Theory Why Incels shouldn't get involved with Women and Violence

[Overdosed]

We're told by subzero IQ people that 'men shall protect women because the latter is the weak, nurturing, and vulnerable sex', but is that claim true?

Let's review the data before we make a conclusion.
First of all, women's heads are more dense than men's:

The researchers found that the average thicknesses of the skull in men was 6.5 millimetres, but 7.1 mm in women..."Skull thickness differences between genders are confirmed in our study,"…Skull thickness, as one might expect, improves the outcome for anyone suffering a head injury, but studies have also demonstrated that skull shape can also have an effect.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080121122138.htm
Aaand that's one of the many reasons why they're thick headed. Now can women heal from that burn?-Yes, quite quickly because of their estrogen and progesterone levels:

The potential impact of estrogen on skin homeostasis and wound repair is underscored by the presence of estrogen receptors in fibroblasts, macrophages and epidermal cells. Topical and systemic estrogen treatments increase the rate of healing in male and female aged humans (particularly females). Estrogen affects cutaneous wound healing response by modulating all phases of the wound healing process…

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1569255803340226

In naturally cycling young women, individuals with higher testosterone levels exhibited delayed wound closure on days 3–7 compared to individuals with lower testosterone levels (based on median split). These effects were not seen in women taking OCs.
...naturally cycling young women lower testosterone levels related to faster wound closure later in the healing process.
The healing pattern of older women not yet menopausal was similar to that of young women and dissimilar from that of post-menopausal women of the same age.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2746088/
Ofc Simps will spatter 'just because women can recover faster doesn't mean they could defend themselves'. In actuality, women's estrogen plays a very important role in muscle accretion (and bone mass):

the effects of RE-induced testosterone increase on an increase in estrogen levels in women. The effects of acute estrogen release may relate to a reduction in exercise-induced muscle damage and improved recovery...estrogen is believed to be important in the regulation of both muscle function and hypertrophy in response to exercise—with rapid changes in systemic concentration occurring immediately post RE, that are dependent upon RE intensity...It is reported that RE acutely augments the activity of the aromatase enzyme which results in an increase in the biosynthesis of estrogen from androgens; in turn explaining the effects of RE-induced testosterone increase on an increase in estrogen levels in women.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7844366/
Before you disagree and leave this thread, ask yourself the question "why did she place herself in harm's way?" After all, historically, queens more often than kings to be aggressors when it comes to waging war and mothers influencing their sons to enlisting in them:

Our primary sample covers 193 reigns in 18 polities, with queens ruling in 18% of these reigns. We include polity fixed effects, holding constant time invariant features of a polity that affect conflict, and exploit variation over time in the gender of the ruler. Using the first born male and sister instruments, we find that polities ruled by queens were 27% more likely to participate in inter-state conflicts, compared to polities ruled by kings...
These studies have shown how mothers influence their sons’ labor market outcomes; and that having a daughter or sister affects male legislative voting, party identity, and judicial decision-making. The combined effect of ethnicity and female socialization has also been found to influence decision-making, for example in Ottoman decisions to fight Europeans.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w23337
I love the fact this paper tries to blame everyone, from advisers to algorithms, but never the women themselves, which if that is true then we should expect women to be less hurtful to fellow women, to partners or at least their children. However:

In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases...Studies of community samples found that a relatively low percentage of women endorsed self-defense as a primary motive for violence. These data suggest that self-defense cannot fully explain the reciprocal violence phenomenon.

...For perpetrators who were women, IPV was more frequent when perpetrated in the context of reciprocal IPV versus nonreciprocal IPV (AOR = 2.23; P < .001). In other words, women perpetrated IPV more frequently in the context of reciprocal violence than in nonreciprocal violence.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/

The study, which challenges the long-standing view that women are overwhelmingly the victims of aggression, is based on an analysis of 34,000 men and women by a British academic. Women lash out more frequently than their husbands or boyfriends, concludes John Archer, professor of psychology at the University of Central Lancashire and president of the International Society for Research on Aggression.

Professor Archer analysed data from 82 US and UK studies on relationship violence, dating back to 1972. He also looked at 17 studies based on victim reports from 1,140 men and women. Speaking last night, he said that female aggression was greater in westernised women because they were "economically emancipated" and therefore not afraid of ending a relationship.​

Between 1989 and 1998...arrests of girls for serious violent offenses increased by 64.3 percent and arrests of girls for "other assaults" increased an astonishing 125.4 percent.

The research group The Future of Children adds, “Between 1985 and 2002, the overall number of delinquency cases for girls increased 92 percent.”​

https://archive.vn/ExX1Y
And it's not men's fault or because women are mimicking men, as this shows:

Around 44% of lesbian and 61% of bisexual women have experienced forms of rape and physical violence by an intimate partner as compared to 35% of straight women.

https://www.dcvlp.org/domestic-violence-peaks-more-than-ever-for-the-lgbtqia-community/
And its already demonstrated that mothers don't even spare their children from suffering: https://incels.is/threads/the-mompill.446527/

Even you decide to injure women instead, they might enjoy the pain regardless. As epillepsy demonstrated that women feel pleasure from pain through their dimorphic opioidergic system: https://incels.is/threads/women-gai...-the-pain-that-is-inflicted-upon-them.254271/ You're not winning by attacking them and hurting your chances of pussy if you kill one since you'd increase the value (& potentially more options) of other, would-be smaller group of women.
So either way, Simp-letons will rush to their defense putting yourself in a disadvantage (unless you planned to injure women as bait to lure simps to their destruction which is genius but).

In short, unless you're dealing with a pregnant, pre-fifthteen yo, elderly woman or your job is defending people, women don't need your protection. They can recover faster than you anyway. There's a good chance that altercations are caused by the women themselves, and the claim that they're the 'the weak, nurturing, and vulnerable sex' is just a product of the bluepill, not the blackpilled data and truth.

TLDR; You'll be more in danger protecting women than said women experiencing the danger, and you'll just a tool for their convenience with no fulfilled incentives.

 

[Lonelyus]

We're told by subzero IQ people that 'men shall protect women because the latter is the weak, nurturing, and vulnerable sex', but is that claim true?

Let's review the data before we make a conclusion.
First of all, women's heads are more dense than men's:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080121122138.htm
Aaand that's one of the many reasons why they're thick headed. Now can women heal from that burn?-Yes, quite quickly because of their estrogen and progesterone levels:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1569255803340226

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2746088/
Ofc Simps will spatter 'just because women can recover faster doesn't mean they could defend themselves'. In actuality, women's estrogen plays a very important role in muscle accretion (and bone mass):

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7844366/
Before you disagree and leave this thread, ask yourself the question "why did she place herself in harm's way?" After all, historically, queens more often than kings to be aggressors when it comes to waging war and mothers influencing their sons to enlisting in them:

https://www.nber.org/papers/w23337
I love the fact this paper tries to blame everyone, from advisers to algorithms, but never the women themselves, which if that is true then we should expect women to be less hurtful to fellow women, to partners or at least their children. However:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/

https://archive.vn/ExX1Y
And it's not men's fault or because women are mimicking men, as this shows:

https://www.dcvlp.org/domestic-violence-peaks-more-than-ever-for-the-lgbtqia-community/
And its already demonstrated that mothers don't even spare their children from suffering: https://incels.is/threads/the-mompill.446527/

Even you decide to injure women instead, they might enjoy the pain regardless. As epillepsy demonstrated that women feel pleasure from pain through their dimorphic opioidergic system: https://incels.is/threads/women-gai...-the-pain-that-is-inflicted-upon-them.254271/ You're not winning by attacking them and hurting your chances of pussy if you kill one since you'd increase the value (& potentially more options) of other, would-be smaller group of women.
So either way, Simp-letons will rush to their defense putting yourself in a disadvantage (unless you planned to injure women as bait to lure simps to their destruction which is genius but).

In short, unless you're dealing with a pregnant, pre-fifthteen yo, elderly woman or your job is defending people, women don't need your protection. They can recover faster than you anyway. There's a good chance that altercations are caused by the women themselves, and the claim that they're the 'the weak, nurturing, and vulnerable sex' is just a product of the bluepill, not the blackpilled data and truth.

TLDR; You'll be more in danger protecting women than said women experiencing the danger, and you'll just a tool for their convenience with no fulfilled incentives.

I saw a vid of a woman throwing a newborn ALIVE baby into a trashcan, I heard stories she was arrested tho, GOOD, FUCK THAT WOMAN FOR DOING THAT, IF I WAS BORN I WOULDNT WANT MY FIRST LIGHT OF LIFE TO BE THROWN IN THE GARBAGE BY MY OWN CARATAKER AKA MOTHER

 

[Lonelyus]

Women often play social games on men and sometimes they can become violent, In germany a woman did this and the teenage boy slam dunked her into the ground and said are you stopping? Woman put in place, SHE IS NOT A MAN, SHE DOES NOT HAVE MALE STRENGHT, SO HE COULD EASILY BEAT HER!

 

[Overdosed]

I saw a vid of a woman throwing a newborn ALIVE baby into a trashcan, I heard stories she was arrested tho, GOOD, FUCK THAT WOMAN FOR DOING THAT, IF I WAS BORN I WOULDNT WANT MY FIRST LIGHT OF LIFE TO BE THROWN IN THE GARBAGE BY MY OWN CARATAKER AKA MOTHER

I remember hearing from the news that a woman flushed a baby down the toilet, and the only reason why people found out is because the child was found stunk crying when an employee heard noises in the pipes.

The perception of female innocence leads to exploitation of those who are will sacrifice themselves for the innocent. Artificial selection, I suppose.

Women often play social games on men and sometimes they can become violent, In germany a woman did this and the teenage boy slam dunked her into the ground and said are you stopping? Woman put in place, SHE IS NOT A MAN, SHE DOES NOT HAVE MALE STRENGHT, SO HE COULD EASILY BEAT HER!

Women can heal faster, have thicker skulls, have sexual value to their attackers, and soycity will cater to them afterwords, so they're going to be fine no matter what. They can't lose.

 

[Lonelyus]

I remember hearing from the news that a woman flushed a baby down the toilet, and the only reason why people found out is because the child was found stunk crying when an employee heard noises in the pipes.

The perception of female innocence leads to exploitation of those who are will sacrifice themselves for the innocent. Artificial selection, I suppose.

Women can heal faster, have thicker skulls, have sexual value to their attackers, and soycity will cater to them afterwords, so they're going to be fine no matter what. They can't lose.

A bullet to theyre head is gonna stop them

 

[Lonesome Bright]

We're told by subzero IQ people that 'men shall protect women because the latter is the weak, nurturing, and vulnerable sex', but is that claim true?

Let's review the data before we make a conclusion.
First of all, women's heads are more dense than men's:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080121122138.htm
Aaand that's one of the many reasons why they're thick headed. Now can women heal from that burn?-Yes, quite quickly because of their estrogen and progesterone levels:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1569255803340226

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2746088/
Ofc Simps will spatter 'just because women can recover faster doesn't mean they could defend themselves'. In actuality, women's estrogen plays a very important role in muscle accretion (and bone mass):

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7844366/
Before you disagree and leave this thread, ask yourself the question "why did she place herself in harm's way?" After all, historically, queens more often than kings to be aggressors when it comes to waging war and mothers influencing their sons to enlisting in them:

https://www.nber.org/papers/w23337
I love the fact this paper tries to blame everyone, from advisers to algorithms, but never the women themselves, which if that is true then we should expect women to be less hurtful to fellow women, to partners or at least their children. However:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/

https://archive.vn/ExX1Y
And it's not men's fault or because women are mimicking men, as this shows:

https://www.dcvlp.org/domestic-violence-peaks-more-than-ever-for-the-lgbtqia-community/
And its already demonstrated that mothers don't even spare their children from suffering: https://incels.is/threads/the-mompill.446527/

Even you decide to injure women instead, they might enjoy the pain regardless. As epillepsy demonstrated that women feel pleasure from pain through their dimorphic opioidergic system: https://incels.is/threads/women-gai...-the-pain-that-is-inflicted-upon-them.254271/ You're not winning by attacking them and hurting your chances of pussy if you kill one since you'd increase the value (& potentially more options) of other, would-be smaller group of women.
So either way, Simp-letons will rush to their defense putting yourself in a disadvantage (unless you planned to injure women as bait to lure simps to their destruction which is genius but).

In short, unless you're dealing with a pregnant, pre-fifthteen yo, elderly woman or your job is defending people, women don't need your protection. They can recover faster than you anyway. There's a good chance that altercations are caused by the women themselves, and the claim that they're the 'the weak, nurturing, and vulnerable sex' is just a product of the bluepill, not the blackpilled data and truth.

TLDR; You'll be more in danger protecting women than said women experiencing the danger, and you'll just a tool for their convenience with no fulfilled incentives.

wow my man may I follow you, legend. My experiences with females throughout my life tells me all that you have said here.

 

[VλREN]

I remember hearing from the news that a woman flushed a baby down the toilet, and the only reason why people found out is because the child was found stunk crying when an employee heard noises in the pipes.

man that’s fucked

 

[Lonesome Bright]

man that’s fucked

LOL and they call us evil and creepy.

 

[Izayacel]

man that’s fucked

The empaletic gend4r

 

[Lonesome Bright]

The empaletic gend4r

LOL I know SUPOSED to be empathetic but it is not true nor loyal.