Discussion Why genetic editing is the best and most practical way to end inceldom

[ThePlagueDoctor]

TLDR: Other methods are just dumb, don’t skim a tldr if you want a decent elaboration on why.

First off, when we’re talking about gene editing, we assume that it’s advanced enough to the point where you can be 24, go to your doctors and go from 5’5 to 6’2 in just a few days. It might be unrealistic but a few years ago we didn’t have phones so, really, doubting the power of technology is stupid.

Let’s see what other solutions there are before we talk more about gene editing.

1) Traditionalism/Enforced Monogamy - This solution essentially proposes that we go back to some way to enforce monogamy, whether it be by law or social customs. However, proponents of this fail to acknowledge that female nature isn’t willing to settle for that. If they’re with a 4/10 man and see another woman with a 8/10, they’ll feel jealous or unhappy. Those negative feelings may be taken out on the 4/10 man and ruin the relationship.

Not only that, but monogamy was fairly common earlier in America’s history. What happened to that? People were unhappy and wanted sex to become more liberalized and wanted to do it before marriage, so the sexual revolution effective changed the culture of sex.

No matter what, human nature will find a way to destroy monogamy, so it’s unpractical to enforce it with laws.

2) Artificial Wombs - You don’t have the feelings of the companionship that comes from being a parent, which just fuckin sucks.

3) State-Issued Girlfriends - This requires an autocratic government that has a massive amount of control, so you’d be sacrificing your freedoms. Not only that, but most people would be against this so implementing it would be nearly impossible. Even after it’s implemented, over time the dissatisfaction of women is likely to get some empathetic simp in power to get rid of the system, similar to enforced monogamy, it just isn’t in human nature to do this, so it’s not entirely practical.

Now that I’ve covered some commonly discussed solutions to inceldom and why they’re not entirely practical or effective let’s talk about why gene editing IS.

So, how is genetic editing more practical? Simple, most people actually want to change their appearance, why do you think women wear makeup? Why do you think people dye their hair? All they want to do is change the way they present themselves, and gene editing lets them do that, so the normies would be all over this shit. Not only that, but there’s an ethical component to this as well. All we really need to do is point to people with Parkinson’s, children with cancer, etc. Show the impact of negative genetics in a way which garner sympathy can result in more support and vilify those who don’t.

So, why is gene editing more effective? Well, if you’re born a Chad, women will be just as attracted to you as another guy born as a Chad. The differences would be minute and they wouldn’t care. Critics of genetic editing can say that if everyone is Chad tier then hypergamy would be worse (I actually thought this a few weeks ago), but if you think about how this would work out for a woman, they’re guaranteed to get a tall good looking man which isn’t a bad deal from their perspective. Not only that, but because we’re going from incel to Chad, our SMV is raised infinitely, which the other methods don’t accomplish.
Last minute edit : Also, feel free to mention other methods of dealing with inceldom I forgot to include if you’d like another opinion on it.

 

[guaucel]

There will be still hypergamy and small variations (differentation of men) will determine the new hierarchy of men when selected. Knowing the limits of our actual biology and expand it (modifying our nature from its nature itself with technology and science) is a definitive way to experience everything in the world (undoing our predictable biological slavery) in a independent (at least more than now) and changing way. TO make the things that may scare, perturb, sadden us another sort of stumulus that doesn't cause any negative effect, for instance: our dependance ("attaction") to women would be the first thing to be eliminated and ending inceldom btw.

 

[Lookscel]

My solution is genetically modified artificially birthed state issued girlfriend/wife which using genetic modification have been wired to never cheat or be fully monogamous and actually like a man soley for his personality.

Imo nothing beats my idea although it is most technologically challenging, "ethically" challenging and politically challenging.

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

I look at universal gene editing and surgerymaxxing the same way as gymmaxxing. Gym and getting ripped used to be something unique 10 to 15 years ago. You could get laid just off of being gymmaxxed. Now, it is REQUIRED if you want any chance of foid attention. Their standards go up as men improve themselves. 80/20 will not go away because that is how foids (the sexual selectors of our species) are wired.

they’re guaranteed to get a tall good looking man which isn’t a bad deal from their perspective.

This is accomplishes nothing. Zoomers are usually taller and more attractive than other generations, yet they suffer from inceldom as well. 80/20 rule will always be in effect. Foids will just use some other bullshit criteria to screen out men. If everyone is Chad, Chad becomes the new incel and only gigachads reproduce. The only way would be to make every man look the exactly same.

In reality, we need to stop caring about what foids think and just replace them outright with sexbots. Its far easier than surgerymaxxing or genemaxxing every male on the planet, and its a permanent, final solution to the foid question. Its also feasible, considering the advances being made in robotics. It would force foids to actually do something besides be a hole, and would provide a bare minimum looks expectation from foids. Porn should do this, but cucks and simps still white knight and support whores.

2) Artificial Wombs - You don’t have the feelings of the companionship that comes from being a parent, which just fuckin sucks.

To be clear, I don't advocate artificial wombs to remove feelings of romantic companionship, I simply use them as a tool to be completely independent of foids. A way to have kids without foids or their selection pressure.

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

There will be still hypergamy and small variations (differentation of men) will determine the new hierarchy of men when selected. Knowing the limits of our actual biology and expand it (modifying our nature from its nature itself with technology and science) is a definitive way to experience everything in the world (undoing our predictable biological slavery) in a independent (at least more than now) and changing way. TO make the things that may scare, perturb, sadden us another sort of stumulus that doesn't cause any negative effect, for instance: our dependance ("attaction") to women would be the first thing to be eliminated and ending inceldom btw.

I look at universal gene editing and surgerymaxxing the same way as gymmaxxing. Gym and getting ripped used to be something unique 10 to 15 years ago. You could get laid just off of being gymmaxxed. Now, it is REQUIRED if you want any chance of foid attention. Their standards go up as men improve themselves. 80/20 will not go away because that is how foids (the sexual selectors of our species) are wired.


This is accomplishes nothing. Zoomers are usually taller and more attractive than other generations, yet they suffer from inceldom as well. 80/20 rule will always be in effect. Foids will just use some other bullshit criteria to screen out men. If everyone is Chad, Chad becomes the new incel and only gigachads reproduce. The only way would be to make every man look the exactly same.

In reality, we need to stop caring about what foids think and just replace them outright with sexbots. Its far easier than surgerymaxxing or genemaxxing every male on the planet, and its a permanent, final solution to the foid question. Its also feasible, considering the advances being made in robotics. It would force foids to actually do something besides be a hole, and would provide a bare minimum looks expectation from foids. Porn should do this, but cucks and simps still white knight and support whores.


To be clear, I don't advocate artificial wombs to remove feelings of romantic companionship, I simply use them as a tool to be completely independent of foids. A way to have kids without foids or their selection pressure.

Both of you guys assume that hypergamy will be relevant when guys are Chads, but the thing is that this is due to very few people being attractive. If everyone or a majority of the population is attractive, hypergamy would be lessened. We know this because attractive can be measured and is definitive, with things like facial width & height, cheekbone height, eye shape, etc. I’ve yet to see legitimate evidence that when given MANY attractive options that are similar women would choose only the top ones then. If you think about it, the 80/20 only exists because only a few guys are attractive, but if most were? I’d doubt the 80/20 rule would be in effect.

If you guys don’t mind, I’d like to see an experiment showing women are still picky when given many good options, over very few.

 

[Deleted member 14577]

gene editing is gonna be based af tbh.

 

[Gyros_Pretcel]

The only problem is it doesn't exist yet.

 

[ItsOver4cel]

I look at universal gene editing and surgerymaxxing the same way as gymmaxxing. Gym and getting ripped used to be something unique 10 to 15 years ago. You could get laid just off of being gymmaxxed. Now, it is REQUIRED if you want any chance of foid attention. Their standards go up as men improve themselves. 80/20 will not go away because that is how foids (the sexual selectors of our species) are wired.


This is accomplishes nothing. Zoomers are usually taller and more attractive than other generations, yet they suffer from inceldom as well. 80/20 rule will always be in effect. Foids will just use some other bullshit criteria to screen out men. If everyone is Chad, Chad becomes the new incel and only gigachads reproduce. The only way would be to make every man look the exactly same.

In reality, we need to stop caring about what foids think and just replace them outright with sexbots. Its far easier than surgerymaxxing or genemaxxing every male on the planet, and its a permanent, final solution to the foid question. Its also feasible, considering the advances being made in robotics. It would force foids to actually do something besides be a hole, and would provide a bare minimum looks expectation from foids. Porn should do this, but cucks and simps still white knight and support whores.


To be clear, I don't advocate artificial wombs to remove feelings of romantic companionship, I simply use them as a tool to be completely independent of foids. A way to have kids without foids or their selection pressure.

Size of omniverse IQ. This is what I've been saying for a long while. If everyone is Chad, basically NOBODY will be. In our past times the ripped af roided muscles were seen as attactive, well, that is no more. As social media has impregnated women with the idea that there are one thousand million gigachads in the world when in reality those ads are using models who are in fact less than 1% of the male population in terms of attractiveness.

This brainwashing has resulted in foid's standards going sky high making it impossible for sub8 men as they are facing the greatest hypergamy they've seen in years. That's why most boomers would say to you that you're attractive, cuz in the past men weren't as handsome as today due to society's quality of life rising up.

If every man suddenly turn into a literal nordic God YotaChad, women would still compete for the chaddest of all no matter what, without themselves being that impressive.

This is why foids shouldn't have rights, they are entitled to high hell and nothing will stop them if politicians don't do something.

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

the thing is that this is due to very few people being attractive

No. This is due to technology and foid liberation allowing them to become open practitioners of eugenics based on bone length.

everyone or a majority of the population is attractive, hypergamy would be lessened.

Wrong. Nordic countries, particularly Denmark, have incels too. They average male height there is over 6'. And the average man there looks like chad compared to a man from SEA.

And this is still ignoring a fundamental point I made. Why are we trying to cater to foids when they can simply be replaced? Why should humanity spend billions of dollars genemaxxing/looksmaxxing males so thots can have decent looking boyfriends? Imagine that money being spent on actual good shit like space exploration or nuclear fusion research.

Foids are simply walking wombs and egg carriers. They are nothing else. What they want doesn't and shouldn't matter. They only exist to make more males.

Size of omniverse IQ. This is what I've been saying for a long while. If everyone is Chad, basically NOBODY will be. In our past times the ripped af roided muscles were seen as attactive, well, that is no more. As social media has impregnated women with the idea that there are one thousand million gigachads in the world when in reality those ads are using models who are in fact less than 1% of the male population in terms of attractiveness.

This brainwashing has resulted in foid's standards going sky high making it impossible for sub8 men as they are facing the greatest hypergamy they've seen in years. That's why most boomers would say to you that you're attractive, cuz in the past men weren't as handsome as today due to society's quality of life rising up.

If every man suddenly turn into a literal nordic God YotaChad, women would still compete for the chaddest of all no matter what, without themselves being that impressive.

This is why foids shouldn't have rights, they are entitled to high hell and nothing will stop them if politicians don't do something.

This is absolutely correct. This madness won't stop until foids are forced to evolve beyond simply being holes.

 

[Deleted member 23820]

Everything is a cope.

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

Wrong. Nordic countries, particularly Denmark, have incels too. They average male height there is over 6'. And the average man there looks like chad compared to a man from SEA.

Fuck, I didn’t take that into account

And this is still ignoring a fundamental point I made. Why are we trying to cater to foids when they can simply be replaced? Why should humanity spend billions of dollars genemaxxing/looksmaxxing males so thots can have decent looking boyfriends? Imagine that money being spent on actual good shit like space exploration or nuclear fusion research.

This isn’t 100% catering to foids, it helps anyone with a genetic illness like me, @Emergency Manual or @wereqryan, the intention is to help men like us.

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

This isn’t 100% catering to foids, it helps anyone with a genetic illness like me, @Emergency Manual or @wereqryan, the intention is to help men like us.

I misunderstood you then. In that case, genetic engineering and surgery should be funded for you. All I'm saying is to not feed foid princess fantasies and their massively inflated sense of self worth.

 

[randomguy1235]

TLDR: Other methods are just dumb, don’t skim a tldr if you want a decent elaboration on why.

First off, when we’re talking about gene editing, we assume that it’s advanced enough to the point where you can be 24, go to your doctors and go from 5’5 to 6’2 in just a few days. It might be unrealistic but a few years ago we didn’t have phones so, really, doubting the power of technology is stupid.

Let’s see what other solutions there are before we talk more about gene editing.

1) Traditionalism/Enforced Monogamy - This solution essentially proposes that we go back to some way to enforce monogamy, whether it be by law or social customs. However, proponents of this fail to acknowledge that female nature isn’t willing to settle for that. If they’re with a 4/10 man and see another woman with a 8/10, they’ll feel jealous or unhappy. Those negative feelings may be taken out on the 4/10 man and ruin the relationship.

Not only that, but monogamy was fairly common earlier in America’s history. What happened to that? People were unhappy and wanted sex to become more liberalized and wanted to do it before marriage, so the sexual revolution effective changed the culture of sex.

No matter what, human nature will find a way to destroy monogamy, so it’s unpractical to enforce it with laws.

2) Artificial Wombs - You don’t have the feelings of the companionship that comes from being a parent, which just fuckin sucks.

3) State-Issued Girlfriends - This requires an autocratic government that has a massive amount of control, so you’d be sacrificing your freedoms. Not only that, but most people would be against this so implementing it would be nearly impossible. Even after it’s implemented, over time the dissatisfaction of women is likely to get some empathetic simp in power to get rid of the system, similar to enforced monogamy, it just isn’t in human nature to do this, so it’s not entirely practical.

Now that I’ve covered some commonly discussed solutions to inceldom and why they’re not entirely practical or effective let’s talk about why gene editing IS.

So, how is genetic editing more practical? Simple, most people actually want to change their appearance, why do you think women wear makeup? Why do you think people dye their hair? All they want to do is change the way they present themselves, and gene editing lets them do that, so the normies would be all over this shit. Not only that, but there’s an ethical component to this as well. All we really need to do is point to people with Parkinson’s, children with cancer, etc. Show the impact of negative genetics in a way which garner sympathy can result in more support and vilify those who don’t.

So, why is gene editing more effective? Well, if you’re born a Chad, women will be just as attracted to you as another guy born as a Chad. The differences would be minute and they wouldn’t care. Critics of genetic editing can say that if everyone is Chad tier then hypergamy would be worse (I actually thought this a few weeks ago), but if you think about how this would work out for a woman, they’re guaranteed to get a tall good looking man which isn’t a bad deal from their perspective. Not only that, but because we’re going from incel to Chad, our SMV is raised infinitely, which the other methods don’t accomplish.
Last minute edit : Also, feel free to mention other methods of dealing with inceldom I forgot to include if you’d like another opinion on it.

High IQ, completely agree. If it wasn't for Jews maligning eugenics throughout the 20th century, we'd all already be happy and genetically gifted.

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

High IQ, completely agree. If it wasn't for Jews maligning eugenics throughout the 20th century, we'd all already be happy and genetically gifted.

Eugenics is not the same thing as genetic editing through technology lmao

 

[randomguy1235]

Eugenics is not the same thing as genetic editing through technology lmao

"Eugenics: the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics."

Gene editing improves the genetic health and fitness of humanity by allowing us to choose what genes get passed on to our offspring. Gene editing a grown adult's genome wouldn't do much aside from fixing some genetic disorders (eg we'll be able treat parkinsons but it'll be much more difficult to make a 5'5'' ugly dude into a 6'5'' gigachad without a billion other interventions).

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

"Eugenics: the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics."

Gene editing improves the genetic health and fitness of humanity by allowing us to choose what genes get passed on to our offspring. Gene editing a grown adult's genome wouldn't do much aside from fixing some genetic disorders (eg we'll be able treat parkinsons but it'll be much more difficult to make a 5'5'' ugly dude into a 6'5'' gigachad without a billion other interventions).

by controlled breeding

technology doesn’t force certain people to leave the breeding pool

 

[randomguy1235]

by controlled breeding

technology doesn’t force certain people to leave the breeding pool

Control =///////= force. For example: Controlled environments, controlled temperature, etc.

Eugenics has nothing to do with Nazis or fascism (the idea of Eugenics far precedes Nazism and was implemented in over 30 countries long before Hitler was even born).

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

Control =///////= force. For example: Controlled environments, controlled temperature, etc.

Eugenics has nothing to do with Nazis or fascism (the idea of Eugenics far precedes Nazism and was implemented in over 30 countries long before Hitler was even born).

I didn’t bring up hitler so idc about that

the idea behind eugenics is to limit who can and cannot mate, with gene editing you could have two dwarves fuck and get a 6’10 giant

 

[randomguy1235]

I didn’t bring up hitler so idc about that

the idea behind eugenics is to limit who can and cannot mate, with gene editing you could have two dwarves fuck and get a 6’10 giant

The idea that Eugenics (again: "the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics") = forcing people not to breed is propagandistic nonsense Jews have always espoused. They bring this up because "hitler bad, nazis bad, eugenics bad", which is why you're ignorant about Eugenics and its definition/meaning

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

The idea that Eugenics (again: "the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics") = forcing people not to breed is propagandistic nonsense Jews have always espoused. They bring this up because "hitler bad, nazis bad, eugenics bad", which is why you're ignorant about Eugenics and its definition/meaning

It literally has controlled breeding in the definition lmfao

 

[Deleted member 18214]

I prefer roping tbh

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

I prefer roping tbh

Roping won’t get you a girlfriend

 

[lightskin2thousand0]

They say it is unethical china and the incels say otherwise

 

[Deleted member 18214]

Roping won’t get you a girlfriend

Cope the great old ones will grant me a tall blonde woman of Germanic descent when I reincarnate

 

[Sexdoll Pioneer]

In reality, we need to stop caring about what foids think and just replace them outright with sexbots. Its far easier than surgerymaxxing or genemaxxing every male on the planet, and its a permanent, final solution to the foid question. Its also feasible, considering the advances being made in robotics.

 

[randomguy1235]

It literally has controlled breeding in the definition lmfao

You seem to have trouble understanding that "controlled" (as in the scientific understanding of the term) does NOT mean "controlled by the government/people/etc." Having two race horses in a pin together and then mate is "controlled breeding" for example.

Just like when people say "evolution isn't true because it's the THEORY of evolution and not the FACT of evolution", they don't understand that the scientific use of the word "theory" is very different from the average use of the word "theory"

 

[FrustratedWhiteMale]

Isn't this what Hitler wanted to do? Create the Master Race.

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

You seem to have trouble understanding that "controlled" (as in the scientific understanding of the term) does NOT mean "controlled by the government/people/etc." Having two race horses in a pin together and then mate is "controlled breeding" for example.

Just like when people say "evolution isn't true because it's the THEORY of evolution and not the FACT of evolution", they don't understand that the scientific use of the word "theory" is very different from the average use of the word "theory"

Okay, so in a society that practices eugenics, who would control the breeding if not for a government or societal pressure? Most guys won’t not fuck some girl just because they have negative traits due to hypergamy.

Isn't this what Hitler wanted to do? Create the Master Race.

View attachment 194649

Nah, he definitely wasn’t having people work on the human genome, the idiots in Germany were too busy measuring the sizes of their heads n shit rather than playing with genetics

 

[randomguy1235]

Okay, so in a society that practices eugenics, who would control the breeding if not for a government or societal pressure? Most guys won’t not fuck some girl just because they have negative traits due to hypergamy.

No one has to force anyone to do anything to practice eugenics. If society wasn't brainwashed into disavowing eugenics then we wouldn't be giving low IQ, irresponsible, morally dubious single moms welfare so they can continue to fuck up our gene pool for example. And like I said, Gene editing IS Eugenics. Everyone with half a brain cell would understand that it's morally necessary to have their children inherit the best genes possible. In fact, the government will try everything they can to hinder or ban gene editing technologies like they're trying with in vitro fertilization

 

[based_meme]

It would force foids to actually do something besides be a hole

 

[Deleted member 24166]

I am a strong supporter of eugenics, and gene editing should also be made accessible when it will be available. It is in everyone's interest to improve the gene pool, and because of it, it is actually a realistic goal to have that should be easy to gain broad support for.

Humans are not a naturally monogamous species. It is just a tradcuck cope. 8,000 years ago, females had 17 times the reproductive success of men. What the hypergamy of today implies, is – in fact – just that humans are getting closer to their natural evolutionary state.

8,000 Years Ago, 17 Women Reproduced for Every One Man

An analysis of modern DNA uncovers a rough dating scene after the advent of agriculture.

psmag.com

Polygyny is actually good for the improvement of the human species, since only the genetically most fit men will reproduce then. From an evolutionary perspective, there is no reason at all to make it easier for genetic trash – both among men and females – to reproduce. We do not need any more low T cucks to be born, which the majority of low SMV males are. We also need to increase the average testosterone level of men in order for them to not reproduce with genetic trash females.

Isn't this what Hitler wanted to do? Create the Master Race.

That should absolutely be the goal.

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

I know, wishful thinking.

Polygyny is actually good for the improvement of the human species, since only the genetically most fit men will reproduce then.

This issue, greycel, is that women are looking for traits that mattered 20,000 years ago, not now in 2020. If this were true, every high IQ male would have dozens of offspring. But we all know that's not true.

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

This issue, greycel, is that women are looking for traits that mattered 20,000 years ago, not now in 2020. If this were true, every high IQ male would have dozens of offspring. But we all know that's not true.

Right, if good genetics mattered women wouldve been lining up to fuck Newton and Einstein, except Newton died a virgin.

 

[Mogged Loner]

SuperHyperGigaCope

Some other genetic trait will arise in non modified populations that foids will flock too. Being Chad will always be a luck of the draw thing that no one will win

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

Some other genetic trait will arise in non modified populations that foids will flock too.

Like what?

 

[Mogged Loner]

Like what?

Idk but it’ll be something unaccounted for.

Eugenics in general is cope. Humans have been trying to create the perfect person since the beginning of man (mostly through inbreeding) and have only managed to create retards

 

[based_meme]

I made a related post about a couple of hours ago on this subject. My thoughts on this are that there should be state-implemented "soft" eugenics (as opposed to "hard" eugenics, which involves forced sterilization), where citizens are screened for genetic fitness, undergo a a full medical exam, and are economically stable. Then, and only then, will they be issued breeding licenses.

Previous post:

Implement breeding licenses. Screen all children for genetic defects. Issue them to biologically, physically, psychologically AND economically healthy people. State-supported single motherhood wouldn't exist. The state policies and the culture forming and being shaped around them would discourage whimsical promiscuity and pregnancy with genetically fit, but socially and economically unstable men. It would improve the quality of society. Perhaps not on a case by case basis on an individual level (no system can promise that), but it would be a positive sum outcome.

Anybody found to have physically and/or psychologically debilitating and/or degenerative genetic conditions that will only manifest in time would be ineligible for breeding licenses. Some would argue to even go a step further and simply neuter babies with genetic deformities or simply screen and abort in utero. But I'm not in support of this for varying reasons, such as cutting off life and it's natural right to live, and throwing away potential utility for society. For example, you can have a genetically unfit citizens with no breeding privileges who could still make important scientific and technological contributions (San Francisco is full of them) that everyone can benefit from.

 

[Purveyoroftruth]

TLDR: Other methods are just dumb, don’t skim a tldr if you want a decent elaboration on why.

First off, when we’re talking about gene editing, we assume that it’s advanced enough to the point where you can be 24, go to your doctors and go from 5’5 to 6’2 in just a few days. It might be unrealistic but a few years ago we didn’t have phones so, really, doubting the power of technology is stupid.

Let’s see what other solutions there are before we talk more about gene editing.

1) Traditionalism/Enforced Monogamy - This solution essentially proposes that we go back to some way to enforce monogamy, whether it be by law or social customs. However, proponents of this fail to acknowledge that female nature isn’t willing to settle for that. If they’re with a 4/10 man and see another woman with a 8/10, they’ll feel jealous or unhappy. Those negative feelings may be taken out on the 4/10 man and ruin the relationship.

Not only that, but monogamy was fairly common earlier in America’s history. What happened to that? People were unhappy and wanted sex to become more liberalized and wanted to do it before marriage, so the sexual revolution effective changed the culture of sex.

No matter what, human nature will find a way to destroy monogamy, so it’s unpractical to enforce it with laws.

2) Artificial Wombs - You don’t have the feelings of the companionship that comes from being a parent, which just fuckin sucks.

3) State-Issued Girlfriends - This requires an autocratic government that has a massive amount of control, so you’d be sacrificing your freedoms. Not only that, but most people would be against this so implementing it would be nearly impossible. Even after it’s implemented, over time the dissatisfaction of women is likely to get some empathetic simp in power to get rid of the system, similar to enforced monogamy, it just isn’t in human nature to do this, so it’s not entirely practical.

Now that I’ve covered some commonly discussed solutions to inceldom and why they’re not entirely practical or effective let’s talk about why gene editing IS.

So, how is genetic editing more practical? Simple, most people actually want to change their appearance, why do you think women wear makeup? Why do you think people dye their hair? All they want to do is change the way they present themselves, and gene editing lets them do that, so the normies would be all over this shit. Not only that, but there’s an ethical component to this as well. All we really need to do is point to people with Parkinson’s, children with cancer, etc. Show the impact of negative genetics in a way which garner sympathy can result in more support and vilify those who don’t.

So, why is gene editing more effective? Well, if you’re born a Chad, women will be just as attracted to you as another guy born as a Chad. The differences would be minute and they wouldn’t care. Critics of genetic editing can say that if everyone is Chad tier then hypergamy would be worse (I actually thought this a few weeks ago), but if you think about how this would work out for a woman, they’re guaranteed to get a tall good looking man which isn’t a bad deal from their perspective. Not only that, but because we’re going from incel to Chad, our SMV is raised infinitely, which the other methods don’t accomplish.
Last minute edit : Also, feel free to mention other methods of dealing with inceldom I forgot to include if you’d like another opinion on it.

It is. I will found a eugenics foundation based upon that.

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

Idk but it’ll be something unaccounted for.

Eugenics in general is cope. Humans have been trying to create the perfect person since the beginning of man (mostly through inbreeding) and have only managed to create retards

I don’t understand why people here keep thinking eugenics and gene editing is the same fucking thing, it’s not. Eugenics is controlled breeding, gene editing doesn’t care about who the parents are

Eugenics is taking two people and expecting their child to have certain traits

gene editing is using technology to edit genes that control specific traits, we have done this with animals and vegetables so it has the potential to work. In fact we have the entire human genome mapped out, so it’s only a matter of time.

I made a related post about a couple of hours ago on this subject. My thoughts on this are that there should be state-implemented "soft" eugenics (as opposed to "hard" eugenics, which involves forced sterilization), where citizens are screened for genetic fitness, undergo a a full medical exam, and are economically stable. Then, and only then, will they be issued breeding licenses.

Previous post:

Implement breeding licenses. Screen all children for genetic defects. Issue them to biologically, physically, psychologically AND economically healthy people. State-supported single motherhood wouldn't exist. The state policies and the culture forming and being shaped around them would discourage whimsical promiscuity and pregnancy with genetically fit, but socially and economically unstable men. It would improve the quality of society. Perhaps not on a case by case basis on an individual level (no system can promise that), but it would be a positive sum outcome.

Anybody found to have physically and/or psychologically debilitating and/or degenerative genetic conditions that will only manifest in time would be ineligible for breeding licenses. Some would argue to even go a step further and simply neuter babies with genetic deformities or simply screen and abort in utero. But I'm not in support of this for varying reasons, such as cutting off life and it's natural right to live, and throwing away potential utility for society. For example, you can have a genetically unfit citizens with no breeding privileges who could still make important scientific and technological contributions (San Francisco is full of them) that everyone can benefit from.

This wouldnt be necessary if genetic editing were more advanced. Two people could have cerebral palsy and have genes that cause cancer but have CRISPR fix that and the issue would be gone

 

[Mogged Loner]

I don’t understand why people here keep thinking eugenics and gene editing is the same fucking thing

Eugenics is taking two people and expecting their child to have certain traits

gene editing is using technology to edit genes that control specific traits, we have done this with animals and vegetables so it has the potential to work. In fact we have the entire human genome mapped out, so it’s only a matter of time.

Still won’t work

They still don’t even know what Over 90% of your dna does so they call it junk lol

There’s always gonna be an unaccountable factor and even if they create a homogenous group of humans to their ideal “beauty” standards the idea of beauty has changed throughout history

It’s all fantasy and cope as far as I’m concerned

 

[Incline]

But it's too late for us.

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

Still won’t work

They still don’t even know what Over 90% of your dna does so they call it junk lol

The human genome project was completed in 2003, and sequenced roughly 90% of our DNA.

It’s all fantasy and cope as far as I’m concerned

Fair, but thinking of solutions is better than roping IMO

 

[tulasdanslos]

the idea of beauty has changed throughout history

I guess Don Juan Tenorio was a Dravidian currycel in your fantasy world.

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

I guess Don Juan Tenorio was a Dravidian currycel in your fantasy world.

 

[Itsover4maymaycels]

Polygyny is actually good for the improvement of the human species, since only the genetically most fit men will reproduce then. From an evolutionary perspective, there is no reason at all to make it easier for genetic trash – both among men and females – to reproduce. We do not need any more low T cucks to be born, which the majority of low SMV males are. We also need to increase the average testosterone level of men in order for them to not reproduce with genetic trash females.

Cucked and pilled, the traits foids select for literally do NOTHING for the improvement of society, foids would choose Justin Bieber over Newton, pre-surgery Elon Musk or Steve Wozniak, need i say more?

 

[AlexanderTheGreat11]

I prefer roping tbh

 

[Deleted member 24166]

This issue, greycel, is that women are looking for traits that mattered 20,000 years ago, not now in 2020. If this were true, every high IQ male would have dozens of offspring. But we all know that's not true.

Right, if good genetics mattered women wouldve been lining up to fuck Newton and Einstein, except Newton died a virgin.

Cucked and pilled, the traits foids select for literally do NOTHING for the improvement of society, foids would choose Justin Bieber over Newton, pre-surgery Elon Musk or Steve Wozniak, need i say more?

Cope. Attractive men tend to have higher intelligence as well. Good genetics come in packages.

Intelligence and mate choice: intelligent men are always appealing

What role does a man's intelligence play in women's mate preferences? Selecting a more intelligent mate often provides women with better access to resources and parental investment for offspring....

web.archive.org

It is an issue though that intelligent men have too few children, but that is voluntary to a certain degree because even they are bluepilled, and that is also one reason that the blackpill must be spread. If they were blackpilled, they would have known the importance of spreading their genes. An intelligent man would also have it easier to impregnate a female through manipulation or gaining social status, power and money – which somewhat can be used in order to compensate for poor looks and height – since he would be more likely to know have to do it properly.

 

[ThePlagueDoctor]

Cope. Attractive men tend to have higher intelligence as well. Good genetics come in packages.

Yeah, but even if a man is smart & ugly, women won’t be attracted to him. Even if his genetics are good he won’t be seen as attractive

 

[Itsover4maymaycels]

Cope. Attractive men tend to have higher intelligence as well. Good genetics come in packages.

An intelligent man would also have it easier to impregnate a female through manipulation or gaining social status, power and money

The link you gave is not working (text is not loading), i've heard this "good genes come in packages" dozens of times but not a single study confirming it, what i see from most members who say this is inverting cause and consequence, attractive people are more likely to climb up the social ladder, intelligent people are more likely to climb up the social ladder, people of the same social standing mate thus forming attractive and intelligent offspring, this does not mean that having genes for good looks also somehow increases your likelihood of genes for high intelligence, that is an extremely bold claim to make when the vast majority of men who built the foundation of all sciences have been either normie tier or incel tier, for every revolutionary Chad scientist you can name far, far more revolutionary normie tier or incel tier scientists, so to prove that "good genes come in packages", you'll need an actual scientific explanation that genes for good looks are likely to bring genes for intelligence or vice versa, rather than statistics, which are skewed by attractive ppl and intelligent ppl being more likely to mate with eachother.

Also, that explanation that foids selecting against ugly but intelligent men is fine just because they're more likely to succeed is fucking retarded anyways, why should ugly but intelligent men have to get lucky enough to become millionaire celebrities just to betabuxx while dumb Chads with no major talents slay effortlessly? This "good genes come in packages" belief from certain members appears to be nothing but a mix of pseudoscience and self-hatred as proof has been very lacking.

 

[based_meme]

This wouldnt be necessary if genetic editing were more advanced. Two people could have cerebral palsy and have genes that cause cancer but have CRISPR fix that and the issue would be gone

CRISPR editing technology will introduce a whole slew of problems related to disparity issues. It open the flood gates to historically unprecedented levels of social stratification and class hierarchy. Given enough time and gradual editing of any given population, you will have a very strict upper class and lower class, based purely on genetics.

It already is this way in a loose sense with social circles, cliques and subgroups forming out of class and genetic level similarity. You'll never see a White, rich, LA chad, for example, be socially associated with a ghetto Mexican manlet. It just doesn't happen for a ton of reasons in addition to what's already mentioned, but those are the main reasons.

Designer gene editing will magnify current social and economic problems, by literally creating a synthetic species of humans. Biologists might even create a seperate taxonomic classification to prevent the socio-political problems associated with calling GM humans a different species, namely, racism (though nobody seems to give a shit about classism). It'll functionally be wordplay, but with enough editing it will be a different species of human.

You have to think in scales of hundreds, if not thousands of years, when thinking of introducing and implementing new technologies in the world. You have to think about all of the variables than be affected. Gene editing will bring more overall harm than good. Yes, it will suck for people who suffer due to the negative lottery of improbable, random mutations, I'll admit, but the problems of the technology far outweigh the benefits.