Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

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.

Blackpill There IS No Distinction Between 'Vol'cel and 'In'cel

  • Thread starter Deleted member 35171
  • Start date
Deleted member 35171

Deleted member 35171

Mother Nature's Failed Experiment
-
Joined
Jun 16, 2021
Posts
3,317
1. There is NO free will.

We live in a deterministic universe, all choices made by a person are caused by events and facts outside their control. Human behavior can be explained through the clockwork of cause and effect. Every decision essentially comes down to neurochemical changes in your brain which itself is a result of outside stimuli.

Once you view the world through an objective deterministic lens, the distinction between volcel and incel breaks down. There is no such thing as the “will” to have sex, but the “ability” which itself is deterministic and neither the volcel or the incel (by whatever subjective standards you are using to distinguish the two) have it.


2. Looks are NOT a good measure of determining who is and isn’t volcel

I’m going to use an example to illustrate my point here.
Let’s say we gathered a bunch of .is users and ranked them on the looks scale and we got the results below. Remember looks are in fact OBJECTIVE and measurable.
1


Now here comes the fun part, person A may argue that only users 5 and below are incels and that everything above that line is a volcel that could get a gf but "chooses" not to and therefore must be banned. According to person A, this is the graph we're going to get:
2


Person B may argue that 5 is too much and that the line should be drawn at the 3/10 mark and so we end up with the graph below.
3


Now here comes person C, the truest of all truecels, and argues the line should be drawn at even a lower point thus leading to:
4


So who's right? No one is. My point is wherever you choose to draw this line, it'll ultimately be an arbitrary subjective standard and it has nothing to do with the objectivity of looks. The spectrum is objective, the red line is subjective.


3. It's a LOSING game (a DEFEATIST attitude)

Now that we've established whatever lookist standards you use to determine who should be banned and who should be allowed I want you understand that ultimately this is a losing game. You're simply excluding people no matter how useful they may be to our cause. For ever single user here, there's another user who is even uglier. So what should we do? Ban everyone until the very ugliest user remains?
Your idealogy once taken to the extreme essentially leads to defeat. It's a defeatist cucked attitude and nothing more.

4. You're overflating the value of pussy even further

A few generations ago, all a man needed to do to stand out from the crowd was gymmaxxing. As more and more men started doing it, it slowly became the new standard, now men HAVE to do it not to fall in behind compared to their peers. The social standard was increased and with it the price for pussy. The same exact thing happened in every other area, and now men are forced to jump through a thousand hoops including endless wageslaving and major surgeries in hopes of someday maybe getting a sniff. The only person who can meet these overflated standards is the top 5% genetically gifted Chads.

Now pay attention to what you're essentially doing by excluding people from the forums. You're telling people they are volcels and that they just need to shower more and go out and do this and do that to get laid. You're telling these men you have determined to be volcel according to your own subjective standards, to bow down to gynocentric soyciety and its ridiculous standards for men to get a crumb of pussy in the end. Meanwhile Chad Thundercock doesn't have to do shit to get laid, women flock to him themselves.


5. We're all volcels to a degree (and that's fine)

I'm sure an old ugly ethnic retarded landwhale with literal genetic deformities would gladly accept the majority of users on this forums if they approached her. So are we all volcels and deserving of a ban for not settling with bottom of the barrel trash? No, of course not. This isn't the point of inceldom and never was.
We SHOULD shoot for the highest quality women that we can, we SHOULD try to get the stacy/becky of our dreams, we DESERVE it, soyciety OWES us. Call me entitled if you will, but then you're simply spouting IT nonsense and showing where your true alliance lies.

6. It's essentially liberal victimhood culture

Trying to prove who is and isn't a "real actual truecel! the most oppressed of all!!" essentially takes you back to what you were precisely trying to escape from by coming to these forums.

"I'm a foid! I have it worse than chad therefore I am oppressed!!! :foidSoy:"
"I am a tranny! I have it even worse than you I'm even more of a victim!! :soy:"
"I'm a disabled tranny! everyone notice me instead!! :soy:"
"I'm a disabled tranny sheboon with literal down syndrome! I am the real victim! Truly the most oppressed of all!! :feels:"

NO ONE GIVES A SHIT WHERE YOU FALL ON THE VICTIMHOOD SCALE. Globohomo is the inevitable end to all this victim signaling, we're never gonna beat libtards by playing THEIR OWN GAMES. So reach deep inside your heads and surgically take out the part of your brain that's responsible for this kind of thinking.


So what's the solution? who should we accept and who should we not?

It's simple. If they are men who are not getting laid, and sympathize with our cause and want to contribute then we should accept them. Period.

Blackpill is growing at a rapid pace. You go on youtube, ig and tiktok and you'll see blackpilled comments on completely unrelated content. We see more and more people online including major streamers using our lingo. The number of blackpill communities popping up all over the internet is absolutely bonkers. More and more men are waking up at an exponential pace and this is a fact.

We can either tap in and use this opportunity to majorly grow our presence potentially leading to real life change or we can be defeatist little soyboy cuck little bitches who sit here and cry eternally about not getting laid without ever doing shit to change things.

Put your emotions and infighting aside and redirect your feelings of jealousy, wrath and anger towards our enemies: IT, foids, globohomo, libtards, etc and focus on the end goal:
State enforced monogamy is the future. Men will get one wife, adultery will be punishable by death, bastard children will be aborted by force and women will be forced to copulate with men if they wish to pass on their genes. The unruly whores' DNA will be rooted out while the submissive ones will be able to reproduce. People thought we were memeing with the "state mandated girlfriend" stuff but just wait and see.
 
Last edited:
The reality is it doesn't matter what your standards are but only what you look like. You can say you only date 10/10 stacies but if there's not a single female out there who would fuck you then you are still incel. Whether you are incel or not is not a decision you make, it's one that women make.
 
based asf thread. Well put.
 
4, 5, 6 are insanely based points
 
women have a huge edge in the sexual market place,
 
That's why on our forum we run it as a blackpill forum, people keep changing the definition of what it means to be an incel.
 
Probably the best thread you've made, albeit kind of convoluted
 
Your argument isn't "There's no difference between incels and volcels." Your argument is "Okay maybe there is, but there's more important things to worry about." And maybe there are. But I will be goddamned before any of you fucking children can compare your lives to mine.
 
It's simple. If they are men who are not getting laid, and sympathize with our cause and want to contribute then we should accept them. Period.
TL DR for anyone who doesn't want to read.

OP wants chad's and normies to join the forum. We all saw how well that worked out on looksmax, so obviously its no doubt a great idea. :feelskek:
 
All those mental gymnastics to justify fakecels here?

Point 2 doesn't make sense, we base our metrics on how sexually repulsive or attractive a guy is to foids, not if he is above us in the looks scale.

No, not all men are not volcels at the some degree.

There is no game, there is no important cause, we don't have the slightest of importance, we are not united and we won't achieve anything. Stop trying to act like you are pushing a a significant cause (and using it as a mean to [UWSL]delegitimize [/UWSL]the ones who disagree with you), you are not

if you want to push some cause to non incels, join blackpill.club.

6 point is a strawman and doesn't have anything to do with allowing good looking guys here or not, its a binary issue
 
Last edited:
Chad's getting laid.
Normies don't sympathize with our cause.

Besides you didn't engage me on any points.
What's your cause? How you plan to achieve it by allowing some normies on this forum who just come here to troll and shitpost?
 
1. There is NO free will.

We live in a deterministic universe, all choices made by a person are caused by events and facts outside their control. Human behavior can be explained through the clockwork of cause and effect. Every decision essentially comes down to neurochemical changes in your brain which itself is a result of outside stimuli.

Once you view the world through an objective deterministic lens, the distinction between volcel and incel breaks down. There is no such thing as the “will” to have sex, but the “ability” which itself is deterministic and neither the volcel or the incel (by whatever subjective standards you are using to distinguish the two) have it.


2. Looks are NOT a good measure of determining who is and isn’t volcel

I’m going to use an example to illustrate my point here.
Let’s say we gathered a bunch of .is users and ranked them on the looks scale and we got the results below. Remember looks are in fact OBJECTIVE and measurable.
View attachment 550399

Now here comes the fun part, person A may argue that only users 5 and below are incels and that everything above that line is a volcel that could get a gf but "chooses" not to and therefore must be banned. According to person A, this is the graph we're going to get:
View attachment 550402

Person B may argue that 5 is too much and that the line should be drawn at the 3/10 mark and so we end up with the graph below.
View attachment 550403

Now here comes person C, the truest of all truecels, and argues the line should be drawn at even a lower point thus leading to:
View attachment 550404

So who's right? No one is. My point is wherever you choose to draw this line, it'll ultimately be an arbitrary subjective standard and it has nothing to do with the objectivity of looks. The spectrum is objective, the red line is subjective.


3. It's a LOSING game (a DEFEATIST attitude)

Now that we've established whatever lookist standards you use to determine who should be banned and who should be allowed I want you understand that ultimately this is a losing game. You're simply excluding people no matter how useful they may be to our cause. For ever single user here, there's another user who is even uglier. So what should we do? Ban everyone until the very ugliest user remains?
Your idealogy once taken to the extreme essentially leads to defeat. It's a defeatist cucked attitude and nothing more.

4. You're overflating the value of pussy even further

A few generations ago, all a man needed to do to stand out from the crowd was gymmaxxing. As more and more men started doing it, it slowly became the new standard, now men HAVE to do it not to fall in behind compared to their peers. The social standard was increased and with it the price for pussy. The same exact thing happened in every other area, and now men are forced to jump through a thousand hoops including endless wageslaving and major surgeries in hopes of someday maybe getting a sniff. The only person who can meet these overflated standards is the top 5% genetically gifted Chads.

Now pay attention to what you're essentially doing by excluding people from the forums. You're telling people they are volcels and that they just need to shower more and go out and do this and do that to get laid. You're telling these men you have determined to be volcel according to your own subjective standards, to bow down to gynocentric soyciety and its ridiculous standards for men to get a crumb of pussy in the end. Meanwhile Chad Thundercock doesn't have to do shit to get laid, women flock to him themselves.


5. We're all volcels to a degree (and that's fine)

I'm sure an old ugly ethnic retarded landwhale with literal genetic deformities would gladly accept the majority of users on this forums if they approached her. So are we all volcels and deserving of a ban for not settling with bottom of the barrel trash? No, of course not. This isn't the point of inceldom and never was.
We SHOULD shoot for the highest quality women that we can, we SHOULD try to get the stacy/becky of our dreams, we DESERVE it, soyciety OWES us. Call me entitled if you will, but then you're simply spouting IT nonsense and showing where your true alliance lies.

6. It's essentially liberal victimhood culture

Trying to prove who is and isn't a "real actual truecel! the most oppressed of all!!" essentially takes you back to what you were precisely trying to escape from by coming to these forums.

"I'm a foid! I have it worse than chad therefore I am oppressed!!! :foidSoy:"
"I am a tranny! I have it even worse than you I'm even more of a victim!! :soy:"
"I'm a disabled tranny! everyone notice me instead!! :soy:"
"I'm a disabled tranny sheboon with literal down syndrome! I am the real victim! Truly the most oppressed of all!! :feels:"

NO ONE GIVES A SHIT WHERE YOU FALL ON THE VICTIMHOOD SCALE. Globohomo is the inevitable end to all this victim signaling, we're never gonna beat libtards by playing THEIR OWN GAMES. So reach deep inside your heads and surgically take out the part of your brain that's responsible for this kind of thinking.


So what's the solution? who should we accept and who should we not?

It's simple. If they are men who are not getting laid, and sympathize with our cause and want to contribute then we should accept them. Period.

Blackpill is growing at a rapid pace. You go on youtube, ig and tiktok and you'll see blackpilled comments on completely unrelated content. We see more and more people online including major streamers using our lingo. The number of blackpill communities popping up all over the internet is absolutely bonkers. More and more men are waking up at an exponential pace and this is a fact.

We can either tap in and use this opportunity to majorly grow our presence potentially leading to real life change or we can be defeatist little soyboy cuck little bitches who sit here and cry eternally about not getting laid without ever doing shit to change things.

Put your emotions and infighting aside and redirect your feelings of jealousy, wrath and anger towards our enemies: IT, foids, globohomo, libtards, etc and focus on the end goal:
Very good post and agreed but fuck I’m very ugly
 
Chad's getting laid.
Normies don't sympathize with our cause.
Besides you didn't engage me on any points.
Your mind's already made up, so why bother? I'm not here to change your mind or argue with you. I'm just here to see if the people who've been here longer are gullible enough to buy into this.
 
How you plan to achieve it by allowing some normies on this forum who just come here to troll and shitpost?
When the fuck did I say this? Can you guys even read?
Your mind's already made up, so why bother? I'm not here to change your mind or argue with you. I'm just here to see if the people who've been here longer are gullible enough to buy into this.
"I have no arguments, I made a stupid strawman and get demolished and now I'm feeling sad"
 
When the fuck did I say this? Can you guys even read?
That's are your intentions, hence why you want guys like the 6/10 6'1 here.

Also, aren't you gonna answer my questions? What's your cause and why you think those guys will help you on it?
 
"I have no arguments, I made a stupid strawman and get demolished and now I'm feeling sad"
Antagonizing me isn't going to rope me into an internet battle with you. :feelskek:

It was a nice try though, i'll give you that.
 
That's are your intentions, hence why you want guys like the 6/10 6'1 here.
He can create a tinder and if he's not getting matches he's not getting matches and belongs here. If he does, ban him by all means.
Again you and I don't determine who is incel. Women do through their collective actions and decisions. The end.
And if he's shit posting again ban him by all means I don't care.

Also, aren't you gonna answer my questions? What's your cause and why you think those guys will help you on it?
State-enforced monogamy. Read the end quote.

Or just read this:
Yes I do support enforced monogamy. We need adulatory laws, when both parties are single, they get to choose between marriage or death. In all other cases, the punishment should be death. We also need laws where bastard children are killed at birth. It's not that out of the question to get men to agree to these rules and enforce them especially when they realize how much it benefits them.
This will force women to marry if they wish to reproduce. Once again, men will be wanted for their ability to produce sperm and women for their ability to produce eggs, as nature intended. You don't have to betabuxx and simp just to be able to reproduce, you just have to exist as women do in our current society.
Sure there will be some women who will choose to die single, but guess what? Their bloodlines will end but the more submissive ones will reproduce and give us more submissive women in the next generation.
This is such a perfect system, even evolutioncopers can't criticize it. The idea is that women contribute to the evolution of humanity through sexual selection. In forced monogamy, since everyone can only choose one partner for life, 10s will end up with 10s and breed more 10s, 9s will end up with 9s and breed more 9s, and so on. Almost all 10s will happily breed but as we go down the scale more and more women might opt to stay single and therefore sexual selection or natural eugenics will play out with the exception that BOTH men and women will be affected not just men.
 
Last edited:
High IQ thread.

Tbh I think a good definition of an incel is somebody who cannot get +/- 2 points from their own looksmatch, roughly speaking. This sort of thing already applies, because even deathnic incels here will admit that they don't want 1/10 femoids.

So if a femoid refuses to date within +2 of her looksmatch, she is a volcel.

If a male refuses to date within -2 of his looksmatch, he is a volcel.
 
Nice, but didn't answer my 2nd one though
Read the edit
He can create a tinder and if he's not getting matches he's not getting matches and belongs here. If he does, ban him by all means.
Again you and I don't determine who is incel. Women do through their collective actions and decisions. The end.
And if he's shit posting again ban him by all means I don't care.
Antagonizing me isn't going to rope me into an internet battle with you. :feelskek:

It was a nice try though, i'll give you that.
I accept your surrender.
 
He can create a tinder and if he's not getting matches he's not getting matches and belongs here. If he does, ban him by all means.
Again you and I don't determine who is incel. Women do through their collective actions and decisions. The end.
Sure, if real life had the same gender ratio as tinder and the same ease/convenience, then I'd agree with you, but it doesn't.

You draw the line on how many matches?

We can analyze how would be their actions towards a certain guy based on his appearance, I don't know why you want to deny it.

Also, how would he proof that he can't get laid, in a way other than saying his stats (he can be lying, but innocent until proven guilty) or sending a pic of both? If he has better stats than the guys who I see getting laid, why would I believe he is an incel?
Read the edit


I accept your surrender.
You didn't answer my question again.

How allowing those guys, who come here just to troll, vent or shitpost (aren't commited at all with the forum) would help you with your cause?
 
Last edited:
Sure, if real life had the same gender ratio as tinder and the same ease, then I'd agree with you, but it doesn't.

You draw the line on how many matches?

We can analyze how would be their actions towards a certain guy based on his appearance, I don't know why you want to deny it.

Also, how would he proof that he can't get laid, in a way other than saying his stats or sending a pic of both? If he has better stats than the guys who I see getting laid, why would I believe he is an incel?

You didn't answer my question again.

How allowing those guys, who come here just to troll, vent or shitpost (aren't commited at all with the forum) would help you with your cause?
If he's trolling and shitposting ban him. I said we shouldn't ban someone who OBJECTIVELY isn't getting laid, based on looks.
Quote where I said we shouldn't ban trolls and shitposters.
You're strawmanning so hard.
 
I accept your surrender.
A surrender would assume there was a battle to begin with. You've been fighting with yourself this entire time. :feelshaha:
 
JFL matches do not mean anything. If he can't get sex let alone get dates, he's incel.
 
If he's trolling and shitposting ban him. I said we shouldn't ban someone who OBJECTIVELY isn't getting laid, based on looks.
Quote where I said we shouldn't ban trolls and shitposters.
You're strawmanning so hard.
I never said you said that, I said that allowing those guys will mean shit to your cause, because they come mostly to do what I stated above.

Of course we should ban based on looks, if the guy is better looking than guys who constantly get laid, he should be banned on sight (women are a hivemind when it comes to looks, so you can't say his situation could be different)
 
A surrender would assume there was a battle to begin with. You've been fighting with yourself this entire time. :feelshaha:
Of course there is a battle and you started it when you decided to strawman me.
The only problem for you unfortunately is that you came with your dick in your hands and I brought cutting edge swords of pure logic and reason and now you're regretting picking a fight with me in the first place. Feeling embarrassed you're trying to deny the encounter ever took place which is honestly sad. You accepted your loss without even trying.
From now on stay in your lane shit-posting cuck.
JFL matches do not mean anything. If he can't get sex let alone get dates, he's incel.
Yeah, dates and eventual sex. That's what I meant.
 
Ignoring race and height, a 3/10 is where I draw that subjective line. 5's are Normies since that's the average, but where Chad start and normies end, that is more subjective. I am not against Normies using our Incel lingo, I find it rather funny, but that Normies and even the occasionally Chad with low confidence when the think they are one of us, will usually end up finding a relationships, they humble brag to truly ugly people (most of us :feelswhat:) on whatever platform giving us false hope which is the absolute worst thing. :feelsrope:

tldr: Accepting normies to some degree is okay, but not on forums as they will just humble brag to us. :feelsUgh:
 
Chads can claim they get no pussy and we'll have no choice but to take them on their word. At least there's a no-humblebragging rule so they should not be able to mention how good they have it in comparison to everyone else. I don't like censorship but we go to this forum to escape the mogging that happens to us everywhere, not to experience even more of it.

we're never gonna beat libtards by playing THEIR OWN GAMES
I disagree - it's only when we play their own games that their true hypocrisy shines through and even the braindead masses start to see how retarded they are. Plus, it's a lot more fun to watch them get a taste of their own medicine. :feelsPop:

Also, our identity politics are the ultimate form of identity politics - those libtard idiots band around gender and race without realizing (or without wanting to admit) that racism and sexism are simply tiny pieces of the lookism puzzle. Not to mention they've got the gender thing completely backwards, claiming foids are oppressed. And transgenderism and homosexuality aren't even something most of them are born with, it's just the result of societal brainwashing and/or parental abuse.
 
I never said you said that, I said that allowing those guys will mean shit to your cause, because they come mostly to do what I stated above.

Of course we should ban based on looks, if the guy is better looking than guys who constantly get laid, he should be banned on sight (women are a hivemind when it comes to looks, so you can't say his situation could be different)
You didn't even read the post then. I literally listed 6 points against that
"Ban @trying to ascend because there are uglier users than him:feelstastyman:"
 
Of course there is a battle and you started it when you decided to strawman me.
The only problem for you unfortunately is that you came with your dick in your hands and I brought cutting edge swords of pure logic and reason and now you're regretting picking a fight with me in the first place.
You're definitely trolling, i refuse to believe you're being serious. :feelskek:
 
I used a dating app for 2 years (let's say around 2016 to 2018 or so).

What I got was the following:
-Ugly/Obese and tranny matches
-Becky matches, who either never responded or ghosted me 100% of the time

The result is the same as getting zero matches. No dates, no sex.
 
Last edited:
You didn't even read the post then. I literally listed 6 points against that
"Ban @trying to ascend because there are uglier users than him:feelstastyman:"
You didn't even my first comment then (I didn't responded to the 1st, because I agree with it, except for the final part).

Also, only 1 point of yours is against it.

Who advocated to ban everyone who is not the ugliest user? Not me
 
You didn't even my first comment then (I didn't responded to the 1st, because I agree with it, except for the final part).

Also, only 1 point of yours is against it.

Who advocated to ban everyone who is not the ugliest user? Not me
Ok, state your final point.
 
Ok, state your final point.
''Point 2 doesn't make sense, we base our metrics on how sexually repulsive or attractive a guy is to foids, not if he is above us in the looks scale.''
 
''Point 2 doesn't make sense, we base our metrics on how sexually repulsive or attractive a guy is to foids, not if he is above us in the looks scale.''
If a man isn't getting laid, doesn't it inherently imply that he ISN'T meeting the standards of HIS society? Bruh think.
 
If a man isn't getting laid, doesn't it inherently imply that he ISN'T meeting the standards of HIS society? Bruh think.
No, it can have many other causes (some whom could classify him as a volcel)
 
List them.
Non NT, height, doesn't put effort into meeting foids, lives in a very hypergamic place and so on.

1st and 2nd could classify him as an incel though
 
Non NT, height, doesn't put effort into meeting foids, live in a very hypergamic place and so on
So what's your point?
He's not getting laid because he isn't meeting those standards. Height, ntness, etc are all part of those standards.
 
So what's your point?
He's not getting laid because he isn't meeting those standards. Height, ntness, etc are all part of those standards.
That's my exact point, average guys or anyone who meets those standards shouldn't be here and @Rhaast is one of them.

Living in a hypergamic place or refusing to meet foids IRL doesn't make you an incel.

That's why even if a guy claims to not get laid, he should be banned if he meets this criteria
 
But anyways, its very hard for those rules to be enforced, so that discussion is useless. Also, there are characteristics that can make one incel who aren't verifiable, such as dick size.

Unfortunately there will never be an incel forum where you know a good part is composed of incels
 
That's my exact point, average guys or anyone who meets those standards shouldn't be here and @Rhaast is one of them.

Living in a hypergamic place or refusing to meet foids IRL doesn't make you an incel.

That's why even if a guy claims to not get laid, he should be banned if he meets this criteria
Bruh are you god? You don't determine those standards you retard. You're not fucking god.
Women in your society do. Women have collectively decided not to sleep with a man, he's an incel. Period.
Define hypergamic place? Where's the threshhold for choosing where is and where isn't hypergamic? Literally whatever you choose will be arbitary.
Are you this low IQ? I refuse to believe it. What liberal brainwashing does to a mfer.
First you strawman my post, that I'm saying we should allow shitposters, now this? are you fucking trolling? Read the post you dumbass.

Ignoring race and height, a 3/10 is where I draw that subjective line. 5's are Normies since that's the average, but where Chad start and normies end, that is more subjective. I am not against Normies using our Incel lingo, I find it rather funny, but that Normies and even the occasionally Chad with low confidence when the think they are one of us, will usually end up finding a relationships, they humble brag to truly ugly people (most of us :feelswhat:) on whatever platform giving us false hope which is the absolute worst thing. :feelsrope:

tldr: Accepting normies to some degree is okay, but not on forums as they will just humble brag to us. :feelsUgh:

Chads can claim they get no pussy and we'll have no choice but to take them on their word. At least there's a no-humblebragging rule so they should not be able to mention how good they have it in comparison to everyone else. I don't like censorship but we go to this forum to escape the mogging that happens to us everywhere, not to experience even more of it.


I disagree - it's only when we play their own games that their true hypocrisy shines through and even the braindead masses start to see how retarded they are. Plus, it's a lot more fun to watch them get a taste of their own medicine. :feelsPop:

Also, our identity politics are the ultimate form of identity politics - those libtard idiots band around gender and race without realizing (or without wanting to admit) that racism and sexism are simply tiny pieces of the lookism puzzle. Not to mention they've got the gender thing completely backwards, claiming foids are oppressed. And transgenderism and homosexuality aren't even something most of them are born with, it's just the result of societal brainwashing and/or parental abuse.
Finally two replies with actual substance that I can appreciate.

I used a dating app for 2 years (let's say around 2016 to 2018 or so).

What I got was the following:
-Ugly/Obese and tranny matches
-Becky matches, who either never responded or ghosted me 100% of the time

The result is the same as getting zero matches. No dates, no sex.
Precisely.
 
1. There is NO free will.

We live in a deterministic universe, all choices made by a person are caused by events and facts outside their control. Human behavior can be explained through the clockwork of cause and effect. Every decision essentially comes down to neurochemical changes in your brain which itself is a result of outside stimuli.

Once you view the world through an objective deterministic lens, the distinction between volcel and incel breaks down. There is no such thing as the “will” to have sex, but the “ability” which itself is deterministic and neither the volcel or the incel (by whatever subjective standards you are using to distinguish the two) have it.


2. Looks are NOT a good measure of determining who is and isn’t volcel

I’m going to use an example to illustrate my point here.
Let’s say we gathered a bunch of .is users and ranked them on the looks scale and we got the results below. Remember looks are in fact OBJECTIVE and measurable.
View attachment 550399

Now here comes the fun part, person A may argue that only users 5 and below are incels and that everything above that line is a volcel that could get a gf but "chooses" not to and therefore must be banned. According to person A, this is the graph we're going to get:
View attachment 550402

Person B may argue that 5 is too much and that the line should be drawn at the 3/10 mark and so we end up with the graph below.
View attachment 550403

Now here comes person C, the truest of all truecels, and argues the line should be drawn at even a lower point thus leading to:
View attachment 550404

So who's right? No one is. My point is wherever you choose to draw this line, it'll ultimately be an arbitrary subjective standard and it has nothing to do with the objectivity of looks. The spectrum is objective, the red line is subjective.


3. It's a LOSING game (a DEFEATIST attitude)

Now that we've established whatever lookist standards you use to determine who should be banned and who should be allowed I want you understand that ultimately this is a losing game. You're simply excluding people no matter how useful they may be to our cause. For ever single user here, there's another user who is even uglier. So what should we do? Ban everyone until the very ugliest user remains?
Your idealogy once taken to the extreme essentially leads to defeat. It's a defeatist cucked attitude and nothing more.

4. You're overflating the value of pussy even further

A few generations ago, all a man needed to do to stand out from the crowd was gymmaxxing. As more and more men started doing it, it slowly became the new standard, now men HAVE to do it not to fall in behind compared to their peers. The social standard was increased and with it the price for pussy. The same exact thing happened in every other area, and now men are forced to jump through a thousand hoops including endless wageslaving and major surgeries in hopes of someday maybe getting a sniff. The only person who can meet these overflated standards is the top 5% genetically gifted Chads.

Now pay attention to what you're essentially doing by excluding people from the forums. You're telling people they are volcels and that they just need to shower more and go out and do this and do that to get laid. You're telling these men you have determined to be volcel according to your own subjective standards, to bow down to gynocentric soyciety and its ridiculous standards for men to get a crumb of pussy in the end. Meanwhile Chad Thundercock doesn't have to do shit to get laid, women flock to him themselves.


5. We're all volcels to a degree (and that's fine)

I'm sure an old ugly ethnic retarded landwhale with literal genetic deformities would gladly accept the majority of users on this forums if they approached her. So are we all volcels and deserving of a ban for not settling with bottom of the barrel trash? No, of course not. This isn't the point of inceldom and never was.
We SHOULD shoot for the highest quality women that we can, we SHOULD try to get the stacy/becky of our dreams, we DESERVE it, soyciety OWES us. Call me entitled if you will, but then you're simply spouting IT nonsense and showing where your true alliance lies.

6. It's essentially liberal victimhood culture

Trying to prove who is and isn't a "real actual truecel! the most oppressed of all!!" essentially takes you back to what you were precisely trying to escape from by coming to these forums.

"I'm a foid! I have it worse than chad therefore I am oppressed!!! :foidSoy:"
"I am a tranny! I have it even worse than you I'm even more of a victim!! :soy:"
"I'm a disabled tranny! everyone notice me instead!! :soy:"
"I'm a disabled tranny sheboon with literal down syndrome! I am the real victim! Truly the most oppressed of all!! :feels:"

NO ONE GIVES A SHIT WHERE YOU FALL ON THE VICTIMHOOD SCALE. Globohomo is the inevitable end to all this victim signaling, we're never gonna beat libtards by playing THEIR OWN GAMES. So reach deep inside your heads and surgically take out the part of your brain that's responsible for this kind of thinking.


So what's the solution? who should we accept and who should we not?

It's simple. If they are men who are not getting laid, and sympathize with our cause and want to contribute then we should accept them. Period.

Blackpill is growing at a rapid pace. You go on youtube, ig and tiktok and you'll see blackpilled comments on completely unrelated content. We see more and more people online including major streamers using our lingo. The number of blackpill communities popping up all over the internet is absolutely bonkers. More and more men are waking up at an exponential pace and this is a fact.

We can either tap in and use this opportunity to majorly grow our presence potentially leading to real life change or we can be defeatist little soyboy cuck little bitches who sit here and cry eternally about not getting laid without ever doing shit to change things.

Put your emotions and infighting aside and redirect your feelings of jealousy, wrath and anger towards our enemies: IT, foids, globohomo, libtards, etc and focus on the end goal:
Extremely high iq:bigbrain::bigbrain::bigbrain::bigbrain::bigbrain::bigbrain::bigbrain::bigbrain::bigbrain::bigbrain::bigbrain::bigbrain::bigbrain:

Brocel you deserve your own audience. Post this on youtube
 
Bruh are you god? You don't determine those standards you retard. You're not fucking god.
Women in your society do. Women have collectively decided not to sleep with a man, he's an incel. Period.
Define hypergamic place? Where's the threshhold for choosing where is and where isn't hypergamic? Literally whatever you choose will be arbitary.
Are you this low IQ? I refuse to believe it. What liberal brainwashing does to a mfer.
First you strawman my post, that I'm saying we should allow shitposters, now this? are you fucking trolling? Read the post you dumbass.




Finally two replies with actual substance that I can appreciate.


Precisely.
Where I said I do?

Yes and we can analyze their standards and apply them to other men. Even if you are not a foid, you can classify if a men is either attractive to them or not (I don't even know why I'm needing to explain the obvious, you are probably trolling).

Hypergamic place? Places composed mostly of above average looking people and taller than average.

Where do I said something that is liberal related?

How you know women collectively decided to not sleep with him? Why would he be incel if there are worse looking guys getting laid?
 
Last edited:
How you know women collectively decided to not sleep with him? Why would he be incel if there are worse looking guys getting laid?

You admitted it yourself. Being non NT is a significant factor.
 
Where I said I do?

Yes and we can analyze their standards and apply them to other men. Even if you are not a foid, you can classify if a men is either attractive to them or not (I don't even know why I'm needing to explain the obvious, you are probably trolling).

Hypergamic place? Places composed mostly of above average looking people and taller than average.

Where do I said something that is liberal related?

How you know women collectively decided to not sleep with him? Why would he be incel if there are worse looking guys getting laid?
Dumbass there are 4 billion foids on earth. Are you telling me that if you millionairmaxx, gymmaxx, surgerymaxx, not one single foid internationally will still be willing to fuck you for you to travel to her location? Because if yes, you're by your own definition just a volcel who's "living in a hypergamic place :feelstastyman:"
 
You admitted it yourself. Being non NT is a significant factor.
True and he is NT, therefore he needs the hammer.

Also, read my other comment, its impossible to verify things here, this discussion is useless
 
Also, read my other comment, its impossible to verify things here, this discussion is useless
The only thing we need to verify is whether or not he's getting laid
 
Dumbass there are 4 billion foids on earth. Are you telling me that if you millionairmaxx, gymmaxx, surgerymaxx, not one single foid internationally will still be willing to fuck you for you to travel to her location? Because if yes, you're by your own definition just a volcel who's "living in a hypergamic place :feelstastyman:"
Well, all foids I've looked with disgust towards me, I guess that's enough to know that >99% of those 4 billion wouldn't want anything with me and this gets worse when you filter it.

JFL at millionairemaxx, try it on a shithole.

No, foids in my place aren't above average. Not getting laid in your place doesn't mean you live in a hypergamic place (I don't know why complain about people throwing strawmans on you if you are the one doing it the most)
The only thing we need to verify is whether or not he's getting laid
How will we verify that? We won't/can't, therefore it also proves my point
 

Similar threads

Efiliste
Replies
4
Views
153
FinnCel
FinnCel
SnakeCel
Replies
28
Views
842
Drinkcel
Drinkcel
Moroccancel2-
Replies
10
Views
344
Moroccancel2-
Moroccancel2-
T
Replies
11
Views
855
balkanceI
balkanceI
AshamedVirgin34
Replies
8
Views
247
lazy_gamer_423
lazy_gamer_423

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top