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.

Sue and Reed - in the 1960s Marvel Comics acknowledged that a 12 year old girl could fall in love with an adult man and it could lead to happiness

HeOweGoreWrath

HeOweGoreWrath

Paragon
★★★★★
Joined
May 20, 2018
Posts
19,726
Floodgates


but of course they decided to rewrite it later so Sue was a college freshman when she fell for Reed

SueWhenReedLeaves


and then go on to say it's creepy or some shit

Twelve


cowards and cucks writing comics in modern day TBH, should stick with canon even if it risks cancellation

FIRST LOVE,
A LOVE THAT WILL BURN TRUE AND SURE
THROUGH ALL THE YEARS THAT FOLLOW

They were blackpilled as fuck about the reality of this bonding.

That said, they're still blackpilled because they don't take the bond too serious: she did nearly cheat w/ Black Panther and Namor after all, LOL

What other comic foids toyed with cheating on their BFs/husbands like Sue?

Doubtful that modern heroines would be depicted that realistically.
 
Last edited:
I'm European and not very familiar with the Marvel comics. But we did have something similar over here in France/Belgium/the Netherlands, called Axel Moonshine. It's about this dude who flies across the cosmos in his starship, along with a 13-year old girl called Musky. She's secretly in love with him, while he sees her as a boy... Ah, weird shit from the seventies!

3758101 axel moonshine 1
 
View attachment 385568

but of course they decided to rewrite it later so Sue was a college freshman when she fell for Reed

View attachment 385569

and then go on to say it's creepy or some shit

View attachment 385570

cowards and cucks writing comics in modern day TBH, should stick with canon even if it risks cancellation
Back when people were still normal
That said, they're still blackpilled because they don't take the bond too serious: she did nearly cheat w/ Black Panther and Namor after all, LOL
Wait what?
@Colvin76 thoughts?
1608523600175

KEKD
 
Even until the nineties, themes where tween girls fell for older guys was a thing --- an example was in 'The Legends of the Fall' (1994): a girl of about 10-12 years old had a crush on Pitt's character (he was 31 at the time this was released). Decent film, but if it's remade, you know that part will be changed, because 21st century audiences will find that "creepy", despite there being no sexual tension whatsoever; it was just an innocent crush, like many tweens do, and as it was depicted in the original Fantastic Four storyline
 
Yeah, the absurd modern anti-pedo hysteria, witch hunt, and moral panic was non-existent back in 1960.
 
@Mainländer
@BummerDrummer
@Robtical
 
It's sad how worse things can get so fast.
 
I'm European and not very familiar with the Marvel comics. But we did have something similar over here in France/Belgium/the Netherlands, called Axel Moonshine. It's about this dude who flies across the cosmos in his starship, along with a 13-year old girl called Musky. She's secretly in love with him, while he sees her as a boy... Ah, weird shit from the seventies!

View attachment 385573
 
Even until the nineties, themes where tween girls fell for older guys was a thing --- an example was in 'The Legends of the Fall' (1994): a girl of about 10-12 years old had a crush on Pitt's character (he was 31 at the time this was released). Decent film, but if it's remade, you know that part will be changed, because 21st century audiences will find that "creepy", despite there being no sexual tension whatsoever; it was just an innocent crush, like many tweens do, and as it was depicted in the original Fantastic Four storyline
Another film with a similar theme is "Beautiful Girls" from 1996, where Nathalie Portman plays a 13-year old who crushes on Timothy Hutton's 30-something character.
 
Take the cartoonpill bros!
 
Nothing romantic about Paedophilia.

It’s Immoral, uncivilised and comes with an unfathomable potential for abuse.
 
Nothing romantic about Paedophilia.

It’s Immoral, uncivilised and comes with an unfathomable potential for abuse.
Not going to be a popular opinion on here. I hear you, but unfortunately many of our fellow incels cope by not considering women or girls to be human beings.

I don't blame them. Makes it easier to deal with reality, I imagine.
 
Nothing romantic about Paedophilia.

It’s Immoral, uncivilised and comes with an unfathomable potential for abuse.
Girls should be married to good men as soon as puberty to prevent feminism and fornication.
 
Nothing romantic about Paedophilia.

It’s Immoral, uncivilised and comes with an unfathomable potential for abuse.
Depends on what you define as paedophilia. It's more or less normal and natural for men to become attracted to foids as soon as the latter become sexually viable. In the modern era this usually happens around the ages of 12 to 16. Considering this, there is something to be said for marrying foids off sooner rather than later, in order to counteract exactly the kind of immorality and uncivilizedness that you condemn. Most earlier eras understood this as something completely obvious btw. Thomas Edison's first marriage was to a 16-year old, for example.
 
Nothing romantic about Paedophilia.

It’s Immoral, uncivilised and comes with an unfathomable potential for abuse.
There would be nothing at all immortal about 19yo Reed fucking 12yo Sue right then and there.

It's entirely civilized: he's a college student and he's paying rent. They talked to each other, got to know each other. That's what civilization is.

Also: Sue's clearly begun puberty (mid-pubescent not pre-pubescent) so you shouldn't be throwing around the term pedophilia as it would not apply here.

The greatest potential for abuse with dating someone underage is they can abuse the overage person under threat of tattling and getting them imprisoned, TBH

Not going to be a popular opinion on here. I hear you, but unfortunately many of our fellow incels cope by not considering women or girls to be human beings.

I don't blame them. Makes it easier to deal with reality, I imagine.

What a crock: how exactly is thinking you could avoid exploiting an opportunity to abuse a foid considering them to be inhuman?

The biggest problem is gigachads who DGAF because foids flock to them so they don't know suffering of rejection.

We know suffering of rejection so we would not flippantly inflict it on a cute girl like chad would.

That's why we should date the virgins and not chad.

Girls should be married to good men as soon as puberty to prevent feminism and fornication.

Prior to puberty would be smarter to make sure she's already pair-bonding before she starts getting hormone lush rusts.

You also shouldn't be recovering from a torn hymen as you're pregnant so sex should begin a couple months prior to first menarche. That way you don't confuse hymen blood with egg blood.
 
Nothing romantic about Paedophilia.

It’s Immoral, uncivilised and comes with an unfathomable potential for abuse.
Not going to be a popular opinion on here. I hear you, but unfortunately many of our fellow incels cope by not considering women or girls to be human beings.

I don't blame them. Makes it easier to deal with reality, I imagine.
Since you are new here I will give you the benefit of the doubt.

Everything you just said would be true if only it wasn't completely invalidated by one thing: Adult chads fuck jbs all the time.

The only reason you never hear about it is because the foidlets keep it a secret so no one ever finds out. Sometimes, later on, they will even start a relationship together. It might even becomes public knowledge they were dating when she was still underage and yet still no one cares because it's chad.

The next time you consider moralfagging remember this. Pretending that foids aren't sexual at that age is being either naive or disingenuous.

It's frankly disgusting that Chads just get a free pass to do this shit while ugly men who aren't even pedophiles are treated like one.

There have been tinder experiments on here where the catfish openly admits to being a pedophile who raped a young boy and the women on there didn't even care and wanted to fuck him anyways, solely because of his profile picture's appearance.
 
View attachment 385568

but of course they decided to rewrite it later so Sue was a college freshman when she fell for Reed

View attachment 385569

and then go on to say it's creepy or some shit

View attachment 385570

cowards and cucks writing comics in modern day TBH, should stick with canon even if it risks cancellation



They were blackpilled as fuck about the reality of this bonding.

That said, they're still blackpilled because they don't take the bond too serious: she did nearly cheat w/ Black Panther and Namor after all, LOL

What other comic foids toyed with cheating on their BFs/husbands like Sue?

Doubtful that modern heroines would be depicted that realistically.
B-b-but muh normie narrative
 
There have been tinder experiments on here where the catfish openly admits to being a pedophile who raped a young boy and the women on there didn't even care and wanted to fuck him anyways, solely because of his profile picture's appearance.
Some small minority of women (it's got to be less than 50% right? hoping majority of women are just repulse by rape) are aroused by chad rapists, and if the chad rapist is raping men that probably arouses foids even more because it's a harder task to accomplish and shows he DGAF about her
 
Feminists are jealous of younger females so they stigmatized what was once normal.
 
Feminists are jealous of younger females so they stigmatized what was once normal.
yep, see:

This is basically what was to blame for ending the golden age where states had AOC of 7/10/12 a bunch of bitter (((Christian))) hags mad that they couldn't land a good husband because men were more highly-valued back then and self-sufficient so their thirst didn't make them settle for degenerate women.

It's interesting to note that while this effort sprung up in the 1860s, it only really had success by the 1920s, about a generation after the mass introduction of (((circumcision))) to the west.

You can see this shift was influenced Encyclopedia Brittanica:

9th edition (1876) "like other body mutilations ... [it is] of the nature of a representative sacrifice"​
11th edition (1910) "surgical operation, which is commonly prescribed for purely medical reasons, is also an initiation or religious ceremony among Jews and Muslims"​
14th edition (1929) "done as a preventive measure in the infant .. performed chiefly for purposes of cleanliness"​

You can see there was still some common sense back in the 18th century before the decline in the 19th/20th due to opposition to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Naturalisation_Act_1753

What made the bill (passed as the Jewish Naturalisation Act) "notorious" was the opposition it generated among the public, who launched such a vigorous campaign that it was eventually repealed.

What is interesting about the pamphleteers etc is that they made circumcision central to their polemic and warned of a supposed Jewish plan to circumcise the entire male population if the bill became law;

men were urged to protect "the best of Your property" and guard their threatened foreskins. It was an extraordinary outpouring of popular beliefs about sex, fears about masculinity


Wolper's 1982 commentary called this "misconceptions about Jews" but as we can see they weren't misconceptions at all because they DID end up spreading mass circumcision to the male population.

Our inability to be self-sufficient fappers means we could not coom easily by hand and relied upon the softer-than-hand female vagina to coom. Men could not be as independent because onaholes were a dream of the future. This is when thirsty orbit beta behaviors became rampant.

This is largely why roasties were able to manipulate men into lowering AOC, giving suffrage w/o draft, allow moms to be painted as better parents than dads, and other sexist "feminist" anti-masculine non-egalitarian measures which elevated women above men a century ago.

Men couldn't fap so they got pent-up blue balls and would get led around by their dicks by women who promised sex only to those who cooperated.

This is literally the first mass-circumcised generation of men who finally capitulated to these changes. Jews don't just control the feminist movements but they also soften the male populace ahead of time via infiltrating the medical/science academia and twisting it, to be unable to resist them.
 
Last edited:
Normies and their capeshit.
 
sue and reed?
Sneed :what: :what: :what: (formally chuck's)
 
Last edited:
Our inability to be self-sufficient fappers means we could not coom easily by hand and relied upon the softer-than-hand female vagina to coom. Men could not be as independent because onaholes were a dream of the future. This is when thirsty orbit beta behaviors became rampant.
I had no idea of all this. Circumcition should be punished with jail.
You know I have never been able to fap porperlly cause I have no foreskin and I need a vagina to have an orgasm? And this is the reason I'm not ben able to give up on women yet? This makes me rage so much im gonna quit reading right now and jump to another topic :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree:
 
Normies and their capeshit.
kind of undeserves as nobody in F4 wore a fucking cape and they were public about their identities
Circumcition should be punished with jail.
Not going far enough, deserves the Bob Bowers response.
You know I have never been able to fap porperlly cause I have no foreskin and I need a vagina to have an orgasm? And this is the reason I'm not ben able to give up on women yet? This makes me rage so much im gonna quit reading right now and jump to another topic :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree: :feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree::feelsree:
Foreskin wouldn't guarantee you wouldn't be dominated by thirst for women, the greeks didn't circumcise and still fought the Trojan War over a foid after all.

But it would've improved your odds and happiness
 
probably why a woman who has had more partners can never settle down and be loyal, they rode too much cock carousel and lost their ability to pairbond
 
probably why a woman who has had more partners can never settle down and be loyal, they rode too much cock carousel and lost their ability to pairbond
I think part of it is also that mass circumcision has made sex a painful and uncomfortable experience for a lot of women. Those "sex is violence" feminists were probably onto something, they just didn't realize the circumstance they were channeling was an artificial one engineered by the Jews steering their own movement.

Due to the increased friction from the absence of the mobile sheath, sex with a circumcised man relies entirely upon the foid providing natural lubrication to make the experience possible, so it only works well with Chad.

For men with foreskin, sex could still be reasonably pleasant for women who weren't wet because the sheath provides mobility. Also whatever lubrication she DOES provide the foreskin would help seal it inside with the increased girth. Foreskin making sex initially pleasant would help to arouse the foid and cause her to lubricate.

Foreskin is essentially a wetness inertia countermeasure: it gets the ball rolling into a pleasure spiral.

This is increased even further with condoms because whatever minor amount of skin mobility might be left behind on the penis is lost by using a condom. Condoms also prevent the direct chemical cause of pairbonding too.

Sure you can bring your own lube but it's probably going to be cold and uncomfortable for the foid. She knows it's artificial and feels violated by it. The man feels cheated too because he wants it to be naturally slippery by the foid's arousal and the subconscious desire he has for his cock to be inherently low-friction.

- - -

another thing I just thought of is that foreskin essentially leads to more wholesome sex because it makes the base shaft of the cock thicker without making the head thicker. So rather than a tiny point (glans) of largeness moving to the back of the womb, the foid feels entirely filled.

This also leads to the cock feeling entirely stimulated from all sides to a greater degree, normally the widest part (head) would get most of the pressure.

Being circumcised in a way makes natural sex degenerate and resemble anal sex in a way, just in reverse because you're limiting the shaft to a single point of tightness instead of the tunnel.

Anal sex is inferior to vaginal sex because the only tight part is the sphincter and then you're just floating in air unless there happens to be poop at the end of that tunnel and smashing your dick into that is going to fill you with a sense of inherent revulsion.

It should not just be our glans that is the part which feels tight to us and to the foid, it should be the entire thing because our foreskin should make our shaft as wide as our glans.

I am betting there is a strong causatory relationship between celibacy and circumcision because we know there is less bliss to aspire to. We feel incomplete. We know we can't provide the satisfaction we were born with the ability to cause. We know any sex we might have will be unnatural.

Condoms probably cause that too, for intact men. I bet women are more likely to let intact men have unprotected sex with them too.

- - -

Arguments around circumcision seem to center on myths that it prevents STDS: in the 1800s and early 1900s it was syphilis while in the late 1900s and early 2000s it's shifted to HIV. They push this in Africa because niggers won't wear condoms, while admitting that you should wear condoms in the west anyway.

The stupid thing about this is that Tyrone is the one spreading all the STDs by fucking dozens of women (and he probably didn't get circumcised) while all the celibate African men who wouldn't have gotten more than 1 sexual partner in their lifetime (at best) lose the ability to fap.

In the west they try to replace this with "intact dicks gross foids out, you will get more sex if you're cut" bullshit.

It's the most cucked thing I've ever heard of: lose your ability to fap competently and actually make sex WORSE (assuming you ever get it: being cut makes it extremely unlikely) because of propaganda of fake benefits.

Foids who spread this myth are pure fucking evil. They are sadists who get off on the idea of having incel dicks mutilated. They secretly fuck the uncut chads while lamenting how much nicer cut incel dicks work. These foids are far worse than the "I just want a nice guy" or "I think short men are cute" foids who fuck tall jerks, because at least those ones haven't endorsed mass permanent mutilation of our genitalia, permanently crippling our ability to coom or give pleasure to a potential wife.

- - -

Knowing we can never have ideal pleasant sex I think makes sex a bitter experience for men, and why you see so many men become angry abrasive misogynistic lovers who will be more apt to settle for a 'hatefuck' or 'pump and dump'. You either need to embrace that (be a sadist) or deny it (be deluded).

Foids inherently attracted to Chad (he gets a pass on delusions/sadism .. his "low-inhib" mind will actually arouse them) might have looked past him for a wholesome healthy-minded sub-Chad in the past: they would value his non-sadism (empathy) and realistic groundedness as a husband.

This is an increasingly difficult thing now because you can't really have both these traits coexist with a desire for doing sex with your mutilated circumcised cock. There is an element of insanity, wherther denialism or cruelty, inherent to wanting to put your prepuceless penis into a vagina now, which logically puts foids on guard about it and resist the sex.

This leaves the only sexual offers from a male which are NOT resisted the ones from Chad where his DNA value appeals purely to a foid's baser instincts as she looks past instincts to find a caring and intelligent husband to sexually bond with. I believe in this way circumcision has contributed to the breakdown of the traditional monoamorous society. It persists as an illusion cast for cut celibate men to cling to so they don't revolt against the Jew.
 
I think part of it is also that mass circumcision has made sex a painful and uncomfortable experience for a lot of women. Those "sex is violence" feminists were probably onto something, they just didn't realize the circumstance they were channeling was an artificial one engineered by the Jews steering their own movement.

Due to the increased friction from the absence of the mobile sheath, sex with a circumcised man relies entirely upon the foid providing natural lubrication to make the experience possible, so it only works well with Chad.

For men with foreskin, sex could still be reasonably pleasant for women who weren't wet because the sheath provides mobility. Also whatever lubrication she DOES provide the foreskin would help seal it inside with the increased girth. Foreskin making sex initially pleasant would help to arouse the foid and cause her to lubricate.

Foreskin is essentially a wetness inertia countermeasure: it gets the ball rolling into a pleasure spiral.

This is increased even further with condoms because whatever minor amount of skin mobility might be left behind on the penis is lost by using a condom. Condoms also prevent the direct chemical cause of pairbonding too.

Sure you can bring your own lube but it's probably going to be cold and uncomfortable for the foid. She knows it's artificial and feels violated by it. The man feels cheated too because he wants it to be naturally slippery by the foid's arousal and the subconscious desire he has for his cock to be inherently low-friction.

- - -

another thing I just thought of is that foreskin essentially leads to more wholesome sex because it makes the base shaft of the cock thicker without making the head thicker. So rather than a tiny point (glans) of largeness moving to the back of the womb, the foid feels entirely filled.

This also leads to the cock feeling entirely stimulated from all sides to a greater degree, normally the widest part (head) would get most of the pressure.

Being circumcised in a way makes natural sex degenerate and resemble anal sex in a way, just in reverse because you're limiting the shaft to a single point of tightness instead of the tunnel.

Anal sex is inferior to vaginal sex because the only tight part is the sphincter and then you're just floating in air unless there happens to be poop at the end of that tunnel and smashing your dick into that is going to fill you with a sense of inherent revulsion.

It should not just be our glans that is the part which feels tight to us and to the foid, it should be the entire thing because our foreskin should make our shaft as wide as our glans.

I am betting there is a strong causatory relationship between celibacy and circumcision because we know there is less bliss to aspire to. We feel incomplete. We know we can't provide the satisfaction we were born with the ability to cause. We know any sex we might have will be unnatural.

Condoms probably cause that too, for intact men. I bet women are more likely to let intact men have unprotected sex with them too.

- - -

Arguments around circumcision seem to center on myths that it prevents STDS: in the 1800s and early 1900s it was syphilis while in the late 1900s and early 2000s it's shifted to HIV. They push this in Africa because niggers won't wear condoms, while admitting that you should wear condoms in the west anyway.

The stupid thing about this is that Tyrone is the one spreading all the STDs by fucking dozens of women (and he probably didn't get circumcised) while all the celibate African men who wouldn't have gotten more than 1 sexual partner in their lifetime (at best) lose the ability to fap.

In the west they try to replace this with "intact dicks gross foids out, you will get more sex if you're cut" bullshit.

It's the most cucked thing I've ever heard of: lose your ability to fap competently and actually make sex WORSE (assuming you ever get it: being cut makes it extremely unlikely) because of propaganda of fake benefits.

Foids who spread this myth are pure fucking evil. They are sadists who get off on the idea of having incel dicks mutilated. They secretly fuck the uncut chads while lamenting how much nicer cut incel dicks work. These foids are far worse than the "I just want a nice guy" or "I think short men are cute" foids who fuck tall jerks, because at least those ones haven't endorsed mass permanent mutilation of our genitalia, permanently crippling our ability to coom or give pleasure to a potential wife.

- - -

Knowing we can never have ideal pleasant sex I think makes sex a bitter experience for men, and why you see so many men become angry abrasive misogynistic lovers who will be more apt to settle for a 'hatefuck' or 'pump and dump'. You either need to embrace that (be a sadist) or deny it (be deluded).

Foids inherently attracted to Chad (he gets a pass on delusions/sadism .. his "low-inhib" mind will actually arouse them) might have looked past him for a wholesome healthy-minded sub-Chad in the past: they would value his non-sadism (empathy) and realistic groundedness as a husband.

This is an increasingly difficult thing now because you can't really have both these traits coexist with a desire for doing sex with your mutilated circumcised cock. There is an element of insanity, wherther denialism or cruelty, inherent to wanting to put your prepuceless penis into a vagina now, which logically puts foids on guard about it and resist the sex.

This leaves the only sexual offers from a male which are NOT resisted the ones from Chad where his DNA value appeals purely to a foid's baser instincts as she looks past instincts to find a caring and intelligent husband to sexually bond with. I believe in this way circumcision has contributed to the breakdown of the traditional monoamorous society. It persists as an illusion cast for cut celibate men to cling to so they don't revolt against the Jew.

never understood the US obsession with mutilating dudes dicks.
 
I think part of it is also that mass circumcision has made sex a painful and uncomfortable experience for a lot of women. Those "sex is violence" feminists were probably onto something, they just didn't realize the circumstance they were channeling was an artificial one engineered by the Jews steering their own movement.

Due to the increased friction from the absence of the mobile sheath, sex with a circumcised man relies entirely upon the foid providing natural lubrication to make the experience possible, so it only works well with Chad.

For men with foreskin, sex could still be reasonably pleasant for women who weren't wet because the sheath provides mobility. Also whatever lubrication she DOES provide the foreskin would help seal it inside with the increased girth. Foreskin making sex initially pleasant would help to arouse the foid and cause her to lubricate.

Foreskin is essentially a wetness inertia countermeasure: it gets the ball rolling into a pleasure spiral.

This is increased even further with condoms because whatever minor amount of skin mobility might be left behind on the penis is lost by using a condom. Condoms also prevent the direct chemical cause of pairbonding too.

Sure you can bring your own lube but it's probably going to be cold and uncomfortable for the foid. She knows it's artificial and feels violated by it. The man feels cheated too because he wants it to be naturally slippery by the foid's arousal and the subconscious desire he has for his cock to be inherently low-friction.

- - -

another thing I just thought of is that foreskin essentially leads to more wholesome sex because it makes the base shaft of the cock thicker without making the head thicker. So rather than a tiny point (glans) of largeness moving to the back of the womb, the foid feels entirely filled.

This also leads to the cock feeling entirely stimulated from all sides to a greater degree, normally the widest part (head) would get most of the pressure.

Being circumcised in a way makes natural sex degenerate and resemble anal sex in a way, just in reverse because you're limiting the shaft to a single point of tightness instead of the tunnel.

Anal sex is inferior to vaginal sex because the only tight part is the sphincter and then you're just floating in air unless there happens to be poop at the end of that tunnel and smashing your dick into that is going to fill you with a sense of inherent revulsion.

It should not just be our glans that is the part which feels tight to us and to the foid, it should be the entire thing because our foreskin should make our shaft as wide as our glans.

I am betting there is a strong causatory relationship between celibacy and circumcision because we know there is less bliss to aspire to. We feel incomplete. We know we can't provide the satisfaction we were born with the ability to cause. We know any sex we might have will be unnatural.

Condoms probably cause that too, for intact men. I bet women are more likely to let intact men have unprotected sex with them too.

- - -

Arguments around circumcision seem to center on myths that it prevents STDS: in the 1800s and early 1900s it was syphilis while in the late 1900s and early 2000s it's shifted to HIV. They push this in Africa because niggers won't wear condoms, while admitting that you should wear condoms in the west anyway.

The stupid thing about this is that Tyrone is the one spreading all the STDs by fucking dozens of women (and he probably didn't get circumcised) while all the celibate African men who wouldn't have gotten more than 1 sexual partner in their lifetime (at best) lose the ability to fap.

In the west they try to replace this with "intact dicks gross foids out, you will get more sex if you're cut" bullshit.

It's the most cucked thing I've ever heard of: lose your ability to fap competently and actually make sex WORSE (assuming you ever get it: being cut makes it extremely unlikely) because of propaganda of fake benefits.

Foids who spread this myth are pure fucking evil. They are sadists who get off on the idea of having incel dicks mutilated. They secretly fuck the uncut chads while lamenting how much nicer cut incel dicks work. These foids are far worse than the "I just want a nice guy" or "I think short men are cute" foids who fuck tall jerks, because at least those ones haven't endorsed mass permanent mutilation of our genitalia, permanently crippling our ability to coom or give pleasure to a potential wife.

- - -

Knowing we can never have ideal pleasant sex I think makes sex a bitter experience for men, and why you see so many men become angry abrasive misogynistic lovers who will be more apt to settle for a 'hatefuck' or 'pump and dump'. You either need to embrace that (be a sadist) or deny it (be deluded).

Foids inherently attracted to Chad (he gets a pass on delusions/sadism .. his "low-inhib" mind will actually arouse them) might have looked past him for a wholesome healthy-minded sub-Chad in the past: they would value his non-sadism (empathy) and realistic groundedness as a husband.

This is an increasingly difficult thing now because you can't really have both these traits coexist with a desire for doing sex with your mutilated circumcised cock. There is an element of insanity, wherther denialism or cruelty, inherent to wanting to put your prepuceless penis into a vagina now, which logically puts foids on guard about it and resist the sex.

This leaves the only sexual offers from a male which are NOT resisted the ones from Chad where his DNA value appeals purely to a foid's baser instincts as she looks past instincts to find a caring and intelligent husband to sexually bond with. I believe in this way circumcision has contributed to the breakdown of the traditional monoamorous society. It persists as an illusion cast for cut celibate men to cling to so they don't revolt against the Jew.
tera IQ
i'll search for more info myself to be shure about that of course but it all makes sense from what i already picked up
 
never understood the US obsession with mutilating dudes dicks.
it's because of Jewish influence on the medical community and MSM

literally pushed in 1890s because some guy was all "jews are immune to syphilis" or some shit

then of course Christcucks pushed it like that Kellogg's guy because he didn't want guys to fap

he literally knew if you circumcised it fucked up your fapping

making us unable to fap was the whole point

Osentaku Otj said:
I really should give this comic a chance

hqdefault.jpg
550x738.jpg
e18e0b60-6dbb-4e7c-b27a-22e5e070f6c5.jpg
 
Last edited:
Nothing romantic about Paedophilia.

It’s Immoral, uncivilised and comes with an unfathomable potential for abuse.
This is for your moralfag ass.
8013B56B 3646 4FD0 B322 FBE63729FBCD
 

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top