[RageFuel] Permanent IQ-Bragging By Cucktears/Leftists In General

Lebensmüder

Lebensmüder

ADHDcel
★★★★★
Joined
Aug 21, 2018
Posts
484
Online
21d 7h 29m
Nothing is more enfuriating than that shit:
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/j11aoq/well_its_hard_to_believe_in_incel_ideology_if/


It's quite common that leftists/feminists think that everyone that disagrees with them has to have a low IQ - no other side has such a high opinion about their intellectual capacities solely based on their beliefs. Whenever someone disagrees with them or commits acts that aren't conformable with their ideals they think of him as a retarded degenerate with no redeeming qualities, they always claim that violent people or people with different beliefs must have a low intelligence or a mental disturbance while nothing could be further away from the truth.

1) An intelligent person isn't moral or good by necessity and even "evil" people can have positive qualities - denying these facts is denying the truth:
Just look at Ted Bundy (an exception when it comes to serial killers based on intellect/eloquency) for example: This man behaved like a wild animal, tore chunks of flesh out of his victims with his bare teeth, bashed their skulls in and had sex with their rotting corpses. According to redditors a person capable of such deeds has to be a violent retard smearing shit at the walls of his mental asylum, but in reality Ted Bundy was an eloquent man with above average intelligence who worked at a suicide prevention hotline, saved a boy from drowning, captured a thief, released tips for women to avoid sexual predators and was at the start of his political career. His actions were (according to any social standards) completely evil, but this doesn't mean that he had no positive qualities - even the judge sentencing him to death had to admit that. That doesn't make him less evil, but denying these facts would be lying.
Just look at Oskar Dirlewanger, that man was (according to history) probably everything these people despise: a nazi, a sexual predator and a war-criminal that totally loved the violence itself (unless most other nazis). But he was also a very competent soldier in the first world war and was undoubtely highly intelligent - in his young years he wrote a dissertation and even the officials that had to evaluate him saw him as an intelligent man despite being a drug-addicted and violence-loving fanatic. Intelligence itself is a completely neutral trait: Stupid and intelligent people can commit extremely violent acts and hold abhorrent beliefs and intelligence alone doesn't make you moral.

2) The beliefs of a person don't say anything about their intelligence:

Just because someone believes in something you consider to be "crazy"/"stupid" it doesn't mean that said person is stupid by necessity or suffers from a disease affecting sanity like schizophrenia. William Luther Pierce, the author of the "Turner Diaries", had a doctorate in physics, Ted Kaczynski was a genius and became a math professor in young years, Franz Fuchs, the Austrian equivalent of the Unabomber, was also highly intelligent, James Watson isn't a person most people would like, but his advances in science are undeniable, Bobby Fisher was an antijudaist, but still a chess genius and many other examples - these people all have ideas that are universally despised and deemed as "dangerous" and "stupid" by most people, but they are definetely mentally/intellectually superior to some redditor that deems himself to be a genius just because he has a certain belief set. Even if you (sometimes rightfully) disagree with the positions/ideas of these people, you cannot deny their intellectual capacities despite hating their beliefs and them at a person level.
Many people working in physics (or evolutionary biology) are not edgy atheists and even say that their work brought them closer to religion in the case of many physicists - but a teenage atheist edgelord still considers them to be mentally inferior in his hybris just because of their beliefs while neglecting the fact that being a scientist and religious isn't mutually exclusive - something that is told actual students of science within their first lectures. Your beliefs don't make you mentally inferior/superior. People believe in different things (even things most people despise/deem as irrational) regardless of their intelligence.
Even if someone's beliefs are "stupid"/"inferior" in your eyes you cannot just call a certain person stupid and be done with it without twisting reality (something you accuse others of doing).

3) There is no objective truth and there are no objective facts:

Even the same data set can be interpreted in different ways and perspective is everything - objective truths (most of the time) just don't exist (especially when it comes to studying social phenomenons). For example: If the data says that women talk more than men, a MRA will say that women try to dominate men in a conversation while a feminist will say that the words of women don't matter as much as the words of men in a patriarchal society and that's why women have to talk more to be heard/make their point - the same data and completely different results depending on the subjective perspective of the researcher. The same is seen in debates about IQ-differences of different races - a leftist will attribute it to environmental racism (like lead poisoning) and inferior educational opportunities due to systemic racism, while a race-realist will attribute it to biological differences between races. The hard facts are exactly the same, but the conclusions are completely different.
Most of the time however noone even argues about the facts because they are emotionally invested in a debate (which is just human nature) - you can see it in debates with climate-change deniers, conspiracy theorists about 9/11 and holocaust-deniers - the facts are never addressed, most of the time it's a quasi-religious duel of completely differing belief-sets, entire worlds collide and there is no real debate just reciprocal accusations. The skeptic and paranoid world-view of the dissident and the confident and (often) condescending attitude of the fan of accepted beliefs - both remain the same and they only accuse each other of being morally inferior in the debate without ever addressing any facts.

4) Your knowledge (and the knowledge of most people) is an illusion:

You think of yourselves as calm rationalists, but you are as emotionally invested as we are when it comes to defending beliefs - and there is nothing aberrant with that, because it's just human nature. We often talk about statistics and all that stuff, but in reality most people have no ideas about statistics (for example a simple beginner question: Define a p-value, statistical significance and a confidence level - could you do it without using Google in all honesty?). You believe that you know something about science, but it's a vague idea made out of half-truths, a quasi-religious belief-set. You read popular science and watch Bill Nye and consider yourself to be smart/educated, while nothing could be further away from the truth. Stop deluding yourself, you have no real idea about statistics and/or proper science and your knowledge is superficial at best (like mine and the knowledge of most people); you don't know anything, but you believe to know something - like all other people (including me), just have the courage to admit it, Cucktears.
 
your personality

your personality

Luminary
★★★★★
Joined
Jun 26, 2020
Posts
12,560
Online
45d 20h 51m
I knew it was going to be a BScel post when I saw the "well, " in the beginning of the title lmao.

4) Your knowledge (and the knowledge of most people) is an illusion:
You think of yourselves as calm rationalists, but you are as emotionally invested as we are when it comes to defending beliefs - and there is nothing aberrant with that, because it's just human nature
. We often talk about statistics and all that stuff, but in reality most people have no ideas about statistics (for example a simple beginner question: Define a p-value, statistical significance and a confidence level - could you do it without using Google in all honesty?). You believe that you know something about science, but it's a vague idea made out of half-truths, a quasi-religious belief-set. You read popular science and watch Bill Nye and consider yourself to be smart/educated, while nothing could be further away from the truth. Stop deluding yourself, you have no real idea about statistics and/or proper science and your knowledge is superficial at best (like mine and the knowledge of most people); you don't know anything, but you believe to know something - like all other people (including me), just have the courage to admit it, Cucktears.
Preach.
 
Last edited:
Justice Bao

Justice Bao

My own Mother proposes that i rope
★★★★
Joined
May 31, 2020
Posts
1,334
Online
19d 22h 26m
cuckma and most others are just karma farmers. they screenshot something and make a stupid headline out of context but there is little to no actual discussion about that matter and even if there are comments, its an embarrasing circle jerk
 
Ineedassitance

Ineedassitance

Incel praxis shouldn't be LDAR
★★
Joined
Sep 5, 2020
Posts
650
Online
12d 9h 12m
The world is so cucked. IT has to come here to get pleasure because of their schadenfreude
 
Aedracel

Aedracel

Aedric
★★★★★
Joined
Aug 31, 2020
Posts
6,189
Online
18d 13h 31m
cuckma and most others are just karma farmers. they screenshot something and make a stupid headline out of context but there is little to no actual discussion about that matter and even if there are comments, its an embarrasing circle jerk
For real, there is literally no discussion, no counter-arguments on their side, they just take some threads from here and post them, then proceed to call us ''Silly inkwells ur sexist this is y u inkel :feelstastyman::feelstastyman::feelstastyman:''

No man can show me IT debunking this ; https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill

Or this : https://incels.co/threads/studies-e...-discrimination-against-males-instead.206629/
Or this thread right here : https://incels.co/threads/i-insult-...talking-to-me-and-give-me-their-number.39717/

They can only take some threads certain members make here out of rage/sadness and such, I haven't seen any High IQ threads get featured on IT, they are wrong, they can deny it all they want, the Blackpill is the truth.
 
Lebensmüder

Lebensmüder

ADHDcel
★★★★★
Joined
Aug 21, 2018
Posts
484
Online
21d 7h 29m
cuckma and most others are just karma farmers. they screenshot something and make a stupid headline out of context but there is little to no actual discussion about that matter and even if there are comments, its an embarrasing circle jerk
Yes. But the IQ-Bragging is something that always happens with feminists. And it's so enfuriating.
For real, there is literally no discussion, no counter-arguments on their side, they just take some threads from here and post them, then proceed to call us ''Silly inkwells ur sexist this is y u inkel :feelstastyman::feelstastyman::feelstastyman:''

No man can show me IT debunking this ; https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill

Or this : https://incels.co/threads/studies-e...-discrimination-against-males-instead.206629/
Or this thread right here : https://incels.co/threads/i-insult-...talking-to-me-and-give-me-their-number.39717/

They can only take some threads certain members make here out of rage/sadness and such, I haven't seen any High IQ threads get featured on IT, they are wrong, they can deny it all they want, the Blackpill is the truth.
This.
 
BududubNow

BududubNow

TORTURE ALL FOIDS AND SHOOT ALL MUTTS
★★★★★
Joined
Feb 11, 2020
Posts
2,467
Online
35d 20h 3m
Nothing is more enfuriating than that shit:
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/j11aoq/well_its_hard_to_believe_in_incel_ideology_if/


It's quite common that leftists/feminists think that everyone that disagrees with them has to have a low IQ - no other side has such a high opinion about their intellectual capacities solely based on their beliefs. Whenever someone disagrees with them or commits acts that aren't conformable with their ideals they think of him as a retarded degenerate with no redeeming qualities, they always claim that violent people or people with different beliefs must have a low intelligence or a mental disturbance while nothing could be further away from the truth.

1) An intelligent person isn't moral or good by necessity and even "evil" people can have positive qualities - denying these facts is denying the truth:
Just look at Ted Bundy (an exception when it comes to serial killers based on intellect/eloquency) for example: This man behaved like a wild animal, tore chunks of flesh out of his victims with his bare teeth, bashed their skulls in and had sex with their rotting corpses. According to redditors a person capable of such deeds has to be a violent retard smearing shit at the walls of his mental asylum, but in reality Ted Bundy was an eloquent man with above average intelligence who worked at a suicide prevention hotline, saved a boy from drowning, captured a thief, released tips for women to avoid sexual predators and was at the start of his political career. His actions were (according to any social standards) completely evil, but this doesn't mean that he had no positive qualities - even the judge sentencing him to death had to admit that. That doesn't make him less evil, but denying these facts would be lying.
Just look at Oskar Dirlewanger, that man was (according to history) probably everything these people despise: a nazi, a sexual predator and a war-criminal that totally loved the violence itself (unless most other nazis). But he was also a very competent soldier in the first world war and was undoubtely highly intelligent - in his young years he wrote a dissertation and even the officials that had to evaluate him saw him as an intelligent man despite being a drug-addicted and violence-loving fanatic. Intelligence itself is a completely neutral trait: Stupid and intelligent people can commit extremely violent acts and hold abhorrent beliefs and intelligence alone doesn't make you moral.

2) The beliefs of a person don't say anything about their intelligence:

Just because someone believes in something you consider to be "crazy"/"stupid" it doesn't mean that said person is stupid by necessity or suffers from a disease affecting sanity like schizophrenia. William Luther Pierce, the author of the "Turner Diaries", had a doctorate in physics, Ted Kaczynski was a genius and became a math professor in young years, Franz Fuchs, the Austrian equivalent of the Unabomber, was also highly intelligent, James Watson isn't a person most people would like, but his advances in science are undeniable, Bobby Fisher was an antijudaist, but still a chess genius and many other examples - these people all have ideas that are universally despised and deemed as "dangerous" and "stupid" by most people, but they are definetely mentally/intellectually superior to some redditor that deems himself to be a genius just because he has a certain belief set. Even if you (sometimes rightfully) disagree with the positions/ideas of these people, you cannot deny their intellectual capacities despite hating their beliefs and them at a person level.
Many people working in physics (or evolutionary biology) are not edgy atheists and even say that their work brought them closer to religion in the case of many physicists - but a teenage atheist edgelord still considers them to be mentally inferior in his hybris just because of their beliefs while neglecting the fact that being a scientist and religious isn't mutually exclusive - something that is told actual students of science within their first lectures. Your beliefs don't make you mentally inferior/superior. People believe in different things (even things most people despise/deem as irrational) regardless of their intelligence.
Even if someone's beliefs are "stupid"/"inferior" in your eyes you cannot just call a certain person stupid and be done with it without twisting reality (something you accuse others of doing).

3) There is no objective truth and there are no objective facts:

Even the same data set can be interpreted in different ways and perspective is everything - objective truths (most of the time) just don't exist (especially when it comes to studying social phenomenons). For example: If the data says that women talk more than men, a MRA will say that women try to dominate men in a conversation while a feminist will say that the words of women don't matter as much as the words of men in a patriarchal society and that's why women have to talk more to be heard/make their point - the same data and completely different results depending on the subjective perspective of the researcher. The same is seen in debates about IQ-differences of different races - a leftist will attribute it to environmental racism (like lead poisoning) and inferior educational opportunities due to systemic racism, while a race-realist will attribute it to biological differences between races. The hard facts are exactly the same, but the conclusions are completely different.
Most of the time however noone even argues about the facts because they are emotionally invested in a debate (which is just human nature) - you can see it in debates with climate-change deniers, conspiracy theorists about 9/11 and holocaust-deniers - the facts are never addressed, most of the time it's a quasi-religious duel of completely differing belief-sets, entire worlds collide and there is no real debate just reciprocal accusations. The skeptic and paranoid world-view of the dissident and the confident and (often) condescending attitude of the fan of accepted beliefs - both remain the same and they only accuse each other of being morally inferior in the debate without ever addressing any facts.

4) Your knowledge (and the knowledge of most people) is an illusion:

You think of yourselves as calm rationalists, but you are as emotionally invested as we are when it comes to defending beliefs - and there is nothing aberrant with that, because it's just human nature. We often talk about statistics and all that stuff, but in reality most people have no ideas about statistics (for example a simple beginner question: Define a p-value, statistical significance and a confidence level - could you do it without using Google in all honesty?). You believe that you know something about science, but it's a vague idea made out of half-truths, a quasi-religious belief-set. You read popular science and watch Bill Nye and consider yourself to be smart/educated, while nothing could be further away from the truth. Stop deluding yourself, you have no real idea about statistics and/or proper science and your knowledge is superficial at best (like mine and the knowledge of most people); you don't know anything, but you believe to know something - like all other people (including me), just have the courage to admit it, Cucktears.
Imagine writing a book because of IT tards. Holy shit. 24/7 rent free in your head. I think all IT attention giving threads should result in a perm ban.
 
soymonkcel

soymonkcel

Asceticel. Monkmaxxing & healthmaxxing.
★★
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Posts
2,152
Online
17d 17h 15m
Lebensmüder

Lebensmüder

ADHDcel
★★★★★
Joined
Aug 21, 2018
Posts
484
Online
21d 7h 29m
I guess the blackpill is just very intersubjective.
This tbh. The Blackpill is the reality for truecels. They cannot improve and their effort doesn't matter. Even before they read something on these forums they knew something was off about them because everything they tried with women failed, even before the Blackpill became a concept underpinned by studies they instinctively knew/conceptualized it. For a normie the Redpill is the reality because he can improve his success by Looksmaxxing and by gaining more confidence. For different people different pills are useful/true because their living realities are different.
 
soymonkcel

soymonkcel

Asceticel. Monkmaxxing & healthmaxxing.
★★
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Posts
2,152
Online
17d 17h 15m
This tbh. The Blackpill is the reality for truecels. They cannot improve and their effort doesn't matter. Even before they read something on these forums they knew something was off about them because everything they tried with women failed, even before the Blackpill became a concept underpinned by studies they instinctively knew/conceptualized it. For a normie the Redpill is the reality because he can improve his success by Looksmaxxing and by gaining more confidence. For different people different pills are useful/true because their living realities are different.
Looksmaxxing for me is something more akin to the blackpill tbh. Redpillers would talk about game this, game that (a.k.a. jestermaxxing). If they admitted how important are looks, they wouldn't be redpillers anymore, imo.
 
Shigechi

Shigechi

Proud MSTOW
Joined
Jun 16, 2019
Posts
3,034
Online
62d 13h 16m
>1 points


LOL, they are not giving you cuck points anymore CUCKMA. Se mata, lol.