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.

Based r/shortguys drops another irrefutable trvke on ace women.

1761747005121


Please consult the chart
 
"One of the biggest copes is that women are incapable of love. Brother, they incapable of loving YOU, and I know that that is a tough pill to swallow" - Rehab Room
 
I'm using the term 'female gaze' colloquially rather than academically, but I think it's applicable here. The attractive qualities were not inherently or overtly sexual (as opposed to the male gaze), and they were rooted in deliberate choices / expressions of the guy's taste and personality, therefore overall subjectifying and humanizing (again vs. the objectifying male gaze).
This has to be the most egregiously outrageous drivel I have read today. The so-called female gaze is far more objectifying, superficial, and based on immutable physical characteristics — unlike the male gaze which is specifically focused on features that are changeable, such as weight, and is far more lenient when it comes to intrinsic features such as one's craniofacial features and proportions.

There is nothing humanizing about judgment focused solely on the person's physical traits — such as height, frame, face, and even hair which is largely genetic; the fact she claims otherwise is laughable and insulting to anyone with the capacity to critically analyze this nonsense. The so-called deliberate choices and expressions of that man are only emphasized post-hoc, once the genetically determined physical judgment has reached its verdict; she wouldn't care at all if it were a balding manlet who engaged in the exact same things and attempted to present himself that way, so I don't understand why she is trying to sugarcoat it as if her 'gaze' is somehow preferable — it's disingenuous and intellectually vacuous.

The female gaze is far more superficial than the male counterpart, and that is simply a fact of nature that can be observed through countless studies, and evolutionary psychology which perfectly explains the emergence of this phenomenon.

Further to that, it appears to me that the sole reason she believes the male gaze is 'more sexual' is because men find a significantly larger number of women as attractive, thereby leading to higher rates of sexualizing women, whereas women only do the same for a modicum of highly attractive men. This appearance of sexualization is simply a reflection of the skewed intersexual dynamics that heavily favor women.
 
This has to be the most egregiously outrageous drivel I have read today. The so-called female gaze is far more objectifying, superficial, and based on immutable physical characteristics — unlike the male gaze which is specifically focused on features that are changeable, such as weight, and is far more lenient when it comes to intrinsic features such as one's craniofacial features and proportions.

There is nothing humanizing about judgment focused solely on the person's physical traits — such as height, frame, face, and even hair which is largely genetic; the fact she claims otherwise is laughable and insulting to anyone with the capacity to critically analyze this nonsense. The so-called deliberate choices and expressions of that man are only emphasized post-hoc, once the genetically determined physical judgment has reached its verdict; she wouldn't care at all if it were a balding manlet who engaged in the exact same things and attempted to present himself that way, so I don't understand why she is trying to sugarcoat it as if her 'gaze' is somehow preferable — it's disingenuous and intellectually vacuous.

The female gaze is far more superficial than the male counterpart, and that is simply a fact of nature that can be observed through countless studies, and evolutionary psychology which perfectly explains the emergence of this phenomenon.

Further to that, it appears to me that the sole reason she believes the male gaze is 'more sexual' is because men find a significantly larger number of women as attractive, thereby leading to higher rates of sexualizing women, whereas women only do the same for a modicum of highly attractive men. This appearance of sexualization is simply a reflection of the skewed intersexual dynamics that heavily favor women.
all true. specially inflated superficiality. women will reject a man for not meeting her height requirement by 3% (2 inch dif at top end). U could not think of a criterion a man would reject a woman where she was missing 3%. Most dudes would even give up 30% (for example bust size)
 
all true. specially inflated superficiality. women will reject a man for not meeting her height requirement by 3% (2 inch dif at top end). U could not think of a criterion a man would reject a woman where she was missing 3%. Most dudes would even give up 30% (for example bust size)
Indeed. Men are simply far more lenient and also have higher variance in their attraction.
 
She met Chad .

Thats litteraly it .
 
This has to be the most egregiously outrageous drivel I have read today. The so-called female gaze is far more objectifying, superficial, and based on immutable physical characteristics — unlike the male gaze which is specifically focused on features that are changeable, such as weight, and is far more lenient when it comes to intrinsic features such as one's craniofacial features and proportions.

There is nothing humanizing about judgment focused solely on the person's physical traits — such as height, frame, face, and even hair which is largely genetic; the fact she claims otherwise is laughable and insulting to anyone with the capacity to critically analyze this nonsense. The so-called deliberate choices and expressions of that man are only emphasized post-hoc, once the genetically determined physical judgment has reached its verdict; she wouldn't care at all if it were a balding manlet who engaged in the exact same things and attempted to present himself that way, so I don't understand why she is trying to sugarcoat it as if her 'gaze' is somehow preferable — it's disingenuous and intellectually vacuous.

The female gaze is far more superficial than the male counterpart, and that is simply a fact of nature that can be observed through countless studies, and evolutionary psychology which perfectly explains the emergence of this phenomenon.

Further to that, it appears to me that the sole reason she believes the male gaze is 'more sexual' is because men find a significantly larger number of women as attractive, thereby leading to higher rates of sexualizing women, whereas women only do the same for a modicum of highly attractive men. This appearance of sexualization is simply a reflection of the skewed intersexual dynamics that heavily favor women.
Absolute trvke as always from you. Still don't know why the jannies haven't moved your patriarchy thread to Must Read.
 
Dilligent is a fellow incel. Him and I go way back.
 

Similar threads

kay'
Replies
5
Views
790
kay'
kay'
DoomThreeKoala
Replies
11
Views
801
St3v3Cel
St3v3Cel
Oneitiscel
Replies
15
Views
664
Last2025cel
Last2025cel

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top