Hypocrisy Power imbalance? Bullshit!

[Simba]

Lets pretend that ’power imbalance‘ is for real for a few minutes.

Agecucks say a 37 year old shouldn’t be finding 16 year olds attractive because of muh power imbalance because muh teenagers are immature which is illogical because what if the 37 year old is immature too and has a brain age lower than his actual age, where is the power imbalance in that?

I find the whole concept of power imbalance retarded but just to go by the retarded agecuck concept, if we’re going to get upset about muh power imbalance due to age gaps then what about brain age, shouldn’t it be ok for an immature 50 year old to be attracted to an immature 16 year old since they are both the same brain age?

There should be nothing wrong with a mature 43 year old finding a mature 16 year old attractive because they are both the same brain age, there can’t be any ‘power imbalance‘ in both scenarios I mentioned.

I don’t believe in any of the power imbalance nonsense but it would be much fucking better if agecucks could just start talking about brain age rather than real age because they are fucking hypocrites and it makes me feel enraged.

Holy cow, agecucks are so retarded!

Never forget, teenagers aren’t kids, they are teenagers, you low IQ cucks, it’s in the name!

 

[verybasedindeed]

Women prefer taller men (power imbalance in stature).

Women prefer stronger men (power imbalance in muscularity).

Women prefer men that make more money (power imbalance in finance).

Women prefer men that are more handsome (power imbalance in aesthetics).

Men prefer women that are younger ("That's pedophilia. That's power imbalance. Arrest him." )

 

[FrothySolutions]

If you're 50 years old with the mental state of a teenager, that's a mental deficiency. It's not normal for 50 year olds to be like that, it should be fixed somehow, not facilitated.

 

[Simba]

If you're 50 years old with the mental state of a teenager, that's a mental deficiency. It's not normal for 50 year olds to be like that, it should be fixed somehow, not facilitated.

It was a hyperbole ig.

 

[FrothySolutions]

It was a hyperbole ig.

If you're 40 with the mind of a 16 year old, that's also bad. Or 30. You're not supposed to be in such a juvenile state of development that you could be compared to a teenager. Unless you're a teenager.

 

[Butter Dawg]

All men can rape women so there’s a power imbalance there but no one cares.

 

[asdfghjqbbbb]

Lets pretend that ’power imbalance‘ is for real for a few minutes.

Agecucks say a 37 year old shouldn’t be finding 16 year olds attractive because of muh power imbalance because muh teenagers are immature which is illogical because what if the 37 year old is immature too and has a brain age lower than his actual age, where is the power imbalance in that?

I find the whole concept of power imbalance retarded but just to go by the retarded agecuck concept, if we’re going to get upset about muh power imbalance due to age gaps then what about brain age, shouldn’t it be ok for an immature 50 year old to be attracted to an immature 16 year old since they are both the same brain age?

There should be nothing wrong with a mature 43 year old finding a mature 16 year old attractive because they are both the same brain age, there can’t be any ‘power imbalance‘ in both scenarios I mentioned.

I don’t believe in any of the power imbalance nonsense but it would be much fucking better if agecucks could just start talking about brain age rather than real age because they are fucking hypocrites and it makes me feel enraged.

Holy cow, agecucks are so retarded!

Never forget, teenagers aren’t kids, they are teenagers, you low IQ cucks, it’s in the name!

childhood ends when puberty starts

 

[Mainländer]

Women prefer taller men (power imbalance in stature).

Women prefer stronger men (power imbalance in muscularity).

Women prefer men that make more money (power imbalance in finance).

Women prefer men that are more handsome (power imbalance in aesthetics).

Men prefer women that are younger ("That's pedophilia. That's power imbalance. Arrest him." )

As usual, all instances of something that benefit or cater to women are acceptable, but the one which caters to men is considered a heinous crime.

Also, remember when I thoroughly refuted the concept of "power imbalance" back in the day? (I do at least )

 

[verybasedindeed]

As usual, all instances of something that benefit or cater to women are acceptable, but the one which caters to men is considered a heinous crime.

Also, remember when I thoroughly refuted the concept of "power imbalance" back in the day? (I do at least )

I remember the post in question. Solid arguments. I had never thought of consent that way prior to your post. I also like that thread of yours where you refute the idea of hypergamy being some kind of eugenics.

 

[Mainländer]

If you're 40 with the mind of a 16 year old, that's also bad. Or 30. You're not supposed to be in such a juvenile state of development that you could be compared to a teenager. Unless you're a teenager.

Foids are not supposed to be attracted to criminals and Chads who pump and dump them either, but they are + have full freedom to pursue these self-destructive and evil attractions.

Then, some guy wants to date a teenager and people will come up with whatever bullshit to say he can't (even try).

That's gynocentrism, pure and simple.

 

[Mainländer]

I had never thought of consent that way prior to your post.

The thing about the whole "consent" thing is that I actually stopped and thought about it and realized it makes no sense whatsoever. It's not simply about me not liking feminists and/or agecucks cockblocking me or me liking teens or whatever, shit just makes no sense and it's kinda strange that I seem to be the first person to notice it, or at least to say it.

If people below a certain arbitrary age can't consent, that means everything everyone does to them is non-consensual. Which, if we consider actual small children, is kinda obvious. The adult is the one choosing everything about the child's life - what and when they eat, where they go/stay. What they dress, when they go to sleep, etc.

So it's clearly not a matter of consent. The true issue is whether or not something is good for the minor. It's useless to talk about consent. If a person is blind, for instance, it's useless to keep numbering all the things they can't see. You just accept they can't see and don't talk about it anymore.

People accept a mother dressing a little kid or sending them to school or kindergarten or whatever because they perceive these things as good, not because they think the child consented to them (in the case of school, many children will actually openly say they don't want to go to that shit, I was one of them).

Likewise, marrying young to an upright man is objectively good for women. All major religions agree, data agrees. so what's even the difference?

Also I'm glad there were people like you and @cutthroat who were able to read what I wrote about those things and actually get it. We who can think logically about such stuff are a minority, but it feels good not to be completely alone there

 

[Incel TV]

They don’t even think 18 and 19 year olds are adults either if agecucks had it their way the age of cucksent would be 25

 

[Mainländer]

cucksent

Damn, I feel bad for never having thought of that. Probably the best incelspeak word ever.

 

[verybasedindeed]

Also I'm glad there were people like you and @cutthroat who were able to read what I wrote about those things and actually get it. We who can think logically about such stuff are a minority, but it feels good not to be completely alone there

Likewise. We are united against clown world.

 

[BlueCore]

Women prefer taller men (power imbalance in stature).

Women prefer stronger men (power imbalance in muscularity).

Women prefer men that make more money (power imbalance in finance).

Women prefer men that are more handsome (power imbalance in aesthetics).

Men prefer women that are younger ("That's pedophilia. That's power imbalance. Arrest him." )

 

[Simba]

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTears/comments/18fypnj/comment/kczc8y3/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

How can power imbalance exist then?

 

[StefiBeaLipton]

IT will touch you.

 

[basedcel1_]

Female brain mature faster than male brain so in all teenage relationships female are pedos

 

[FrothySolutions]

Foids are not supposed to be attracted to criminals and Chads who pump and dump them either, but they are + have full freedom to pursue these self-destructive and evil attractions.

Then, some guy wants to date a teenager and people will come up with whatever bullshit to say he can't (even try).

That's gynocentrism, pure and simple.

Because that hurts them. You can't blame the victim.

 

[Mainländer]

Because that hurts them. You can't blame the victim.

What hurts who? That wasn't clear tbh.

 

[Simba]

All men can rape women so there’s a power imbalance there but no one cares.

Ya, that is an excellent point. Men are physically stronger than the average foid.

 

[CobsonCel]

Because that hurts them. You can't blame the victim.

since when you care about foids being hurt.Fakecel.is? What?

 

[FrothySolutions]

What hurts who? That wasn't clear tbh.

Having the kind of illness that attracts you to violent people makes you the victim of the illness.

Having the kind of illness that puts you on equal mental footing as children makes the children the victims.

 

[Mainländer]

Having the kind of illness that attracts you to violent people makes you the victim of the illness.

You're still rewarding insanely immoral behavior with love and sex, which is something that should be punished. Having a mental illness can get you to some mental institution instead of jail, but still, it should get some punishment.

For instance, the main argument for simple possession of CP being criminalized is that, although you're not the one having the sex with the minors, producing it or even financing it, you somehow, magically, contribute to it being made by looking at it (even if the people who made it don't even have a way to know you're doing it, JFL).

Meanwhile, women ACTIVELY incentivize violent criminal activity by showering such violent criminals with love and sex and get no punishment at all for it.

Having the kind of illness that puts you on equal mental footing as children makes the children the victims.

1. no one said anything about children, the thread has been about teens for the beginning

2. prove that relationships between adults and teenagers are always damaging to the latter. I've never seen any proof of it, and yes, I did read studies which attempted to prove it but ended up just extrapolating results from small children being abused in multiple ways to "any minor gets traumatized by anysexual contact with any adult", which is a complete non sequitur.

 

[Simba]

You're still rewarding insanely immoral behavior with love and sex, which is something that should be punished. Having a mental illness can get you to some mental institution instead of jail, but still, it should get some punishment.

For instance, the main argument for simple possession of CP being criminalized is that, although you're not the one having the sex with the minors, producing it or even financing it, you somehow, magically, contribute to it being made by looking at it (even if the people who made it don't even have a way to know you're doing it, JFL).

Meanwhile, women ACTIVELY incentivize violent criminal activity by showering such violent criminals with love and sex and get no punishment at all for it.


1. no one said anything about children, the thread has been about teens for the beginning

2. prove that relationships between adults and teenagers are always damaging to the latter. I've never seen any proof of it, and yes, I did read studies which attempted to prove it but ended up just extrapolating results from small children being abused in multiple ways to "any minor gets traumatized by anysexual contact with any adult", which is a complete non sequitur.

It’s all just feminist brainwashing, pal.

 

[Nig nog pilled]

If you're 50 years old with the mental state of a teenager, that's a mental deficiency. It's not normal for 50 year olds to be like that, it should be fixed somehow, not facilitated.

 

[Mainländer]

It’s all just feminist brainwashing, pal.

I know, still curious to see how he's gonna argue in favor of such nonsensical status quo feminist opinions though.

 

[FrothySolutions]

You're still rewarding insanely immoral behavior with love and sex, which is something that should be punished. Having a mental illness can get you to some mental institution instead of jail, but still, it should get some punishment.

For instance, the main argument for simple possession of CP being criminalized is that, although you're not the one having the sex with the minors, producing it or even financing it, you somehow, magically, contribute to it being made by looking at it (even if the people who made it don't even have a way to know you're doing it, JFL).

Meanwhile, women ACTIVELY incentivize violent criminal activity by showering such violent criminals with love and sex and get no punishment at all for it.

But they are the victims of the crime. That's like punishing the child porn star for contributing to the existence of child pornography. It's not the child's fault, the child was taken advantage of by the adult. And women who are attracted to criminals are taken advantage of by criminals. It's the criminal's obligation to not be a criminal, same as how it's the burglar's obligation to not burgle. Even if I don't lock my doors, even if I wave cash around, the onus is on the criminal.

1. no one said anything about children, the thread has been about teens for the beginning

2. prove that relationships between adults and teenagers are always damaging to the latter. I've never seen any proof of it, and yes, I did read studies which attempted to prove it but ended up just extrapolating results from small children being abused in multiple ways to "any minor gets traumatized by anysexual contact with any adult", which is a complete non sequitur.

1. I mean minors. I don't do the "Well she's pubescent, so..." thing.

2. The damage is in that children are not mentally mature enough for adult relationships or adult materials. Crippling trauma isn't the end-all and be-all of how you can fuck a kid up with sex. Just because the kid grows up to be a "functioning" adult doesn't mean they're "healthy." This is why so many boys who watch porn grow up to be fucked up.

 

[Mainländer]

But they are the victims of the crime.

I was talking about hybristophiliacs who choose to act on their attraction towards criminals. Although they commonly end up killed by such criminals, it isn't always the case.

That's like punishing the child porn star for contributing to the existence of child pornography. It's not the child's fault, the child was taken advantage of by the adult.

I'm not knowledgeable about CP production, kek, but I'm kinda sure many of the children who participate in such movies are ACTUALLY forced to do so, unlike a person who has an attraction and chooses to act on it although it's immoral (practicing hybristophiliacs).

And women who are attracted to criminals are taken advantage of by criminals. It's the criminal's obligation to not be a criminal, same as how it's the burglar's obligation to not burgle. Even if I don't lock my doors, even if I wave cash around, the onus is on the criminal.

Why can't the criminal be a victim of his mental illness as well? Maybe he's so far gone in his mental illness he can't help but to commit crimes.

Notice your way of thinking: women and "children" (18 and under) are always the poor manipulated victims, while men always know better no matter what. Even if it's some retarded emotionally arrested guy, you'll still spin things so that he is always someone who must be punished or at least treated, whereas women and minors can do no wrong and don't need any treatment (hybristophiliacs).

1. I mean minors. I don't do the "Well she's pubescent, so..." thing.

Then say "minors". Saying "children" is, at best, innacurate, and at worst, dishonest since that word will evoke the image of an actual small kid in most people's minds, not of some 17 yo sexually experienced slut.

2. The damage is in that children are not mentally mature enough for adult relationships or adult materials.

Again, proof? I'll even concede actual children to you (although still debatable, but sadly there's no real freedom of speech about that topic even here, and I don't want to end up like @DeepSea , so nevermind that) , but I assume you mean "minors" again there, so let's focus on teens.

Crippling trauma isn't the end-all and be-all of how you can fuck a kid up with sex. Just because the kid grows up to be a "functioning" adult doesn't mean they're "healthy." This is why so many boys who watch porn grow up to be fucked up.

So it's basically what I said in this thread.

It's not the people who claim all sexual/romantic interactions between teens and adults (which happened for millenia, creating a plethora of successful marriages) cause trauma that have to provide proof of such claim; the claim is already assumed as true to begin with and even if no evidence at all of such claim is found, well, "it must be somewhere!".

So much for the scientific method, huh?

 

[FrothySolutions]

I was talking about hybristophiliacs who choose to act on their attraction towards criminals. Although they commonly end up killed by such criminals, it isn't always the case.

Yes, they are victims of the crime. The criminals take advantage of these kids' attraction to dangerous people and situations. And the kids end up hurt for it.

I'm not knowledgeable about CP production, kek, but I'm kinda sure many of the children who participate in such movies are ACTUALLY forced to do so, unlike a person who has an attraction and chooses to act on it although it's immoral (practicing hybristophiliacs).

Not always, and I would wager it very rarely goes down that way. Guy here named @Doug was nukebanned because he posted CP. I saw it before I reported him. The children "looked" happy. Because CP is not made with night abductions and basement torture most of the time. It's made by sick people who manipulate trust.

Why can't the criminal be a victim of his mental illness as well? Maybe he's so far gone in his mental illness he can't help but to commit crimes.

Notice your way of thinking: women and "children" (18 and under) are always the poor manipulated victims, while men always know better no matter what. Even if it's some retarded emotionally arrested guy, you'll still spin things so that he is always someone who must be punished or at least treated, whereas women and minors can do no wrong and don't need any treatment (hybristophiliacs).

I never said men couldn't be victims. Bad women take advantage of naive men all the time. That's a power imbalance. And none of us here would excuse that woman's crimes with "But she can't help being a piece of shit." Because the crime here is using your power on the weak for evil.

Then say "minors". Saying "children" is, at best, innacurate, and at worst, dishonest since that word will evoke the image of an actual small kid in most people's minds, not of some 17 yo sexually experienced slut.

It's not dishonest, and I defy that it's inaccurate because this is how people talk in the real world. Only creeps distinguish with "But she was pubescent." If you touch someone under the age of consent, you're a pedophile in the real world. Only the weirdos are making differentiations like "ephebophile."

Again, proof? I'll even concede actual children to you (although still debatable, but sadly there's no real freedom of speech about that topic even here, and I don't want to end up like @DeepSea , so nevermind that) , but I assume you mean "minors" again there, so let's focus on teens.


So it's basically what I said in this thread.

It's not the people who claim all sexual/romantic interactions between teens and adults (which happened for millenia, creating a plethora of successful marriages) cause trauma that have to provide proof of such claim; the claim is already assumed as true to begin with and even if no evidence at all of such claim is found, well, "it must be somewhere!".

So much for the scientific method, huh?

Yes, you can be fucked up but not be aware of it, or even glad in it. Drug addicts love their drugs, but our standards for what's "healthy" don't care how good the drugs make you feel. Or how much you love degeneracy thanks to being exposed to it at a young age.

And these "successful marriages" you speak of, how was the power balance then? I think you've said before that you find no problem with women being subservient subordinates to men, but that's unhealthy by our current standards. It's not fair to the woman. That's specifically the kind of power imbalance we mean to avoid this time around because partners are supposed to not just be capable of healthy adult living, but equals in healthy adult living.

 

[Mainländer]

Yes, they are victims of the crime. The criminals take advantage of these kids' attraction to dangerous people and situations. And the kids end up hurt for it.

Kids? I'm talking about women in general with the hybristophilia thing. It was an example of women encouraging crimes and not getting punished for it.

I never said men couldn't be victims. Bad women take advantage of naive men all the time. That's a power imbalance. And none of us here would excuse that woman's crimes with "But she can't help being a piece of shit." Because the crime here is using your power on the weak for evil.

Would you agree that a hybristophiliac woman (adult, let's make things easier for you, kek) who rewards a mass murderer with sex and love should receive some kind of punishment or at least be forwarded to a mental institution of some kind?

It's not dishonest, and I defy that it's inaccurate because this is how people talk in the real world. Only creeps distinguish with "But she was pubescent." If you touch someone under the age of consent, you're a pedophile in the real world. Only the weirdos are making differentiations like "ephebophile."

That's just an authority argument. Some feminist bureaucrat wrote on a piece of paper that 17 year olds are considered children in the US and other cucked places. Is it based in actual biology? Not at all.

The people who make the pertinent division between prepubescents and postpubescents are backed by actual biology and not just some arbitrary, local, cultural whim of the moment.

Also "creeps" and "weirdos" are just empty insults based off nowadays feminist culture's perception. There's nothing weird about being sexually atracted to a person who not only is fertile but on the prime of their youth.

Yes, you can be fucked up but not be aware of it, or even glad in it. Drug addicts love their drugs, but our standards for what's "healthy" don't care how good the drugs make you feel. Or how much you love degeneracy thanks to being exposed to it at a young age.

The effects of drugs are tangible though. As for the supposed negative effects of teenage x adult relationships, even if none appears at all, agecucks like you will still claim that they absolutely have to exist to match your feminist garbage of an ideology.

And these "successful marriages" you speak of, how was the power balance then?

Who cares. They worked, unlike modern marriage which is a joke and generates tons of dysfunction. People back then married young, stayed married and raised strong, functional men, not male feminists like you.

I think you've said before that you find no problem with women being subservient subordinates to men, but that's unhealthy by our current standards.

Who set such standards? Some feminist, some politician trying to appeal to feminists. It's not based on science, biology, data. It's based on an ideology, and an extremely shitty one at that, which only brings about dysfunction, misery and things like our (assuming you're incel) inceldom (feminism).

It's not fair to the woman.

Yeah, men have to build and maintain everything that matters in society, have to give their lives to protect women and children when shit hits the fan, but how dare men say women should fulfill their part and marry, stay married, be faithful to (these are also men's part btw) and obey the damn husband and take proper care of children. Really unfair

That's specifically the kind of power imbalance we mean to avoid this time around because partners are supposed to not just be capable of healthy adult living, but equals in healthy adult living.

Men and women are not equals. You believe they are because you're a delusional male feminist. You've been poisoned by a shitty ideology.

Also, feminism is not even about making attempts at such "equality" ideal; because, like I already said, when push comes to shove, everybody knows who's going to be sent to die in the useless wars the governments you like so much to obey eventually start.

 

[FrothySolutions]

Kids? I'm talking about women in general with the hybristophilia thing. It was an example of women encouraging crimes and not getting punished for it.

That doesn't make sense. Punishing someone for "encouraging" the crimes that they themselves are the victims of? Sending women to prison for getting their asses beat for committing the "crime" of getting manipulated by the wifebeater?

Would you agree that a hybristophiliac woman (adult, let's make things easier for you, kek) who rewards a mass murderer with sex and love should receive some kind of punishment or at least be forwarded to a mental institution of some kind?

No, not a punishment. Because again, she is the victim. You don't punish the victim. Now, if a woman manipulates a man and takes advantage of him, the man would be the victim. And the woman should be punished. But punishing victims is ass-backwards.

That's just an authority argument. Some feminist bureaucrat wrote on a piece of paper that 17 year olds are considered children in the US and other cucked places. Is it based in actual biology? Not at all.

The people who make the pertinent division between prepubescents and postpubescents are backed by actual biology and not just some arbitrary, local, cultural whim of the moment.

Also "creeps" and "weirdos" are just empty insults based off nowadays feminist culture's perception. There's nothing weird about being sexually atracted to a person who not only is fertile but on the prime of their youth.

The authority comes from a better understanding of biology, and more refinement of our medical standards. We know better now than we knew in older years.

No one said a kid going through puberty wasn't "biologically distinct" from a kid who isn't going through puberty. But what we understand now (and probably back then too) is that both of these kids are not mentally mature enough to be held to adult standards. They are both kids in every way that matters. They are both kids in every way that involves deciding whether they can do adult things.

If teenagers make your dick hard, that's understandable. But you're also supposed to understand that forming a sexual relationship with those teenagers will ruin them because they can't handle it yet. That's why you keep those urges in your pants.

The effects of drugs are tangible though. As for the supposed negative effects of teenage x adult relationships, even if none appears at all, agecucks like you will still claim that they absolutely have to exist to match your feminist garbage of an ideology.

I don't mean meth mouth and cocaine noses. I mean mental illnesses.

Who cares. They worked, unlike modern marriage which is a joke and generates tons of dysfunction. People back then married young, stayed married and raised strong, functional men, not male feminists like you.


Who set such standards? Some feminist, some politician trying to appeal to feminists. It's not based on science, biology, data. It's based on an ideology, and an extremely shitty one at that, which only brings about dysfunction, misery and things like our (assuming you're incel) inceldom (feminism).


Yeah, men have to build and maintain everything that matters in society, have to give their lives to protect women and children when shit hits the fan, but how dare men say women should fulfill their part and marry, stay married, be faithful to (these are also men's part btw) and obey the damn husband and take proper care of children. Really unfair


Men and women are not equals. You believe they are because you're a delusional male feminist. You've been poisoned by a shitty ideology.

Also, feminism is not even about making attempts at such "equality" ideal; because, like I already said, when push comes to shove, everybody knows who's going to be sent to die in the useless wars the governments you like so much to obey eventually start.

Well, now this isn't a discussion about "Do we apply rules about power balance equally?" This is a discussion about "Shouldn't people want to be in a power imbalance with their partner? To be at a disadvantage compared to them, totally dependent and incapable without them?" And if you wanna talk history, women fighting for agency is not a new thing. It keeps coming up. Which means ignoring it hasn't worked, and will never work. The women will be unhappy and every now and then and forevermore hence, there will be dysfunction.

It only works if the idea of women submitting to men stands up to scrutiny, and it hasn't. Society keeps rejecting it as an idea.

 

[NEETcel2023]

My thoughts is that teen girls are the only acceptable and only viable option for men who want something real. It's disgusting and intolerable that society tries to force men into becoming betabuxx cucks for dirty washed up sluts, landwhales, and feminist whores.

 

[nystagmuscel]

If you're 40 with the mind of a 16 year old, that's also bad. Or 30. You're not supposed to be in such a juvenile state of development that you could be compared to a teenager. Unless you're a teenager.

Over for autist cels