Wrong, the anger in chad is based on real experiences where these people judge low status men based on looks themselves.
Okay, I'll think about it. I think you're right about that
You are the one arbitrarly judging all incels as ''envious''
This is my guess. I am still confused by what you say about hating all the chads. Obviously, not all of them judge you by your looks.
It's obvious that the intent behind your posts are nothing but a pathetic attempt to gaslight and victim blaming.
in a dispute, truth is born. Sometimes I can persistently argue a position in order to hear good arguments. That's why I created this thread. Thanks to you, I will think about a lot. Don't be mad at me)
I do not blame those who are victims of lookism. I know how disgusting it is. My statements about envy do not apply to all forum participants, some have a well-founded opinion
Wrong, it's women and normalfaggots being shallow sociopath retards, thing that you unironically criticizes incels for without no proof, while defending them being shallow and lookist, as I previously said.
If we are not talking about lookism, but about abstinence and lack of a sexual partner, then I think that sexual selection plays a role here. Chads are to blame in the sense that they beat us in the competition, and females choose them - but after all, when there is a choice, people always choose the best
You aren't. You are against apparent ''lookism'' from incels, while you get outraged at us for criticizing normalfaggots and women for being shallow lookists.
Sorry if I made you angry, be kinder, man. I am against lookism, but as I said, I try to defend a certain position in order to hear the arguments. Thanks to you I got them and now I have food for thought
You also have this issue where you contradict yourself many times, as I pointed out 3 times across your previous posts. Your most comical contradiction is advocating all humans as souless NPCs that can't control their actions and at the same time getting outraged as incels apparently ''generalizing'' everyone.
Lookism and sexual selection are two different things. Honestly, my views are too complex for me to describe my own shitty English ... In general, I distinguish between contemptuous attitude towards people on the basis of external signs (lookism) and the choice of a sexual partner. My claims about instinct were about sexual selection. There is no contradiction between not wanting to have sex with a person, but at the same time respecting him
When I thought a lot about lookism, I quickly came to the conclusion that it was useless to fight it. I just took it for granted and moved on. I said "yes, the world is shitty, but I won't do anything about it" and began to live on without bothering my head
If we talk about my life, I create a halo effect with my competencies: people do not care how I look when I am competent. You are a smart person, I think you will succeed.
A certain degree of lookism is the firmware of our brain, turn on children's cartoons with ugly villain characters and kind, beautiful characters. You may not like the ugly person as a sexual partner, nothing can be done about it, but you can treat him with respect. Unfortunately, there will inevitably be a part of the people who will not be able to do this. But why should I care so much?
Slaves shouldn't be angry at their owners. Every human looks for their own interests.
Starving children shouldn't be fed. Humans naturally want to keep their own food.
Being angry at a murderer is irrational. All animals kill each other.
See how dumb that sounds? Sorry, but this logic just fails badly. If we let everyone do whatever they want, everything collapses into violent anarchy
You exaggerated my point of view, although I admit that I could put it wrong somewhere
Going to the forum, I first of all saw the posts that all beautiful people need to be killed, I was impressed by this nonsense.