Blackpill Rape is not disgusting and is the most heterosexual thing ever!

[pedrolopezwasright]

Many people claim that rape being immoral and disgusting is that it lacks consent, but according to this logic zoophilia can be justified as moral if animals were able to give consent. I think i don't have to explain that it is absurd, and that zoophilia is inherently subhuman and disgusting thing to do, no matter the ability of animal to consent, its still extremely disgusting thing no matter what. Now with rape, you are having sex with woman and as you can see consent doesn't make anything moral or not discusting, therefore people who deny rape are closed homos.

@Flagellum_Dei

 

[Ambatukam Alone]

Many people claim that rape being immoral and disgusting is that it lacks consent, but according to this logic zoophilia can be justified as moral if animals were able to give consent. I think i don't have to explain that it is absurd, and that zoophilia is inherently subhuman and disgusting thing to do, no matter the ability of animal to consent, its still extremely disgusting thing no matter what. Now with rape, you are having sex with woman and as you can see consent doesn't make anything moral or not discusting, therefore people who deny rape are closed homos.

Disgusting =/= immoral, as a reddit example some people put le pineapple on le pizza.

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Disgusting =/= immoral, as a reddit example some people put le pineapple on le pizza.

Yes it is immoral. I don't consider being zoophile . moral even if you don't act on it. Disgusting in sexuality = immoral. Sexuality is fully built on perception of disgust and not disgust.

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Disgusting =/= immoral, as a reddit example some people put le pineapple on le pizza.

Especially when we consider that "disgust" is the final level. Since women are complete genetic trash ruled by the hypergamy imperative, only thing which is possibly left to judge morality is disgust even if we consider "higher morality" women are inherently immoral beings

 

[ihatefoids109]

Despite agreeing with you on this position, i have to admit that you possess low iq and this is the reasoning of an ape

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Despite agreeing with you on this position, i have to admit that you possess low iq and this is the reasoning of an ape

Least obvious ragebait, try again nigger

 

[ihatefoids109]

Least obvious ragebait, try again nigger

There's no way you just did an analogy with zoophilia and called it a day to justify how rape isn't disgusting

You could've used like 10 better arguments nigga

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Despite agreeing with you on this position, i have to admit that you possess low iq and this is the reasoning of an ape

Go fuck Koko the gorilla. Estimated iq 70-95, according to your logic its very moral thing to do if consents.

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Go fuck Koko the gorilla. Estimated iq 70-95, according to your logic its very moral thing to do if consents.

@Flagellum_Dei @Anarcho Nihilist @Rapistcel

 

[ihatefoids109]

Go fuck Koko the gorilla. Estimated iq 70-95, according to your logic its very moral thing to do if consents.

Dumbass proceeds to miss my whole point being that he could have used much better arguments, further proving his low iq

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Dumbass proceeds to miss my whole point being that he could have used much better arguments, further proving his low iq

You made no point apart from demonstrating your low ability to construct any meaningful critique. I am using same reverse-ad hominem as you do; Don't like it? You are disabled enough to miss the whole point of discussion and address me specifically, I never heard any meaningful response to any of my arguments, therefore I attacked your ad hominem.

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Dumbass proceeds to miss my whole point being that he could have used much better arguments, further proving his low iq

Now I would ask you to explain how your logic does not justify my proposed reductio ad absurdum. Either that or you need to accept you used ad hominem in the first place

 

[ihatefoids109]

You made no point apart from demonstrating your low ability to construct any meaningful critique. I am using same reverse-ad hominem as you do; Don't like it? You are disabled enough to miss the whole point of discussion and address me specifically, I never heard any meaningful response to any of my arguments, therefore I attacked your ad hominem.

"Me ask chatgpt for big words to act smart me smart"

 

[NonNTFailure]

There's no way you just did an analogy with zoophilia and called it a day to justify how rape isn't disgusting

You could've used like 10 better arguments nigga

The greycels are iqmogging longtime users now jfl.

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

"Me ask chatgpt for big words to act smart me smart"

"big words". Subhuman just further proved failure of both crystallized and fluid intelligence. Don't worry maybe LARP intelligence (EQ) will save you. JFL if you never heard of these words, now I am not impressed with your stupidity anymore, I am more concerned merely for security of local mental hospitals

 

[Justnormalincel]

Many people claim that rape being immoral and disgusting is that it lacks consent, but according to this logic zoophilia can be justified as moral if animals were able to give consent. I think i don't have to explain that it is absurd, and that zoophilia is inherently subhuman and disgusting thing to do, no matter the ability of animal to consent, its still extremely disgusting thing no matter what. Now with rape, you are having sex with woman and as you can see consent doesn't make anything moral or not discusting, therefore people who deny rape are closed homos.

@Flagellum_Dei

another IT bait

 

[curls]

Women love simulating rape during sex. It's why they like to be acted on: slapped, cussed at, have their hair pulled, etc.

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Women love simulating rape during sex. It's why they like to be acted on: slapped, cussed at, have their hair pulled, etc.

Thats my point, nobody thinks rape is disgusting unless you are homosexual. Consent doesn't correlate with perception of disgust in any way, its all cope

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

"Me ask chatgpt for big words to act smart me smart"

>I am stupid
>I am writing using chatgpt cuz "highiq words"
So highiq of you nigger

 

[curls]

Thats my point, nobody thinks rape is disgusting unless you are homosexual. Consent doesn't correlate with perception of disgust in any way, its all cope

Consent is mostly a meme. Women are turned off by men who need their consent for everything. Once they give you signs of interest, they want you to possess them sexually, and any man who fails to do this is a beta nice guy cuck in their eyes. Explains why they love bad boys.

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Consent is mostly a meme. Women are turned off by men who need their consent for everything. Once they give you signs of interest, they want you to possess them sexually, and any man who fails to do this is a beta nice guy cuck in their eyes. Explains why they love bad boys.

Imagine how much retarded this shit sounds "Do you legally consent to sexual intercourse with me?" instead "go fuck bitch". Literally even the biggest ND would know second phrase is much more socially normal

 

[BlackPilledNormi]

Many people claim that rape being immoral and disgusting is that it lacks consent, but according to this logic zoophilia can be justified as moral if animals were able to give consent. I think i don't have to explain that it is absurd, and that zoophilia is inherently subhuman and disgusting thing to do, no matter the ability of animal to consent, its still extremely disgusting thing no matter what. Now with rape, you are having sex with woman and as you can see consent doesn't make anything moral or not discusting, therefore people who deny rape are closed homos.

Okay how does rape not beein disgusting or immoral everyone who deny it a homosexual. If a men rapes another men, you sayin that he isnt a homosexual since he raped him?

 

[warm wool blanket]

In my view, rape is not morally wrong when undertaken for the purpose of reproduction.

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Okay how does rape not beein disgusting or immoral everyone who deny it a homosexual. If a men rapes another men, you sayin that he isnt a homosexual since he raped him?

No. If you deny heterosexual rape you are homo. If you deny homosexual rape you are heterosexual

 

[Chud Norris72]

It's only disgusting when it's race-mixed

 

[BlackPilledNormi]

No. If you deny heterosexual rape you are homo. If you deny homosexual rape you are heterosexual

Why are are you homo if you deny heterosexual rape, like it seems like there has one part of the chain gone missing

 

[Flagellum_Dei]

Tbh there are degenerates saying that consensuality also apply to animals. Their beliefs aren't inherently wrong; but built upon dogmas. To criticize them, show how unreasonable and arbitrary are their scholastic axioms.

First of all, why even consider such concept as consent to be lawful? If it's because of its morality, why should it be considered moral? Because of subjectivity? But how subjectivity raises a need for consensuality? Because of human rights? Now the goal is to recognize who is to be named human. One can easily argue against naming biological specie a human in full meaning of this word, because it's arbitrary; if we're looking at biological classification, species are distinct by academic consensus, and one specie fluidly evolve into other; thus by this classification there's no sharp, objective point to consider humanity. But humanity can be considered as different from animals because of its traits. And the only trait that humans posses and animals don't, clearly separating them from each other, is free will, which femoids lacks. Thus femoids are not human, nor posses human rights.

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Tbh there are degenerates saying that consensuality also apply to animals. Their beliefs aren't inherently wrong; but built upon dogmas. To criticize them, show how unreasonable and arbitrary are their scholastic axioms.

@ihatefoids109 is a good example. Calling my reasoning (about disgust) stupid he justifies zoophilia; As the former is immoral only based on principle of disgust. Nobody looks at man fucking a dog and thinks "thats bad because it does not involve consent", everyone thinks "its bad because its degenerate behavior, disgusting and no matter the consent unacceptable". As already proven the measure for morality on this particular axis of reasoning turns out to be only the disgust, which is not present in the act of rape, therefore rape is fully morally justified and its sexually pathological

 

[Flagellum_Dei]

As the former is immoral only based on principle of disgust. Nobody looks at man fucking a dog and thinks "thats bad because it does not involve consent", everyone thinks "its bad because its degenerate behavior, disgusting and no matter the consent unacceptable". As already proven the measure for morality on this particular axis of reasoning turns out to be only the disgust, which is not present in the act of rape, therefore rape is fully morally justified and its sexually pathological

Arguing about morality, so what should be, by taking principles from current reality, so what is, is weak argumentation. Hume proved (by his guillotine) that it's impossible to deduce latter from first.
One can however argue what should be done to achieve something, which is a lot more certain reasoning.

 

[andrej]

Rape doesn't exist for Chads

 

[andrej]

Tbh there are degenerates saying that consensuality also apply to animals. Their beliefs aren't inherently wrong; but built upon dogmas. To criticize them, show how unreasonable and arbitrary are their scholastic axioms.

First of all, why even consider such concept as consent to be lawful? If it's because of its morality, why should it be considered moral? Because of subjectivity? But how subjectivity raises a need for consensuality? Because of human rights? Now the goal is to recognize who is to be named human. One can easily argue against naming biological specie a human in full meaning of this word, because it's arbitrary; if we're looking at biological classification, species are distinct by academic consensus, and one specie fluidly evolve into other; thus by this classification there's no sharp, objective point to consider humanity. But humanity can be considered as different from animals because of its traits. And the only trait that humans posses and animals don't, clearly separating them from each other, is free will, which femoids lacks. Thus femoids are not human, nor posses human rights.

Do you have any posts that further explain and give arguments to foids lacking free will? If you do so please tag me

 

[Frail Link]

"rape" is just sex by sub5

 

[Flagellum_Dei]

Do you have any posts that further explain and give arguments to foids lacking free will? If you do so please tag me

I have old posts with some explanation, however not very detailed. There's more insightful analysis in treatise of mine here.

I'm currently writing a blackpillist sum, wherein I already finished part on their free will. I can tag you when I publish the whole if you want; but since I'm not english native speaker, it would require translator.

 

[Chaos;BrutaLr2]

Idk man, consent is what is important for morality. Not only for rape but for murder, stealing, etc. Just because one thing is immoral because of it being disgusting doesn't mean another thing cannot be immoral because it lacks consent. They are not exclusive and morals are not that linear.

 

[Chaos;BrutaLr2]

"big words". Subhuman just further proved failure of both crystallized and fluid intelligence. Don't worry maybe LARP intelligence (EQ) will save you. JFL if you never heard of these words, now I am not impressed with your stupidity anymore, I am more concerned merely for security of local mental hospitals

Knowing these words would only indicate crystallized intelligence not fluid intelligence lol. I'm sure much smarter people than us both have never heard these terms before lol. Crystallized intelligence is cope anyway, it's just basically knowledge. Interestingly EQ is occasionally more positively correlated with learning outcomes than basic IQ. EQ may not be as of a pseudo measure as we think...

 

[Poopless One]

Rape is justice

 

[rcnfive]

rape isn't really a crime in the way most people see it. it's like just normal sex as nature intended. if you let foids pick, they say no to 95% of guys, as society is learning.

besides what's the big deal? it's just another dick in an infinite line of them.

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Arguing about morality, so what should be, by taking principles from current reality, so what is, is weak argumentation. Hume proved (by his guillotine) that it's impossible to deduce latter from first.
One can however argue what should be done to achieve something, which is a lot more certain reasoning.

You might be right in one thing. Applying normal principle of morality from current society to potential might seem vague, but such application can be done using the principle of isolating the premise and examining the core trait which pertains the conclusion of action being "moral" or "immoral". I am not merely examning the current principle i do a full scale analysis peculiar to both, should be and is. I take an element which should be and is (bestiality being illegal and that it should be) take the only possible premise by which it should be and is, therefore I derive the only principle which should be if subject is like women ruled by the imperative of hypergamy

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Knowing these words would only indicate crystallized intelligence not fluid intelligence lol. I'm sure much smarter people than us both have never heard these terms before lol. Crystallized intelligence is cope anyway, it's just basically knowledge. Interestingly EQ is occasionally more positively correlated with learning outcomes than basic IQ. EQ may not be as of a pseudo measure as we think...

Knowing would indeed indicate only Gc, but using mindless ad hominem in response to "smart" words is Gf fail.

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Knowing these words would only indicate crystallized intelligence not fluid intelligence lol. I'm sure much smarter people than us both have never heard these terms before lol. Crystallized intelligence is cope anyway, it's just basically knowledge. Interestingly EQ is occasionally more positively correlated with learning outcomes than basic IQ. EQ may not be as of a pseudo measure as we think...

Not EQ but executive function. EQ correlation is non-direct via serotonin

 

[St.Greypiller]

Many people claim that rape being immoral and disgusting is that it lacks consent, but according to this logic zoophilia can be justified as moral if animals were able to give consent. I think i don't have to explain that it is absurd, and that zoophilia is inherently subhuman and disgusting thing to do, no matter the ability of animal to consent, its still extremely disgusting thing no matter what. Now with rape, you are having sex with woman and as you can see consent doesn't make anything moral or not discusting, therefore people who deny rape are closed homos.

@Flagellum_Dei2ha

what the fuck did i just read

 

[Chaos;BrutaLr2]

Knowing would indeed indicate only Gc, but using mindless ad hominem in response to "smart" words is Gf fail.

Fair

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Crystallized intelligence is cope anyway

Is not, it is positively correlated with fluid intelligence. The only thing which does not positively correlates between them is impact of aging

 

[Chaos;BrutaLr2]

Not EQ but executive function. EQ correlation is non-direct via serotonin

Also I mistyped I meant EI (emotional intelligence) not EQ, my bad. Here's the meta-analysis I skimmed that finds a correlation between EI and second language learning outcomes: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12092430/

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Also I mistyped I meant EI (emotional intelligence) not EQ, my bad. Here's the meta-analysis I skimmed that finds a correlation between EI and second language learning outcomes: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12092430/

Makes sense since language is mostly truly learnt through immersion, which would obviously be higher in people with higher emotional intelligence. Otherwise, emotional intelligence would be absurd in its definition if it does not increase the amount of immersion into culture

 

[Chaos;BrutaLr2]

Is not, it is positively correlated with fluid intelligence. The only thing which does not positively correlates between them is impact of aging

Yes it is positively correlated with fluid intelligence (higher cognitive functional ability leads to easier acquisition of CI) but I would argue personality can just as easily influence CI. Someone who has a much higher conscientiousness level than someone with higher fluid intelligence can have much more knowledge on a subject. Also I doubt the correlation between FI and CI is high to assume most variation in CI stems from FI.

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Also I mistyped I meant EI (emotional intelligence) not EQ, my bad. Here's the meta-analysis I skimmed that finds a correlation between EI and second language learning outcomes: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12092430/

Emotional intelligence can't be objectively measured too. Logically speaking it could be but in multitude of ways which already undermines the validity of such analysis. For example ASPD person might have high emotional intelligence in terms of understanding emotion and manipulation, but much lower in terms of impulse control. "managing emotions" is even more vague concept, why not just analyse a frontal lobe then in response to a huge scale of triggers?

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Yes it is positively correlated with fluid intelligence (higher cognitive functional ability leads to easier acquisition of CI) but I would argue personality can just as easily influence CI. Someone who has a much higher conscientiousness level than someone with higher fluid intelligence can have much more knowledge on a subject. Also I doubt the correlation between FI and CI is high to assume most variation in CI stems from FI.

Gc in terms of functional Gc has very strong correlation with Gf. Accumulated knowledge and knowledge which is actively used are different things and Its foolish to doubt the role of Gf in for example fixing a broken PC (novel problem/Gc/Gf are being actively used). Gc does involve functional knowledge:the ability to use one’s accumulated skills, varieties of knowledge, and experience to make informed decisions. Which is built functionally on Gf even if isn't 1:1 correlated

 

[pedrolopezwasright]

Idk man, consent is what is important for morality. Not only for rape but for murder, stealing, etc. Just because one thing is immoral because of it being disgusting doesn't mean another thing cannot be immoral because it lacks consent. They are not exclusive and morals are not that linear.

I am highlighting the absurdity of modern world. The consent is dismissed in cases of assisted suicide, but in rape consent suddenly becomes the only judge for the morality of an action? it is absurd. Also act of rape does not involve consent, as already proven by me, but enjoyment, if by consent we mean whats legally defined as consent not merely some sort of "emotional guessing" or whether she will enjoy it, then consent makes no sense at all and all these laws depend on enjoyment.

 

[Chaos;BrutaLr2]

Emotional intelligence can't be objectively measured too. Logically speaking it could be but in multitude of ways which already undermines the validity of such analysis. For example ASPD person might have high emotional intelligence in terms of understanding emotion and manipulation, but much lower in terms of impulse control. "managing emotions" is even more vague concept, why not just analyse a front lobe then in response to a huge scale of triggers?

Ah yes, that is a good point. EI and even IQ measures cant and never will measure fully what they are trying to represent. The idea of these measures is to correlate them with other variables; yes, EI measurements cannot always be fully objective, but if it is significantly positively or negatively correlated with a dependent variable than it has to represent something. If it was a truly subjective measurement there would likely be no correlations with other dependent variables.

Also fMRI studies often have small correlates I believe? It isn't really reasonable to be able to deduce impulse control solely from fMRI as it does not fully explain behavioral results.