We have a bunch of science here https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill
There are a ton of TED talks of social scientists explaining the tyranny of looks over the dating market, and videos on Youtube of social scientists walking their layman audiences through all the studies telling the world what incels already know from experience.
Normies don't care.
The smarter normies will skim through a couple studies you cite and nitpick parts of the methodology that they don't like. An example would be if you had a study that observed trends in a speed dating environment. If thebrick wall normie you're talking to has a triple-digit IQ, you can bet good money they'll tell you that because the study used an environment where personality would supposedly matter less than it would in a real-world dating scenario, it's not a valid refutation of their personality-over-all narrative.
Of course, they'll outright ignore other studies with different methodologies that come to the same conclusion, and if you ask them to provide data of their own to back up their claims, they'll come up short; nary a single study or fact. The most you can expect is some anecdote that sounds fake.
Other normies with IQ's closer to the double-digits will mock you for looking at something they view as entirely subjective from an objective lens, though the language they use will be less sophisticated since they are low IQ people.
And they both will use your own lack of success as evidence against your argument, an ad hominem which only shows the bad faith in which they argue. If the personality-over-all narrative is so obvious, why is it so difficult to prove objectively? If what we're saying is true (which it is), a person's actual working knowledge of the SMP's mechanisms has little bearing on how they fare within it.
There are a ton of TED talks of social scientists explaining the tyranny of looks over the dating market, and videos on Youtube of social scientists walking their layman audiences through all the studies telling the world what incels already know from experience.
Normies don't care.
The smarter normies will skim through a couple studies you cite and nitpick parts of the methodology that they don't like. An example would be if you had a study that observed trends in a speed dating environment. If the
Of course, they'll outright ignore other studies with different methodologies that come to the same conclusion, and if you ask them to provide data of their own to back up their claims, they'll come up short; nary a single study or fact. The most you can expect is some anecdote that sounds fake.
Other normies with IQ's closer to the double-digits will mock you for looking at something they view as entirely subjective from an objective lens, though the language they use will be less sophisticated since they are low IQ people.
And they both will use your own lack of success as evidence against your argument, an ad hominem which only shows the bad faith in which they argue. If the personality-over-all narrative is so obvious, why is it so difficult to prove objectively? If what we're saying is true (which it is), a person's actual working knowledge of the SMP's mechanisms has little bearing on how they fare within it.
