Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Theory The myth of the "slut"

D

Dial

Banned
-
Joined
Aug 31, 2021
Posts
23
Online
20h 40m
Here on this forum, I see a lot of people hating on females, especially young females, who act "slutty" because they act "slutty". And justifiably so- these females are often engaging in behavior that concentrates even more of the available sexual capital in the hands of "Chads" (I don't hold the same notions about the nature of Chad- let's just call them "top males"- as this forum, but I digress) decreases their chance of getting sexually aroused by anyone other than these top males, and decreases their ability to commit to a long-term relationship with a non-top male, thus increasing the chances of catastrophic breakup and delaying childbirth and families. However, that's not really what I'm here to talk about today.

I'm here to ask the question-"why is slutting fundmentally BAD for incels?" And the answer is, well, NOT what you think. You see, there is a cultural myth, often spouted by tradcons, that a "slut" is a female who will have sex with any man with a penis (who asks her), and do so enthusiastically. And that this is bad because her "body count" goes up, or she "delays marriage" or some shit. As if the problem with sluts is that they aren't selective ENOUGH. :feelshaha::feelshaha::feelshaha:

Let's look up the definition of "slut", shall we? According to Dictionary.com https://www.dictionary.com/browse/slut , a slut is, "a person, especially a woman, who is sexually promiscuous." And what does "promiscuous" mean? Well- according to Dictionary.com (same website), promiscuous is- "characterized by or involving indiscriminate mingling or association, especially having sexual relations with a number of partners on a casual basis." Did you catch that? I highlighted the word "indiscriminate" for a reason.

This means that the myth is that a "sluts" are INDISCRIMINATE in their sexual selection, offering LITTLE OR NO SELECTION WHATSOEVER in their sexual partners. Meaning that both bottom 80% males and top males are both equally likely (and very likely) to get a "yes" from "sluts" if they simply walk up to them and ask them for sex. :feelshaha: And that "conservatives" "tradcons" "right-wingers" "patriarchy supporters" etc. are fighting AGAINST what would obviously, if true, end inceldom. :feelstastyman:

I mean, think about it: If feminism results in more "sluts" walking around, and "sluts" are an "international problem across the West and more largely the world" according to the right, shouldn't incels side with the left, who are the "pro-slut" side? I mean it makes sense, right?

Except it doesn't at all. :feelshaha: Why? Because sluts ARE EXTREMELY SELECTIVE when it comes to choosing partners. They are "top male only", and the "sluttier" they are, the MORE selective they are. "But wait," you say, "that doesn't make any sense. I thought sluts were UNSELECTIVE, as per the dictionary definition of the word? So why is it that with increase in "sluttiness", we have an INCREASE in standards and inceldom?" Well, the answer to this perplexing mystery is that the females who are CALLED sluts aren't TRUE sluts, but rather something else. Or more accurately, they are "sluts", not trusluts. :feelsthink:

From this perspective, we can now see that the "dictionary definition" of "slut", "promiscuous", etc., and the general misunderstanding surrounding this is USED to pull young, teenage males into a form of complacency with hypergamy. To them, of COURSE they would want to side with the "side" that says promiscuity (perceived as females having lots of UNSELECTIVE sex) is good and "sex-positive" or whatever, because the Zeitgeist that they follow being pro-promiscuity would, in theory, increase their sexual chances. This gets many teenagers trapped in bluepill logic, as they just figure that if they simp harder or "approach more women", they will eventually be successful, and if they're not it means it's their fault for not having a good enough personality. By the time that they have been conditioned by the bluepill/Zeitgeist to believe that sluttiness/promiscuity is simply females having lots of sex, not necessarily with them (because that would be ENTITLEMENT :feelshaha:) it's already too late, they're caught in the trap. It's a classic bait-and-switch.

Basically, the common cultural mythology of the "slut" is a lie, and "right-wingers" feed into it just as much as left-wingers. :feelsUnreal::feelspuke: The left isn't pro-"slut", they're pro-hypergamy. "Sluts" are not really what they say. A sufficient population of TRUsluts (even 5% of females) would end inceldom tomorrow. They don't really exist, at least not nearly in the numbers the label would suggest.

So stop attacking "sluts", trusluts are desirable for society, actually (but nonexistent :feelskek:) . Instead, mindfuck them by pointing out that they aren't fitting with the dictionary definition of the word when they act so hypergamously.

Nine months ago, I created a Discord server to test my hypothesis. I called it "TruSlut Union", and the purpose was to point out this contradiction and get trusluts who were willing to have sex with some limited number of guys over a certain period of time for free. Any guy on the server within a 50-mile radius could request sex, and she would have to give it to him as long as she had not overstepped her numerial limit for the month (I think it was 10 per month or something, females on the server lobbied to make the number lower than it was originally, which was 20 per month).

On the server, over the course of one month of tryharding to make the server better and upkeep it, I got one verified female to post pictures of herself from multiple angles and put up an advertisement in the advertisement channel. She was in Helinski, Finland. Then, shortly after that happened, I ran away from home due to personal problems with my dad, and my dad got my "best friend" to wipe my Discord account clean "for my safety" just because I had a MAP server. :feelshaha:He didn't know my password, but hacked it anyway. :cryfeels::cryfeels::cryfeels: Shows you how loyal irl "friends" are to you, ultimately.

The server is still up, but I guarantee it's dead now, and it's inaccessible: https://disboard.org/server/788118754843426827

There are no real sluts. If there were, it would be good. There are only thots.

I hope one day we can find a way to get all females to be trusluts, then we wouldn't even need enforced monogamy to keep society stable (at least in the short run).

Feminism, sex-positivity, it's all about breeding nerds and guys who pursue meaning in productive and wonderful ways out of existence, ma doods. That's it. All it ever was, really.

Thanks for getting to the end. I hope you got something out of this post. Follow me idk. :bigbrain:
 
Last edited:
Animecel2D

Animecel2D

Hee Ho!
★★★★★
Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Posts
96,164
Online
452d 13h 36m
 
Deleted member 20073

Deleted member 20073

‏‏‎
-
Joined
Jul 26, 2019
Posts
9,136
Online
132d 21h 19m
overcomplicating things is a sign of low iq
 
L

Linesnap99

Overlord
★★★★★
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Posts
7,458
Online
53d 10h 12m
no point in not calling them sluts. and they know what they are.
 
RandomGuy

RandomGuy

Mythic
★★
Joined
Feb 20, 2018
Posts
4,608
Online
105d 2h 56m
unsettling

unsettling

Demigod
★★★★★
Joined
Apr 27, 2019
Posts
79,203
Online
186d 13h 37m
Dialgatime321 @Dialgatime321
 
unuser

unuser

Relationships are a basic human right
Joined
Oct 6, 2021
Posts
585
Online
7d 14h 57m
Very interesting op, I've read it all.

But, dictionaries are merely descriptive and not prescriptive, so it can't say what is the correct definition of a word, because languages are constantly evolving and organically modifying themselves. Dictionaries only record what meanings people may be giving to the words in a given moment. (I learned this the hard way getting my ass beat in a debate :smonk:)

However your insight about feminism is interesting. :feelsokman:

I think the only solution to our problem is state-enforced eugenics, either to reduce the amount of males relative to females or to ensure all men to be born aren't genetically shit, or both. And free surgeries and social/sexual training to all incels.
 
Last edited:
Overdosed

Overdosed

No glowcel badge for face or height
-
Joined
May 24, 2021
Posts
562
Online
6d 5h 8m
I wonder if this means that women who insult others as "sluts" conveys the insulted as '(openly) willing to sleep with non-chads', unlike the average woman (chadsexuals)?
 
RecessedChinCel

RecessedChinCel

Major
★★★★★
Joined
May 19, 2021
Posts
2,440
Online
52d 19m
Rotter

Rotter

LDARcel
-
Joined
Sep 5, 2021
Posts
2,855
Online
15d 14h 48m
What the fuck is this bullshit
 
NorthernWind

NorthernWind

Commander
★★★
Joined
Feb 13, 2021
Posts
3,230
Online
76d 3h 39m
"Sluts are selective".

WW.
 
HeimatVertrieben

HeimatVertrieben

Bis zum bitteren Ende
★★
Joined
Sep 24, 2021
Posts
139
Online
1d 5h 36m
Dial said:
Then, shortly after that happened, I ran away from home due to personal problems with my dad, and my dad got my "best friend" to wipe my Discord account clean "for my safety" just because I had a MAP server. :feelshaha:
what the fuck:feelswhat:

Anyway, you need to stop making such a big deal of semantics, and actually think about what is really meant when people say things. The usage of slut is a holdover from a time when looks weren't as highly valued in society, and men upheld a pro-civilization zeitgeist where a man's worth was what he could provide to society, rather than just his looks. In the past, a pretty guy who didn't work was generally considered worthless, and so in that framing, a slut is a woman who fucks worthless men. The word is a psyop on women to get them to prefer a productive normie over some thugmaxxed chad, and think that picking the latter would be a lack of taste on their part. Women are highly susceptible to groupthink, so this kind of stuff actually worked even though it seems dumb. Men figured all this shit out, how to keep women in check, how to build civilization, etc.

It has all been figured out before, and we simply need to return to those old systems. Traditionalism is the answer, forced monogamy is the answer. The concept of a true slut makes zero sense, every biological being simply must have a selection system, that's how evolution works, all you can do is influence through social structures whether that selection favors you or not. You seem to have some resistance to this idea, which no incel ever should. Don't be greedy, accept your looks match.
 
AlphaCentauri

AlphaCentauri

Indo-europaiom dəngweh
★★★★★
Joined
Aug 22, 2021
Posts
5,646
Online
28d 19h 46m
Retarded GAYcel thread. Fornication is satanic and destroys every society, that's why jews promote it throughout the world and most importantly for them - in the countries of western civilizational type - the engine, the leading force of the planet. Fornication is unnatural and destroys the bonding between people, it distords the inter-sexual relationships and such relations in general, it's the exact oposite of love. But it affects women more than men, whores can't be good wives nor mothers.
 
Last edited:
Deleted member 20073

Deleted member 20073

‏‏‎
-
Joined
Jul 26, 2019
Posts
9,136
Online
132d 21h 19m
unuser said:
Dictionaries only record what meanings people may be giving to the words in a given moment.

the meaning extractable from words is reflectivity of our coadjuvancy in describing and creating reality.
 
D

Dial

Banned
-
Joined
Aug 31, 2021
Posts
23
Online
20h 40m
OwlGod said:
overcomplicating things is a sign of low iq
Eh you're probably right, my brain is fried on psychiatric drugs right now. But I have gotten a proctored IQ test before, and it was around 116.

unuser said:
Very interesting op, I've read it all.

But, dictionaries are merely descriptive and not prescriptive, so it can't say what is the correct definition of a word, because languages are constantly evolving and organically modifying themselves. Dictionaries only record what meanings people may be giving to the words in a given moment. (I learned this the hard way getting my ass beat in a debate :smonk:)

However your insight about feminism is interesting. :feelsokman:

I think the only solution to our problem is state-enforced eugenics, either to reduce the amount of males relative to females or to ensure all men to be born aren't genetically shit, or both. And free surgeries and social/sexual training to all incels.
Thanks for reading my whole post!

Dictionaries aren't perfect, but it would be easy enough for them to change the definition of (sexual) promiscuity, for example, to better fit reality. The fact that they don't shows that there are lingering cultural misconceptions.

Eugenics is great and all, but it won't solve inceldom, it will just put different people at the top. Since the sexual market is a zero-sum game, one man's gain is another's loss.

Overdosed said:
I wonder if this means that women who insult others as "sluts" conveys the insulted as '(openly) willing to sleep with non-chads', unlike the average woman (chadsexuals)?
I wish, lol.

In reality, it's just enforcing whatever traditional social norms are still in place, which why you hear it less nowadays.

HeimatVertrieben said:
what the fuck:feelswhat:

Anyway, you need to stop making such a big deal of semantics, and actually think about what is really meant when people say things. The usage of slut is a holdover from a time when looks weren't as highly valued in society, and men upheld a pro-civilization zeitgeist where a man's worth was what he could provide to society, rather than just his looks. In the past, a pretty guy who didn't work was generally considered worthless, and so in that framing, a slut is a woman who fucks worthless men. The word is a psyop on women to get them to prefer a productive normie over some thugmaxxed chad, and think that picking the latter would be a lack of taste on their part. Women are highly susceptible to groupthink, so this kind of stuff actually worked even though it seems dumb. Men figured all this shit out, how to keep women in check, how to build civilization, etc.

It has all been figured out before, and we simply need to return to those old systems. Traditionalism is the answer, forced monogamy is the answer. The concept of a true slut makes zero sense, every biological being simply must have a selection system, that's how evolution works, all you can do is influence through social structures whether that selection favors you or not. You seem to have some resistance to this idea, which no incel ever should. Don't be greedy, accept your looks match.
JFL at thinking females ever preferred productive normies to thugmaxxed chads for anything other than resources. :feelskek:

However, interesting insight regarding the usage of the word, "slut". I still don't see how females having no selection bias would correlate to thugmaxxed males having better chances at sex unless the default was preferring productivity over thugmaxxing, which once again I don't think was ever the case.

Or are you saying that the purpose of the word was to get females who preferred thugmaxxed guys to productive guys to THINK that they had no standards, thus making them ashamed, when they really did? The rest of your comment seems to point towards this.

"Every biological being has a selection system"- true, but to think it would be easier to get females to like something different than to be unselective seems silly. It's easier to get guys to be unselective than to get them to prefer landwhale, for example. So why wouldn't it be true the other way around?

"Don't be greedy, accept your looks match" But why when we can do so much more, without compromising society?

AlphaCentauri said:
Retarded GAYcel thread. Fornication is satanic and destroys every society, that's why jews promote it throughout the world and most importantly for them - in the countries of western civilizational type - the engine, the leading force of the planet. Fornication is unnatural and destroys the bonding between people, it distords the inter-sexual relationships and such relations in general, it's the exact oposite of love. But it affects women more than men, whores can't be good wives nor mothers.
JFL at the Cringestians in this comments section.

But really though, good luck getting young people on your side preaching about "satanism" and "fornication". Traditionalism didn't make people happy. Modernism/post-modernism doesn't, either. We're going to have to forge a new path, a third way, to propose as an alternative to young people, if we want to succeed.
 
Caesercel

Caesercel

Just pass me the rope already
★★★★★
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Posts
15,571
Online
198d 16h 33m
If she ever had more than one partner she's a certified slut
 
I want to believe

I want to believe

I enjoy self-destruction.
★★★★★
Joined
Sep 15, 2020
Posts
8,073
Online
61d 33m
Sometimes I think about that. So, I agree with you about the wrong definition of the word "slut".
 
beyond repair

beyond repair

Officer
★★★★★
Joined
Sep 12, 2021
Posts
967
Online
25d 4h 53m
Op ignore the morons. Your post is based asf. :blackpill::blackpill::blackpill::blackpill:

Bluepill conditioning is justified in the environment where foid sexuality is repressed in key ways. American right-wingers cling to that old set of books as if hoping that, by denying the reality of the post-Sexual Revolution foid's marital and sexual behavior, women will choose to conform to the behavior that used to be expected of them in more conservative times. Slut-shaming stigmatized female non-monagamous behavior while (as you observe) on the surface re-inforcing bluepill indoctrination about the true nature of their behavior.

This is why I am pro-legalization of sex work. It really is a way of redistributing female erotic capital hence why the female hivemind in the U.S resists it.
 
kanyepilled

kanyepilled

footsketball jersey wearer
★★
Joined
Mar 13, 2021
Posts
4,624
Online
75d 2h 28m
what the fuck is up with greycels coming on here and typing literal paragraphs of water is wet posts? perhaps its just them venting ideas they've built up for awhile in an environment where they won't be persecuted for it, but everything you just said can be summed up with "AWALT."
 
B

based_meme

I.N.C.E.L. High Command
★★★★★
Joined
Oct 11, 2019
Posts
11,562
Online
140d 22h 48m
OP is correct. They are still sluts, AND they're more selective. What OP hasn't taken into account is that their promiscuity is directed towards the top-tier men only. All the other men (us included) she doesn't see as potential sexual partners, so to the rest of men who aren't chads, tyrones etc., she is completely platonic towards. We never see how much of a dirty whore she is, because she saves all of that for chad, who does everything from choking, to spitting and pissing on her, if he so pleases, and she gladly submits.
 
D

Dial

Banned
-
Joined
Aug 31, 2021
Posts
23
Online
20h 40m
beyond repair said:
Op ignore the morons. Your post is based asf. :blackpill::blackpill::blackpill::blackpill:

Bluepill conditioning is justified in the environment where foid sexuality is repressed in key ways. American right-wingers cling to that old set of books as if hoping that, by denying the reality of the post-Sexual Revolution foid's marital and sexual behavior, women will choose to conform to the behavior that used to be expected of them in more conservative times. Slut-shaming stigmatized female non-monagamous behavior while (as you observe) on the surface re-inforcing bluepill indoctrination about the true nature of their behavior.

This is why I am pro-legalization of sex work. It really is a way of redistributing female erotic capital hence why the female hivemind in the U.S resists it.
See, I agree with you to a point. It's important to ensure a more equitable distribution of erotic capital. And you are right on the money with regards to American right-wingers, etc.

However, I don't think that bluepill conditioning is ever justified, even under patriarchy. I think that this mindset, this tolerance of reinforcing bluepill narratives, causes all soft patriarchies to eventually dissolve into more egalitarianism. If we want to create a system that lasts, it must actively try to convince people that females aren't oppressed, that they are hypergamous unless made not to be through incentives, etc.

I also don't know how much prostitution solves in the long run. Will these females end up as single moms, or will they, more likely, contribute to people waiting longer and longer before having kids? Who will take these used up females? Well, we all know the answer, but is that really good?

Honestly, if trusluts were a thing, we could just allow randomness and paternity tests to sort everything out, with males being forced to take care of their children and the females they impregnate with some kind of rotation, and then have all relationships be open relationships but with the raw use of vagina off limits, and people could get out their promiscuous and degenerate urges without the complete destruction of the concept of civilization. It's less than ideal, but it compromises at a point not too alien to modernity, yet without a significant incel problem.

And Kamala Harris supports prostitution legalization. So the idea isn't exactly entirely outside of the zeitgeist.

based_meme said:
OP is correct. They are still sluts, AND they're more selective. What OP hasn't taken into account is that their promiscuity is directed towards the top-tier men only. All the other men (us included) she doesn't see as potential sexual partners, so to the rest of men who aren't chads, tyrones etc., she is completely platonic towards. We never see how much of a dirty whore she is, because she saves all of that for chad, who does everything from choking, to spitting and pissing on her, if he so pleases, and she gladly submits.
I have taken that into account, and that's part of the idea I was attempting to express. If I failed, that's my fault.
 
DepravedAndDeprived

DepravedAndDeprived

And then one day, for no reason at all...
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Posts
5,016
Online
45d 13h 26m
Dial said:
This means that the myth is that a "sluts" are INDISCRIMINATE in their sexual selection, offering LITTLE OR NO SELECTION WHATSOEVER in their sexual partners. Meaning that both bottom 80% males and top males are both equally likely (and very likely) to get a "yes" from "sluts" if they simply walk up to them and ask them for sex. :feelshaha: And that "conservatives" "tradcons" "right-wingers" "patriarchy supporters" etc. are fighting AGAINST what would obviously, if true, end inceldom. :feelstastyman:
Your point is merely autistic semantics so far.

When we say she's a slut the emphasis is not on whether the partners are discriminate, regardless of whether the dictionary implies that.
 
B

based_meme

I.N.C.E.L. High Command
★★★★★
Joined
Oct 11, 2019
Posts
11,562
Online
140d 22h 48m
Dial said:
I have taken that into account, and that's part of the idea I was attempting to express. If I failed, that's my fault.
Then WTF. You're not saying anything new that we don't already know.

Water is wet tier post.
 
ThoughtfulCel

ThoughtfulCel

G.O.R.I.L.L.A _M.A.X.I.N.G
★★★★★
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Posts
20,326
Online
357d 12h 26m
Ask me how I knew this was made by a greycel
 
Last edited:
Caesercel

Caesercel

Just pass me the rope already
★★★★★
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Posts
15,571
Online
198d 16h 33m
Caesercel said:
If she ever had more than one partner she's a certified slut
The only correct answer
 
Deleted member 20073

Deleted member 20073

‏‏‎
-
Joined
Jul 26, 2019
Posts
9,136
Online
132d 21h 19m
Overdosed said:
I wonder if this means that women who insult others as "sluts" conveys the insulted as '(openly) willing to sleep with non-chads', unlike the average woman (chadsexuals)?

that just means a personal issue. someone can be something but still insult other for being the same because of unrelated reasons.
 
B

based_meme

I.N.C.E.L. High Command
★★★★★
Joined
Oct 11, 2019
Posts
11,562
Online
140d 22h 48m
ThoughtfulCel said:
Ask me how I knew this was made by a greycel
KEK
 
B

belowhumanity

Recruit
★★★★★
Joined
Jun 21, 2021
Posts
414
Online
11d 21h 13m
this is just far too complicated for a fucking incel forum lmfao. we arent stupid, literally nobody thought that sluts arent selective
 
HeimatVertrieben

HeimatVertrieben

Bis zum bitteren Ende
★★
Joined
Sep 24, 2021
Posts
139
Online
1d 5h 36m
Dial said:
JFL at thinking females ever preferred productive normies to thugmaxxed chads for anything other than resources. :feelskek:

However, interesting insight regarding the usage of the word, "slut". I still don't see how females having no selection bias would correlate to thugmaxxed males having better chances at sex unless the default was preferring productivity over thugmaxxing, which once again I don't think was ever the case.

Or are you saying that the purpose of the word was to get females who preferred thugmaxxed guys to productive guys to THINK that they had no standards, thus making them ashamed, when they really did? The rest of your comment seems to point towards this.

"Every biological being has a selection system"- true, but to think it would be easier to get females to like something different than to be unselective seems silly. It's easier to get guys to be unselective than to get them to prefer landwhale, for example. So why wouldn't it be true the other way around?
Yes, you have it correct, I meant the word was a strategy to control how women thought. In any case, resources mattered a whole lot more in the past than now, you would literally starve if things went bad, and criminals were simply killed. In this context thugmaxxed chad looks a lot less appealing. You might say this is betabuxxing, but the difference back then is that the guy had a radically better chance of not getting cucked. If a wife cheated on her husband and was found out, she would be socially ostracized, which also mattered a WHOLE lot more at that time. Not a perfect system, but much better than what we have now.

Your point about making females unselective being easier than making them prefer something else is so dumb I really can't believe it. Everything I know about women would contradict this. They are social creatures, they look at what other people value and just try and copy that. That's what makes them so dumb, and so controllable. But trying to remove selection is simply idiotic, my point was that it goes against all evolution, and so would be like pushing a boulder uphill sociologically. How do you extol the value of no values? It makes no sense. Besides, selecting partially for productive men isn't even that bad an evolutionary strategy in most cases, so it wouldn't end up being that unnatural.

And how would child-rearing work? For society to function the woman needs to settle and raise a family at some point. Why would I want my wife to have been a slut? It ruins pair-bonding abilities. I would prefer an ugly virgin who wouldn't cheat on me to some slut supermodel that would just fuck some other guy for the novelty of it.

You talk about how unlikely a return to traditionalism is, but honestly, you have a terrible idea for a system that has never even been tried.
 
Mentally lost cel

Mentally lost cel

Overlord
★★★★★
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Posts
6,923
Online
34d 16h 11m
Dial said:
that a "slut" is a female who will have sex with any man with a penis
This is unironically true for thugmaxxed ntmaxx or chads, that’s why it’s fucking bad
Dial said:
Every biological being has a selection system
lol they would fuck truecel if he was thugmaxxed, there is no selection system and it doesn’t even work
Dial said:
Here on this forum, I see a lot of people hating on females, especially young females, who act "slutty" because they act "slutty". And justifiably so- these females are often engaging in behavior that concentrates even more of the available sexual capital in the hands of "Chads" (I don't hold the same notions about the nature of Chad- let's just call them "top males"- as this forum, but I digress) decreases their chance of getting sexually aroused by anyone other than these top males, and decreases their ability to commit to a long-term relationship with a non-top male, thus increasing the chances of catastrophic breakup and delaying childbirth and families. However, that's not really what I'm here to talk about today.

I'm here to ask the question-"why is slutting fundmentally BAD for incels?" And the answer is, well, NOT what you think. You see, there is a cultural myth, often spouted by tradcons, that a "slut" is a female who will have sex with any man with a penis (who asks her), and do so enthusiastically. And that this is bad because her "body count" goes up, or she "delays marriage" or some shit. As if the problem with sluts is that they aren't selective ENOUGH. :feelshaha::feelshaha::feelshaha:

Let's look up the definition of "slut", shall we? According to Dictionary.com https://www.dictionary.com/browse/slut , a slut is, "a person, especially a woman, who is sexually promiscuous." And what does "promiscuous" mean? Well- according to Dictionary.com (same website), promiscuous is- "characterized by or involving indiscriminate mingling or association, especially having sexual relations with a number of partners on a casual basis." Did you catch that? I highlighted the word "indiscriminate" for a reason.

This means that the myth is that a "sluts" are INDISCRIMINATE in their sexual selection, offering LITTLE OR NO SELECTION WHATSOEVER in their sexual partners. Meaning that both bottom 80% males and top males are both equally likely (and very likely) to get a "yes" from "sluts" if they simply walk up to them and ask them for sex. :feelshaha: And that "conservatives" "tradcons" "right-wingers" "patriarchy supporters" etc. are fighting AGAINST what would obviously, if true, end inceldom. :feelstastyman:

I mean, think about it: If feminism results in more "sluts" walking around, and "sluts" are an "international problem across the West and more largely the world" according to the right, shouldn't incels side with the left, who are the "pro-slut" side? I mean it makes sense, right?

Except it doesn't at all. :feelshaha: Why? Because sluts ARE EXTREMELY SELECTIVE when it comes to choosing partners. They are "top male only", and the "sluttier" they are, the MORE selective they are. "But wait," you say, "that doesn't make any sense. I thought sluts were UNSELECTIVE, as per the dictionary definition of the word? So why is it that with increase in "sluttiness", we have an INCREASE in standards and inceldom?" Well, the answer to this perplexing mystery is that the females who are CALLED sluts aren't TRUE sluts, but rather something else. Or more accurately, they are "sluts", not trusluts. :feelsthink:

From this perspective, we can now see that the "dictionary definition" of "slut", "promiscuous", etc., and the general misunderstanding surrounding this is USED to pull young, teenage males into a form of complacency with hypergamy. To them, of COURSE they would want to side with the "side" that says promiscuity (perceived as females having lots of UNSELECTIVE sex) is good and "sex-positive" or whatever, because the Zeitgeist that they follow being pro-promiscuity would, in theory, increase their sexual chances. This gets many teenagers trapped in bluepill logic, as they just figure that if they simp harder or "approach more women", they will eventually be successful, and if they're not it means it's their fault for not having a good enough personality. By the time that they have been conditioned by the bluepill/Zeitgeist to believe that sluttiness/promiscuity is simply females having lots of sex, not necessarily with them (because that would be ENTITLEMENT :feelshaha:) it's already too late, they're caught in the trap. It's a classic bait-and-switch.

Basically, the common cultural mythology of the "slut" is a lie, and "right-wingers" feed into it just as much as left-wingers. :feelsUnreal::feelspuke: The left isn't pro-"slut", they're pro-hypergamy. "Sluts" are not really what they say. A sufficient population of TRUsluts (even 5% of females) would end inceldom tomorrow. They don't really exist, at least not nearly in the numbers the label would suggest.

So stop attacking "sluts", trusluts are desirable for society, actually (but nonexistent :feelskek:) . Instead, mindfuck them by pointing out that they aren't fitting with the dictionary definition of the word when they act so hypergamously.

Nine months ago, I created a Discord server to test my hypothesis. I called it "TruSlut Union", and the purpose was to point out this contradiction and get trusluts who were willing to have sex with some limited number of guys over a certain period of time for free. Any guy on the server within a 50-mile radius could request sex, and she would have to give it to him as long as she had not overstepped her numerial limit for the month (I think it was 10 per month or something, females on the server lobbied to make the number lower than it was originally, which was 20 per month).

On the server, over the course of one month of tryharding to make the server better and upkeep it, I got one verified female to post pictures of herself from multiple angles and put up an advertisement in the advertisement channel. She was in Helinski, Finland. Then, shortly after that happened, I ran away from home due to personal problems with my dad, and my dad got my "best friend" to wipe my Discord account clean "for my safety" just because I had a MAP server. :feelshaha:He didn't know my password, but hacked it anyway. :cryfeels::cryfeels::cryfeels: Shows you how loyal irl "friends" are to you, ultimately.

The server is still up, but I guarantee it's dead now, and it's inaccessible: https://disboard.org/server/788118754843426827

There are no real sluts. If there were, it would be good. There are only thots.

I hope one day we can find a way to get all females to be trusluts, then we wouldn't even need enforced monogamy to keep society stable (at least in the short run).

Feminism, sex-positivity, it's all about breeding nerds and guys who pursue meaning in productive and wonderful ways out of existence, ma doods. That's it. All it ever was, really.

Thanks for getting to the end. I hope you got something out of this post. Follow me idk. :bigbrain:
They literally throw themselves to thugs who kill them or get them in serious trouble by destroying the society
 
Last edited:
C

Cope or die

Recruit
★★★★★
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Posts
468
Online
8d 21h 34m
The thing about sluts is they are only interested in sex. Given how many options women have for opening their legs, they can easily have lots of meaningless empty sex with the top men. There are no other requirements except being a top tier guy for sluts because again they just want sex. Now other women, that arent sluts, and need more than just sex, will be more selective based on qualities other than meaningless sex. They also wont give up sex so easy. So the non-sluts will make men offer them more than just sex and they give the man sex in exchange for whatever else it is that he has to offer besides looks and sex. Thats the difference.
 
Escthectrler

Escthectrler

Veteran
★★★
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Posts
1,284
Online
27d 17h 58m
Not one letter
 
Izayacel

Izayacel

V L O V "
★★★★★
Joined
May 5, 2018
Posts
9,133
Online
30d 12h 11m
OwlGod said:
overcomplicating things is a sign of low iq
your avi is the very definition os Slut
 
shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape7
shape8
Top