I am writing blackpill theory and mostly stick to the idea that lookism and denial is what causes poor treatment of incels.
However I have developed my own bit as well. I don't normally like to do so as I think it weakens the argument but I think this might be a good point and have not seen it posted.
If people are able to believe that lookism is not real, then surely that means they themselves can believe that they do have some quality and character that earned their relationship, even if they can't identify or describe what that quality is. It simply must exist by default. Thus feeling great about themselves, by doing nothing. If lookism doesn't exist, then by default it must be something else.
Lookism has to be denied, because if it does exist, then they would not get that feeling, because it would just be based on looks that they got the relationship, and that doesn't really work for empowering the self. As things stand, there must be a reason why they merited the relationship. They don't actually have to do anything to feel that way, it just is part of being in a relationship, which itself serves as the proof that they have those qualities. People openly admit that this feeling is a big reason why they get into relationships. They say being in one helps them feel good about themselves as a person.
When people can find a safe way to believe they are better than someone else, they take it without fail, unless social norms prevent them from doing so. This isn't prevented at all, it is encouraged. This is one of those cases.
It has always been my belief that truth exists only in so far as people believe it when they can AFFORD to believe it. And if they cannot, then they just believe something false, and we have the ability to accept nonsensical arguments when there is no other alternative but are required to.
Therefore I suspect a big part of the reason incels are said to be '90% of the time, hateful people who all deserve to be alone' is because it is required for people who start relationships to feel that they are better than they actually are. This does play a large role in the way people feel good about themselves.
Lookism is a well proven and heavily studied phenomenon in human psychology. And yet as we see, it is not accepted by almost everybody. How can people deny something that is a well studied human behaviour? Because it invalidates a multitude of things people depend on for their self image, past the point where they would collapse into self hatred.
There is a smaller, secondary issue where genetics being involved simply deflates the idealization of being in a relationship, as love is something people venerate, but is really just a chemical emotion beneficial for raising children.
Also, do we all not (looking at non incels too), say about modern society that lots of people like themselves an awful lot and have an inflated ego
Is this true of the sexless? No not really Could be that relationships make people feel proud of their qualities based on denying lookism. The biggest evidence I see for this is that EVERYBODY does it even if they are undeniably terrible people, this method allows them to believe they are not, even if other sexhavers think they are.
It is not mentioned here often but 90% of incels don't hate women and this has been proven in a recent study that only about 10% of incels actually hold this belief in the total population. Wish I could find it but I don't have time. This is about the average rate in men, which means even after being incel, we don't disproportionately even dislike women. Sure this forum does, but there's 9 bluepillcels out there for every 1 of us. Bluepillcels don't want to join here because it is antithecal to their goal. But if you look at anything about incels in journalism its 'incels all hate women they are evil and all of them hate women'.
I think this is required of journalism and of public belief in order for things people depend on to exist, and this is why incels are smeared as all hateful. This ego boost is a daily part of most peoples self image, this isn't just a thing people START relationships to feel, but also get from them throughout. Married couples take the veneration that 'hey, I'm a husband! I am a winner! No it can't be lookism, that invalidates me'
I am a huge fan of the idea that evolution is visible outside of its home ground of biology. Businesses must be greedy as if they are not, they die to other businesses that are. If a society can't afford to believe something, it won't, because it can't afford to. As things stand, people rely on ridiculous reasons to hate incels. They don't make sense, but they need to be believed and so that's what happens.
Thoughts anyone? Might be wrong but I am not posting for forum points, just want to check with others who read blackpill theory.
However I have developed my own bit as well. I don't normally like to do so as I think it weakens the argument but I think this might be a good point and have not seen it posted.
If people are able to believe that lookism is not real, then surely that means they themselves can believe that they do have some quality and character that earned their relationship, even if they can't identify or describe what that quality is. It simply must exist by default. Thus feeling great about themselves, by doing nothing. If lookism doesn't exist, then by default it must be something else.
Lookism has to be denied, because if it does exist, then they would not get that feeling, because it would just be based on looks that they got the relationship, and that doesn't really work for empowering the self. As things stand, there must be a reason why they merited the relationship. They don't actually have to do anything to feel that way, it just is part of being in a relationship, which itself serves as the proof that they have those qualities. People openly admit that this feeling is a big reason why they get into relationships. They say being in one helps them feel good about themselves as a person.
When people can find a safe way to believe they are better than someone else, they take it without fail, unless social norms prevent them from doing so. This isn't prevented at all, it is encouraged. This is one of those cases.
It has always been my belief that truth exists only in so far as people believe it when they can AFFORD to believe it. And if they cannot, then they just believe something false, and we have the ability to accept nonsensical arguments when there is no other alternative but are required to.
Therefore I suspect a big part of the reason incels are said to be '90% of the time, hateful people who all deserve to be alone' is because it is required for people who start relationships to feel that they are better than they actually are. This does play a large role in the way people feel good about themselves.
Lookism is a well proven and heavily studied phenomenon in human psychology. And yet as we see, it is not accepted by almost everybody. How can people deny something that is a well studied human behaviour? Because it invalidates a multitude of things people depend on for their self image, past the point where they would collapse into self hatred.
There is a smaller, secondary issue where genetics being involved simply deflates the idealization of being in a relationship, as love is something people venerate, but is really just a chemical emotion beneficial for raising children.
Also, do we all not (looking at non incels too), say about modern society that lots of people like themselves an awful lot and have an inflated ego
Is this true of the sexless? No not really Could be that relationships make people feel proud of their qualities based on denying lookism. The biggest evidence I see for this is that EVERYBODY does it even if they are undeniably terrible people, this method allows them to believe they are not, even if other sexhavers think they are.It is not mentioned here often but 90% of incels don't hate women and this has been proven in a recent study that only about 10% of incels actually hold this belief in the total population. Wish I could find it but I don't have time. This is about the average rate in men, which means even after being incel, we don't disproportionately even dislike women. Sure this forum does, but there's 9 bluepillcels out there for every 1 of us. Bluepillcels don't want to join here because it is antithecal to their goal. But if you look at anything about incels in journalism its 'incels all hate women they are evil and all of them hate women'.
I think this is required of journalism and of public belief in order for things people depend on to exist, and this is why incels are smeared as all hateful. This ego boost is a daily part of most peoples self image, this isn't just a thing people START relationships to feel, but also get from them throughout. Married couples take the veneration that 'hey, I'm a husband! I am a winner! No it can't be lookism, that invalidates me
'I am a huge fan of the idea that evolution is visible outside of its home ground of biology. Businesses must be greedy as if they are not, they die to other businesses that are. If a society can't afford to believe something, it won't, because it can't afford to. As things stand, people rely on ridiculous reasons to hate incels. They don't make sense, but they need to be believed and so that's what happens.
Thoughts anyone?
Might be wrong but I am not posting for forum points, just want to check with others who read blackpill theory.
Last edited:
