[Blackpill] Society expects men to constrain the "negative" elements of our nature but not women to constrain theirs

RageAgainstTDL

RageAgainstTDL

‌Rage, Rage Against the Dying of the Light
-
Joined
Dec 15, 2017
Messages
6,598
Quite simply, it is male nature to:
  • Kill, fight, steal, rape, pillage.
  • Seek women of any age for partners (even <18 :soy:).
Men have done these things for thousands of years. It is in our blood.

Society has deemed these are "anti-social" traits and men have learned to restrain ourselves accordingly to make the social contract work.

Conversely, it is female nature to:
  • Seek partnership with dark triad psychopaths, criminals, and narcissists.
  • Reward height which offers no current evolutionary advantage (more back pain, more cancer).
  • Punish men who are high IQ by rejecting them more often (which would be more useful).
  • Be far more racist than men.
  • Wait until they are way past their prime reproductive years to have kids.
  • Choose not to have kids at all as they are often happier being selfish.
  • Not value a man's long term commitment to her.
If you doubt any of the above, see here:
https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill

It is all well proven.

So when do we reach a point where we can expect society to tell women to hold up their end of the social contract and restrain their Toxic Femininity :soy:? Do we wait until the extinction of the species? Or societal collapse?

It is not even a matter of law. Eg. It is not illegal for a 35 year old man to date a 18 year old woman, but if one does, he is shamed as if he has broken a law. So when should women start being ashamed for all the most horrible aspects of their nature?
 
happiless

happiless

genetic trash
-
Joined
May 2, 2018
Messages
2,978
It will only change if society collapses.

- Wait until they are way past their prime reproductive years to have kids.
- Choose not to have kids at all as they are often happier being selfish.

will only change if society collapses.
 
mylifeistrash

mylifeistrash

Overlord
-
Joined
Dec 28, 2017
Messages
9,931
my nature is be lazy and consume resources

also all the tallest guys i know and play ball with have fucked up knees
 
FrothySolutions

FrothySolutions

Post like the FBI is watching.
-
Joined
May 6, 2018
Messages
4,601
We need the opposite of soyboys. Girls who point out toxic femininity and how it infringes on men.
 
MayorOfKekville

MayorOfKekville

Toxic Misogynist™ with a Bad Personality™
-
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
6,795
Very high IQ thread bro. Congrats. Agreed with every word.

Incidentally, women USED TO be shamed for their bad behaviours, but feminism made it unacceptable- sometimes even illegal - to shame women for almost anything.
 
Of Manlets and Men

Of Manlets and Men

Getting wristmogged by Mileena
-
Joined
Aug 26, 2018
Messages
1,685
We need the opposite of soyboys. Girls who point out toxic femininity and how it infringes on men.
I have searched for years for this magical NAWALT unicorn, but I haven't found her. Every tradthot/"anti-feminist" female youtuber I've found is simply someone who's using her looks to get views and money - and living the very feminist lifestyle (slutting it up with chads, having no kids or having kids out of wedlock, etc.) that she's supposed to be condemning.
 
mental_out

mental_out

Facel mod
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
3,212
Women like the negative traits of men but only when it serves their purposes. Plenty of women use their boyfriends as attack dogs to engage in violence on their behalf, often simply for their entertainment.
 
incel-american

incel-american

Officer
-
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
759
Well observed.
 
EyesAreSoCold

EyesAreSoCold

Commander
-
Joined
Feb 23, 2018
Messages
3,180
It's almost impossible to be incel. Either we live naturally and just rape whenever we are horny, or both men and women agree to suppress their nature for the greater good and we get sex through marriage. We are so unlucky to live in that brief moment in history when men are domesticated while women are completely free.
 
H

Homoculus

Recruit
-
Joined
Jan 11, 2019
Messages
209
Quite simply, it is male nature to:
  • Kill, fight, steal, rape, pillage.
  • Seek women of any age for partners (even <18 :soy:).
Men have done these things for thousands of years. It is in our blood.

Society has deemed these are "anti-social" traits and men have learned to restrain ourselves accordingly to make the social contract work.

Conversely, it is female nature to:
  • Seek partnership with dark triad psychopaths, criminals, and narcissists.
  • Reward height which offers no current evolutionary advantage (more back pain, more cancer).
  • Punish men who are high IQ by rejecting them more often (which would be more useful).
  • Be far more racist than men.
  • Wait until they are way past their prime reproductive years to have kids.
  • Choose not to have kids at all as they are often happier being selfish.
  • Not value a man's long term commitment to her.
If you doubt any of the above, see here:
https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill

It is all well proven.

So when do we reach a point where we can expect society to tell women to hold up their end of the social contract and restrain their Toxic Femininity :soy:? Do we wait until the extinction of the species? Or societal collapse?

It is not even a matter of law. Eg. It is not illegal for a 35 year old man to date a 18 year old woman, but if one does, he is shamed as if he has broken a law. So when should women start being ashamed for all the most horrible aspects of their nature?
I disagree. I believe men naturally, and irrespective of time or place, want to live happy and peaceful lives. For men to be irresistibly drawn to continuous warfare for plunder seems a way to destroy civilizations, not make them.
 
Evildоer

Evildоer

Veteran
-
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
1,265
Wanna hear a joke? Women call it "equality".
 
C

cancerousgreed

Recruit
-
Joined
Jun 19, 2019
Messages
133
Interstellar IQ
 
yeshuallah

yeshuallah

...
-
Joined
Jun 25, 2019
Messages
466
Feminist society is a scam.
 
I

ItsAllOverButTheCry

Officer
-
Joined
Oct 27, 2018
Messages
692
Very high IQ thread bro. Congrats. Agreed with every word.

Incidentally, women USED TO be shamed for their bad behaviours, but feminism made it unacceptable- sometimes even illegal - to shame women for almost anything.
Yes, women used to shame other women but these days it's totally flipped somehow and now women encourage whorish behaviours...
 
H

horseshoe

Recruit
-
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
92
OP’s IQ is on par with Carl Sagan
 
lifeisbullshit95

lifeisbullshit95

Life is a scam
-
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
1,542
Honeypot

Honeypot

Admiral
-
Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
2,988
Quite simply, it is male nature to:
  • Kill, fight, steal, rape, pillage.
  • Seek women of any age for partners (even <18 :soy:).
Men have done these things for thousands of years. It is in our blood.

Society has deemed these are "anti-social" traits and men have learned to restrain ourselves accordingly to make the social contract work.

Conversely, it is female nature to:
  • Seek partnership with dark triad psychopaths, criminals, and narcissists.
  • Reward height which offers no current evolutionary advantage (more back pain, more cancer).
  • Punish men who are high IQ by rejecting them more often (which would be more useful).
  • Be far more racist than men.
  • Wait until they are way past their prime reproductive years to have kids.
  • Choose not to have kids at all as they are often happier being selfish.
  • Not value a man's long term commitment to her.
If you doubt any of the above, see here:
https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill

It is all well proven.

So when do we reach a point where we can expect society to tell women to hold up their end of the social contract and restrain their Toxic Femininity :soy:? Do we wait until the extinction of the species? Or societal collapse?

It is not even a matter of law. Eg. It is not illegal for a 35 year old man to date a 18 year old woman, but if one does, he is shamed as if he has broken a law. So when should women start being ashamed for all the most horrible aspects of their nature?
Men are overprotective of woman so collapse probably will never happen.

Woman can do no wrong as they have a vagina to insert your penis on.(average male thinking).

Males had to carry a dysfunctional gender as partner for million of years and we will keep doing it because we are too good at everything.

And we can carry one dead weight gender without much problems, besides they are the ones choosing who will reproduce.

Thus their taste will be always forced on men and we will be always the same slightly above beast intelligence overprotective cuck thing with pleasant looks.

Anyone who deviates from this pattern and is too smart to realize this biological reality will be overwhelmed by sheer number superiority like the communists against Germany in WWII.
 
Last edited:
TheLastSorrow

TheLastSorrow

The End Of The Beginning
-
Joined
May 7, 2019
Messages
597
Women and society can seriously go fuck themselves. The level/amount of unfairness is too damn high. It's time to stop enabling their bullshit.
 
GeneticDysfunction

GeneticDysfunction

Wizard
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Messages
4,405
Because most men are disposable sperm bags
 
Arthas93

Arthas93

Always remember that we all will die.
-
Joined
Apr 16, 2018
Messages
1,543
OP you are Nikola Tesla level IQ. Good points. Society stoped holding women accountable for their ugly behavior.

We need some kind of social law system, similar to Sharia Law but without all the religious fanatism. To hold them accountable for their degeneracy.

A social law system can even prevent Chads from hoarding all the females and sex, if it punishes both the female and the male she is cheating with.
 
DeepSea

DeepSea

Recruit
-
Joined
Jun 29, 2018
Messages
142
I disagree. I believe men naturally, and irrespective of time or place, want to live happy and peaceful lives. For men to be irresistibly drawn to continuous warfare for plunder seems a way to destroy civilizations, not make them.
In the past 3,400 years, there have been only around 268 years of peace and most of those years were used to get ready for more war. Polygamous civilizations, such as Islam, have always been more violent and warlike than monogamous civilizations. Young men who couldn't get a wife were sent to war against other peoples and allowed to rape or enslave the women of the enemy. Even in the monogamous West, there were no laws against war rape until the early 20th century.

Modern society is polygamous due to female promiscuity but unlike past polygamous societies, it forces men to permanently repress their natural instincts and desires and denies them opportunities to obtain women by going to war. At the same time, it allows women to indulge their animal instincts and does not punish or shame them for engaging in socially harmful behavior such as promiscuity.

Thus their taste will be always forced on men and we will be always the same slightly above beast intelligence overprotective cuck thing with pleasant looks.
Gynocentrism is mostly a cultural thing. The mate guarding instinct, i.e the desire to protect and provide for a woman for the purpose of reproduction, is biological, but all the other aspects of gynocentrism are cultural. If gynocentrism was biological, all historical societies would have been feminist. When women are empowered and allowed to freely choose their sexual partners, beta males will compete with each other in order to pander to them. But if women are the property of their fathers and husbands and don't have any rights, then men don't have any rational reason to pander to them.

Men are overprotective of woman so collapse probably will never happen.
The collapse most likely won't happen in our lifetimes, and that's a bitter blackpill to swallow, but feminist societies are doomed in the long run because of sub-replacement birthrates and dysgenic fertility. Eventually, the average IQ drops so low that society collapses, and then women will lose all of their rights and revert back to being the property of men, as they have been for much of history.
 
Last edited:
Honeypot

Honeypot

Admiral
-
Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
2,988
In the past 3,400 years, there have been only around 268 years of peace and most of those years were used to get ready for more war. Polygamous civilizations, such as Islam, have always been more violent and warlike than monogamous civilizations. Young men who couldn't get a wife were sent to war against other peoples and allowed to rape or enslave the women of the enemy. Even in the monogamous West, there were no laws against war rape until the early 20th century.

Modern society is polygamous due to female promiscuity but unlike past polygamous societies, it forces men to permanently repress their natural instincts and desires and denies them opportunities to obtain women by going to war. At the same time, it allows women to indulge their animal instincts and does not punish or shame them for engaging in socially harmful behavior such as promiscuity.



Gynocentrism is mostly a cultural thing. The mate guarding instinct, i.e the desire to protect and provide for a woman for the purpose of reproduction, is biological, but all the other aspects of gynocentrism are cultural. If gynocentrism was biological, all historical societies would have been feminist. When women are empowered and allowed to freely choose their sexual partners, beta males will compete with each other in order to pander to them. But if women are the property of their fathers and husbands and don't have any rights, then men don't have any rational reason to pander to them.



The collapse most likely won't happen in our lifetimes, and that's a bitter blackpill to swallow, but feminist societies are doomed in the long run because of sub-replacement birthrates and dysgenic fertility. Eventually, the average IQ drops so low that society collapses, and then women will lose all of their rights and revert back to being the property of men, as they have been for much of history.
No such thing as "cultural" if something exist in human societies is because biology allows it, is a biological cycle rather than culture.

Overprotective cuckism was much of biological advantage till it went to far to where we are now and we became easily manipulable by foids.
 
H

Homoculus

Recruit
-
Joined
Jan 11, 2019
Messages
209
In the past 3,400 years, there have been only around 268 years of peace and most of those years were used to get ready for more war. Polygamous civilizations, such as Islam, have always been more violent and warlike than monogamous civilizations. Young men who couldn't get a wife were sent to war against other peoples and allowed to rape or enslave the women of the enemy. Even in the monogamous West, there were no laws against war rape until the early 20th century.

Modern society is polygamous due to female promiscuity but unlike past polygamous societies, it forces men to permanently repress their natural instincts and desires and denies them opportunities to obtain women by going to war. At the same time, it allows women to indulge their animal instincts and does not punish or shame them for engaging in socially harmful behavior such as promiscuity.



Gynocentrism is mostly a cultural thing. The mate guarding instinct, i.e the desire to protect and provide for a woman for the purpose of reproduction, is biological, but all the other aspects of gynocentrism are cultural. If gynocentrism was biological, all historical societies would have been feminist. When women are empowered and allowed to freely choose their sexual partners, beta males will compete with each other in order to pander to them. But if women are the property of their fathers and husbands and don't have any rights, then men don't have any rational reason to pander to them.



The collapse most likely won't happen in our lifetimes, and that's a bitter blackpill to swallow, but feminist societies are doomed in the long run because of sub-replacement birthrates and dysgenic fertility. Eventually, the average IQ drops so low that society collapses, and then women will lose all of their rights and revert back to being the property of men, as they have been for much of history.
If all you go back is 3400 years, then you are looking only at people who lived long after civilizations began to form, and very long after agriculture was established. That's maybe 2% of the total time of humans have existed. If you're going to look at evolutionary biology as a guide to the "correct" social structures for men to live in, you've got to get beyond the Pyramids at the very least, the big ones were built 4500 years ago. You've got to get past Stonehenge. Hell, you need to get beyond the beginning of the last ice age to have a chance of looking at men living in the environment they were evolved for.
 
SchrodingersDick

SchrodingersDick

Youth ends at NW2. Life ends at NW3.
-
Joined
Aug 7, 2018
Messages
5,227
We need the opposite of soyboys. Girls who point out toxic femininity and how it infringes on men.
Such specimens don’t exist. Edgy YouTube tradthots don’t count. They’re just doing niche fertility advertising.
 
MulattoDisgrace

MulattoDisgrace

The worst of blacks and whites in just one person.
-
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
245
Multiverse IQ, OP. I really don't understand how men let these things happen, feminism is putting women's interests over everything and society is too anesthetized to notice. We need to make the blackpill something mainstream, it's the only way we can make people discuss these negative elements of female nature.
 
Emba

Emba

PreDisposed
-
Joined
May 19, 2019
Messages
1,273
Unleash the hungry-vjj-weapon!
They Goyim know!
 
Hate_my_life

Hate_my_life

Fuck all foids
-
Joined
Dec 30, 2018
Messages
3,090
Einstein IQ
 
FrothySolutions

FrothySolutions

Post like the FBI is watching.
-
Joined
May 6, 2018
Messages
4,601
Such specimens don’t exist. Edgy YouTube tradthots don’t count. They’re just doing niche fertility advertising.
When would we know we've found the real deal?
 
Of Manlets and Men

Of Manlets and Men

Getting wristmogged by Mileena
-
Joined
Aug 26, 2018
Messages
1,685
Such specimens don’t exist. Edgy YouTube tradthots don’t count. They’re just doing niche fertility advertising.
It's amazing how many dumb bluepill/redpill cucks fall for that tradthot shit.

If they have their tits showing in their videos, they ain't the magical NAWALT unicorn.
If they have a Patreon, they ain't the magical NAWALT unicorn.
If they keep fucking chads and ignoring/insulting incels, they ain't the magical NAWALT unicorn.
If they live a feminist lifestyle while condemning feminism, they ain't the magical NAWALT unicorn.

Haven't found a magical NAWALT unicorn yet.
 
K

keithbauhaus

Recruit
-
Joined
Jun 8, 2019
Messages
98
Fucking immaculate post, OP. Gynocentrism is prevalent in the first world, and I do believe it will stay this way until we reach abysmal levels of savage behavior in our society like we were eons ago. Society will continue to encourage women to espouse/perpetuate their shit qualities onto everyone else (men), so things won't change unless the media finally decides to stop being biased pieces of shit.
 
Last edited:
NotQuiteChadLite

NotQuiteChadLite

The Meeks shall inherit the Earth
-
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
4,058
Seek partnership with dark triad psychopaths, criminals, and narcissists.
Explain non psychopaths in relationships with kids please. Explain Normies with loving girlfriends.

Reward height which offers no current evolutionary advantage (more back pain, more cancer).
They don’t “reward” height, that’s what is sexually attractive due to sexual dimorphism. Being tall is the ultimate sexual masculine trait, it’s not them consciously deciding to only go for tall men. This is the exact same as chastising men for going after young and fertile women, it’s called biology you coping sperg. And WTF is this cope, being tall means you have back pain and cancer now? Citation fucking needed, and don’t you dare cherry pick at Frankenstein heights, you can be perfectly healthy and pain free at 6 foot 2. LOW IQ COPE

Punish men who are high IQ by rejecting them more often (which would be more useful).
Retard cope. Being high IQ doesn’t just mean you memorize a bunch of useless scientific facts and read books, high IQ in nature means high survival skills, ingenuity, spatial awareness, and environmental knowledge. Plenty of sports jocks and chads have high IQs but they don’t fit your spergy book-smart definition of high IQ. Dogshit cope.

Be far more racist than men.
That’s why white women fuck blacks, Latin men, and refugees and Asian women fuck white Men, because of muh racism. Dogshit cope again. Women are the biggest race traitors around, they don’t give a fuck about race as long as you’re chad, you brainlet.

Wait until they are way past their prime reproductive years to have kids.
Societal problem and cultural engineering, not women’s nature to do so. You think women not living in the west wait till 30 to have kids? JFL at you.

Choose not to have kids at all as they are often happier being selfish.
Read answer above.

Not value a man's long term commitment to her.
Dipshit IQ. Women’s number one complaint about dating is that they can’t get chad to commit to her. They value commitment more than anything as long as it’s from a superior male.



What a stupid fucking post, can’t believe this trash was sticky’d , JFL
 
Last edited:
RageAgainstTDL

RageAgainstTDL

‌Rage, Rage Against the Dying of the Light
-
Joined
Dec 15, 2017
Messages
6,598
Explain non psychopaths in relationships with kids please. Explain Normies with loving girlfriends.

They don’t “reward” height, that’s what is sexually attractive due to sexual dimorphism. Being tall is the ultimate sexual masculine trait, it’s not them consciously deciding to only go for tall men. This is the exact same as chastising men for going after young and fertile women, it’s called biology you coping sperg. And WTF is this cope, being tall means you have back pain and cancer now? Citation fucking needed, and don’t you dare cherry pick at Frankenstein heights, you can be perfectly healthy and pain free at 6 foot 2. LOW IQ COPE

Retard cope. Being high IQ doesn’t just mean you memorize a bunch of useless scientific facts and read books, high IQ in nature means high survival skills, ingenuity, spatial awareness, and environmental knowledge. Plenty of sports jocks and chads have high IQs but they don’t fit your spergy book-smart definition of high IQ. Dogshit cope.

That’s why white women fuck niggers and refugees and Asian women fuck white Men, because of muh racism. Dogshit cope again. Women are the biggest race traitors around, they don’t give a fuck about race as long as you’re chad, you brainlet.

Societal problem and cultural engineering, not women’s nature to do so. You think women not living in the west wait till 30 to have kids? JFL at you.

Read answer above.

Dipshit IQ. Women’s number one complaint about dating is that they can’t get chad to commit to her. They value commitment more than anything as long as it’s from a superior male.

What a stupid fucking post, can’t believe this trash was sticky’d , JFL
Dude nothing you said was scientifically valid at all except that height is sexually dimorphic for men. Everything I said was backed by science.

Scientific studies have proven women find psychopaths more attractive than normal men, and that niceness is not an attribute women find attractive (while men do). Scientific studies have proven intelligent men do worse in the sexual marketplace than lower to middle IQ men. Science has shown white women have the strongest preference for same race dating of all female races. Science has shown that women rapidly lose interest in sex in long term relationships and they are the #1 initiators of divorce by a large margin.

Your notion that "nonpsychopaths get married and that proves women like nice guys" is like saying "Danny Devito got married so that proves women don't like tall men."

Sexual dimorphism also leads men to like teenaged girls as they have higher voices and are more youthful with more ideal BMI and ratios. But yet we suppress that urge because it is part of the social contract for us.

Height is proven to increase cancer risk:
Again saying someone can be tall and healthy therefore this is invalid is like saying "I know a guy who smoked his whole life and never got cancer so smoking isn't bad." IQ is inarguably more important in our modern world than height, except as it pertains to getting women. But IQ is not rewarded by women while height is.

Come back when you have some actual logic or science that refutes the proven blackpill:

Just throwing around a bunch of insults doesn't actually make for a valid debate.
 
Last edited:
NotQuiteChadLite

NotQuiteChadLite

The Meeks shall inherit the Earth
-
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
4,058
Dude nothing you said was scientifically valid at all except that height is sexually dimorphic for men. Everything I said was backed by science.

Scientific studies have proven women find psychopaths more attractive than normal men, and that niceness is not an attribute women find attractive (while men do). Scientific studies have proven intelligent men do worse in the sexual marketplace than lower to middle IQ men. Science has shown white women have the strongest preference for same race dating of all female races. Science has shown that women rapidly lose interest in sex in long term relationships and they are the #1 initiators of divorce by a large margin.

Your notion that "nonpsychopaths get married and that proves women like nice guys" is like saying "Danny Devito got married so that proves women don't like tall men."

Sexual dimorphism also leads men to like teenaged girls as they have higher voices and are more youthful with more ideal BMI and ratios. But yet we suppress that urge because it is part of the social contract for us.

Height is proven to increase cancer risk:
Again saying someone can be tall and healthy therefore this is invalid is like saying "I know a guy who smoked his whole life and never got cancer so smoking isn't bad." A certain amount of height leads to poorer health outcomes overall.

Come back when you have some actual logic or science that refutes the proven blackpill:

Just throwing around a bunch of insults doesn't actually make for a valid debate.
JFL at this wall of garbage. Being taller increases risk of cancer, know what else does? Breathing polluted air. Does that mean everyone who breathes polluted air gets cancer, no you brainlet. Stop cherry picking dogshit studies to support your delusional coping. Being tall does not mean are any less healthy than a manlet. I could too could cherry pick a “study” that says short men have weaker bones and worse respiratory systems due to having more compact bodies and less room for internal organs, but I won’t because you can find a study for literally anything. Stop cherrypicking.

Lmao at the Danny devito analogy. There’s only one Danny devito but there are millions and millions of non psychopaths, nice false equivalency. Nothing is even comparable in these statements, because only a retard would say Danny devito getting married means short men are not unwanted, because that’s ONE example whereas there are probably billions of normie, non dark triad men in long term relationships. You’re such a fucking brainlet.

Prove that women are more racist, you can’t, because women are race traitors who fuck other races of men constantly. Asian outmarry rates disproves your entire premise. If women are so racist then why are they distancing themselves from their own men at breakneck speeds? Because race doesn’t fucking matter, just be tall and be chad you brainlet.

Not even going to bother arguing because you are so set in confirmation bias and I don’t have time nor the inclination to cherry pick retarded “studies” and wiki articles (rofl) to counter your bullshit. Just understand that you’re completely wrong on most of your points.
 
RageAgainstTDL

RageAgainstTDL

‌Rage, Rage Against the Dying of the Light
-
Joined
Dec 15, 2017
Messages
6,598
JFL at this wall of garbage. Being taller increases risk of cancer, know what else does? Breathing polluted air. Does that mean everyone who breathes polluted air gets cancer, no you brainlet. Stop cherry picking dogshit studies to support your delusional coping. Being tall does not mean are any less healthy than a manlet. I could too could cherry pick a “study” that says short men have weaker bones and worse respiratory systems due to having more compact bodies and less room for internal organs, but I won’t because you can find a study for literally anything. Stop cherrypicking.

Lmao at the Danny devito analogy. There’s only one Danny devito but there are millions and millions of non psychopaths, nice false equivalency. Nothing is even comparable in these statements, because only a retard would say Danny devito getting married means short men are not unwanted, because that’s ONE example whereas there are probably billions of normie, non dark triad men in long term relationships. You’re such a fucking brainlet.

Prove that women are more racist, you can’t, because women are race traitors who fuck other races of men constantly. Asian outmarry rates disproves your entire premise. If women are so racist then why are they distancing themselves from their own men at breakneck speeds? Because race doesn’t fucking matter, just be tall and be chad you brainlet.

Not even going to bother arguing because you are so set in confirmation bias and I don’t have time nor the inclination to cherry pick retarded “studies” and wiki articles (rofl) to counter your bullshit. Just understand that you’re completely wrong on most of your points.
Jesus Christ dude, you really don't understand the racepill at all.

Women have much stronger racial preferences than men - this has been proven repeatedly, therefore yes, women are more racist than men. White men do the best overall.

If you want to read more about the precise details of racial hierarchy in dating see here. That's a summary of all the big race based studies that have been done on dating. Try to educate yourself before you reply.

As for your version of "logic":
- There are millions of short men in relationships therefore height doesn't matter.
- There are millions of ugly men in relationships therefore face doesn't matter.
- There are millions of ethnic men in relationships therefore race doesn't matter.
- There are millions of poor men in relationships therefore money doesn't matter.

Do you understand why this is not actually logical? Science has proven height, face, race, and money all matter. The fact that disadvantaged men have managed to succeed in spite of these things does not mean they don't matter.

If you want to read some of the science behind women's attraction for narcissistic and sociopathic men, it is here.

As for the subject of height, no height does not serve an evolutionary advantage anymore. We have no natural predators and being bigger does not advance society. On the other hand, higher intelligence can help us solve the real problems of our world and advance civilization. Women are still running on a primal system that was developed when we were cave people. It isn't well adapted to our modern world.

Our primal system as men leads to 52% of men getting erections over naked female children. Our gender suppresses it because that primal system also isn't well adapted to our modern world.

Now I'll leave you with a challenge: Try to write a reply without a single insult. See if you can. Try to actually learn a bit about the blackpill before you reject it. If you are actually correct and your ideas are valid, you shouldn't have to insult anyone. You can just state them and they will speak for themselves.
 
seija

seija

Autistcel & Mentalcel
-
Joined
Apr 27, 2019
Messages
5,758
Women don't believe that they're toxic because bluepilled soyboy cucks put them on a pedestal and believe that "no woman could ever be wrong" :soy::soy::soy::soy::soy::soy::soy::soy:

This is seriously high IQ and has some very good points.
 
Solcel_2000

Solcel_2000

Recruit
-
Joined
Jul 9, 2019
Messages
2
Quite simply, it is male nature to:
  • Kill, fight, steal, rape, pillage.
  • Seek women of any age for partners (even <18 :soy:).
Men have done these things for thousands of years. It is in our blood.

Society has deemed these are "anti-social" traits and men have learned to restrain ourselves accordingly to make the social contract work.

Conversely, it is female nature to:
  • Seek partnership with dark triad psychopaths, criminals, and narcissists.
  • Reward height which offers no current evolutionary advantage (more back pain, more cancer).
  • Punish men who are high IQ by rejecting them more often (which would be more useful).
  • Be far more racist than men.
  • Wait until they are way past their prime reproductive years to have kids.
  • Choose not to have kids at all as they are often happier being selfish.
  • Not value a man's long term commitment to her.
If you doubt any of the above, see here:
https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill

It is all well proven.

So when do we reach a point where we can expect society to tell women to hold up their end of the social contract and restrain their Toxic Femininity :soy:? Do we wait until the extinction of the species? Or societal collapse?

It is not even a matter of law. Eg. It is not illegal for a 35 year old man to date a 18 year old woman, but if one does, he is shamed as if he has broken a law. So when should women start being ashamed for all the most horrible aspects of their nature?
Checkmate
 
frustratedhapa

frustratedhapa

Recruit
-
Joined
Jul 6, 2019
Messages
190
I agree with this post overall but it fails to mention that Chads are not restraining the negative elements of their nature. By nature, Chads are meant to be polygamous and have large harems of women. This does not benefit society at all. But Chads don't care and still continue to pursue lots of women including ugly and fat ones that they have no interest in for long term relationships but they will still fuck those women and get them hooked on Chad cock and taint them for life because they'll never want to settle for less. Women are hypgamous by nature but Chads greatly enable them.
 
RageAgainstTDL

RageAgainstTDL

‌Rage, Rage Against the Dying of the Light
-
Joined
Dec 15, 2017
Messages
6,598
you want more people brought into this bullshit life?
I certainly don't want kids of my own because they'd likely be fucked up like me and I wouldn't want the responsibility.

But if women were selecting high IQ men to breed with and create a new generation of smarter and more effective humans I would be fine with that. Maybe they could turn things around for our species.
 
BlackWizard

BlackWizard

Recruit
-
Joined
Jul 9, 2019
Messages
23
One of the things that boggles my mind is that how is high IQ not sexy to foids? Even as a man, I'm really impressed whenever I notice high intelligence in someone, and I do find smart women quite attractive as opposed to dumb bimbos. When I was young, I thought women were more like that and men were the superficial gender, but boy was I wrong. It's pretty clear now that foid are the main drivers of dysgenics (at least when it comes to intelligence, not looks) and people will just become dumber and dumber unless something is done on a societal level to stop this trend.
 
CameronCel

CameronCel

Recruit
-
Joined
Jul 7, 2019
Messages
382
So when do you think the gynocentric, feminist society will fall and the natural, correct male-centric world will be restored?

I agree sadly we won't see it in our lifetime.

But 2100? 2200? Even later? (Provided human civilization and earth still exist by then)
 
CopeToNotRope

CopeToNotRope

Recruit
-
Joined
Jan 26, 2019
Messages
242
Quite simply, it is male nature to:
  • Kill, fight, steal, rape, pillage.
  • Seek women of any age for partners (even <18 :soy:).
Men have done these things for thousands of years. It is in our blood.

Society has deemed these are "anti-social" traits and men have learned to restrain ourselves accordingly to make the social contract work.

Conversely, it is female nature to:
  • Seek partnership with dark triad psychopaths, criminals, and narcissists.
  • Reward height which offers no current evolutionary advantage (more back pain, more cancer).
  • Punish men who are high IQ by rejecting them more often (which would be more useful).
  • Be far more racist than men.
  • Wait until they are way past their prime reproductive years to have kids.
  • Choose not to have kids at all as they are often happier being selfish.
  • Not value a man's long term commitment to her.
If you doubt any of the above, see here:
https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill

It is all well proven.

So when do we reach a point where we can expect society to tell women to hold up their end of the social contract and restrain their Toxic Femininity :soy:? Do we wait until the extinction of the species? Or societal collapse?

It is not even a matter of law. Eg. It is not illegal for a 35 year old man to date a 18 year old woman, but if one does, he is shamed as if he has broken a law. So when should women start being ashamed for all the most horrible aspects of their nature?
Quite simply, it is male nature to:
  • Kill, fight, steal, rape, pillage.
I don’t really see this part specifically on the scientific blackpill compilation

I guess men truly have been domesticated
 
Smallus Dickus

Smallus Dickus

Recruit
-
Joined
Aug 29, 2018
Messages
443
It's not a worldwive phenomena, I doubt that in islamic world women nature is let to free roam like in western world. Just wait a couple decadec bro and islammaxx.
 
alone

alone

Nihil morte certius
-
Joined
Jul 8, 2018
Messages
1,197
So when do you think the gynocentric, feminist society will fall and the natural, correct male-centric world will be restored?

I agree sadly we won't see it in our lifetime.

But 2100? 2200? Even later? (Provided human civilization and earth still exist by then)

2100 imo the planet will be not suitable for living imo

imo the war and collapse are coming next yes this is my hope and cope
 
VirtueSignaller

VirtueSignaller

M0DCEL
-
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
3,088
Men are overprotective of woman so collapse probably will never happen.

Woman can do no wrong as they have a vagina to insert your penis on.(average male thinking).

Males had to carry a dysfunctional gender as partner for million of years and we will keep doing it because we are too good at everything.

And we can carry one dead weight gender without much problems, besides they are the ones choosing who will reproduce.

Thus their taste will be always forced on men and we will be always the same slightly above beast intelligence overprotective cuck thing with pleasant looks.

Anyone who deviates from this pattern and is too smart to realize this biological reality will be overwhelmed by sheer number superiority like the communists against Germany in WWII.
High iq.
In the past 3,400 years, there have been only around 268 years of peace and most of those years were used to get ready for more war. Polygamous civilizations, such as Islam, have always been more violent and warlike than monogamous civilizations. Young men who couldn't get a wife were sent to war against other peoples and allowed to rape or enslave the women of the enemy. Even in the monogamous West, there were no laws against war rape until the early 20th century.

Modern society is polygamous due to female promiscuity but unlike past polygamous societies, it forces men to permanently repress their natural instincts and desires and denies them opportunities to obtain women by going to war. At the same time, it allows women to indulge their animal instincts and does not punish or shame them for engaging in socially harmful behavior such as promiscuity.



Gynocentrism is mostly a cultural thing. The mate guarding instinct, i.e the desire to protect and provide for a woman for the purpose of reproduction, is biological, but all the other aspects of gynocentrism are cultural. If gynocentrism was biological, all historical societies would have been feminist. When women are empowered and allowed to freely choose their sexual partners, beta males will compete with each other in order to pander to them. But if women are the property of their fathers and husbands and don't have any rights, then men don't have any rational reason to pander to them.



The collapse most likely won't happen in our lifetimes, and that's a bitter blackpill to swallow, but feminist societies are doomed in the long run because of sub-replacement birthrates and dysgenic fertility. Eventually, the average IQ drops so low that society collapses, and then women will lose all of their rights and revert back to being the property of men, as they have been for much of history.
Newton iq. This thread is iq overload tbh.
 
yeshuallah

yeshuallah

...
-
Joined
Jun 25, 2019
Messages
466
@NotQuiteChadLite can you provide data and sources to your statements, besides 'life experiences', @RageAgainstTDL provides various links to studies, tests and experiments, while you pollute this thread with ad hominems and dubious knowledge.
 
Alfen

Alfen

Veteran
-
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
1,417
@NotQuiteChadLite can you provide data and sources to your statements, besides 'life experiences', @RageAgainstTDL provides various links to studies, tests and experiments, while you pollute this thread with ad hominems and dubious knowledge.

I personally disagree with :

Quite simply, it is male nature to:
  • Kill, fight, steal, rape, pillage.
  • Seek women of any age for partners (even <18 :soy:).
I absolutely cant relate to this. Seems like rushed low IQ statement tbh.

At the very best, I could say male wants to dominate (?) but to say its male nature to steal and rape??
lol wtf. this almost seems like IT bait tbh

Furthermore, whenever videos of hood black people comes up doing these things, people like him will shout ''n*ggers are low IQ'' but here for the sake of his argument', it's seen as normal and male nature.

LOW IQ thread.
OP delet dis
 
yeshuallah

yeshuallah

...
-
Joined
Jun 25, 2019
Messages
466
I personally disagree

I absolutely cant relate to this. Seems like rushed low IQ statement tbh.

LOW IQ thread.
So you disagree, therefore it's low iq and not based on reality ?
 
yeshuallah

yeshuallah

...
-
Joined
Jun 25, 2019
Messages
466
people like him will shout ''n*ggers are low IQ'' but here for the sake of his argument', it's seen as normal and male nature.
He probably doesnt like individuals with abundant melanin, so maybe there is a bias on his part. Or maybe he doesn't approve nature violent and brutal ways. It doesnt invalidate the shared info.
I cant' relate to op's points.can you read?
You dont relate / dont feel like raping , killing, robbing / disagree with the generalization. So, you do disagree that it is male nature to act the way he demonstrated
 
Last edited:
RageAgainstTDL

RageAgainstTDL

‌Rage, Rage Against the Dying of the Light
-
Joined
Dec 15, 2017
Messages
6,598
I personally disagree with :



I absolutely cant relate to this. Seems like rushed low IQ statement tbh.

At the very best, I could say male wants to dominate (?) but to say its male nature to steal and rape??
lol wtf. this almost seems like IT bait tbh

Furthermore, whenever videos of hood black people comes up doing these things, people like him will shout ''n*ggers are low IQ'' but here for the sake of his argument', it's seen as normal and male nature.

LOW IQ thread.
OP delet dis
Of course it is male nature to be violent and aggressive. Throughout history, we have been the ones who commit warfare. We are the ones who murder the most (unless you count abortion - then women might win). We are the ones who perform most rapes. Men are designed to be the more powerful, aggressive, and violent gender. We need to be. Women aren't strong enough to hunt large prey or defend a tribe against wild tigers. That was our role. That violence is part of us.

Men nowadays are probably the least aggressive and can relate the least to those impulses of any men in history because our testosterone levels and sperm count are dropping and we are all gradually becoming soyboys.

I'm not even going to provide studies proving those facts because they're too easy to find, and it's so obviously true it's pointless. Look at rape/murder/assault stats and tell me which gender does more of it. Look at wars through history and how many were fought before women even had rights to determine the course of civilizations.

A generalization is just that - it's generalized. It speaks of the overall trend. There are some men who are so emasculated and meek they are less physically aggressive than most women. That does not change the fact that comparing the two genders, men are absolutely the most physically aggressive and violent.

If you've completely lost the ability to recognize your natural wild male nature internally then you might want to question how much of a man you remain. Masculinity is dying. Maybe you don't have any left yourself.

Saying men have this nature is not an assault on men. To the contrary - it's a celebration of what makes our gender unique. We are the protectors, defenders, attackers, raiders, hunters, marauders, conquerers, explorers, warriors, and revolutionaries.

Did women perform these roles in history to get our species to this point? No. Men did. That is something to be celebrated. Without that male nature we would have been annihilated thousands of years ago. Men have nothing to be ashamed of on this subject. Without all aspects of our nature, there would be no civilization at all.
 
Alfen

Alfen

Veteran
-
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
1,417
@RageAgainstTDL

I understand your point better.
This is something a red pill guy actually tlaked about.

Itès basically male sexual agressiveness. Our prime sexual energy, without controlled, can find itself chaotic. However, throught history, the sexual energy manifested itself into various prowess that led us to develop humankind.

I think such energy must be channeled somehow. It is after all what makes us men; the dominator.

the problem with modern society is that is bascially trying to supress that energy imo.
 
ThirdWorldcel

ThirdWorldcel

It's over
-
Joined
Aug 16, 2018
Messages
92
Female sexuality is seen as inherently good and beneficial while male sexuality is heavily regulated and monitored
 
NotQuiteChadLite

NotQuiteChadLite

The Meeks shall inherit the Earth
-
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
4,058
@NotQuiteChadLite can you provide data and sources to your statements, besides 'life experiences', @RageAgainstTDL provides various links to studies, tests and experiments, while you pollute this thread with ad hominems and dubious knowledge.
No thanks, because all he does is cherrypick garbage. Seriously, “being tall increases risk of cancer, so there’s no reason why women should be attracted to tall men! They’re not as healthy!”

Imagine unironically believing this, lmao.


He’s an absolute idiot who cherrypicks stupid studies and makes blanket statements, thinks that being “high IQ” means only academic success / booksmart knowledge, and is just generally a sperg talking out of his. He uses the “incel wiki” as his sources. JFL.
 
Top