F
cope
u wouldnt be able to do shit against the agendas of the high value males in ur tribe or risk exile
u wouldnt be able to do shit against the agendas of the high value males in ur tribe or risk exile
You really like to bullshit, don't you?
Your entire premise was that "nature is right." Re-read your original post. The whole tone of it implies that "nature is right and therefore incels are wrong." You can say all you want that it's not a "moral argument" but the argument is implied by everything you wrote. Otherwise, your OP has no meaning whatsoever and you might as well have said "I love cucks and hate incels lol!!!"
There's no reason to believe the sub-8 strategy would be any less successful than any other strategy. You just don't like it for whatever reason.
No, it's not peripheral. It is natural selection, sexual selection, and hypergamy.
It doesn't have to be like this, you can give up and blame it on biology and cry about how powerless you are or you can view the current society with its popular progressive politics as your enemy and refuse to support it or even actively fight against it.
F
stop projecting your interpretations on me. i NEVER said right or wrong. its a larger, more powerful prerogative that overrides all lesser ones.
its evidently less successful and far less impactful than sexual selection as it appears in all other species.
moralfags omfl
ok you're right there but we would have more room for maneuver.
Why are naturecucks always so cocky about being weak-willed nihilists?
Of course you can hate nature. Civilization and all of its products are the results of reigning in nature. You wouldn't be posting on this forum, living in a heated house, or even using written language if everyone was a faggot bugman who prioritized devil's advocate posturing over asserting himself and his interests over the "immutability" of nature. Highly developed societies have their genesis in suppressing the retarding influence of holes, eventually succumbing to it again after it is liberated by technology, exhaustion, and complacency.
You claim civilization constitutes a brief period of human history and that monogamy is "unnatural" (both true), then go on to imagine the yet narrower period of modern sexual liberalism paired with artificial peace in the developed world and ubiquitous technological buffers will continue unaffected. Moreover, you seem to think monogamy is ensured by civilization and not the other way around.
Internet pseudo-Darwinism is shit. Take the Spenglerpill or better yet the Unwinpill.
Dead giveaway you're dealing with a brainlet when they pull out "survival of the fittest" too. Sexual selection is not rational. You're right that female nature is unchanging at least, but this is paired with the dynamism of environment. Holes obey impulses shaped in the distant past and their free agency is entirely incompatible with man's adaptability. Look into Fisherian runaway selection as an example of what happens when environmental constraints are removed and sexual selection comes to primacy. You ultimately end up with broken animals buried in non-funtional ornamentation.
Anyone who falls for this debased and Redditpilled garbage should work on not getting reeled in by appeals to high school-level pictures of evolutionary biology.
Glad to see that at least a few people get it.
Of course you can hate nature. Civilization and all of its products are the results of reigning in nature. You wouldn't be posting on this forum, living in a heated house, or even using written language if everyone was a faggot bugman who prioritized devil's advocate posturing over asserting himself and his interests over the "immutability" of nature. Highly developed societies have their genesis in suppressing the retarding influence of holes, eventually succumbing to it again after it is liberated by technology, exhaustion, and complacency.
You claim civilization constitutes a brief period of human history and that monogamy is "unnatural" (both true), then go on to imagine the yet narrower period of modern sexual liberalism paired with artificial peace in the developed world and ubiquitous technological buffers will continue unaffected. Moreover, you seem to think monogamy is ensured by civilization and not the other way around.
Internet pseudo-Darwinism is shit. Take the Spenglerpill or better yet the Unwinpill.
Dead giveaway you're dealing with a brainlet when they pull out "survival of the fittest" too. Sexual selection is not rational. You're right that female nature is unchanging at least, but this is paired with the dynamism of environment. Holes obey impulses shaped in the distant past and their free agency is entirely incompatible with man's adaptability. Look into Fisherian runaway selection as an example of what happens when environmental constraints are removed and sexual selection comes to primacy. You ultimately end up with broken animals buried in non-funtional ornamentation.
Anyone who falls for this debased and Redditpilled garbage should work on not getting reeled in by appeals to high school-level pictures of evolutionary biology.
Glad to see that at least a few people get it.
Last edited:
F
you can do whatever you want. im not prescribing any course of action. im just presenting the reality of our situation.
Op -
That's right, incels, don't you dare think about fighting back. It's all natural so it's good to go, so just lay down and rot already.
That's right, incels, don't you dare think about fighting back. It's all natural so it's good to go, so just lay down and rot already.
I hate foids. Our system makes no fucking sense. Money, and intelligence are the traits they should be going after. I really don't see how having a good face is gonna advance the human race. Ugly foids get to fuck and spread their shitty genetics and make more incels. Chads who are dumb as fuck spread their low iq genetics. This is why foids need to have their mates chosen for them. They're just gonna slow down our evolution otherwise
F
projection again. i never even mentioned nihilism nor do i consider myself one.
i dont pretend to know what will happen to society. im speculating off what examples i could find. we're moving into uncharted territory. no one can say for certain collapse or otherwise.
i never stated sexual selection was rational. more projection. i made the exact case regarding fisherian runaway in previous topics. look at my post history.
stop with the insults. idk why youre so butthurt. what are you even trying to argue for or against? i just see projection.
where do i prescribe a course of action? act as you will. just dont point fingers and cope
Which is? That foids prefers attractive men because of biology? That's obvious, but you said more in your first post you told us to stop blaming feminism and society as if they had nothing to do with it.
If there were no society, laws, duties, social structures, but we would live 100% naturally then it would make sense. But then I could also go out and rape every woman and kill every Chad weaker than me, I'm physically stronger than them and I want to do it so it makes sense according to your biological determinism right?
But the unnatural man-made society stops me from doing that, so why should we turn a blind eye to our natural urges to rape and kill which we are perfectly capable of but when it comes to a women's sexual preferences then its just "determinism bro you can't fight nature".
Last edited:
You didn't need to since you implied it. And if you deny implying it, then your entire OP becomes meaningless and can be summarized as: "I want incels to stop complaining because...nature!"
Morality goes hand-in-hand with consciousness, and is thus built-in to every discussion involving humans. You can ignore it, but then don't expect to be taken seriously.
F
we're arguing past each other. im not impling, suggesting, insinuating, connoting any moral or ethical standpoint.
my op can be summarized as inceldom is a natural and immutable consequence of biological determinism.
Chances are that if you're interpreting every counter-argument as a "projection", your original argument wasn't coherent.
"Projection" is usually a meme word that amounts to "no u" during online arguments. You don't even seem to know what it means though. The word you are looking for is "strawman" even though this was in direct response to your posts and clearly addressed whatever feeble points were made in them.
I don't care if you "identify" as a nihilist. You are one. Pure biological determinism, materialism, and nature worship is a hollow worldview. Once you stop blaming people, their actions, or their creations, you've lost any positive, vital philosophy that would allow for transcendence.
The insults are present because this is the same noxious argument that 100 cucks before you have made, and they all come at it with pretensions to a monopoly on truth. You try to pass yourself of as a copeless truth-seeker by presenting life as a mechanistic process, only apparently successful due to the cold emptiness of nihilism forming a thin mask imitating (but, like anything, never reaching) rational disinterest.
i won't need to risk exile after i decapited them one by one, do you think Genghis Chad had 2000 kids because of good facial bones? nope he only killed all the stupider males and stealed their foids, why o you think asians have 105+ IQ
I hate women but dont expect them to fuck me. I dont want to fuck ugly women. They dont want to fuck ugly men. But i still hate them because of feminism and how entitled and slutty they are.
Incorrect. Re-read your OP. Hell, just look at the title: "You guys need to stop fucking coping." That's implying something that incels should do; namely that they should take a different view of their situation. You're therefore taking a moral/ethical standpoint.
Even if that was an accurate summary (it's not), then you'd just be saying, "evolution is a thing," to which all of us would respond, "yeah, no shit."
i disagree ugly genes have a right to be passed on too without ugly genes how could you define good genes? the hypergamy will keep getting worse and worse and in a few years a 9/10 aryan chad could be considered incel is this a future humanity wants? without ugly genes there will be no balance and more suffering to other males society needs to change only destruction awaits us
F
when i say projection its because youre attributing qualities to me that YOU imagine but arent evident in my statements.
im not going into philosophical ideas about trascendence or theosophy although i do enjoy those discussions. i have a robust, multifaceted perspective on the metaphysical nature of the world. but thats not what im addressing.
im speaking entirely to the facts self evident in nature regarding mate selection. its everyone else trying to extrapolate an put ideas in my mouth.
Yes bro, thats why 80% of the male population in the world is made of incels. We didnt manage to reproduce that much, the babies were made and brought by storks.
Fucking 2019 members man...
they a dude in the middle fo the florest, if he survive good genes, if he die bad genes
F
i lol'd but fr look into societal lifecycles and youll see how and why populations rise and collapse
Yes, that is called "strawmanning". "Projection" is the transferral of personal insecurities onto another figure. I am not arguing with strawmen though; I am directly addressing things you've stated and are now trying to pave over.
Your first post attempted to prescribe a particular perspective on the operation of nature as 'truth'. That people here should stop 'coping' and accept nature. This ignores the relationship of man to nature and how he molds it with his will. That it is in our - your - nature to subdue nature broadly, to arrest the idiot backwards march of female nature.
You exhort people not to blame holes, normies, cucks, technology, historical contingency, or degeneracy as if any of those things had no affect on the role of nature in man's world. Now you're just trying to pass your post off as "lol I'm just saying that women act in their own biological interest". No shit. Act in yours by curbing theirs.
oh my god this here is devolving into a pyscholagy class
Would love you to tell me how an average guy cna compete with the 1000 or so matches a girl (even ugly ones0 on tinder gets per day
I don't blame society for my inceldom. What I do blame society (and by that family, media etc.) about is all the propaganda. You know the ones: be a good person and you will find a wife, that kind of crap.
F
semantics. thanks for clarifying. im not paving over anything. i stand by all my points.
i said ppl need to stop coping by blaming things that arent the real cause of the issue. theyre certainly detestable but theyre peripheral to the root of the issue. nature is a truth whether u accept it or not. i never said by accepting it u have to bow to it.
you want to prescribe a course of action and propose solutions go for it. thats not what im talking about.
im simply stating what the issue actually is and why its cope to propose otherwise.
ur the one who came in here throwing insults and extolling some nietzchian will to power ethos. which is fine. but not on topic.
i hate the bluepilling as well. but its necessary normie brainwashing.
1.Darwins algorithm.
2.Epigenetics
3.Women are primaraly attracted to power; genetic quality acts only as a potential marker of power
4.Natures economy; predator as the governing force controlling unsustainable exponentially growing systems; (man curbing hypergamy through intervention which is an exponentially growing, self annihaliting force)
5 Human Society and wilderness("nature") occupy two different orders of informational complexity, and different set of rules and language are used to describe them.
/thread
2.Epigenetics
3.Women are primaraly attracted to power; genetic quality acts only as a potential marker of power
4.Natures economy; predator as the governing force controlling unsustainable exponentially growing systems; (man curbing hypergamy through intervention which is an exponentially growing, self annihaliting force)
5 Human Society and wilderness("nature") occupy two different orders of informational complexity, and different set of rules and language are used to describe them.
/thread
This distinction is totally artificial. These problems are not "peripheral". They are very much central and directly modulate the operation of female nature in the world.
The problem comes twofold when you ascribe values to nature simply by virtue of it being the physiological baseline, when it's merely a dank foundation pit devoid of attribute until it is covered over with monuments (culture). Threefold when you totalize female nature as nature as a whole. It is not that men are "genetic trash" when not chosen by holes - this is an obviously cucked and false worldview born out of awarding primacy to female desires. It is that holes are primitive saboteurs whose agency must be placed under tight control in order to elevate man out of naturalistic servitude.
Again, "female nature exists" is not the revelation you think it is.
F
none of those phenomena disprove my statement or hold a candle to the magnitude of the observable prerogative of females - fuck chad.
F
the distinction is real. if those other phenomena didnt exist inceldom still would as is self evident in other species.
i agree with ur assessments. but i never pedestalized or attributed value to nature. merely pointed it out as an immutable reality. how we contend with it is each individuals prerogative.
idt anything im saying is a revelation at all. im just plainly reiterating a fact ppl dont like to look at.
This is a cope. Other species males “rape” (I say this in quotes because it’s not really rape, In the usual context) their females. In nature, there is no complex mating ritual due to technological advances, using technology to see beyond our line of sight, or having the technology to summon a better male to your presence.
Incel animals get laid all the time, Through “rape” and being the only male around. If an incel male animal reproduces this way, then they were obviously fit to reproduce. I think you’re thinking of “deformed, sickly, and injured” males which can STILL reproduce through said “rape”.
JFL at comparing western world 21st century human mating with animal mating. Low IQ.
Incel animals get laid all the time, Through “rape” and being the only male around. If an incel male animal reproduces this way, then they were obviously fit to reproduce. I think you’re thinking of “deformed, sickly, and injured” males which can STILL reproduce through said “rape”.
JFL at comparing western world 21st century human mating with animal mating. Low IQ.
Before that brief monogamy focused time in history there was chaos and wars. Chads weren't the only ones getting laid back then either, it was usually the richest and most powerful.
These things make femoid hypergamy worse at sub6 men's expense, through excessive taxation and forcing them to follow cucked laws. Foids are meant to be put in check like before the 60's, that's the way nature intended men to have control over them. But even if that's not what nature intended, nature never wanted us to fly planes or build skyscrapers either.
this thread should be renamed as:
Why you cant get laid/love/happiness in your life and (((why thats a good thing)))
Why you cant get laid/love/happiness in your life and (((why thats a good thing)))
More like the consequence of instinctive female sexual selection. Is life truly deterministic? Or is it completely random and uncertain?
If you’re born into an incel body, then it is determined that you will have low sexual success. This is observable. How do you ‘choose’ the body you’re born into, the quality of life that you have? Do you even get to choose?
Is your condition already determined by reality before you’re even born? Or is your condition randomly selected for you by reality as it unfolds?
Only the second half is solidly deterministic, because it is the consequence of something else and observable. Whether the first part is deterministic or indeterministic is uncertain; this is non-observable.
Last edited:
I agree. But we're not completely incapable or helpless to change the way in which the sexual market is rigged. As humans, we're provided the unique option guide our own evolution forward through various eugenic measures. It is a fact, as you say, that what foids deem attractive is what will maximize the survivability of their potential off spring out in the wild. As such, it is indeed true that traits that on the face of it may seem arbitrary, such as jawline, correlate to a bunch of other shit which is essential for survival. But there's also a greater picture to it than that. There's also the fact that we build civilizations, that we make new discoveries in the various sciences, build heavy machinery, record melodies that will far outlive the composers writing them, construct airplanes that would've baffled even the brightest among us living 10000 years ago, make spaceships capable of landing on other planets etc. etc.
My point is that we don't live in the jungle anymore, and we should therefore seek to construct a eugenics program, or a sexual reproductive paradigm, better suited to our current societal needs. We also shouldn't be beholden to primitive indicators of function when we have ways of measuring said function in a far more accurate way with the help of tools and modern technology than with our mere naked eyes. Why should a manlet with 150 IQ, whose genes aren't useful for survivability out in the wild, get weeded out and crushed under the tyranny of female sexual selection, when we could utilize him and harvest his genes for the greater cause of furthering civilization? Do we really say to ourselves that we're completely helpless to change anything simply because our nature has bred us a certain way?
no shit we are ugly. i still hate women and society and JFL at how cucked OP is if he thinks they dont have any blame.
get out cuck OP.
get out cuck OP.
Just gonna drop this truth Bomb on u copers
Nature is apathetic to your plights .. it is under no obligation to be convenient for you. Such is life as a mammal.. female sexual nature is not a social construct.. put any other sexually dimorphic mammal species with concealed ovulation in the same position as humans and You will get an identical outcome.. foids become ultra hypergamous and most men become incel when you introduce contraception, easy transportation, and high efficiency eugenics platforms to a population.. 10x more when you lift all restraints too like religion, survival-leverage, slut shaming, etc
Modern society is the consequence of playing on and leveraging biological imperatives.. nothing of any consequence is a social construct.
Also, the modern world is not built by one generation.. every generation improves on what the generation before it created..
Some high IQ physicists said “if I’ve seen further than you, it’s because I’ve stood on the shoulders of giants”
Point is, people aren’t that smart.. you can’t go from cavemen in the jungle to iPhones and skyscrapers in 1 generation.. were not that smart, were not that special, we’re still governed by biological imperatives whether we live in the jungle or not.. we just can’t shake that. It’s the same code that all other life forms run on.. we’re not about to transcend biology.. and as it stands , most people don’t accept that because they like to think they’re special, they like to think they’re made in the image of god, and they’re blinded by the seemingly infinite dichotomy between humans and all other mammals.. sure we can do some social engineering and re-leverage biological imperatives in our favor.. that’s whats been done for all of civilization.. restrain female sexuality by withholding survival resources. Survival instincts trump reproductive instincts.. that keeps things at bay.. men have been blinded by their own success and reversed this when they thought that a civil society was the default state of humanity.. they fucked up when they got so comfortable that they forgot we were just apes..
Only thing that can make things better for men is to suppress female sexuality again, but tbh I don’t know if any western country has the balls to do that. It would be seen as “literally hitler” tier.. repealing women’s rights, their right to vote and work, bringing back slut shaming, banning contraception for unmarried couples, banning eugenics platforms and social media, etc.. it can be done, it’s within physics and females would respond sexuality would respond in a predictable way that would benefit men at the expense of women... but it would be seen as a step backwards by the low IQs in charge of the world and the even-more-lowIQ public.. I don’t think it will happen, and we’re just now seeing the consequences of lifting all the things that restrained female sexuality.. ngl it’s dangerous af. It’s the first time civilization (aka high T male primates living together and contributing instead of killing each other) and unrestricted female sexuality/genetics based sexual selection have ever coexisted, and not just that, it’s amplified 10000x by all the things I posted earlier like contraception and high efficiency eugenics platforms .. uncharted territory tbh this isn’t the fault of foids, It just happened to happen at a time of high technology.
Nature is apathetic to your plights .. it is under no obligation to be convenient for you. Such is life as a mammal.. female sexual nature is not a social construct.. put any other sexually dimorphic mammal species with concealed ovulation in the same position as humans and You will get an identical outcome.. foids become ultra hypergamous and most men become incel when you introduce contraception, easy transportation, and high efficiency eugenics platforms to a population.. 10x more when you lift all restraints too like religion, survival-leverage, slut shaming, etc
Modern society is the consequence of playing on and leveraging biological imperatives.. nothing of any consequence is a social construct.
You give humanity too much credit. The intelligence difference between humans and the next smartest apes is like 1%.. 1% is the difference between throwing shit at each other and making skyscrapers.. maybe wearing suits and driving to our jobs isn’t such a fancy magical thing.. just need to reframe things tbh.. example: presidential elections, as fancy and complicated and non-animal as they seem, are just a bunch of chimps making noise for a tribal leader.... cavemen could have done it.. it’s all perspective and everything is relative.
Also, the modern world is not built by one generation.. every generation improves on what the generation before it created..
Some high IQ physicists said “if I’ve seen further than you, it’s because I’ve stood on the shoulders of giants”
Point is, people aren’t that smart.. you can’t go from cavemen in the jungle to iPhones and skyscrapers in 1 generation.. were not that smart, were not that special, we’re still governed by biological imperatives whether we live in the jungle or not.. we just can’t shake that. It’s the same code that all other life forms run on.. we’re not about to transcend biology.. and as it stands , most people don’t accept that because they like to think they’re special, they like to think they’re made in the image of god, and they’re blinded by the seemingly infinite dichotomy between humans and all other mammals.. sure we can do some social engineering and re-leverage biological imperatives in our favor.. that’s whats been done for all of civilization.. restrain female sexuality by withholding survival resources. Survival instincts trump reproductive instincts.. that keeps things at bay.. men have been blinded by their own success and reversed this when they thought that a civil society was the default state of humanity.. they fucked up when they got so comfortable that they forgot we were just apes..
Only thing that can make things better for men is to suppress female sexuality again, but tbh I don’t know if any western country has the balls to do that. It would be seen as “literally hitler” tier.. repealing women’s rights, their right to vote and work, bringing back slut shaming, banning contraception for unmarried couples, banning eugenics platforms and social media, etc.. it can be done, it’s within physics and females would respond sexuality would respond in a predictable way that would benefit men at the expense of women... but it would be seen as a step backwards by the low IQs in charge of the world and the even-more-lowIQ public.. I don’t think it will happen, and we’re just now seeing the consequences of lifting all the things that restrained female sexuality.. ngl it’s dangerous af. It’s the first time civilization (aka high T male primates living together and contributing instead of killing each other) and unrestricted female sexuality/genetics based sexual selection have ever coexisted, and not just that, it’s amplified 10000x by all the things I posted earlier like contraception and high efficiency eugenics platforms .. uncharted territory tbh this isn’t the fault of foids, It just happened to happen at a time of high technology.
Negative IQ . Looks are not trivial teehee social constructs pushed by media.. there’s a reason every foid that’s ever existed in the history of the species, across time and cultures, all love tall broad high test men with square jaws. Without exception.. and short low test narrow shouldered chincels are universally repulsive to women..
Last edited:
F
^^^^
this is what no cope looks like. take note 'infinity iqcels'
this is what no cope looks like. take note 'infinity iqcels'
Whether this is correct or not is irrelevant. We have a right to cope anyway we see fit(refering to the title). Also hating and blaming society is very much justified as they are the very ones who enforce nature's bias to actively make our lives miserable.
No one is talking about looks as "social constructs". They are material realities - just not ones that have to be meaningful. All of this has been addressed in earlier posts, namely that you are elevating the female will to a decisive position over your own. Who cares what they like? Slutcunts have barely evolved to live indoors. Almost the entire sum of cultural achievement was carried out in environments where cunts were subjugated to some degree; certainly not by letting them select for cumbersome ornamentation, raze genetic diversity, strangle intelligence, and breed the species to extinction (again, Fisherian runaway).
Even if you pull back to the condition of man before the dawn of culture, even if you think sexual selection is or ever was "good", the female sexual selection regime evolved alongside a whole set of environmental pressures, with the evolution of man being a tightly balanced act strung between innumerable contingent factors. Sexual selection relies on extensive tempering to be anything approaching a contribution toward eugenic. Holes are not to be trusted on their own. It's amateurish and Redditpilled to reduce the full sum of the debate to "fighting success" (shouldn't be surprised at the room temp IQ on this post, given that you always post about 6'0" being a free ticket to pussy heaven).
Millimeters of bone.
In what world does the bolded correspond to "nature"? "Most men become incel in artificial and highly singular environments, so basically nature fucking owned u lol". None of these things would have been possible in the first place with keeping holes in line. The real lesson here is that man succumbs to the disruptions wrought by his own inventions and that no civilization lasts forever. You've even hinted at this yourself, so I don't know what use the rest of your post serves beyond "nature exists".
But on the whole, all of this post can just be addressed by the following: it is in your own nature to control nature. Female nature should never be respected, as holes are defective relics of bygone imperatives. Man's ascendancy is due entirely to the fact that he was able to extricate himself from primitive strife and will himself into defeating other natures, and you're not much of a man to stand in awe of biological impulses.
Figures that "no cope" just equates to agreeing with you.
To repeat why naturecucks bother me so much again:
tbh all I see is a 100 IQ sophist stroking himself about being bruuuuuuuuuuutally blackpilled. A closed circle of spinelessness where someone with no confidence in their own thinking or abilities drops out of legitimate struggle, takes up a position as an uninvested spectator, and begins thinking that the less an idea corresponds to his own interests, the more "true" ("no cope") it is. All out of a fear to take a stand; you can't be too closely scrutinized for failure ('cringe' or whatever) when you actively work against yourself. Quit before you get fired, as it were. You see a similar thing with White soyboys and social justice.
The blackpill =/= developing justifications for your mistreatment
Last edited:
You can’t force evolution. We never evolved past the jungle. The last couple thousand years is NOTHING in the grand scale of things.. just because things don’t need to matter anymore, doesn’t mean they stop mattering. You’re approaching this from a fair, just, logical world view. You need to approach it from a knuckledragging ape view.
You’re admitting that it’s our fault for not keeping foids in line.. do you blame a lion if it eats you? Or do you blame the guy that opens his cage? We just fucked up and didn’t control female nature well enough.. it’s not foids fault that theyre eugenics automatons by nature. If you’re gonna put the blame on anyone, put it on men for fucking up and opening the lion’s cage. That’s probabaly the most immediate blame, but then you can always just think of the butterfly effect of countless historical events and attribute that to female empowerment.. no point trying to pinpoint any blame cause tbh there really isn’t any.. it’s just the way shit worked out.. if men knew that giving women freedom would put eugenics into overdrive, they never would have done it.. so it’s not even their fault really.
Sloots gon sloot
By definition, the incel animal is no longer incel. If he;s the only male around, he’s the most fit to survive in one way or another. He has better genes than the other males that are not around anymore.. He’s a chad animal. He either killed the other males or the other males were killed by some force of natural selection. Either way, his DNA kept him alive.. in the jungle, if you get within penetration distance of a female, your sperm is welcome into her womb. Think about what it takes to get within penetration distance. It means there are either no other males around, or the other males don’t dare challenge you in order to have that womb for themselves .. there is no such thing as rape in the animal world.
It’s better for a foid to reproduce with a “genetically undesirable” male than to die child ness.. altleast with an incel, her DNA has a greater than zero chance of propragating. I put that in quotations because genetic disresblility is relative to Her other options. Male SMV is 100% relative.. pit a 5’2’ bald Indian in a world of 4’9” aboriginals with deformities and missing limbs, and he’s gigachad.. put him in an island alone with 1000 foids, and he will impregnate every single one.. but put him in the normal world and he will die alone.
So if there’s a huge amount of men (I.e. diminished influence of natural selection via forming societies), sexual selection takes over. Foids will select for the men MOST fit to survive.. society’s rules regarding murder don’t apply. Females will select the largest and healthiest males for reproduction, if for NO reason other than to produce large healthy sons that willl after be sexually chosen by females..
Survival and reproduction instincts will adapt to various environmental and circumstantial factors . Foids will respond a certain way, in unison, to a change in environment/circumstances.. mammals don’t just “error:404 wtf do we do now”.. their mating practices and biological imperatives will never change though: survive and mate with the best male. Period. You can apply that to any set of circumstances a female might face, any types of social engineering, any size tribe, anything.. and the results will always be predictable.. whatever it takes for her and her offspring to have the highest chance of survival, to propagate her DNA and achieve genetic immortality. That’s all life on earth is about.. achieve genetic immortality by any means necessary. You wanna figure anything out, or wanna know why foids do certain things or like certain things? Just reason up from that biological imperative.. then everything makes sense.
Last edited:
F
all u do is create strawmen, denouce some imvented position u attribute to us, then espouse masturbatory high minded ideals. bro get ur head out ur ass. we're discussing objective phenomena. this isnt an opportunity to diddle your intellectual ego.
ur essentially arguing with your own interpretations lol at your iq
ur essentially arguing with your own interpretations lol at your iq
F
to not rope is to cope...
Well yeah, you slap mosquitos on your arm. You take antibiotics for infection. You (should be able to) keep holes in line to make the world habitable for yourself and 98% of other men. The crucial difference between the first two and the third is that, memes aside, holes are human as much as you are and engaging with them ends up being a crucial part of what it means to negotiate your life as a conscious being. You ascribe feelings, desires, and intelligence to them that you don't to other things. If you go full bugman determinist, it's all an epiphenomenon of molecular processes seeking their own propagation. So when it comes down to it, why hate other men for whiteknighting? Why hate cucks for enabling feministic policy? "They can't help it." This is a one way ticket to getting trampled to death by greedy flesh machines (triumphant as it happens, "at least I know you're a flesh machine"). The question is not what is and isn't, but how you will continue to be.
This is also ignoring the pervasiveness of rape in this context, so ubiquitous that it's not really conceptualized as "rape" (I think someone else in here noted this). Why would a hole choose a strong, high T man when the convention was more like it being taken itself by a man who had bested other men? Few redpill scum actually know what "alpha" and "beta" males are in primate hierarchies. Alphas follow the pattern already described, establishing their claims through conflict with other men. Betas are forced to preen like the normalfaggots you see in the modern age and be chosen. No lie, it is beta to strut around for whores, which I should have added to this thread: https://incels.is/threads/male-promiscuity-as-inchoate-faggotry.83945/.
Learned a new word huh? You're welcome. As a blustering internet retard, please don't abuse it like most of your kind do.
Where have I misrepresented your positions? It is telling that almost everyone who responded here made the same "mistake" I did in determining what you were arguing.
One poster comes in to agree with you and you're on your knees sucking him off right away. Funny how it works out that it seems the only way not to "cope" or be "low IQ" is to agree with you. And then you claim you're talking about "objective phenomena".
Jfl, you absolute brainlet. I was ready to drop it, at least in regard to your opening post, after you started pretending to agree with me. Just admit your position is barely coherent.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
