It will never work. You are doing the exact opposite of what you're trying to do. The blackpill has everything from professional peer-reviewed scientific journals to crass amateur catfishing experiments on dating sites to support it, all readily available at everyone's fingertips. The facts are already there for those who are willing to learn. By trying to force it on people who don't, you're wasting your time and pushing them deeper into their bluepilled haze.
Most of you suck, suck, suck at arguing for the blackpill. Just recently, one of you tried to argue with your therapist and used a webcomic to prove or illustrate your claims. You will step into an argument with no sources or facts, nothing but the anti-credential of a 100% failure rate with foids, with friends and loved ones and strangers online who probably already see you as a pathetic loser whose every opinion is less than worthless. Or you'll step into an argument confident that because the facts support the blackpill, you'll be able to pull sources out of a hat called Google and wipe the floor with the opposing statement without even reading those sources, not even the abstracts. You will make outlandish claims, or at least claims that seem outlandish to people not already firm in the blackpill camp, without considering how they make you and your argument look. Indeed, the very same people who swear up and down that looks rule the sexual marketplace seem to be completely oblivious to the power of optics on the marketplace of ideas. You may be blackpilled on sex and relationships, but on rhetoric and debate, you're as bluepilled as the pastiest soyboy on Reddit. An idea isn't necessarily wrong just because it's argued poorly, but the damage you do with a poor argument is such that you'd serve it better with no argument at all.
By arguing with bluepillers and insisting they're wrong, you are attacking their egos. Egos they will protect by any means necessary. They have an emotional attachment to their beliefs just like you do to yours; the thought of being wrong hurts. A successful demolition of their argument won't make them rethink their beliefs. It will only hurt their pride, make them resent you, and ultimately feel stronger in their dogma. Even worse is when you let them beat you, since they not only feel stronger in their beliefs, but superior to you, their defeated opponent of an opposing camp. This is the scenario most likely to play out since you probably suck at arguing.
So, stop. Just stop. It's time to stop. Think about it: how many of you were former bluepillers who "saw the light" after some autist from this forum called you a butthole-sniffing moron before linking to a half-dozen studies he never read, or some amateur Tinder experiments that wouldn't pass in Sociology 101 let alone a professional review board? Probably none; I'd bet good money your transition was more gradual. Save your time, save your dignity, let the blackpill be found by those who seek it and leave the rest to rot.
Most of you suck, suck, suck at arguing for the blackpill. Just recently, one of you tried to argue with your therapist and used a webcomic to prove or illustrate your claims. You will step into an argument with no sources or facts, nothing but the anti-credential of a 100% failure rate with foids, with friends and loved ones and strangers online who probably already see you as a pathetic loser whose every opinion is less than worthless. Or you'll step into an argument confident that because the facts support the blackpill, you'll be able to pull sources out of a hat called Google and wipe the floor with the opposing statement without even reading those sources, not even the abstracts. You will make outlandish claims, or at least claims that seem outlandish to people not already firm in the blackpill camp, without considering how they make you and your argument look. Indeed, the very same people who swear up and down that looks rule the sexual marketplace seem to be completely oblivious to the power of optics on the marketplace of ideas. You may be blackpilled on sex and relationships, but on rhetoric and debate, you're as bluepilled as the pastiest soyboy on Reddit. An idea isn't necessarily wrong just because it's argued poorly, but the damage you do with a poor argument is such that you'd serve it better with no argument at all.
By arguing with bluepillers and insisting they're wrong, you are attacking their egos. Egos they will protect by any means necessary. They have an emotional attachment to their beliefs just like you do to yours; the thought of being wrong hurts. A successful demolition of their argument won't make them rethink their beliefs. It will only hurt their pride, make them resent you, and ultimately feel stronger in their dogma. Even worse is when you let them beat you, since they not only feel stronger in their beliefs, but superior to you, their defeated opponent of an opposing camp. This is the scenario most likely to play out since you probably suck at arguing.
So, stop. Just stop. It's time to stop. Think about it: how many of you were former bluepillers who "saw the light" after some autist from this forum called you a butthole-sniffing moron before linking to a half-dozen studies he never read, or some amateur Tinder experiments that wouldn't pass in Sociology 101 let alone a professional review board? Probably none; I'd bet good money your transition was more gradual. Save your time, save your dignity, let the blackpill be found by those who seek it and leave the rest to rot.
