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.

Hypocrisy Normies logic on philosophers, scientists and inventors who were misogynysts

Yabadadabadoo

Yabadadabadoo

Total manlet uprsising
Joined
Feb 4, 2025
Posts
4,078
"Oh, you were one of the most intelligent minds in the history of humanity that contributed to several changes in the way we live nowadays, I will base my entire personality on your ideas for the next month.

Nonetheless, I will ignore completely your views on women. Yes, I agree with you in everything else but don't touch my KWEENS!

I don't care about how smart you proved to be. Regarding foids you are completely wrong bro!"

JFL
 
They become atheist so they can give away their pussy for chad or be a faggot, but still CRAVE religion.

Foids became the god of their new leftist religion.

Foids [father]
tranny [son]
faggs [holy ghost]
 

Almost every important philosopher was incelish
 
Robert Briffault was right when he came up with Briffault's Law as it applies equally to human males and females as it does with any other animal in the animal kingdom.



However, I doubt any of this is conscious on the part of women, but instinctive behavior.
 
Last edited:
"Nooo saar they were just products of their time!"
1750540682318
 
One of the biggest contradictions I find in normie rhetoric is that when ancient thinkers are brought up, their biographies often detail how their ideas were (mostly) against their era and the prevailing dogmatism. But when you mention these thinkers' opinions on women, they usually excuse it by saying "they were products of their time" and that you can't reproach a thinker from centuries ago for anything "morally incorrect." This sounds extremely contradictory; meaning, these thinkers were intelligent enough to go against the ideas of their time but not intelligent enough to have a good opinion of women. Normies are incapable of considering that perhaps these thinkers genuinely believed women were inferior and weren't simply following the popular opinion of their time
 
One of the biggest contradictions I find in normie rhetoric is that when ancient thinkers are brought up, their biographies often detail how their ideas were (mostly) against their era and the prevailing dogmatism. But when you mention these thinkers' opinions on women, they usually excuse it by saying "they were products of their time" and that you can't reproach a thinker from centuries ago for anything "morally incorrect." This sounds extremely contradictory; meaning, these thinkers were intelligent enough to go against the ideas of their time but not intelligent enough to have a good opinion of women. Normies are incapable of considering that perhaps these thinkers genuinely believed women were inferior and weren't simply following the popular opinion of their time
You're making a bold assumption that normies actually care about the truth
 
Any smart man will grow to resent women and non-whites over time. It's just how the world works.
 
Normies love dead philosophers only when they're neutered and sanitized. They want Schopenhauer without his essay On Women, Darwin without sexual selection. Cherry-picking to maintain their gynocentric reality. They can’t handle full intellectual honesty.
 
The logic holds up though, you can be smart in one aspect and completely wrong in another
 
The logic holds up though, you can be smart in one aspect and completely wrong in another
But all of them are wrong? 109 of the greatest philosophers r/itjustsohappens they’re wrong on foids JFL
 

Similar threads

Manlet_cel
Replies
12
Views
626
BricABrac
BricABrac
Kamanbert
Replies
24
Views
684
glutty
glutty
Just say NIGGER!
Replies
4
Views
580
Just say NIGGER!
Just say NIGGER!

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top