Social norms prohibiting sexuality exist to gaslight sexually undesirable men

[TheLastandtheFirst]

Everything in human society that conceals sexuality - whether it's religious ideas viewing chastity as a good thing, morals about sex talk in professional environments / communities, prohibiting sexuality in public, even to songs from not so long ago that were sexually suggestive but not explicit, down even to the very clothes that we wear exist to gaslight and restrain sexually undesirable men.

Imagine a world where all these restrictions are removed. People are naked, can fuck whenever they want, talk whenever they want, and no religion. The thought of sex would be on your mind way more frequently, just from your exposure to it constantly, and for sexually undesirable men, that leads to anger; get enough angry sexually undesirable men and that leads to mass social violence.

So naturally, human beings organized society with certain rules regarding sexuality specifically to maintain the anger and sadness of sexually undesirable men, so they can just go along with their life - usually just working until their dead alone; by giving them religious delusions about chastity being a good thing, they can be distracted from their lack of sexual fulfillment. By giving people clothes, they restrain sexually exciting visuals. By prohibiting talk in professional environments and communities, you prevent sexually undesirable men from being angered at their lack of sexual success.

You might believe these restrictions serve some other role, but none of these restrictions serve any function as important as this one.

If you want proof, just look at how people actually treat you in real life compared to the expectations society sets out. Sure, people may bend a knee to basic social rules regarding basic formal kindness, responding to you with politeness for your inquiries, giving you a nice pat on the back if you need it. But beyond that, nobody wants to form a close relationship with you. Why is this? Simply put, men and women form close relationships to be able to bend certain social rules and talk freely (for example, sex), and I can tell you, that many men and women don't want close relationships where they still have to give a nod to basic social etiquette regarding sexual discussion. Men and women feel restrained when they try to form relationships with you, because they know you will be angered if they start discussing sexual matters with you.

Nothing so confirms this than music. So much music from the 2010s and before (now there's much more explicit music just by virtue of an increasingly dumbed down population that doesn't value lyrics and the atomization of different interests from different hierarchical groups) had so much sexual innuendos that are never explained explicitly, specifically so sexually active men and women can relate to one another about the activity, while gaslighting non-sexhavers about what the "big boys" or "adults" are talking about.

What comes to mind immediately, for example, is Katy Perry's "E.T.", where she tells the Alien to "take her" and "fill her with his poison"; or perhaps Peter Gabriel's Sledgehammer (his penis); or even the 1920s swing songs where euphemisms for "whistle" and "blow" are used.

Incorporate all of this. What other conclusion can one come to other than modesty is used to gaslight and trick sexless, ugly, gross men into going along with social functionality while not experiencing a need that most people get or would kill themselves if they could never get?

 

[Count Yorga]

Excellent post.

 

[TheLastandtheFirst]

Of course, it should be said all this gaslighting doesn't work completely (hence the people on this forum who have broken through the gaslighting and realized the dark bitter truth about sexuality and human beings), but it works enough that society can still function.

I think we are witnessing a massive social collapse which will happen over the next 60 years or so (there's too many complacent people as of now) due to sexual norms being totally eroded thanks to feminism, social media, consumerism, and the collapse of institutional religions, where the majority of men will realize just how undesirable they actually are. But as of now, there's sufficient complacency that men will just cope or delude themselves about the reality of sexual activity and it's prominence in the lives of chads and most women.

I also don't deny these norms serve other functions besides this one, but I think this is the most important function it serves.

 

[Lonelyus]

I just watched porn and the finest tightest pussy and coomed

 

[TheLastandtheFirst]

I just watched porn and the finest tightest pussy and coomed

Yeah, and you're not allowed to watch this in public because, pragmatically, sexually undesirable men might get angered over being reminded of their lack of sexual activity.

 

[blackraven]

high IQ post, although this is now shifting to opposite direction due to sex positivity etc.

 

[TheLastandtheFirst]

high IQ post, although this is now shifting to opposite direction due to sex positivity etc.

And this will lead to widespread social disaster in the next 60 years or so, in my opinion.

Not soon. But unfortunately, I'll be an old man or dead by the time shit hits the fan.

 

[subhuman]

I respect your high effort post and original ideas, but I actually disagree with your argument. You are right that the culture of concealing sexuality is subversive and life denying. But I don't think there is like this cabal of sex havers that are using it to oppress the masses of ugly men. In fact I think it's the other way around. I think this culture is a form of slave morality created by the ugly men to justify their condition as being morally righteous.

Basically, people used to value traits such as beauty, strength, and so on. But naturally, this led to a small group of elites having all the power and dominating others. So in response to this, the oppressed develop a moral code that inverts these life affirming values, and instead give value to things like humility, meekness, selflessness, and so on to justify their abject condition.

This is literally what we do on incel forums. We hate attractive chads, and value the ugliest most "truecel" people. We hate people who are social and have sex, and value the guys who never talk to girls. We also idolize the people who lash out in "slave revolts" against the strong to temporarily assert some power over them as a reaction to their oppression (like elliot rodger).

In our culture, I think this sexual oppression was mostly done through the artifice of religion. Some parts of it have stuck around because of social inertia, but now that religion isn't a big part of our society anymore, you can see it going away. However, just because the old culture of sexual repression was shit, doesn't mean what we have now is any better. We have a unique opportunity to create a new system of morality that will be even better. Something that affirms life rather than denying it. But sadly it seems like the direction our culture is heading in is one of consumerism, mediocrity, and atomization.

 

[Indari]

religious sexual repression has been around way longer than that.

 

[BraincelsRefugee]

One rule for the sexual bourgeois and one for the inceltariat. If you've ever been around normies for a sustained length of time you know that relationships and sex-related drama come up AT LEAST once every week in conversation.

 

[Cletus Longthing]

Over

I just watched porn and the finest tightest pussy and coomed

 

[ethniccel1]

If you want proof, just look at how people actually treat you in real life compared to the expectations society sets out.

okay, for low IQ users here like me. What you mean? Bring examples to help a low iq understand

 

[Murder Mario]

Imagine a world where all these restrictions are removed. People are naked, can fuck whenever they want, talk whenever they want, and no religion. The thought of sex would be on your mind way more frequently, just from your exposure to it constantly, and for sexually undesirable men, that leads to anger; get enough angry sexually undesirable men and that leads to mass social violence.

Wrong, ugly men could just rape. The idea of a completely sexually free society as a hypothetical makes practically no sense.

 

[AnilBashir]

Great insight, i enjoyed this post

 

[vidyacel]

Even a medieval SERF had a more meaningful life, compared to THIS!

 

[SlayerSlayer]

I respect your high effort post and original ideas, but I actually disagree with your argument. You are right that the culture of concealing sexuality is subversive and life denying. But I don't think there is like this cabal of sex havers that are using it to oppress the masses of ugly men. In fact I think it's the other way around. I think this culture is a form of slave morality created by the ugly men to justify their condition as being morally righteous.

Basically, people used to value traits such as beauty, strength, and so on. But naturally, this led to a small group of elites having all the power and dominating others. So in response to this, the oppressed develop a moral code that inverts these life affirming values, and instead give value to things like humility, meekness, selflessness, and so on to justify their abject condition.

This is literally what we do on incel forums. We hate attractive chads, and value the ugliest most "truecel" people. We hate people who are social and have sex, and value the guys who never talk to girls. We also idolize the people who lash out in "slave revolts" against the strong to temporarily assert some power over them as a reaction to their oppression (like elliot rodger).

In our culture, I think this sexual oppression was mostly done through the artifice of religion. Some parts of it have stuck around because of social inertia, but now that religion isn't a big part of our society anymore, you can see it going away. However, just because the old culture of sexual repression was shit, doesn't mean what we have now is any better. We have a unique opportunity to create a new system of morality that will be even better. Something that affirms life rather than denying it. But sadly it seems like the direction our culture is heading in is one of consumerism, mediocrity, and atomization.

THIS IS WHY WE NEED SHARIA LAW, TO GIVE OURSELVES POWER

 

[TheLastandtheFirst]

One rule for the sexual bourgeois and one for the inceltariat. If you've ever been around normies for a sustained length of time you know that relationships and sex-related drama come up AT LEAST once every week in conversation.

Yeah. The irony is that we aren't obsessed with sex, they are. If a person bases another person's entire worth on the ability to have sex, who is really the sex-obsessed person?

 

[TheLastandtheFirst]

I respect your high effort post and original ideas, but I actually disagree with your argument. You are right that the culture of concealing sexuality is subversive and life denying. But I don't think there is like this cabal of sex havers that are using it to oppress the masses of ugly men. In fact I think it's the other way around. I think this culture is a form of slave morality created by the ugly men to justify their condition as being morally righteous.

Basically, people used to value traits such as beauty, strength, and so on. But naturally, this led to a small group of elites having all the power and dominating others. So in response to this, the oppressed develop a moral code that inverts these life affirming values, and instead give value to things like humility, meekness, selflessness, and so on to justify their abject condition.

This is literally what we do on incel forums. We hate attractive chads, and value the ugliest most "truecel" people. We hate people who are social and have sex, and value the guys who never talk to girls. We also idolize the people who lash out in "slave revolts" against the strong to temporarily assert some power over them as a reaction to their oppression (like elliot rodger).

In our culture, I think this sexual oppression was mostly done through the artifice of religion. Some parts of it have stuck around because of social inertia, but now that religion isn't a big part of our society anymore, you can see it going away. However, just because the old culture of sexual repression was shit, doesn't mean what we have now is any better. We have a unique opportunity to create a new system of morality that will be even better. Something that affirms life rather than denying it. But sadly it seems like the direction our culture is heading in is one of consumerism, mediocrity, and atomization.

Listen bro, Nietzsche is my favorite philosopher and I agree with the transvaluation of morals. But it's not so cut and dry to say that the Judeo-Christian religions (as well as the Dharmic religions via his commentary on Buddhism in "The Antichrist") have strictly inverted morality. Self-restraint is always part in parcel of any functional civilizational - you can't just murder and rape people you don't like. While the Proto-Abrahamic and Proto-Dharmic pagan religions viewed sex, beauty, strength as morally good things while villifying weakness, celibacy, and ugliness, nevertheless self-indulgence to an anti-social degree was viewed as bad too. "Venereal diseases" were diseases sent by Aphrodite / Venus for people who were having illicit sexual relations, for example. The Bhagavad Vita is similar.

I'm not speaking within the context of social development within the timeframe of the change from paganism to Christianity / Islam. Rather, I'm speaking to the very beginnings of civilization, moving from a more ape-like existence into the creation of basic moral rules and clothes; probably with the shift from Pre-Agricultural Revolution to Post-Agricultural Revolution.

 

[TheLastandtheFirst]

Wrong, ugly men could just rape. The idea of a completely sexually free society as a hypothetical makes practically no sense.

Rape = violence

 

[Murder Mario]

Rape = violence

Then they could just talk kids into sex

 

[theundeadburg]

Yep, I agree %100. The modest clothes wearing women you see on the streets are sucking the shit out of their husband's cock. Imagine if they did that shit in public.
The anger of incels would increase 100 times.

 

[Kamikaze]

I respect your high effort post and original ideas, but I actually disagree with your argument. You are right that the culture of concealing sexuality is subversive and life denying. But I don't think there is like this cabal of sex havers that are using it to oppress the masses of ugly men. In fact I think it's the other way around. I think this culture is a form of slave morality created by the ugly men to justify their condition as being morally righteous.

Basically, people used to value traits such as beauty, strength, and so on. But naturally, this led to a small group of elites having all the power and dominating others. So in response to this, the oppressed develop a moral code that inverts these life affirming values, and instead give value to things like humility, meekness, selflessness, and so on to justify their abject condition.

This is literally what we do on incel forums. We hate attractive chads, and value the ugliest most "truecel" people. We hate people who are social and have sex, and value the guys who never talk to girls. We also idolize the people who lash out in "slave revolts" against the strong to temporarily assert some power over them as a reaction to their oppression (like elliot rodger).

In our culture, I think this sexual oppression was mostly done through the artifice of religion. Some parts of it have stuck around because of social inertia, but now that religion isn't a big part of our society anymore, you can see it going away. However, just because the old culture of sexual repression was shit, doesn't mean what we have now is any better. We have a unique opportunity to create a new system of morality that will be even better. Something that affirms life rather than denying it. But sadly it seems like the direction our culture is heading in is one of consumerism, mediocrity, and atomization.

High IQ post as usual.

 

[Cock'nBalls]

Then they could just talk kids into sex

it would hurt when the seks

 

[Murder Mario]

it would hurt when the seks

Only if the cock is too big

 

[CHOoseWisely123]

Women's clothing are getting skimpier and more revealing each year… there is no decency left.

 

[Namtriz912]

Amazing thread! Things will only go so far until things bubble over

 

[based_meme]

Everything in human society that conceals sexuality - whether it's religious ideas viewing chastity as a good thing, morals about sex talk in professional environments / communities, prohibiting sexuality in public, even to songs from not so long ago that were sexually suggestive but not explicit, down even to the very clothes that we wear exist to gaslight and restrain sexually undesirable men.

Imagine a world where all these restrictions are removed. People are naked, can fuck whenever they want, talk whenever they want, and no religion. The thought of sex would be on your mind way more frequently, just from your exposure to it constantly, and for sexually undesirable men, that leads to anger; get enough angry sexually undesirable men and that leads to mass social violence.

So naturally, human beings organized society with certain rules regarding sexuality specifically to maintain the anger and sadness of sexually undesirable men, so they can just go along with their life - usually just working until their dead alone; by giving them religious delusions about chastity being a good thing, they can be distracted from their lack of sexual fulfillment. By giving people clothes, they restrain sexually exciting visuals. By prohibiting talk in professional environments and communities, you prevent sexually undesirable men from being angered at their lack of sexual success.

You might believe these restrictions serve some other role, but none of these restrictions serve any function as important as this one.

If you want proof, just look at how people actually treat you in real life compared to the expectations society sets out. Sure, people may bend a knee to basic social rules regarding basic formal kindness, responding to you with politeness for your inquiries, giving you a nice pat on the back if you need it. But beyond that, nobody wants to form a close relationship with you. Why is this? Simply put, men and women form close relationships to be able to bend certain social rules and talk freely (for example, sex), and I can tell you, that many men and women don't want close relationships where they still have to give a nod to basic social etiquette regarding sexual discussion. Men and women feel restrained when they try to form relationships with you, because they know you will be angered if they start discussing sexual matters with you.

Nothing so confirms this than music. So much music from the 2010s and before (now there's much more explicit music just by virtue of an increasingly dumbed down population that doesn't value lyrics and the atomization of different interests from different hierarchical groups) had so much sexual innuendos that are never explained explicitly, specifically so sexually active men and women can relate to one another about the activity, while gaslighting non-sexhavers about what the "big boys" or "adults" are talking about.

What comes to mind immediately, for example, is Katy Perry's "E.T.", where she tells the Alien to "take her" and "fill her with his poison"; or perhaps Peter Gabriel's Sledgehammer (his penis); or even the 1920s swing songs where euphemisms for "whistle" and "blow" are used.

Incorporate all of this. What other conclusion can one come to other than modesty is used to gaslight and trick sexless, ugly, gross men into going along with social functionality while not experiencing a need that most people get or would kill themselves if they could never get?

I am impressed, GrAYcel.

Listen bro, Nietzsche is my favorite philosopher and I agree with the transvaluation of morals. But it's not so cut and dry to say that the Judeo-Christian religions (as well as the Dharmic religions via his commentary on Buddhism in "The Antichrist") have strictly inverted morality. Self-restraint is always part in parcel of any functional civilizational - you can't just murder and rape people you don't like. While the Proto-Abrahamic and Proto-Dharmic pagan religions viewed sex, beauty, strength as morally good things while villifying weakness, celibacy, and ugliness, nevertheless self-indulgence to an anti-social degree was viewed as bad too. "Venereal diseases" were diseases sent by Aphrodite / Venus for people who were having illicit sexual relations, for example. The Bhagavad Vita is similar.

I'm not speaking within the context of social development within the timeframe of the change from paganism to Christianity / Islam. Rather, I'm speaking to the very beginnings of civilization, moving from a more ape-like existence into the creation of basic moral rules and clothes; probably with the shift from Pre-Agricultural Revolution to Post-Agricultural Revolution.

Indeed.

Generalizing from this, rules, norms, and even laws were created so that the have-nots would not misbehave against the haves. The same argument could be made for something like the norm/rule/moral/legal prohibition against theft, for example. It's to protect the resources of those who have them from the less fortunate who weren't able to (or incapable of) acquire them.

The same prohibitive function against the low tier members of the tribe/group/community etc. by the high tier members has numerous instances in civilization.

 

[subhuman]

High IQ post as usual.

thank you brocel

 

[TheLastandtheFirst]

The same argument could be made for something like the norm/rule/moral/legal prohibition against theft, for example. It's to protect the resources of those who have them from the less fortunate who weren't able to (or incapable of) acquire them.

The same prohibitive function against the low tier members of the tribe/group/community etc. by the high tier members has numerous instances in civilization.

Exactly

 

[FakeFakecel]

High IQ post.

 

[turbosperg]

modesty is used to gaslight and trick sexless, ugly, gross men into going along with social functionality while not experiencing a need that most people get

Stratospheric IQ.

All of human culture exists basically to discipline which males can access sex and procreation, and which ones are drones who are supposed to work to death without ever being sexually rewarded. All of human culture is a rationalization of hypergamy. Brutal shit.

 

[TheLastandtheFirst]

okay, for low IQ users here like me. What you mean? Bring examples to help a low iq understand

Do you have friends? No? Just a few? Chances are you followed all the rules and were a good boy going along with society. And they punish you anyways because those rules aren’t there to reward good behavior and punish bad behavior - rather, they are there because humans view you as a stain on humanity, and they seek to contain you rather than have your genes or anything deriving from your genes (your ideas, beliefs, values, who you are) contaminate the rest of the species.

The rules exist not to reward good behavior. Rather, they are there so genetically superior men can act out their desires judgment free while gaslighting you so you work as a celibate drone.

 

[ethniccel1]

Men and women feel restrained when they try to form relationships with you, because they know you will be angered if they start discussing sexual matters with you.

why would you be angered if they discuss sex with you?

Do you have friends? No? Just a few? Chances are you followed all the rules and were a good boy going along with society. And they punish you anyways because those rules aren’t there to reward good behavior and punish bad behavior - rather, they are there because humans view you as a stain on humanity, and they seek to contain you rather than have your genes or anything deriving from your genes (your ideas, beliefs, values, who you are) contaminate the rest of the species.

The rules exist not to reward good behavior. Rather, they are there so genetically superior men can act out their desires judgment free while gaslighting you so you work as a celibate drone.

give a concrete example of this concept in practice. Your formulations are very abstarct. I am sure you have mental images with which you used to come to your conclusions but we readers do not knnow your experiences and mental images. Break it down in writing using concrete examples so we understand. Use laymans terms then after when we understand you can gto back into abstract formulations.

I think you are onto something thats why I am saying use concrete examples to really clarify and make crystal clear what you mean.

 

[TheLastandtheFirst]

why would you be angered if they discuss sex with you?

Not me. A significant amount of undesirable men.
Just look at this website.

They would be angered because they would be constantly reminded (and not distracted) from what other human beings are denying them.

Why do jocks make out with women in front of other men at frat parties? It's purely because such sexual openness provokes other men, therefore the goal is mockery.

give a concrete example of this concept in practice. Your formulations are very abstarct. I am sure you have mental images with which you used to come to your conclusions but we readers do not knnow your experiences and mental images. Break it down in writing using concrete examples so we understand. Use laymans terms then after when we understand you can gto back into abstract formulations.

Okay. Let's take the most common example - "just shower, improve your personality, be a lovin, kind guy, make a girl laugh, and one day things will work themselves out if you try your best to be a good, honest, hardworking person" - something we've all heard before.

They don't say this in the belief that this is how the world works. That if you are a good person, you can be worthy of love.
They say this to keep your mind occupied with other things besides sex and force you to ignore other men who are fucking other women. You become a productive, socially useful idiot for others, while they get to have fun with less than half the work. While you fantasize about some magical point of the future of a woman giving you a hug, other men are fucking the brains out of women.

Thanks for being socially useful for other people, dumbass.


I also gave concrete examples in my original post. Sex talk in the workplace. You are generally not allowed to talk about the fact that your girlfriend uses teeth when she sucks your dick after you drink your morning coffee in the office.

Why do we have this restriction? It's not just "politeness" or "formality", there's a practical function as to why this is "polite" or "formal", and it's because of sexless unhappy men. If sexless unhappy men were reminded of sex in the workplace, it would aggravate them and make them angry, increasing the probability of those men lashing out.

 

[General Alek]

Excellent post.

why does a recruit have more stars than a major?

 

[General Alek]

the objective of the autistic incel army is to overthrow social norms in general

 

[based_meme]

I think you are onto something

He is. Most users here don't see it (yet), but he has revealed yet another black pill.

OP is a rare high IQ GrAYcel.

 

[Bastardily]

Insanely high IQ post, perfectly lays out the constant gaslighting society pushes onto sexually undesirable men constantly.

 

[Lookslikeit]

I always thought about that when i was a kid (indirectly, ofc). But i thought in the terms of "what if everyone walked naked on the street?" Than i thought "well i guess we cant have that, uggos would ruin it all (visually and physically). If you asked me about the physical part, i wouldnt know what to tell you, i just knew (instintictually) that something was bound to happen negatively.

 

[Lookslikeit]

Women's clothing are getting skimpier and more revealing each year… there is no decency left.

Thats cause they are not afraid anymore. The culture of subservience to them combined with intricate systems of control*¹ regarding sexuality mean they can do that without major*² repercussion.

*¹ see deleuze societies of control, by cuck philosophy on youtube.

*²chads can still struggle snuggle them ocasionally, but thats what 99% of them want to happen anyway. Implicit sex permit (to chads ofc) is what they are signalling with that behaviour, basically.

 

[Lookslikeit]

Do you have friends? No? Just a few? Chances are you followed all the rules and were a good boy going along with society. And they punish you anyways because those rules aren’t there to reward good behavior and punish bad behavior - rather, they are there because humans view you as a stain on humanity, and they seek to contain you rather than have your genes or anything deriving from your genes (your ideas, beliefs, values, who you are) contaminate the rest of the species.

The rules exist not to reward good behavior. Rather, they are there so genetically superior men can act out their desires judgment free while gaslighting you so you work as a celibate drone.

unironically genius, bro. A genius, in my view, is someone who can take what everyone sees (most pretend they dont and look the other way) and elevate it to the uptmost conclusions (and therefore, consequences). Cheers, man.

 

[Lookslikeit]

I also gave concrete examples in my original post. Sex talk in the workplace. You are generally not allowed to talk about the fact that your girlfriend uses teeth when she sucks your dick after you drink your morning coffee in the office.

Why do we have this restriction? It's not just "politeness" or "formality", there's a practical function as to why this is "polite" or "formal", and it's because of sexless unhappy men. If sexless unhappy men were reminded of sex in the workplace, it would aggravate them and make them angry, increasing the probability of those men lashing out.

Also (if you let me complement) the issue is even more prevalent in the small possibility that the man talking about the bj could be ugly, or just busty ass looking. Imagine you're taking your morning coffee at the wagie and a danny devito looking guy starts talking about how he got his dick sucked by a drunk girl in a dark, back alley last night. The image of it would ruin YOUR day, now imagine what non sub 5s would feel?! They would grab their pitchforks JFL

 

[Cope or die]

Not me. A significant amount of undesirable men.
Just look at this website.

They would be angered because they would be constantly reminded (and not distracted) from what other human beings are denying them.

Why do jocks make out with women in front of other men at frat parties? It's purely because such sexual openness provokes other men, therefore the goal is mockery.



Okay. Let's take the most common example - "just shower, improve your personality, be a lovin, kind guy, make a girl laugh, and one day things will work themselves out if you try your best to be a good, honest, hardworking person" - something we've all heard before.

They don't say this in the belief that this is how the world works. That if you are a good person, you can be worthy of love.
They say this to keep your mind occupied with other things besides sex and force you to ignore other men who are fucking other women. You become a productive, socially useful idiot for others, while they get to have fun with less than half the work. While you fantasize about some magical point of the future of a woman giving you a hug, other men are fucking the brains out of women.

Brutal.

I also gave concrete examples in my original post. Sex talk in the workplace. You are generally not allowed to talk about the fact that your girlfriend uses teeth when she sucks your dick after you drink your morning coffee in the office.

Why do we have this restriction? It's not just "politeness" or "formality", there's a practical function as to why this is "polite" or "formal", and it's because of sexless unhappy men. If sexless unhappy men were reminded of sex in the workplace, it would aggravate them and make them angry, increasing the probability of those men lashing out.

Foids are always bragging and talking about their sex lives at my job. Suifuel

 

[CantEscapeYourFate]

The only way for all these problems to be solved is to bring back religion.

A society without religion is destined to become a female worshipping, beta male chaotic soyciety that inevitably destroys itself.

The Jews knew this, which is why they had to force religions onto everyone, whether it be Christianity or Islam, in order to ensure a functional society could be created on the land they conquered.

But now that they're pushing an anti-religion agenda in the West, that tells me they're trying to destroy us. The West is definitely gonna collapse whether it's in our generation or the next.

 

[Iwgl]

One of long posts that I have readed completely the truth is brutal

 

[diedlonely]

This is true, but most people just don't want to admit it because it would be just too brutal to handle.

 

[FrankieLoner]

the objective of the autistic incel army is to overthrow social norms in general

Facts