Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Men are biologically hardwired to attempt to fight, mog, kill, compete with, and assert dominance over other males.

The whole life is a gladiator's fight for men and the winner gets the foid.
Look at it this way, in the old days you could simply kill chad in a duel and get the foid, and if you lost atleast you wouldn't have to live out your inceldom like we do now. Unless chad fell in love with said foid, he's not going to stake his life for something he can easily get elsewhere.
 
Yeah bro, if this guy
View attachment 112554
slaps your girlfriend's butt in a club, you gotta fight him even if you're
MrqdtSm.jpg


JFL at being an incel looking for conflict, you're gonna get killed boyo. I thought you were Christian, not some Bushido follower or some shit.
firstly why would you take your GF to a club. and secondly shes trash if she accepts it.


clubs are just human meat market.
 
Because fighting over women is idiotic. She decided if she'll fuck you or not within a second of seeing your face. Any energy spent beyond that is wasted.
Is a primal Instinct because in long gone times you really got to fuck her if you won .
Because of Womens instinctive stockholm snydrom she will be aroused when her boyfriend gets beat up , there have been many example of that fact .
 
No matter how “advanced” we become, nature’s fangs and claws will remain embedded in our spines
 
No shit.
The safeguards of the justice system and what not is a double edged sword. Promotes safety but encourages complacency. I have no strong opinion about this myself; just observing.
 
Yeah bro, if this guy
View attachment 112554
slaps your girlfriend's butt in a club, you gotta fight him even if you're
MrqdtSm.jpg


JFL at being an incel looking for conflict, you're gonna get killed boyo. I thought you were Christian, not some Bushido follower or some shit.
legit

attempting to fight stronger opponents is pathetic
 
only sexually starved insecure cucks and normies do this i've noticed, chads dont try to screw over other dudes cuz theyre already eating. they're either neutral towards you or some will help you try to get a girl.

think of it this way. a bunch of starving poor people are gonna fight over food, and they will fight over their place in the pecking order. but the rich king with plenty of food isn't gonna jump in the pit with the starving people and fight for the food or to proclaim his status, he has no reason to. everyone already knows he's the king, and he's already got plenty of food to eat.
 
Last edited:
Men may compete with each other but have you seen how brutal foids can be to each other. We humans truly are but a few steps above apes.
 
They do so only to impress foids.
Foids are the root of all evil on planet earth.
 
I hate normalfag males
I hate normalfags. They are the ones that do this shit. No control of their base instinct
 
normalfags are fighting each other while chad is fucking their girlfriends. When chad see that something is wrong he just get the fuck out of there and let normans to fight.
All normies who is contributing to this kind of society are cucks
 
Please, brothers, do not let inceldom turn you into Christian cvcks!

I can never hate people when they want to live! I only hate people when they deny their Nature and want to die!

Competition is the drive of struggle! Struggle is part of Nature!

What you hate is not competition! But the suicidal behaviour like that in the fable about the frogs in a bucket - they could have jumped out of there if they had worked in accord, yet instead they trampled one another futilely, dooming themselves!

In a proper society, you don't work to impress the girl - you work to impress her caretaker! That's the way of civilization! The more goats, the more chicks!

@to those people who hate being animals, I do not get you. Would you want to be a rock instead? Only two choices. And a living thing is more exciting than a piece of non-living matter like a stone or a star.

I could only understand hating existence. Being composed of matter. But hating life? Life just wants to eat and fuck, and that's cute and exciting and orderly.
 
We should have a fightclub movie night.
 
Personally I've always lacked a strong competitive drive, maybe because of the tism or it may just be because I'm a bitchboy. I wonder how many people just want to be left alone and interact in a mutually beneficial way when they aren't alone.
Me
 
This is why, as humans with brains, we must rise above instinct and be people, not animals.
 
This is true, most guys prefer to betray their friends if that allows them to obtain a foid or increase their status. They prefer lust over camaraderie. I've seen this in highschool all the time.
 
Great post, you're on a roll lately.

- As I've stated before, a lot of men would gladly send their own son to prison or sell him out even if the son is innocent so the dad can virtue signal and say what a good person he is for sending his own son to jail.

- Even if your wife runs off with a drug dealer and gets the kids raped or molested by strange men, your own parents will still blame you. Another very common scenario.

- A cop I knew who I lifted with at the gym once told me, never get into a conflict with a woman if other men are involved. Run the fuck away and get out of that situation.


As long as it involves women, social media likes / virtue signal points, men, even family will turn on each other.
This holds true with unabomber, his brother gave him up. Otherwise he could have kept blowing shit up and living peacefully in the mountains
 
Based ryo thread :feelscry:
 
only sexually starved insecure cucks and normies do this i've noticed, chads dont try to screw over other dudes cuz theyre already eating. they're either neutral towards you or some will help you try to get a girl.

think of it this way. a bunch of starving poor people are gonna fight over food, and they will fight over their place in the pecking order. but the rich king with plenty of food isn't gonna jump in the pit with the starving people and fight for the food or to proclaim his status, he has no reason to. everyone already knows he's the king, and he's already got plenty of food to eat.


I agree. Bullying is mostly done by betas picking on other betas. Generally, loner betas get picked on more by betas in a gang/friend group.
 
In social circles guys try to "cock block" each other". They'll sabotage each other's relationships (seen it happen a million times before). Some will be a little more subtle in establishing dominance over other guys by trying to make someone the butt of jokes, especially when a woman is present.

In the workplace men snitch on each other, abuse their power to fuck over guys below them, and when it comes time for layoffs, hours cuts, or promotions, they'll get extremely cut-throat in their competitiveness. Even minimum wage jobs are like this.

In any conflict that involves a man and a woman, all men will blindly side with the woman no matter how much evidence is in his favor.

In the military guys get very competitive over promotions and will degrade anyone so much as one rank lower.

Homeless guys fight over territory and rob each other over what little they have.

The vast majority of murders involve one male murdering another.

All this is only valid for the modern times. I don't see men before trying to cock block each other and ruining relationships. There was a time when people tried to make me look big infront of girls (before I turned ugly and incel).

The workplace thing is purely due to capitalist economy. Its called the alienation of labour. We wageslave and we don't get to experience the fruits of our own labour while also being pitted against each other and fight with each other for promotions, wage cut and firing etc.

Ok men siding with women is something that I think has happened for ages. But I think its also because women have increased much more in value.

I don't know about the military tbh.

Homeless guys don't do that. If they rob each other its because of their material conditions. Its not inherent to them.

Yes murders are mostly man on man, because women don't have the need to murder mostly. Nor do they have any value to get murdered.

Males in a tribe or pack are supposed to support each other. The currecnt socio economic system stops that natural feeling.
Even as a child I had zero interest in competition. One example I remember vividly is my dad talking me into joining lots of different sports teams, but I felt no desire to participate in them, at least not for the supposed satisfaction of victory or the enjoyment of the sport itself. It felt completely pointless to me, at that age I didn't understand what it was that other people liked about them. However I would make an effort to participate anyway, simply because I wanted other people to like me, however the other boys always treated me different, they would purposely exclude me from the game, and I'm not sure how much of this was due to my appearance or my behavior, but I certainly didn't imagine it. This experience made me like sports even less.
Children are born to be co operative until society changes them. Children growing with bad mothers have more this kind of shittery. Read my other reply. Men are not supposed to bring each other down
 
Last edited:
You will just get aped on by some normie then
 
While I agree to an extent with the motion of this thread, and that The Prisoner's Dilemma is a thing, you can sometimes get exceptions in specialised and interesting scenarios where somebody or a group of people have a deep understanding of human motivation and social skills and use it for co-operation instead of for profit at the expense of another person or people
Check this out:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0qjK3TWZE8

This is an excerpt of a British TV show called Golden Balls. I've never actually watched this show but it looks like this is an event or part of the show that takes place towards the end, or at the very end: two contestants are each given a pair of balls, one which says Split and the other which says Steal. They cannot show each other the balls they have, but they can talk to each other and work out some kind of a solution or compromise
Basically the situation they are in is one where: if they both choose the Split ball, they split the prize money with each other. If one of them chooses Split and the other chooses Steal, the one who chose Split gets nothing and the one who chose Steal takes it all. If they both choose the Steal ball, they both get nothing
Now what I have seen on YouTube of this "split or steal" part of the show is usually the case that both contestants, regardless of gender, will say to each other "I am going to choose Split". Then, it turns out that one of them chooses Split and the other, who was lying when they said they would choose Split, chooses Steal and takes it all. Or, they both choose Steal and neither of them get anything. How, then, do we get two people to co-operate and choose Split?
In this video, the white dude tells the brown dude "I want you trust me 100%, I'm going to pick the Steal ball", and that he wants the brown dude to choose Split, so he can split the money with him after the show. The brown dude is confused and says, "Why don't we just both pick Split?", but the white dude is insistent that he is going to pick Steal. Then, when the balls are revealed, it turns out that they both picked Split - they both get a share of the prize money
What I think happened here was that the white dude used reverse psychology, he already knew that he wanted to split the prize money but also wanted to ensure that the brown dude would pick Split instead of Steal. If one or both of them had said that they would Split, there is a likely chance that one or both of them would have chosen Steal instead, and either received all of the prize money or none of it. So what the white dude did was say "I'm going to Steal", but also threw in the idea that he would split the money with the brown dude after the show. I suspect that the white dude would be satisfied as long as at least one of them got something
Though, to be honest, there are many other factors and I am aware of only a few of them. For example, what if you were more interested in making the other person suffer a harsh penalty out of spite than the actual reward, whether that's money or a shorter prison sentence? If you didn't like the other person, or they had wronged you, you could choose Steal or the non-co-operative option to make sure that they aren't getting anything good out of the situation that you're not getting. Though it could be awkward if that person chose Split or the co-operative option........ It makes me wonder how this Split or Steal would have gone differently if one of the dudes didn't like the other dude or they just didn't like each other
If I was in this situation I am not sure what I would do especially if I did not pick up on any important social cues from the other person. I suppose what I am trying to say is that despite males being competitive for a reward, sometimes other males are willing to co-operate for a shared reward, but also they might be more interested in spiting you for real or imagined wrong-doing than the reward itself, even if neither of you end up getting the reward. I don't know if that's just as bad as being competitive or worse
P.S. I found the video in a Reddit post many years ago during my Redditor days. I suppose it used to be good for something
 
As a man every facet of life is a ruthless competition with other men and there is no escaping it.

In social circles guys try to "cock block" each other". They'll sabotage each other's relationships (seen it happen a million times before). Some will be a little more subtle in establishing dominance over other guys by trying to make someone the butt of jokes, especially when a woman is present.

In the workplace men snitch on each other, abuse their power to fuck over guys below them, and when it comes time for layoffs, hours cuts, or promotions, they'll get extremely cut-throat in their competitiveness. Even minimum wage jobs are like this.

In any conflict that involves a man and a woman, all men will blindly side with the woman no matter how much evidence is in his favor.

In the military guys get very competitive over promotions and will degrade anyone so much as one rank lower.

Homeless guys fight over territory and rob each other over what little they have.

The vast majority of murders involve one male murdering another.

The list goes on and on.

This is all instinct driven. Camaraderie among males is few and far between. Even in situations where all parties would benefit from cooperation and loyalty, men will usually screw each other over if it will get them a slight benefit. (See: prisoner's dilemma)

Everything you've said is a fact about human males.

But the prisoner's dilemma is a contrived hypothetical designed to illustrate that cooperation is not always rational, and that sometimes competitiveness is what's rational. Acting rationally doesn't necessarily imply being cut-throat, nor the reverse. All of the things you've mentioned, however, are cases where competitiveness is cut-throat and not rational, which is not what the prisoner's dilemma shows.

While I agree to an extent with the motion of this thread, and that The Prisoner's Dilemma is a thing, you can sometimes get exceptions in specialised and interesting scenarios where somebody or a group of people have a deep understanding of human motivation and social skills and use it for co-operation instead of for profit at the expense of another person or people
Check this out:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0qjK3TWZE8

This is an excerpt of a British TV show called Golden Balls. I've never actually watched this show but it looks like this is an event or part of the show that takes place towards the end, or at the very end: two contestants are each given a pair of balls, one which says Split and the other which says Steal. They cannot show each other the balls they have, but they can talk to each other and work out some kind of a solution or compromise
Basically the situation they are in is one where: if they both choose the Split ball, they split the prize money with each other. If one of them chooses Split and the other chooses Steal, the one who chose Split gets nothing and the one who chose Steal takes it all. If they both choose the Steal ball, they both get nothing
Now what I have seen on YouTube of this "split or steal" part of the show is usually the case that both contestants, regardless of gender, will say to each other "I am going to choose Split". Then, it turns out that one of them chooses Split and the other, who was lying when they said they would choose Split, chooses Steal and takes it all. Or, they both choose Steal and neither of them get anything. How, then, do we get two people to co-operate and choose Split?
In this video, the white dude tells the brown dude "I want you trust me 100%, I'm going to pick the Steal ball", and that he wants the brown dude to choose Split, so he can split the money with him after the show. The brown dude is confused and says, "Why don't we just both pick Split?", but the white dude is insistent that he is going to pick Steal. Then, when the balls are revealed, it turns out that they both picked Split - they both get a share of the prize money
What I think happened here was that the white dude used reverse psychology, he already knew that he wanted to split the prize money but also wanted to ensure that the brown dude would pick Split instead of Steal. If one or both of them had said that they would Split, there is a likely chance that one or both of them would have chosen Steal instead, and either received all of the prize money or none of it. So what the white dude did was say "I'm going to Steal", but also threw in the idea that he would split the money with the brown dude after the show. I suspect that the white dude would be satisfied as long as at least one of them got something
Though, to be honest, there are many other factors and I am aware of only a few of them. For example, what if you were more interested in making the other person suffer a harsh penalty out of spite than the actual reward, whether that's money or a shorter prison sentence? If you didn't like the other person, or they had wronged you, you could choose Steal or the non-co-operative option to make sure that they aren't getting anything good out of the situation that you're not getting. Though it could be awkward if that person chose Split or the co-operative option........ It makes me wonder how this Split or Steal would have gone differently if one of the dudes didn't like the other dude or they just didn't like each other
If I was in this situation I am not sure what I would do especially if I did not pick up on any important social cues from the other person. I suppose what I am trying to say is that despite males being competitive for a reward, sometimes other males are willing to co-operate for a shared reward, but also they might be more interested in spiting you for real or imagined wrong-doing than the reward itself, even if neither of you end up getting the reward. I don't know if that's just as bad as being competitive or worse
P.S. I found the video in a Reddit post many years ago during my Redditor days. I suppose it used to be good for something


That was fun.

Here's an analysis of this video I found after watching it:

 
Last edited:
Epic necro, this thread is one of the most memorable ones. Anyone has news about Ryo? How has him been doing?
 
That much feminism, cuckoldry and gynocentrism was only possible because of it.

"Homo homini lupus" is 100% true. Women are no real problem by themselves, they're weaker and dumber than us. It's men who enable them. Kill all cucks and the patriarchy would be back overnight. Problem is, most men are cucks.
 
Being born with a penis was the worst thing that’s ever happened to me. Everything about being a man is gay and stupid and I don’t want to participate anymore
 
I keep glimpsing and noticing I'm being haunted by brief framed lapses of @based_meme's virtually fragmented frozen soul around antique dilapidated corners of the forum
 
Yeah, so the best thing a parent can do is get a divorce, and let the kid be raised by a single foid mother.
 
Overly competitive and combative males should be cast out in the wilderness. Why be a part of a civilization if you don't act like a civilized person?
 
I keep glimpsing and noticing I'm being haunted by brief framed lapses of @based_meme's virtually fragmented frozen soul around antique dilapidated corners of the forum
:feelscomfy:
 

Similar threads

ForeverGrey
Replies
38
Views
706
failednormie_
failednormie_
Stupid Clown
Replies
34
Views
695
Stupid Clown
Stupid Clown
RealSchizo
Replies
3
Views
196
RealSchizo
RealSchizo
fukurou
Replies
5
Views
110
turbosperg
turbosperg

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top