As an almost officially oldcel (turning 27 next month), I guess it's time to share a few of the conclusions I came about through my years of solitude, reading and observing life from the outside like most fellow incels here.
This pill is going to be black, but maybe it can put some things into perspective.
The debate about what influences/decides our actions, being it instincts (survival, sexual - internal factors) or social conventions, conditioning and standards (morals, rules, all outside factors) can be solved in the following way: both factors influence and decide our lives/fates.
Anything that applies to animals can be applied to humans, so follow my analogy: a rat or a dog can be satisfied if it has its internal/instinctual needs taken care of (food, reproduction), however, the moment other rats/dogs enter the picture (social interaction), and a comparation/differentiation can be made between the two beings, animals (and humans) are naturally inclined to make a judgement/choice, which means one option will be evaluated higher than the other (this is an insight that can be saved from praxeology). That's why hypergamy (and just wanting to have the best/better/most instead of the worst/less in general) arises, and this is why envy and also intra-sexual competition arises, from comparation, which is natural in social/external interactions. In the same way, if you give two groups of rats/dogs different amounts of resources, you will see decrease in motivation and social conflict arise, even if both groups were given enough to satisfy their biological needs.
This is why even monkeys can spot an unfair deal: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12913-envious-monkeys-can-spot-a-fair-deal/
Now, this does not mean that social/external factors can override and suppress natural instinct and genetic determinism. On the contrary, reason and human rationality, which arises from the human necessity of social relations --- we are born into a society and this is also a biological/deterministic necessity, since we are always born from at least two persons, we are necessarily raised by other people, so being a human cannot be simply determined by internal factors only or external factors only --- are always going to be used by humans to maximize their instinctual and biological nature (internal factors), meaning survival and reproduction, while reason, morals, technology and social conventions - "civilization" in general - are always going to be used in order for this to be achieved.
You can see this in all fields of social behaviour: as humans became civilized and the number of people interacting in a social setting grew exponentially (from pre-historic tiny groups of persons, to nomadic groups, to tribes, to ancient civilizations, to empires, to nation-states, and next the world government) social conventions developed (law, morals, obligations) and also technology developed in general, which made agriculture and livestock be more and more productive, natural resource extraction, automation, etc. All in order to feed people's ever-increasing standards for sufficiency.
However, the crucial point is that the more civilized and grouped people became throughout history, hierarchy became increasingly stratified and the difference between the levels of resources in general between social groups and the concentration of power became bigger and bigger. Remember, this is not (only) the result of global conspiracy and social engineering, this is the fate of humans for being civilized, the natural progression of history is towards concentration of power. In pre-historic times most men could be the head of their groups (lets say only scarcely grouped families existed), then you become a nomadic group and more people get in, you start to have leaders, then through wars and inter-grupo marriages you start to have tribes, then city-states, then empires, nation states, extra-national organizations (UN, NATO, etc) and finally world government. In economic terms, this also means that the difference between the amount of resources (of all kinds, money, sex, power) the top people have and the amount of the resources the masses get.
In mating dynamics, that means that the few Chads and millionaires/billionaires (the second group through paid harems of course) gets an increasingly easier access to fertilize from 1 to 10 to 100 to 1000s of women. And this means that women will increasingly prefer to share the same few Chads throughout their fertile years and be semi-official or official whores (onlyfans, sugar babying and actual sex service providing) instead of settling for an average life and normie even, which explains the drastic increase of inceldom even in normies, and by inceldom in include all types of betabuxx (and we know a normie / sub-8 will only ever be seen as a betabuxx "marriage" material guya for after the cock carousel), because they basically sell their dignity in order to use a washed-up hole and being in a cuckolding relationship (all LTRs after women acquired "rights" are cuckold relationships), which is worse than being an incel and far worse than paying escorts directly for sex only.
So, while in pre-civilizational times and social groupings a woman (and a man) would have few options to pick from and a civilizational need for maintaining a relationship and having big families (in order to acquire more resources because living standards were very harsh), the more the socials groups grow, the more options, comparation and competition arises, and femoids have a bigger and bigger pool to choose from. With globalization and the coming globalism and world government, women already have the option to pick a man from the whole world through internet and, because of media (music, tv, films, radio, whatever), now you will no longer be compared and in competition with your fellow pre-historic gatherings and tribal mates, not your neighbours or the men from your city, your region, state and not even your country, but the whole world.
This doesn't mean that certain social conditions would guarantee all incels a sexual partner and a normie to have a relationship where he's not a cuck, but the chances would be much much higher (and fairer, if you assume such a thing exists), as exemplified above.
Concluding my thoughts, reason and civilization only enabled the genetic winners to concentrate more power and resources and, since socially we only evolved towards a more and more gynocentric society (this began the moment people started becoming civilized/forming social groups), this means femoids have today basically all the social power, enabling both groups (femoids and top genetic men and billionaires) to mate between each other, leaving 95% of men with nothing or leftovers (if you would marry a non-virgin femoid whore who have "rights" you are a cuck, so currently I consider both below average and average men - meaning all sub-8s by current social standards - as incels, because they do not have the ability to be in a non-cucked relationship and will always be traded down the road or have to settle with non-virgins).
Reason and civilization came full circle, they enabled humanity to live exclusively in order to fill their needs. Since the necessity for gathering resources and forming family units is lower than ever and almost non-existent, humans will increasingly live to fulfill their reproductive needs, which means sexual attraction will be the only relevant aspect a femoid will have to consider when picking a mate.
The sad part is that this is how it was always supposed to be. This is nature making sure only the top human material is able to reproduce, and this is what civilization perfectly enabled them to do. However you can't ever redirect/fix civilization in order to make things fair in terms of mate selection - reason is always destined to be a tool of instinct/nature, it was meant to be this way and that's the only direction it's going.
This means that since the dawn of times It's only ever ment to get worse for lower-tier men and incels in general.
It never began.
This pill is going to be black, but maybe it can put some things into perspective.
The debate about what influences/decides our actions, being it instincts (survival, sexual - internal factors) or social conventions, conditioning and standards (morals, rules, all outside factors) can be solved in the following way: both factors influence and decide our lives/fates.
Anything that applies to animals can be applied to humans, so follow my analogy: a rat or a dog can be satisfied if it has its internal/instinctual needs taken care of (food, reproduction), however, the moment other rats/dogs enter the picture (social interaction), and a comparation/differentiation can be made between the two beings, animals (and humans) are naturally inclined to make a judgement/choice, which means one option will be evaluated higher than the other (this is an insight that can be saved from praxeology). That's why hypergamy (and just wanting to have the best/better/most instead of the worst/less in general) arises, and this is why envy and also intra-sexual competition arises, from comparation, which is natural in social/external interactions. In the same way, if you give two groups of rats/dogs different amounts of resources, you will see decrease in motivation and social conflict arise, even if both groups were given enough to satisfy their biological needs.
This is why even monkeys can spot an unfair deal: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12913-envious-monkeys-can-spot-a-fair-deal/
Now, this does not mean that social/external factors can override and suppress natural instinct and genetic determinism. On the contrary, reason and human rationality, which arises from the human necessity of social relations --- we are born into a society and this is also a biological/deterministic necessity, since we are always born from at least two persons, we are necessarily raised by other people, so being a human cannot be simply determined by internal factors only or external factors only --- are always going to be used by humans to maximize their instinctual and biological nature (internal factors), meaning survival and reproduction, while reason, morals, technology and social conventions - "civilization" in general - are always going to be used in order for this to be achieved.
You can see this in all fields of social behaviour: as humans became civilized and the number of people interacting in a social setting grew exponentially (from pre-historic tiny groups of persons, to nomadic groups, to tribes, to ancient civilizations, to empires, to nation-states, and next the world government) social conventions developed (law, morals, obligations) and also technology developed in general, which made agriculture and livestock be more and more productive, natural resource extraction, automation, etc. All in order to feed people's ever-increasing standards for sufficiency.
However, the crucial point is that the more civilized and grouped people became throughout history, hierarchy became increasingly stratified and the difference between the levels of resources in general between social groups and the concentration of power became bigger and bigger. Remember, this is not (only) the result of global conspiracy and social engineering, this is the fate of humans for being civilized, the natural progression of history is towards concentration of power. In pre-historic times most men could be the head of their groups (lets say only scarcely grouped families existed), then you become a nomadic group and more people get in, you start to have leaders, then through wars and inter-grupo marriages you start to have tribes, then city-states, then empires, nation states, extra-national organizations (UN, NATO, etc) and finally world government. In economic terms, this also means that the difference between the amount of resources (of all kinds, money, sex, power) the top people have and the amount of the resources the masses get.
In mating dynamics, that means that the few Chads and millionaires/billionaires (the second group through paid harems of course) gets an increasingly easier access to fertilize from 1 to 10 to 100 to 1000s of women. And this means that women will increasingly prefer to share the same few Chads throughout their fertile years and be semi-official or official whores (onlyfans, sugar babying and actual sex service providing) instead of settling for an average life and normie even, which explains the drastic increase of inceldom even in normies, and by inceldom in include all types of betabuxx (and we know a normie / sub-8 will only ever be seen as a betabuxx "marriage" material guya for after the cock carousel), because they basically sell their dignity in order to use a washed-up hole and being in a cuckolding relationship (all LTRs after women acquired "rights" are cuckold relationships), which is worse than being an incel and far worse than paying escorts directly for sex only.
So, while in pre-civilizational times and social groupings a woman (and a man) would have few options to pick from and a civilizational need for maintaining a relationship and having big families (in order to acquire more resources because living standards were very harsh), the more the socials groups grow, the more options, comparation and competition arises, and femoids have a bigger and bigger pool to choose from. With globalization and the coming globalism and world government, women already have the option to pick a man from the whole world through internet and, because of media (music, tv, films, radio, whatever), now you will no longer be compared and in competition with your fellow pre-historic gatherings and tribal mates, not your neighbours or the men from your city, your region, state and not even your country, but the whole world.
This doesn't mean that certain social conditions would guarantee all incels a sexual partner and a normie to have a relationship where he's not a cuck, but the chances would be much much higher (and fairer, if you assume such a thing exists), as exemplified above.
Concluding my thoughts, reason and civilization only enabled the genetic winners to concentrate more power and resources and, since socially we only evolved towards a more and more gynocentric society (this began the moment people started becoming civilized/forming social groups), this means femoids have today basically all the social power, enabling both groups (femoids and top genetic men and billionaires) to mate between each other, leaving 95% of men with nothing or leftovers (if you would marry a non-virgin femoid whore who have "rights" you are a cuck, so currently I consider both below average and average men - meaning all sub-8s by current social standards - as incels, because they do not have the ability to be in a non-cucked relationship and will always be traded down the road or have to settle with non-virgins).
Reason and civilization came full circle, they enabled humanity to live exclusively in order to fill their needs. Since the necessity for gathering resources and forming family units is lower than ever and almost non-existent, humans will increasingly live to fulfill their reproductive needs, which means sexual attraction will be the only relevant aspect a femoid will have to consider when picking a mate.
The sad part is that this is how it was always supposed to be. This is nature making sure only the top human material is able to reproduce, and this is what civilization perfectly enabled them to do. However you can't ever redirect/fix civilization in order to make things fair in terms of mate selection - reason is always destined to be a tool of instinct/nature, it was meant to be this way and that's the only direction it's going.
This means that since the dawn of times It's only ever ment to get worse for lower-tier men and incels in general.
It never began.
