Discussion Paradoxically, if you think some men deserve to be lonely, then you are also implying that some people deserve sex and relationships

[Celsior]

I’m seeing a lot of anti-incel counterarguments that incels “deserve” to be lonely made by the exact same people who often tell you: you’re not entitled to sex. I have one word for this:

The idea of ‘deserving’ sex renders it as some sort of reward or accomplishment, so given that logic alone, by using the word ‘deserve’ with all its intended connotations, you are suggesting that you view sex as something that must be earned, which means that not only you are, on a subconscious level, seeing it as a symbol of status, power, and happiness, but you are also suggesting that some people are fully entitled to it, because the lack of it is somehow justifiable to you.

Besides, nobody gets to be the judge of who has sex and who doesn’t based on his or her own arbitrary and (more often than not) politically motivated reasons. That’s up to Mother Nature and the quality of your genetics to decide.

So to any and all r/inceltear troons reading this: if you believe that some people deserve to be incels, then you also MUST believe that some people DESERVE and ARE entitled to foids and sex, otherwise, you are being objectively contradictory and disingenuous (as per usual).

 

[BOLLYWOOD BONKLER]

 

[Balding Subhuman]

Well, practically none of their arguments hold any water. If its our personalities that are the problem, then why do psychopaths, serial killers, narcs etc find women who are attracted to them?

Its almost as if normie retards believe that women have sex only with the most moral men, and the men with bad personalities are just left out of the equation. As if. If anything its the complete opposite as studies have shown that (male) bullies have more sex.

I'd go as far as to say that if some particular man is actually popular with foids, then that guy must be asshole selfish prick on some level.

 

[Celsior]

Well, practically none of their arguments hold any water. If its our personalities that are the problem, then why do psychopaths, serial killers, narcs etc find women who are attracted to them?

I remember the day they doubled down on their definitions and went full mask off. The topic was about how serial killers are still capable of pulling foids (honestly, they should continue staying away from this, seeing as how easily they tend to crack when they touch subjects like this), and they outright admitted that good personality ≠ charming attitude (that attracts foids), something that we’ve been saying for how fucking long now? And they weren’t even self-aware enough to realize that they were vindicating us.

If they believed and finally admitted to the fact that the true scum of earth, serial killers, sociopaths, murderers, etc. can and will fuck roasties left and right then seriously, what the fuck is their point then? Why are they suddenly backpeddling?

They’re making fun of incels… for not being… charismatic enough? Wait, what?



I thought the whole “purpose” of their sub was to “make fun of” incels for having le bad personalities i.e., being misogynistic and le hecking evil beings who don’t “deserve” sex. If truly evil scumbags who kill women can still have sex with them, according to their own logic now apparently, then what exactly makes incels unworthy of sex again?

Troon logic never ceases to amaze me, truly.

 

[Balding Subhuman]

I thought the whole “purpose” of their sub was to “make fun of” incels for having le bad personalities i.e., being misogynistic and le hecking evil beings who don’t “deserve” sex. If truly evil scumbags who kill women can still have sex with them, according to their own logic now apparently, then what exactly makes incels unworthy of sex again?

They'll never admit that the point of the whole subreddit is to mock lonely and ugly virgin men. Its just that mocking someone for being a virgin isn't politically correct so they have to make fun of strawman "incel" arguments instead of directly targeting virgins, as it would be too obvious

 

[Celsior]

They'll never admit that the point of the whole subreddit is to mock lonely and ugly virgin men.

It’s just “revenge porn/fantasy” for troons and obese roasties. It’s their way of “getting back at” straight men who found one thing that’s made them dissatisfied in life. I mean, the sub is politically charged to its crooked fucking teeth, just like Reddit itself. Why do you think so many faggots inhabit it?

 

[reveries]

Its almost as if normie retards believe that women have sex only with the most moral men

It's this tbh. They don't understand that foids don't use their cunts as a reward for the most moral and honest men of the year lmao (like some Santa Clause shit), they use it to gain pleasure, and that's it. They simply fuck with whoever gives them stomach butterflies, and it's usually not moral, honest and smart men.

 

[Lux]

Sex will always be a reward, a prize, a great result, even if most males have it with ease, plis something to be proud of getting

Otherwise using virgin as insult/shaming/mockery and cheering that certain men are incels would not be a thing