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.

LifeFuel None of you are subhumans

cunnysseur

cunnysseur

feed me cunny
-
Joined
Dec 23, 2025
Posts
43
except pajeets.
Until the last century roasties were commodities passed around and bough for a few shekels, i didnt matter if you were a few mm recessed, manlet or balding. You were the prize and they the property. Even before we enslave and sissified ourselves with civilization, rape was the law of man, vaginas were worthless and exposed to any incel with the strength to grab em and slam their dirty unwashed penis inside them. But with civilization came gynocentric laws that criminalized rape something that is practiced by all animals in order to elevate the value of pussy and tie the men down to serve worthless holes.
Nothing wrong with us is the Soystem that is the problem.
 
Cope, i am subhuman
 
1000007556
 
except pajeets.
Until the last century roasties were commodities passed around and bough for a few shekels, i didnt matter if you were a few mm recessed, manlet or balding. You were the prize and they the property. Even before we enslave and sissified ourselves with civilization, rape was the law of man, vaginas were worthless and exposed to any incel with the strength to grab em and slam their dirty unwashed penis inside them. But with civilization came gynocentric laws that criminalized rape something that is practiced by all animals in order to elevate the value of pussy and tie the men down to serve worthless holes.
Nothing wrong with us is the Soystem that is the problem.
Pajeets are 50% of this forum though.
 
There is no such thing as a "White incel."
 
You're partly right, but not entirely. We simply need a mechanism to counterbalance female hypergamy.It used to be natural, but now hypergamy is systematically allowed to increase.
 
You're partly right, but not entirely. We simply need a mechanism to counterbalance female hypergamy.It used to be natural, but now hypergamy is systematically allowed to increase.
Nothing natural about hypergamy mother cults died thousands of years ago
 
Until the last century roasties were commodities passed around and bough for a few shekels, i didnt matter if you were a few mm recessed, manlet or balding. You were the prize and they the property.
Anti-male feminist delusions way too many men wholeheartedly believe due to internalized misandry and pro-female bias. Foids were never oppressed in any real way.

Even before we enslave and sissified ourselves with civilization, rape was the law of man, vaginas were worthless and exposed to any incel with the strength to grab em and slam their dirty unwashed penis inside them. But with civilization came gynocentric laws that criminalized rape something that is practiced by all animals in order to elevate the value of pussy and tie the men down to serve worthless holes.
Maybe, but in that case we are talking about millenia, not a single century. Male-on-female rape is one of the most consistently illegal and punished acts in history, being punishable by death or financial ruin even in the earliest legal codes.
 
I am correct.
The same argument can be made for ethnics although. If you can't get any sex then you are an incel, where your current choices have to overpower your innate inceldom/celibacy. Do you really think that would be needed for non-incels.
 
Anti-male feminist delusions way too many men wholeheartedly believe due to internalized misandry and pro-female bias. Foids were never oppressed in any real way.


Maybe, but in that case we are talking about millenia, not a single century. Male-on-female rape is one of the most consistently illegal and punished acts in history, being punishable by death or financial ruin even in the earliest legal codes.
Rape became punishable when gynocentric christcucks came in power, most men had hard lives historically but roasties were the property of their husbands or fathers.
 
you are a jeet and you are blathering atm
 
whose alt is this? :soy:
 
Even before we enslave and sissified ourselves with civilization, rape was the law of man,
Civilization was build upon seizing means of reproductions boyo. Besides first ancient revolution, states like rome were found upon rape. Raptae Sabinae predicted its glory.
 
Civilization was build upon seizing means of reproductions boyo. Besides first ancient revolution, states like rome were found upon rape. Raptae Sabinae predicted its glory.
Carpe cunnyium buddy boyo
 
I am the only white man on this site from what it seems
rape is a crime all the way back to the fucking hammurabi laws so all you said is just some pajeet caca
 
rape is a crime all the way back to the fucking hammurabi laws so all you said is just some pajeet caca
Are you mentally challenged, read my post again all civilizations had anti rape laws to protect their property
 
Are you mentally challenged, read my post again all civilizations had anti rape laws to protect their property
bro is returning to the fucking primordial soup to solve his inceldom
 
bro is returning to the fucking primordial soup to solve his inceldom
He is right. Prechristian laws against grape were to protect property, either husband's or father's, not foids as such. Even goddesses worshiped in antiquity were praised as protectors of property, like deities guarding stock.
 
bro is returning to the fucking primordial soup to solve his inceldom
All barbarians raped all nomadic tribes raped, all pastoral tribes raped, vikings raped, romans raped before they formed the republic, all aristocrats raped, you are just sub 80 iq mongoloid.
 
Rape became punishable when gynocentric christcucks came in power
It was punishable way before Christianity even existed, as @turbocuckcel_7000 pointed out.

roasties were the property of their husbands or fathers.
That's mostly a feminist myth. Women had male guardians in many cultures, but the terms of that varied widely, it was basically never them being treated like property as slaves or other social inferiors were, and had mostly minimal impact on women's lives, if not being worse for men than it was for women as gender roles often are in general.

Are you mentally challenged, read my post again all civilizations had anti rape laws to protect their property
He is right. Prechristian laws against grape were to protect property, either husband or father, not foids as such. Even goddesses worshiped in antiquity were praised as protectors of property, like deities guarding stock.
Maybe, but that wouldn't really mean anything for the guy who was executed for it, would it:feelshaha:.
 
It was punishable way before Christianity even existed, as @turbocuckcel_7000 pointed out.


That's mostly a feminist myth. Women had male guardians in many cultures, but the terms of that varied widely, it was basically never them being treated like property as slaves or other social inferiors were, and had mostly minimal impact on women's lives, if not being worse for men than it was for women as gender roles often are in general.



Maybe, but that wouldn't really mean anything for the guy who was executed for it, would it:feelshaha:.
Read my post above yours, most of you incels are not historically well versed.
 
All barbarians raped all nomadic tribes raped, all pastoral tribes raped, vikings raped, romans raped before they formed the republic, all aristocrats raped, you are just sub 80 iq mongoloid.
so, ancient times that you know anything about and could not even begin to imagine, unless you lived in some rape jeet capital like india.

the only sub 80 iq mongoloid is you, as you keep demonstrating.
 
That's mostly a feminist myth. Women had male guardians in many cultures, but the terms of that varied widely, it was basically never them being treated like property as slaves or other social inferiors were, and had mostly minimal impact on women's lives, if not being worse for men than it was for women as gender roles often are in general.
Tbh in Rome pater familias hold kids as property, including daughters; i'm unsure of wive status though. Classic antiquity was more nuanced and laws were very different in other Polis. But in Homer's times they were asset. Trojan war was caused by stealth. I suppose that Assyrian temple prostitution, where also nonchads attended, wasn't voluntary :feelshaha: Bachofen was very wrong and his state of heterism is refuted by blackpill.
 
Last edited:
so, ancient times that you know anything about and could not even begin to imagine, unless you lived in some rape jeet capital like india.

the only sub 80 iq mongoloid is you, as you keep demonstrating.
You seem triggered are you a redditor cuck or a roasty ? I see no other reason for rape to make you so sensitive
 
You seem triggered are you a redditor cuck or a roasty ? I see no other reason for rape to make you so sensitive

He has always been a whiny, oversensitive bitch.
 
Read my post above yours, most of you incels are not historically well versed.
All barbarians raped all nomadic tribes raped, all pastoral tribes raped, vikings raped, romans raped before they formed the republic, all aristocrats raped, you are just sub 80 iq mongoloid.
I'm not denying any of that, I'm just pointing out that when it happened, it was seen as undesirable behaviour that was legally punishable.

Tbh in Rome pater familias hold kids as property, including daughters; i'm unsure of wive status though.
Wives mostly remained under their fathers' authority I believe. Apparently, the Romans had a few different types of marriage arrangements, and although women could go from their fathers' authority to their husbands' one, that would be mostly among patricians, and uncommon even among them even before the switch from the Republic to the Empire. Considering that they would be living seperately and that most demographic estimates say that only half of Romans who made it past childhood would live to 40, meaning that most people in their 30s would already be fatherless, it's anyone's guess how much power Roman fathers could actually exercise over their daughters past their childhood.

Apart from that, children were equally the father's assets. If an explicit Will wasn't written, Roman law treated all of a man's children as his equal inheritors, regardless of gender or age order, and even the few Wills we do have are split between treating all children equally and privileging the first-born son. Along with those Wills and also mostly from Roman Egypt, we have court records concerning them and the division of property, with disputes between siblings being a majority of them.

And of course, there were no known restrictions on women's freedom of movement and ability to travel, with even historians coping by shit like "Well, nobody would stop them, but they simply wouldn't move around anyway because it would be too dangerous:soy::foidSoy:."

Classic antiquity was more nuanced and laws were very different in other Polis.
Yes, with Sparta usually being seen as being on one end and Athens on the other.

But in Homer's times they were asset. Trojan war was caused by stealth.
Fair enough.

I suppose that Assyrian temple prostitution, where also nonchads attended, wasn't voluntary :feelshaha:
Just checked this out. Literal laws mandating that foids have sex. The tutorial mode never ends lmao:feelskek::feelsUnreal:.

Bachofen was very wrong and his state of heterism is refuted by blackpill.
No contest there.
 
I'm effectively not human and never will be.
 
except pajeets.
Until the last century roasties were commodities passed around and bough for a few shekels, i didnt matter if you were a few mm recessed, manlet or balding. You were the prize and they the property. Even before we enslave and sissified ourselves with civilization, rape was the law of man, vaginas were worthless and exposed to any incel with the strength to grab em and slam their dirty unwashed penis inside them. But with civilization came gynocentric laws that criminalized rape something that is practiced by all animals in order to elevate the value of pussy and tie the men down to serve worthless holes.
Nothing wrong with us is the Soystem that is the problem.
Yes I agree, everybody is subhuman when the standard is 1% of the population but in nature most of us would be considered high ranking because of our inherent being and our capabilities, we could kill animals easy and follow the law of man
 
At my height im not even a human. And when was this time exactly? Im really curious.
 

Similar threads

SlayerSlayer
Replies
34
Views
950
nazianime
nazianime
vco
Replies
18
Views
881
ultraincelmega
ultraincelmega
chris spinefcked
Replies
12
Views
408
z_ro
z_ro
RealSchizo
Replies
4
Views
432
Cryo
Cryo

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top