms."

:foidSoy::foidSoy:
But EVERY MAN THAT WAS SELECTED OUT OF THE POD AND THAT SHE MENTIONS IS CHAD OR CHAD LITE

THEREFORE UNDERMINING ALL OF THE ABOVE POINTS ABOUT MUH MISGONY, MUH MAN CHILD, BECAUSE THE WOMAN ARE CHOOSING THE TOP 20% BASED ON LOOKS.

she UTTERLY FAILS TO MENTION EVERY MAN WHO DOES NOT HAVE THESE TRAITS BUT WERE NOT GOOD LOOKING, WERE ELIMINATED BY THE VERY WOMEN SHE IS LABELING AS VICTIMS.

WOMEN ELIMINATED THE "GOOD PERSONALITY" MEN, IN FAVOUR OF GENES AND LOOKS

ERGO ITS ACTUALLY THEIR FAULT THEY WERE LUMBERED WITH THESE BAFFOONS, AS THEY CHOSE THEM

you reap what you sow witches, is my new tag line for that pathetic game show
 
IncelWithHate

IncelWithHate

Frustrated, highinhib wizardcel
★★★
Joined
Jul 16, 2021
Posts
1,290
Online
20d 7h 50m
Feminists are completely clueless. Most lonely men aren't like this.
No, they're completely disingenuous. Feminists make a career out of spewing bullshit they know to be bullshit. This is no exception.
 
IncelWithHate

IncelWithHate

Frustrated, highinhib wizardcel
★★★
Joined
Jul 16, 2021
Posts
1,290
Online
20d 7h 50m
Nope. I will not deny women the intelligence necessary to recognize the distinction between good and bad; unlike Schopenhauer who falsely claims women are only capable of mediating the present and are practically "big children" who reach the superlative of their intellectual growth at the age of 18 years, I think women are efficacious both morally and intellectually. This way women can be held accountable for their wrongdoings with an unbiased perspective.
Women operate in many instances with the clear intent to be malicious towards men. Which in many cases is premeditated.

For example, divorce proceedings and denying ex-husbands access to children out of sheer pettiness. Or blatant abuse of child support and alimony as a substitute for income.

Yes, women are eternal teenagers in the sense they are coddled by society and the law. But like teenagers they clearly possess the self-awareness to know what they are doing and in a fair and just world would be held accountable.
 
Orzmund

Orzmund

Veteran
★★★★
Joined
Aug 31, 2022
Posts
1,317
Online
17d 12h 6m
Women operate in many instances with the clear intent to be malicious towards men. Which in many cases is premeditated.

For example, divorce proceedings and denying ex-husbands access to children out of sheer pettiness. Or blatant abuse of child support and alimony as a substitute for income.
This proves that women possess the acumen and awareness to explicitly commit acts of ill-intent.
Yes, women are eternal teenagers in the sense they are coddled by society and the law.
Baseless and fruitful, I can already hear the complaints of the little fellows.
But like teenagers they clearly possess the self-awareness to know what they are doing and in a fair and just world would be held accountable.
I agree, but women are not "eternal teenagers" for an alleged lack of maturity in the same way we are not "eternal children." This psychological jargon and its connotations are asinine. This new wave of "Jungsters," as I call them, is beginning to piss me off: not that you are one of them.
 
IncelWithHate

IncelWithHate

Frustrated, highinhib wizardcel
★★★
Joined
Jul 16, 2021
Posts
1,290
Online
20d 7h 50m
This proves that women possess the acumen and awareness to explicitly commit acts of ill-intent.

Baseless and fruitful, I can already hear the complaints of the little fellows.

I agree, but women are not "eternal teenagers" for an alleged lack of maturity in the same way we are not "eternal children." This psychological jargon and its connotations are asinine. This new wave of "Jungsters," as I call them, is beginning to piss me off: not that you are one of them.
Stop overthinking shit.

I call women eternal teenagers based on how they are treated and how they act. This is not a strictly philosophical description.

We classify children a certain way because they cannot accept full responsibility for their actions yet, and society shelters them until it is appropriate to do so.

We classify [male] adults a certain way because they are assumed to be capable of accepting full responsibility for their actions and society punishes/rewards them for their actions.

Women get to have the best of each world where they are assumed to lack responsibility (hypoagency), possess privileges on top of that and yet have the legal rights of men (and more).

Thus, I describe them as 'teenagers' in the sense adolescents aren't fully culpable for their fuckups but have many advantages adults do (for example driving, alcohol). Unlike teenagers, they are not still learning about the world or growing mentally. Thus they don't have that excuse but society treats them like they do regardless. Its as if you are hung up on how 'things should be' and I'm referring to 'how things are' in a practical sense.

And no, I don't subscribe to Jung nor do I see how what I described here applies to his framework at all.
 
Last edited:
Orzmund

Orzmund

Veteran
★★★★
Joined
Aug 31, 2022
Posts
1,317
Online
17d 12h 6m
Stop overthinking shit.

I call women eternal teenagers based on how they are treated and how they act. This is not a strictly philosophical description.

We classify children a certain way because they cannot accept full responsibility for their actions yet, and society shelters them until it is appropriate to do so.

We classify [male] adults a certain way because they are assumed to be capable of accepting full responsibility for their actions and society punishes/rewards them for their actions.

Women get to have the best of each world where they are assumed to lack responsibility (hypoagency), possess privileges on top of that and yet have the legal rights of men (and more).

Thus, I describe them as 'teenagers' in the sense adolescents aren't fully culpable for their fuckups but have many advantages adults do (for example driving, alcohol). Unlike teenagers, they are not still learning about the world or growing mentally. Thus they don't have that excuse but society treats them like they do regardless.
I understand, but this description of the present circumstance will not resolve the issue. You might as well be reiterating Schopenhauer's denunciation of women I mentioned earlier.
Its as if you are hung up on how 'things should be' and I'm referring to 'how things are' in a practical sense.
If women are viewed as culpable adults then they will be held accountable to the same extent that men are.
And no, I don't subscribe to Jung nor do I see how what I described here applies to his framework at all.
Puer Aternus, the idea that women are abusing in order to reprimand one as a man-child. It is the same thing you are doing here.
 
IncelWithHate

IncelWithHate

Frustrated, highinhib wizardcel
★★★
Joined
Jul 16, 2021
Posts
1,290
Online
20d 7h 50m
I understand, but this description of the present circumstance will not resolve the issue. You might as well be reiterating Schopenhauer's denunciation of women I mentioned earlier.
Nor does your alternative. Discussion and description of reality is not required to 'solve any issues'. Not sure what your point is.

If women are viewed as culpable adults then they will be held accountable to the same extent that men are.
My point is...

They aren't. Again, you are hung up on 'what should be'. Which I am admittedly sympathetic to, having a strong sense of fairness. But the world does not conform to my preferences. Or yours, for that matter. Which is the main reason we are both here in the first place.


Puer Aternus, the idea that women are abusing in order to reprimand one as a man-child. It is the same thing you are doing here.
No, you're pontificating again. And not even addressing a point I made, sheesh.
 
Orzmund

Orzmund

Veteran
★★★★
Joined
Aug 31, 2022
Posts
1,317
Online
17d 12h 6m
Nor does your alternative. Discussion and description of reality is not required to 'solve any issues'. Not sure what your point is.
I wanted to argue that if we validate the acts of women as gratuitous of unbaised judgement then, perhaps, the situation would consequently be resolved. This is a hypothetical opinion.
My point is...

They aren't. Again, you are hung up on 'what should be'. Which I am admittedly sympathetic to, having a strong sense of fairness. But the world does not conform to my preferences. Or yours, for that matter. Which is the main reason we are both here in the first place.
I am left wondering how we move forward then. I agree, women can be petulant and guillible, but those are not the innate qualities of all women.

Is woman's ineptitude a consequence of society's disregard of their maturity or is the immaturity of woman a consequence to the prevelant disregard of an impartial society?

No, you're pontificating again. And not even addressing a point I made, sheesh.
Ok. At least I learned a new word from this squabble.
 
IncelWithHate

IncelWithHate

Frustrated, highinhib wizardcel
★★★
Joined
Jul 16, 2021
Posts
1,290
Online
20d 7h 50m
I wanted to argue that if we validate the acts of women as gratuitous of unbaised judgement then, perhaps, the situation would consequently be resolved. This is a hypothetical opinion.

I am left wondering how we move forward then. I agree, women can be petulant and guillible, but those are not the innate qualities of all women.

Is woman's ineptitude a consequence of society's disregard of their maturity or is the immaturity of woman a consequence to the prevelant disregard of an impartial society?


Ok. At least I learned a new word from this squabble.
We don't move forward from this by mere dialogue. Certainly not between virgins on some internet forum. No-one cares what we think...well, that's not quite true. Certain unhinged individuals care a bit too much about what we think but that's ultimately irrelevant. :feelshehe:

What you're really asking is how society moves past the infantilization of women, yes?

Women's preferential treatment ultimately stems from their wombs. As long as humans remain a species that relies on heterosexual reproduction to propagate women will always be the limiting factor and will be prioritized. The only solutions I see are evolution (unlikely) or transhumanism (more likely) into a species that no longer requires women. Sexbots and a potential artificial womb will not suffice. Both options ultimately lead to deplorable outcomes for males or maintaining the status quo. And that's assuming that women don't use their leverage to deny or severely restrict them to begin with. Women are already protesting sexbots, under flimsy pretexts. The real reason is they intrinsically are aware their sexuality and ability to gestate young gives them their power. So men obtaining alternatives will not be tolerated.

Women must be completely eliminated from the equation. I see no other viable alternative. Yes it may sound extreme, and yes I am serious. As long as women exist in any capacity, men will be compelled by years of evolution to provide them with resources, protect them and compete for mating opportunities. It is no exaggeration that I strongly believe most of humankind's woes stem from women.
 
Nemesis

Nemesis

Sick of normies, norwood cell
Joined
Aug 7, 2021
Posts
1,573
Online
12d 9h 47m
Jfl at jewnalists considering that some arrogant sex-haver normies are incels :feelskek:
It's like with redpill and blackpill.

Redpill beside being basicly a bluepill+ is attacked constantly for being "mysogyny". And blackpill is untouched. Like normies and incels
 
Orzmund

Orzmund

Veteran
★★★★
Joined
Aug 31, 2022
Posts
1,317
Online
17d 12h 6m
We don't move forward from this by mere dialogue. Certainly not between virgins on some internet forum. No-one cares what we think...well, that's not quite true. Certain unhinged individuals care a bit too much about what we think but that's ultimately irrelevant. :feelshehe:

What you're really asking is how society moves past the infantilization of women, yes?

Women's preferential treatment ultimately stems from their wombs. As long as humans remain a species that relies on heterosexual reproduction to propagate women will always be the limiting factor and will be prioritized. The only solutions I see are evolution (unlikely) or transhumanism (more likely) into a species that no longer requires women. Sexbots and a potential artificial womb will not suffice. Both options ultimately lead to deplorable outcomes for males or maintaining the status quo. And that's assuming that women don't use their leverage to deny or severely restrict them to begin with. Women are already protesting sexbots, under flimsy pretexts. The real reason is they intrinsically are aware their sexuality and ability to gestate young gives them their power. So men obtaining alternatives will not be tolerated.

Women must be completely eliminated from the equation. I see no other viable alternative. Yes it may sound extreme, and yes I am serious. As long as women exist in any capacity, men will be compelled by years of evolution to provide them with resources, protect them and compete for mating opportunities. It is no exaggeration that I strongly believe most of humankind's woes stem from women.
Transhumanism is the future of male sexuality, but women will continue to seek alternatives to the status quo.

Men will never extirbate women, men are too soft.
 
IncelWithHate

IncelWithHate

Frustrated, highinhib wizardcel
★★★
Joined
Jul 16, 2021
Posts
1,290
Online
20d 7h 50m
Transhumanism is the future of male sexuality, but women will continue to seek alternatives to the status quo.
The status quo(s) (all of them) benefit women, so why would they seek 'alternatives'.

They will continue to legislate (read: whine and/or demand) more legal privileges for themselves though.

Men will never extirbate women, men are too soft.
Not as we are now, no.
 
Orzmund

Orzmund

Veteran
★★★★
Joined
Aug 31, 2022
Posts
1,317
Online
17d 12h 6m
IncelWithHate

IncelWithHate

Frustrated, highinhib wizardcel
★★★
Joined
Jul 16, 2021
Posts
1,290
Online
20d 7h 50m
Why wouldn't they? It is natural for a person to seek out a better option.
Society is set up to benefit women intrinsically, so that doesn't make sense.

Its like saying a billionaire would look for a better option than crony capitalism. Better options in terms of a billionaire are insider trading and reducing worker leverage by outsourcing to third world/going public. Analogous to a woman always looking to monkeybranch or adopt rotating polyandry so women can access chads while exploiting other men for wealth/stability.

But on a societal level there's no need for a 'better option'. The society already enables and facilitates their 'better options'.

What about the sympathizers and Don Juan's of women?
Redundant. The point is that men as a bloc have a preference for women, compounded by women's in-group preference. This all stems from innate built-in conceptualizations in the human brain which itself is from evolution (with a debatable amount of cultural influence). Men 'sympathize' with women because we want them for sex.

I'm not suggesting an overt genocide but a gradual process. You know, the same way groups like politicians and oligarchs slowly erode the rights of the masses in chunks so as to be barely noticeable.
 
Last edited:
298r651

298r651

Recruit
★★
Joined
Oct 20, 2022
Posts
169
Online
1d 16h 24m
This whole "man-child" concept is such a ruse organized by this modern reinterpretation of antiquarian Ideas and philosophies. Men have always been arrogant and confined to their egoism, but there have also been meek and guillible men as well. It is obvious that this is merely a little wile to decieve men who have been unfairly treated into capitulation to what benefits society and not the allegedly "petulant" men.

This perversion of Carl Jung's Puer Aeternus is a pathological misunderstanding of its fundamental doctrines.

A bitch once called me Peter Pan as an insult to my character (if you know, you know). I just responded by saying Pan is the God of all and that I am the life-force bringing structure to the universe. Normal people don't understand this stuff. :feelsjuice:
I dont get the manchild thing tbh the main thing that forced men to change behavior is a serious relationship or having children without that why would they care to do anything except play a video games and jerk off?
 
Orzmund

Orzmund

Veteran
★★★★
Joined
Aug 31, 2022
Posts
1,317
Online
17d 12h 6m
Society is set up to benefit women intrinsically, so that doesn't make sense.

Its like saying a billionaire would look for a better option than crony capitalism. Better options in terms of a billionaire are insider trading and reducing worker leverage by outsourcing to third world/going public. Analogous to a woman always looking to monkeybranch or adopt rotating polyandry so women can access chads while exploiting other men for wealth/stability.

But on a societal level there's no need for a 'better option'. The society already enables and facilitates their 'better options'.
In that case the eradication of ugly males is an inevitable occurrence given the evolution of human-reason. Women are the selective gender, any advancements in their selective process insinuates a consequential change in our society.

We are observing this now. The industrialization and commercialization of Western society has made it feasible for women to subsist in comfort while neglecting the needs of their contemporary men; studies prove 28% of modern men are genuinely sexless. According to statistics on the topic regarding female sexual activity a similar amount of women are sexless, but I think that is false information.
Redundant. The point is that men as a bloc have a preference for women, compounded by women's in-group preference. This all stems from innate built-in conceptualizations in the human brain which itself is from evolution (with a debatable amount of cultural influence). Men 'sympathize' with women because we want them for sex.
Which is more potent? The desire for acknowledgement from females? Or the reasoning with their mediocrity?
I'm not suggesting an overt genocide but a gradual process.
That is highly unlikely. At the beginning of this discussion you considered me to be the one arguing "what should be," yet now it is you who has forgotten practicality.

You know, the same way groups like politicians and oligarchs slowly erode the rights of the masses in chunks so as to be barely noticeable.
Women protest when the slightest encroachment on their privileges are made. Why do you think women will not force guillible men to retaliate against those who seek to subvert them?

After all, we are the minority.
 
IncelWithHate

IncelWithHate

Frustrated, highinhib wizardcel
★★★
Joined
Jul 16, 2021
Posts
1,290
Online
20d 7h 50m
In that case the eradication of ugly males is an inevitable occurrence given the evolution of human-reason.
Its not, because of the asymmetric sexual success between men and women. Let's assume ugly men are completely outsted from reproduction. The problem is ugly women are not. They still have children, likely incels. And that's not even getting into genetic recombination that can throw one a bad hand even with two attractive parents.

Women are the selective gender, any advancements in their selective process insinuates a consequential change in our society.
Women are regressive in terms of mating preference, so no. Like religion, you can make a decent argument for women's evolved behaviors (such as hypergamy) being a net benefit (though flawed) for humanity in its earlier days of development. For example, surpassing the dunbar number. In fact, religion and women are closely associated for several reasons.

What was ultimately advantageous in the past paradigm is now maladaptive.

We are observing this now. The industrialization and commercialization of Western society has made it feasible for women to subsist in comfort while neglecting the needs of their contemporary men; studies prove 28% of modern men are genuinely sexless. According to statistics on the topic regarding female sexual activity a similar amount of women are sexless, but I think that is false information.
If the sexless female statistic is true, it is only due to women's pickiness. It is not unknown for women to go without than settle for a mate they consider subpar.

Which is more potent? The desire for acknowledgement from females? Or the reasoning with their mediocrity?
Acknowledgement. In the past this correlated with sexual success. This is not necessarily true anymore because of women's tendency to virtue signal. However men are slow to adapt to the current paradigm.

That is highly unlikely. At the beginning of this discussion you considered me to be the one arguing "what should be," yet now it is you who has forgotten practicality.
None of it is likely. You asked what it would take for society to cease in their preferential treatment of women and disposability of men. I simply replied to that.

It would be like asking what it would take for us to start deep space travel. To which I respond lightspeed travel. Whether it is practical or not is irrelevant.

Women protest when the slightest encroachment on their privileges are made. Why do you think women will not force guillible men to retaliate against those who seek to subvert them?
That is exactly what I implied. Are you reading my posts or not?


After all, we are the minority.
Even if we weren't, it wouldn't matter. Men are hopeless because we don't align together for our interests in regards to women. We don't see them as the 'enemy'.
 
Orzmund

Orzmund

Veteran
★★★★
Joined
Aug 31, 2022
Posts
1,317
Online
17d 12h 6m
Its not, because of the asymmetric sexual success between men and women. Let's assume ugly men are completely outsted from reproduction. The problem is ugly women are not. They still have children, likely incels. And that's not even getting into genetic recombination that can throw one a bad hand even with two attractive parents.
Fair point but transhumanism will allow us to determine our genetics. Yet ugly people will still emerge as genetics alone does not determine one's appearance.
Women are regressive in terms of mating preference, so no.
What do you mean? Aren't they progressive? Women seek men with superior characteristics.
Like religion, you can make a decent argument for women's evolved behaviors (such as hypergamy) being a net benefit (though flawed) for humanity in its earlier days of development.
Are you saying that the evolutionary behaviors of women are pernicious to women, at least in its totality?
For example, surpassing the dunbar number. In fact, religion and women are closely associated for several reasons.

What was ultimately advantageous in the past paradigm is now maladaptive.
Right, so you are saying women's selection process is harmful to the interests of women... I am having trouble understanding why, exactly. Modern society is a haven for hedonism, women have never relished in gratuitous luxuries and immediately gratification to the extent they presently do.
If the sexless female statistic is true, it is only due to women's pickiness. It is not unknown for women to go without than settle for a mate they consider subpar.
That is true.
Acknowledgement. In the past this correlated with sexual success. This is not necessarily true anymore because of women's tendency to virtue signal. However men are slow to adapt to the current paradigm.
Everyone hates incels because of our misogyny... Why do you think that will change?
None of it is likely. You asked what it would take for society to cease in their preferential treatment of women and disposability of men. I simply replied to that.

It would be like asking what it would take for us to start deep space travel. To which I respond lightspeed travel. Whether it is practical or not is irrelevant.
Fine.
That is exactly what I implied. Are you reading my posts or not?
"You know, the same way groups like politicians and oligarchs slowly erode the rights of the masses in chunks so as to be barely noticeable."

Is this the passage you are suggesting I did not read thoroughly? I though you were stating that men would slowly make steps toward the genocide of women through political maneuvering or something more desperate.
Even if we weren't, it wouldn't matter. Men are hopeless because we don't align together for our interests in regards to women. We don't see them as the 'enemy'.
It is likely that men will isolate themselves deliberately, thus liberating women even further.
 
B

based_meme

I.N.C.E.L. High Command
★★★★★
Joined
Oct 11, 2019
Posts
15,123
Online
195d 6h 23m

:feelspuke:

You know these sites all post garbage articles. No point in wasting time with them.
 
IncelWithHate

IncelWithHate

Frustrated, highinhib wizardcel
★★★
Joined
Jul 16, 2021
Posts
1,290
Online
20d 7h 50m
Fair point but transhumanism will allow us to determine our genetics. Yet ugly people will still emerge as genetics alone does not determine one's appearance.
The main purpose of appearance is to attract mates. So if transhumanism is achieved, how we look likely won't matter.

What do you mean? Aren't they progressive? Women seek men with superior characteristics.
Progressive is regressive when it comes to modern politics and women lol.

Anyways, in terms of genetics women select for the same attributes that were advantageous in an agricultural or even nomadic society. Or inflated instincts that ultimately result in fisherian runaway. Not so much when it comes to an increasingly technological, massively interdependent civilization.

Are you saying that the evolutionary behaviors of women are pernicious to women, at least in its totality?
More in the scope of humankind as a whole.

Right, so you are saying women's selection process is harmful to the interests of women...
Nope, women will reproduce no matter what so there is no real 'greater scope' in regards to women.

Everyone hates incels because of our misogyny... Why do you think that will change?
That's not the reason. How long have you been in incel circles and/or listened to normie rhetoric?

Is this the passage you are suggesting I did not read thoroughly? I though you were stating that men would slowly make steps toward the genocide of women through political maneuvering or something more desperate.


It is likely that men will isolate themselves deliberately, thus liberating women even further.

That's already occurring. However, past a certain point women and greater society will suffer adverse effects from male ambivalence as male labor is necessary for it to function. This is why women shame men for not 'manning up'. They aren't attracted to most men but realize on a subconscious level that male attention is beneficial to them. Which is why they evolved to elicit and manipulate it. Consider how women take advantage of the friend zone and orbiters who they deny sexual access to. Or women's pathological need to invade and colonize male spaces despite having little interest in the activity being hosted.
 
Last edited:
bigantennaemay1

bigantennaemay1

Aspie social drifter without purpose or home
★★★★★
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
13,374
Online
72d 19h 29m
This braindead foid just wrote an entire article trying to explain and justify real-life phenomenon from a TV show. Can it get any more "peak female moment" than this? :foidSoy::foidSoy::foidSoy::feelsseriously::feelsseriously::feelsseriously::feelsseriously:
 
soebre

soebre

Greycel
Joined
Oct 24, 2021
Posts
61
Online
1d 12h 5m
I go to therapy and I'm not like that. Except I can't cook
 
PurgatoryPass

PurgatoryPass

Greycel
Joined
Jul 15, 2022
Posts
75
Online
1d 15h 53m
It's really hard to read through all this when you know where its going. Basically living strawmen. They don't feel humiliated taking up that role because they aren't really incels.
 
Treebarkquartz

Treebarkquartz

Officer
Joined
Sep 29, 2021
Posts
586
Online
9d 14h 42m
I can actually believe there are chad/normie lite man-children.
 
MarquisDeSade

MarquisDeSade

Mephistopheles
★★★★★
Joined
Feb 11, 2021
Posts
11,852
Online
126d 18h 59m
"Love is blind." Bullshit if I ever heard anything, don't need Netflix [Cuckflix] to tell me otherwise. :feelsjuice:
 
Schizoidcel

Schizoidcel

     
★★★★★
Joined
Feb 11, 2018
Posts
4,498
Online
21d 33m
I can actually believe there are chad/normie lite man-children.
Man-childism is "cute" when he's NT darktriad Chadriguez :feelsPop:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LQ4RaiaKCQ

If you have supreme genetics (dictated by lookist/materialistic/hedonistic soyciety) they will give you infinitely more chances before they let you rot in streets (fisherian runaway)

Same as a "homeless" woman on the streets alone, how long does it take for a rich man to save her? Maybe a few minutes if she's above a 6 facially and not morbidly obese.
 
Last edited:
Hoppipolla

Hoppipolla

hop on jj2
★★★★★
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Posts
2,920
Online
53d 14h 54m
Goodness it didn't take that article long to get stuck into the misandry did it? lol

It came out of nowhere!
 

Similar threads

Reclusemaxxer
Replies
15
Views
659
Destined Virgin
Destined Virgin
DepravedAndDeprived
Replies
10
Views
768
bigantennaemay1
bigantennaemay1
InMemoriam
Replies
1
Views
316
AsgardTheFatcel
AsgardTheFatcel
ThisLifeKillsMe
Replies
8
Views
354
ilieknothing
ilieknothing
shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape7
shape8
Top