Discussion Thought I had: Rephrase the black pill as "human behavior" or sociology

[telamon]

There's a huge problem with people flat out denying the black pill exists in relation to incels as well as some incels being gaslighted that the blackpill is too extreme by redditors, therapists etc. and while these groups will always gaslight us as a power move we can re-frame things to stop other incels from being pulled away by radical toxic blue pill ideologies. My suggestion is instead of saying "black pill" we say "sociology" aka the study of human behaviors. If we frame it as a social science then nobody can just dismiss us as a bunch of angry guys making stuff up because we hate women. If any incel thinks "sociology is wrong", then its no longer disagreeing with us rather its disagreeing with a field of study. While I don't think science is the be all end all for everything it will prevent people from being gaslighted so easily.

What's your guys thoughts on this I'm curious

 

[wereq]

Its sociobiology not sociology. Sociology = bluepilled social science focusing on environmental factors to explain human behavior. Sociobiology = blackpilled science focusing on genetics to explain behavior.

 

[telamon]

Its sociobiology not sociology. Sociology = bluepilled social science focusing on environmental factors to explain human behavior. Sociobiology = blackpilled science focusing on genetics to explain behavior.

Ah I see well thanks for bringing that to my attention. I don't think we even need to mention genetics we just need to mention whatever field observes human behavior (which we already do) under a new label that they can't discredit it.

Good idea but I'm pretty sure normshits and redditors are willfully ignorant and just want an excuse to shame genetically inferior men or anyone that doesn't think women are gods

They will of course ignore it like they always do. Its more to prevent incels form being gaslighted that the blackpill is just an extreme ideology created by trolls, and not backed by actual data.

 

[turbosperg]

There's a huge problem with people flat out denying the black pill exists in relation to incels as well as some incels being gaslighted that the blackpill is too extreme by redditors, therapists etc. and while these groups will always gaslight us as a power move we can re-frame things to stop other incels from being pulled away by radical toxic blue pill ideologies. My suggestion is instead of saying "black pill" we say "sociology" aka the study of human behaviors. If we frame it as a social science then nobody can just dismiss us as a bunch of angry guys making stuff up because we hate women. If any incel thinks "sociology is wrong", then its no longer disagreeing with us rather its disagreeing with a field of study. While I don't think science is the be all end all for everything it will prevent people from being gaslighted so easily.

What's your guys thoughts on this I'm curious

The blackpill, in its wider sense, is the set of all facts pertaining to human behaviors, especially social interactions. In the narrow sense, each little fact is a blackpill.

A problem with academia is that it tends to be hijacked by (((political interests))) over time. Anthropology, for instance, once was busy cataloguing the mating rituals of peoples the world over. Nowadays it's busy with intersectional feminist LGBT globohomo bullshit. Same with sociology, it started as a hard science, cataloguing the mensurable effects of a social environment on the reality of human life (e.g. Durkheim's study on religion x suicide) but degenerated into a bluepill cesspool.

It is not the blackpill that needs to be redefined in terms of academia, it is academic fields that must undergo a proper blackpill filtration before it can be considered anything other than kikespeak / pilpul.

In other words: ask not if your blackpill is sociological, but ask instead if your sociology thesis is blackpilled enough.

Over for Traveller-Entity-cels.

 

[BlackCel_from_ZA]

Then I'm behind it, would help our overall image even if it's just marginally

No overall image for your face

 

[BlackCel_from_ZA]

There's a huge problem with people flat out denying the black pill exists in relation to incels as well as some incels being gaslighted that the blackpill is too extreme by redditors, therapists etc. and while these groups will always gaslight us as a power move we can re-frame things to stop other incels from being pulled away by radical toxic blue pill ideologies. My suggestion is instead of saying "black pill" we say "sociology" aka the study of human behaviors. If we frame it as a social science then nobody can just dismiss us as a bunch of angry guys making stuff up because we hate women. If any incel thinks "sociology is wrong", then its no longer disagreeing with us rather its disagreeing with a field of study. While I don't think science is the be all end all for everything it will prevent people from being gaslighted so easily.

What's your guys thoughts on this I'm curious

No sociology for your face

 

[BlackCel_from_ZA]

Its sociobiology not sociology. Sociology = bluepilled social science focusing on environmental factors to explain human behavior. Sociobiology = blackpilled science focusing on genetics to explain behavior.

No sociology or sociobiology for your face

 

[BlackCel_from_ZA]

The blackpill, in its wider sense, is the set of all facts pertaining to human behaviors, especially social interactions. In the narrow sense, each little fact is a blackpill.

A problem with academia is that it tends to be hijacked by (((political interests))) over time. Anthropology, for instance, once was busy cataloguing the mating rituals of peoples the world over. Nowadays it's busy with intersectional feminist LGBT globohomo bullshit. Same with sociology, it started as a hard science, cataloguing the mensurable effects of a social environment on the reality of human life (e.g. Durkheim's study on religion x suicide) but degenerated into a bluepill cesspool.

It is not the blackpill that needs to be redefined in terms of academia, it is academic fields that must undergo a proper blackpill filtration before it can be considered anything other than kikespeak / pilpul.

In other words: ask not if your blackpill is sociological, but ask instead if your sociology thesis is blackpilled enough.

Over for Traveller-Entity-cels.

No social interactions for your face

 

[wereq]

No sociology or sociobiology for your face

Shut up you low IQ nigger.

 

[Friezacel]

Shut up you low IQ nigger.

 

[Lv99_BixNood]

It doesn't matter what you say, it matters who says it.

 

[telamon]

Then I'm behind it, would help our overall image even if it's just marginally

It would somewhat but would be more so for our own benefit as a community

The blackpill, in its wider sense, is the set of all facts pertaining to human behaviors, especially social interactions. In the narrow sense, each little fact is a blackpill.

A problem with academia is that it tends to be hijacked by (((political interests))) over time. Anthropology, for instance, once was busy cataloguing the mating rituals of peoples the world over. Nowadays it's busy with intersectional feminist LGBT globohomo bullshit. Same with sociology, it started as a hard science, cataloguing the mensurable effects of a social environment on the reality of human life (e.g. Durkheim's study on religion x suicide) but degenerated into a bluepill cesspool.

It is not the blackpill that needs to be redefined in terms of academia, it is academic fields that must undergo a proper blackpill filtration before it can be considered anything other than kikespeak / pilpul.

In other words: ask not if your blackpill is sociological, but ask instead if your sociology thesis is blackpilled enough.

Over for Traveller-Entity-cels.

I'm fully aware that academia has been hijacked but a lot of the data on height, race, looks bias's seem legit enough. Even without them we can create our own data with Chad fishes and observation. If we frame the blackpill as more scientific in general (I know we already are) then people will be less inclined to choose what feels good to believe instead of what is.

 

[turbosperg]

It would somewhat but would be more so for our own benefit as a community

I'm fully aware that academia has been hijacked but a lot of the data on height, race, looks bias's seem legit enough. Even without them we can create our own data with Chad fishes and observation. If we frame the blackpill as more scientific in general (I know we already are) then people will be less inclined to choose what feels good to believe instead of what is.

Academia collects facts in order to build a false representation of the world based on these facts.

The beauty of the blackpill content is that it bypasses academic authority in the form of teachers, PhDs etc. who are often corrupted to the core and sided with some political agenda; and instead just focuses on the facts of the matter. The blackpill content shoots facts at you, academia tries to sell their premeditated opinions disguised as "conclusions drawn from facts".

Abstracts are for niggers, conclusions are for faggots. Blackpill discourse bypasses these corrupted middle-men and strikes its reader directly with facts and facts upon facts. Brutal fact, after brutal fact. Nonstop. Just like a belt-fed Vickers machine gun.

In a few centuries from now, academic discourse will be considered as hilarious as those medieval debates on how many angels could dance on the head of a pin, with the difference that medieval scholars actually believed in God and his angels, whereas academic fags don't even believe themselves ---- but believe all women!

 

[GeckoBus]

There's a huge problem with people flat out denying the black pill exists in relation to incels as well as some incels being gaslighted that the blackpill is too extreme by redditors, therapists etc. and while these groups will always gaslight us as a power move we can re-frame things to stop other incels from being pulled away by radical toxic blue pill ideologies. My suggestion is instead of saying "black pill" we say "sociology" aka the study of human behaviors. If we frame it as a social science then nobody can just dismiss us as a bunch of angry guys making stuff up because we hate women. If any incel thinks "sociology is wrong", then its no longer disagreeing with us rather its disagreeing with a field of study. While I don't think science is the be all end all for everything it will prevent people from being gaslighted so easily.

What's your guys thoughts on this I'm curious

Reframing it would 100% work, we have many examples where they accept what we say if it benefits them.
I dont think it will remove the bias completely, because even in "sociology" and other fields, there is a bias, even though these people
are actively encouraged in training to avoid bias.
Its hard not to judge based on looks, even the hardest blackpillers are affected by this.

Honestly, i feel like a lot of peeps are just not supposed to know this shit or people wouldnt reproduce anymore.

 

[GeckoBus]

The blackpill, in its wider sense, is the set of all facts pertaining to human behaviors, especially social interactions. In the narrow sense, each little fact is a blackpill.

A problem with academia is that it tends to be hijacked by (((political interests))) over time. Anthropology, for instance, once was busy cataloguing the mating rituals of peoples the world over. Nowadays it's busy with intersectional feminist LGBT globohomo bullshit. Same with sociology, it started as a hard science, cataloguing the mensurable effects of a social environment on the reality of human life (e.g. Durkheim's study on religion x suicide) but degenerated into a bluepill cesspool.

It is not the blackpill that needs to be redefined in terms of academia, it is academic fields that must undergo a proper blackpill filtration before it can be considered anything other than kikespeak / pilpul.

In other words: ask not if your blackpill is sociological, but ask instead if your sociology thesis is blackpilled enough.

Over for Traveller-Entity-cels.

they've already done that though.
CIA and friends constantly actively recruits from these fields. The reason why these fields push these ideas is because they are undermined on purpose. The real people in charge understand the blackpill perfectly, hence they use authority figures in academia to push bullshit that contradicts reality.

One book on this:
"Weaponizing Anthropology: Social Science in Service of the Militarized State"
by David Price

i uploaded epub here:

819.5 KB file on MEGA

mega.nz

 

[turbosperg]

they've already done that though.
CIA and friends constantly actively recruits from these fields. The reason why these fields push these ideas is because they are undermined on purpose. The real people in charge understand the blackpill perfectly, hence they use authority figures in academia to push bullshit that contradicts reality.

One book on this:
"Weaponizing Anthropology: Social Science in Service of the Militarized State"
by David Price

i uploaded epub here:

819.5 KB file on MEGA

mega.nz

Academics lie on purpose. Their discourse is for midwits.

Obviously the ruling elites and intelligence agencies are informed and instrued by their own private or secret blackpill-esque studies.

They often hire their assets in academia to conduct a study, but they never release the brute data, the full dataset. They only publish bullshit articles with pre-agreed false conclusions and misleading abstracts. The actual inferences from the actual data is only shared among the right people.

 

[telamon]

Academia collects facts in order to build a false representation of the world based on these facts.

The beauty of the blackpill content is that it bypasses academic authority in the form of teachers, PhDs etc. who are often corrupted to the core and sided with some political agenda; and instead just focuses on the facts of the matter. The blackpill content shoots facts at you, academia tries to sell their premeditated opinions disguised as "conclusions drawn from facts".

Abstracts are for niggers, conclusions are for faggots. Blackpill discourse bypasses these corrupted middle-men and strikes its reader directly with facts and facts upon facts. Brutal fact, after brutal fact. Nonstop. Just like a belt-fed Vickers machine gun.

In a few centuries from now, academic discourse will be considered as hilarious as those medieval debates on how many angels could dance on the head of a pin, with the difference that medieval scholars actually believed in God and his angels, whereas academic fags don't even believe themselves ---- but believe all women!

I agree. I don't even look at studies anyway because I believe they are mostly biased however for most people using different terms other than "black pill" would help them out more.

 

[sultryloser]

It doesn't matter what you say, it matters who says it.

It does matter what you say to those would it would matter to say it to.
Regular people are obsessed with looks, that's no secret to us, but what is astounding is the sheer obsession makes them oblivious to the actual ideas being expressed. I believe it's related to the death of literacy, because literacy had nothing to titillate your eyes, it was purely ideas and left to your imagination. Now you can be bombarded by attractive people curated on platforms like Instagram and TikTok, attractive people and their common but looks-haloed, shitty, fallacious ideas possibly.
There was this one New York Time's newspaper article back in 1981 that explored the increasing role that physcial attractiveness has in one's life, and in the article this sentiment was explored briefly too, among other brutal blackpills about with the liberation of women's sexuality the value placed on a man's physical attractiveness becomes greater being no longer suppressed by economic factors and lack of access to these attractive men. What's super bizarre about it, is that it was written by a woman, yet contained some highly blackpilled shit.

 

[ULTRAMAN]

There was this one New York Time's newspaper article back in 1981 that explored the increasing role that physcial attractiveness has in one's life, and in the article this sentiment was explored briefly too, among other brutal blackpills about with the liberation of women's sexuality the value placed on a man's physical attractiveness becomes greater being no longer suppressed by economic factors and lack of access to these attractive men. What's super bizarre about it, is that it was written by a woman, yet contained some highly blackpilled shit.

this

https://www.nytimes.com/1981/09/01/science/effects-of-beauty-found-to-run-surprisingly-deep.html