B
Yes.
Discussion Why is it that some incels on this fourm do not hate women. Logically, speaking, all incels should hate women bc they are responsible for our inceldom
U
I don’t hate them because I think is stupid to be emotional over some biological deterministic mechanism
How would you even determine "bad faith" from a legal standpoint? What law says I can't raise prices of my groceries?
yay
Obviously exploiting a bad situation with over priced goods
Bad situation? Or supply and demand?
I hate everyone. That includes women.
I don't understand why normies make so big deal about hating women specifically.
Just yet another piece of evidence that women are privileged
I don't understand why normies make so big deal about hating women specifically.
Just yet another piece of evidence that women are privileged
This isn’t even a good enough analogy. At least the slave owner gives the slave food and a place to sleep. Women give us nothing, and genuinely want all of us to die, despite us fucking building society and providing for them.
Foid worshippers should be hanged
It’s completely insane to deny that there’s a significant social component to the pro-female bias. Just look at how many female babies were killed in China, or just look at Afghanistan. The bias has gotten insanely bad in most of the world due to both biological and social reasons.
I honestly hate most of people. Npcs are mindless mob that follows everything that jews in medias tell them to do. Npcs also like hurting people for no reson, wich is dumb
Bad situation. Man is it so difficult to you to understand the difference between supply/demand and open speculation? Especially when you CAUSED the disasdvantage for the people you are exploiting. Lol you seem like either shittennial liberals when it comes to sex or boomer cuckservatives when it comes to economy.
If there's extreme demand, shouldn't you be expected to pay what it's worth? If you don't have the money, that's not the fault of the purveyor.
If you are in a community and YOU caused the famine in order to increase the prices like crazy YOU are a criminal, period.
If you didn’t cause the famine but you are exploiting your fellow citizens starvation YOU are a fucking psychopath in bad faith. Period.
It’s not that difficult. Exploiting other people troubles to gain enormous power from them is speculating on their suffering.
Moreover foids are responsible of number 1 case not even number 2 so it’s even worse
What did women do? Make themselves more attractive?
And even if there was a famine going on, how is that not a valid factor in calculating supply and demand? Famine is trouble, but all resource scarcity is.
They wanted female emancipation and female emancipation+ female nature= this current situation. They created it and are fucking speculating over it every fucking day.
They are the george soros of sex
So is this a question of "Do I hate women for wanting to not be dependent on men?" Then no. No one should hinge their whole life on another person.
Again: you misunderstood everything. Men and women are interconnected. Men need women for sex and kids, women need men for resources. Allowing women to get male resources without allowing men to get female intrinsic sexual market value is just a injustice. Understand? Man, it’s about balancing. It’s not that difficult lol. Women do not become like men in terms of chasing and paying for men so they must not be able to have jobs and male resources otherwise you unbalance the equation. Since they unbalanced the equation and are now exploiting male loneliness THEY are to be blamed.
Holy shit it’s litterally impossible to explain it better than this
Because the egalitarian myth has functionally replaced the religion.
The myth of a fair world where everyone has an innate value, an equal playing field, and any inequity is a result of systems making it that way, so legitimizes people emotionally and socially that when you bring up stuff that shows it isn’t true, they get really emotionally upset about it.
It’s also why women are really emotional about politics, in the same way that women were once really emotional about the sky daddy.
Because some people understand, that females are a resource. They are cattle to be distributed and they operate on a much simpler level than men. There simply is no point in hating them, it's a waste of emotion and will archieve nothing.
It's like hating a fertile piece of land or a deer or something. You hating that you don't have the land or the animal to harvest should not be confused or shifted to hating the land or the animal. Better to aim the dislike and possible hatred at who and what is causing it, rather than hating the deer for it's nature.
It's like hating a fertile piece of land or a deer or something. You hating that you don't have the land or the animal to harvest should not be confused or shifted to hating the land or the animal. Better to aim the dislike and possible hatred at who and what is causing it, rather than hating the deer for it's nature.
The reason I don't hate women as a whole group is simply: I only hate people who actively try to harm me. Women, as a group, don't want to actively harm me, so I don't hate me. They do, as a group, not want to have a relationship with me, but that's not "active harm". It's just like a beggar who doesn't get any money from any passerby.
Men shouldn't need women either. No one should "need" anyone to live. That flies in the face of personal autonomy. You should want to be free more than you should want someone to be with you.
I don’t hate them, because they’re privileged over men by nature, and living out their privilege freely enhances their physical pleasure in an unbelievable, for men and incels merely guessable, way that we would strive for as well.
If we had the same natural privileges we would use them as well, and we would enjoy it in the most primal way possible. Because their privilege grants pleasure to them, I can’t be mad at them, because my anger wouldn’t bring me any joy at all.
If we had the same natural privileges we would use them as well, and we would enjoy it in the most primal way possible. Because their privilege grants pleasure to them, I can’t be mad at them, because my anger wouldn’t bring me any joy at all.
T
I don't hate women because why the fuck would they date an incel when they have other options? If i was them i probably wouldn't date incels either. I don't hate women, i just hate god/chance/fate whatever you want to call it for making me socially awkward and ugly.
I would just fill my bookbag with foods & walk out nearly every night last summer. Employees knew & joked about it
Right on, foids hate you but you don't hate foids so you honestlt might as well hate foids.
Its probably stockholm syndrome they dont hate foids
Because of your great qualities
And what do you think about the obligation to pay taxes?
You keep mentioning this grocery store analogy but fail to see that it is illegal to sell and buy pussy.
S
i dont hate women because if i were a women i would never date myself. I dont blame them for that. Its just that this world is unfair where 1 guy can get 20 girls and 19 guys get 0
But men cannot command their biology
Dude, should they give it to you for free even though they don’t like you nor get any pleasure out of you?
It's not even unfair from a female utilitarian perspective:
Let's say sex with chad gives girls 1.0 pleasure, sex with an average guy gives 0.4 pleasure and sex with an incel results in -0.2 pleasure...
when20 girls have free choice, they're all gonna choose chad and achieve a combined 20.0 of pleasure and chad gets 1.0. With enforced monogamy female pleasure will decrease a lot in favor of male pleasure.
What I'm really wondering is, whether free female choice as of now even results in higher overall pleasure than monogamy.
Men need women to start a family. If you want to become a father, you need a woman.
What do taxes have to do with anything?
The grocery store analogy serves to explain that you can't just assume you're owed something, no matter how badly you need it. You don't buy and sell pussy, you offer whatever the woman decides she'll give it up for. And if you don't have it, you don't have it. And you don't get the pussy. Same rules as a grocery store.
Yes we can. We're sapient creatures, we're not beholden to instinct. Instinct might tell me to kill my neighbor or shit on the sidewalk because that's what an animal would do, but human sophistication gives me the power to wait until I get home to take a shit.
And if you want to have sex, you need a woman. The issue here is, you don't need sex to live. You don't die if you don't have sex or start a family. Your life might suck immensely, you might be profoundly miserable, but back to the grocery store analogy: If I don't eat, I'll die. But at the same time the grocery store isn't obligated to feed me.
What's further, if I've got food/pussy to offer, maybe I don't want anyone to have it. Maybe I don't want to be dependent on other people's money/dick. Maybe I'll just keep my food/pussy for myself.
The government will deny me my bodily autonomy If I don’t pay taxes. So I see no reason why the government shouldn’t make it possible to deny a cute instathot model’s bodily autonomy If they don’t have sex with me.(Especially in a polygamous society where some girls are even fucking dogs while we rot)
Basically if government denies my bodily autonomy for the good of society, it should do the same to foids.
I don’t assume I am owed anything.
Just like there is a monetary value associated with the goods sold in the grocery store which makes me know that I will be fed after a long day of hard work(since I know how much the food cost and how much I make), pussy should be commodified as well.
Nope, not the same rules with the grocery store. I don’t need to play mind games with the cashier nor participate in surrogate activities to buy my food from the grocery.
I just pay the $ amount.
Last edited:
Sex (and reproduction) is more essentially to life than living. There is essentially no point in living if you cannot propagate your genes. The only reason would be to support e.g. a sibling who can pass these genes on, but if you don't have that there is no reason to live if there is no chance to reproduce.
no one here "hates" women. we are biologically programmed to love women. it's just frustration that women don't love incels back. when i was 19-21 i used to cope with hatred but now at 23 i got wiser and realized life never owed me shit and never will and crying over things that were never promised to me won't change shit. just gotta be honest with your feelings and do your best to improve your situation with what you're given.
You mean they'll punish you if you don't pay taxes? Taxes are the cost you pay for living in a place with government services. Now, there's definitely a case for not paying taxes for services you didn't sign up for, but your analogy doesn't work for a couple reasons.
Your analogy works by presenting "loss of bodily autonomy" as a punishment for something. You lose yours for not paying taxes. You think women should lose theirs for not having sex with you. Your money and your genitals are not the same thing, cases could be made the taxed portion of your money was never yours. There is no argument to say that your genitals aren't yours. But even if you were to make that argument, what are these women getting in exchange for offering their bodies to the government? You pay taxes, that money is then used to pay for police and firefighters and traffic lights and shit. Government assigns a woman her mandated incel, what does she get in exchange for that? Her sex can't be used for anything that benefits her. You get police service and traffic lights for your taxes. You might not want it, you might wish you could somehow put up signs that say "If I get robbed, please don't come help me," but women get nothing for their service except "The incel won't be angry."
You don't decide how much food costs, and you don't decide how much pussy costs. Only the purveyor can do that. If you want pussy, offer up what it's owed. Same as food. If mind games are part of the cost, you have to pay that by playing the mind games. If you don't like mind games, shop elsewhere.
The government will lock you up and put you in a cage If you don’t pay taxes. So it could very well do the same to foids who refuse to match.
I would argue mandatory marriage no later then age of 19(while you are a virgin) should also be the cost you pay for living in a place with government services. (e.g. police protection)
of course there is but in the end you either pay them or you get put into a cage
Not exactly, I am aware I wrote it like that but there may be different scenarios of how they might lose theirs.
It might be direct slavery, or it might be mandatory marriages before the age of 19 as I suggested above(which applies to both genders). As you can see those two alone are very different cases.
Well they might not be the same thing but when I don’t hand over my money unwillingly, it is in fact my body that gets affected.
and how about military drafts and/or mandatory conscriptions?
Also cases could be made that the reproductive system was never truly the individual females.
There is one I can think of right away and I think I can come up with more given some time. If one day almost every female decide to stop reproducing , will the mankind leave them alone claiming it is their genitals and let the human kind die?
I can list you all the benefits they would be getting but I think the important thing here is that they won’t be getting locked up and put into cages.
Well supply and demand has two sides to it, so technically I affect how much it costs. But you still fail to grasp the idea here. Pussy might cost some arbitrary thing but it doesn’t have a monetary cost because it illegal to do so.
Not possible because it is illegal to open the store. And If you go far up to north of eurpe, you can open a shop but it is still illegal for the customer to shop JFL
Last edited:
I dont really care about my inceldom. I've accepted women dont want me. I dont want ugly or fat women either. Its normal.
Hold on, I thought you said loss of bodily autonomy was the punishment for not having sex with you. Now you're describing it as the main legal responsibility?
It's like this: Paying taxes is your obligation. Going to jail is your punishment for not fulfilling your obligation. Now what are you proposing for women?
Yeah, they're not the same thing. In that one is something they can legally affect your body for if you don't give it up. And the other is yours entirely and they can't take it from you.
You're talking about fantasy scenarios that have never happened in the history of humanity. But sure, I'll humor you: No, you could not mandate that women have sex with you even then. I know this because we have birth rate crises is other countries right now and no one is like "That's it, I'm mandating that you have sex with this man. I'm assigning partners like this is grade school." All they can do is incentivize more sex, and even then they can't make anyone choose a particular man or woman.
You're losing your grip on the analogy, that's not how it works. Remember, you pay taxes because these taxes are meant to go towards something that you're supposed to want. If the government is going to provide police services, they must charge taxes. Same as how you get public services for your tax money, you need to explain what women get from the government for having sex with you.
But you can't, because there's nothing. Taxes turn into public services because taxes pay for public services. If the government wants to have police and traffic lights and plumbing, it needs your tax dollars. There is no other way. But making women have sex with you provides the government with nothing they can use. It's just you saying "Do it or else."
It's you that's failing to grasp the idea. "Money for groceries" is just an allegory.
When I say "You don't decide how much food costs" I mean "You don't decide what a woman should appreciate in a man that would make her have sex with him." When I say "Shop elsewhere" I mean "If you can't offer what this woman wants, go find another woman."
To that you might say "No women want what I have to offer." Continuing the allegory, just because no grocery stores will accept Monopoly money for a bag of rice doesn't give me the power to force them to accept it.
I will write a detailed reply including your entire post when I sit down somewhere but for now please tell me how a military draft and/or mandatory conscription is a fantasy scenario that have never happened in the history of humanity? And if you weren’t referring to that, what is your thoughts on military draft and/or mandatory conscription?
We're not having another mandatory draft again, specifically because we've had these fights for bodily autonomy. The government realizes they can't get away with it.
You are out of touch If you think I am going to take your word on this.
Good for you and your country, I guess. Mine, like many others, still has mandatory conscription, so this doesn’t apply to me and many others.
I am proposing mandatory marriage before 19 for all. It is your obligation to get married. Enslavement is your punishment for not fulfilling your obligation.
they’re the same thing.
correct
We shall see weather it is something that can’t be taken from you or not when you are faced with violence from the hands of government. Just like enslavement If you don’t pay taxes(our obligation as you put it).
Is it a fantasy scenario or the reality? Can you make up your mind?
There are plenty like this, you just refuse to remove your horse blinders.
Keep believing that.
I can list you plenty of things that women will get that they
If the government wants to maintain and expand a functioning civilization it needs females to fulfill their societal role. There is no other way.
Exactly, like taxes and mandatory conscription/military draft.
and it is a poor analogy that doesn’t fit the case. Try to come up with a better one If you want to. Products in the grocery store are commodities. There is a transfer of ownership when I purchase an item there. So according to your analogy, females are property.
Last edited:
"Can't be taken from you" as in, no one has any right to do it. No one has any right to impose an obligation to marry/have sex on you. As opposed to charging you taxes. There's a debate on taxes for sure. Strong points on either side of the debate. But no one is debating "Do women owe us sex/marriage? Is a woman's vagina her own?"
All women going celibate is fantastical nonsense. But there are, in reality, birth crises where a good number of women aren't having babies. A good number, but all. "All" is fantastical nonsense.
What governments anywhere are assigning women husbands? Or even trying to?
Then list them.
Public services benefit the taxpayer. The government says "You owe us taxes" because they can also say "Look at these nice public services we provide you." Even in the face of declining birth rates, the government still has no argument for "We need to make you pregnant because your babies will provide for you personally with your contributions to society." That's not how having kids works.
Look instead at how the issue of low birth rates are actually addressed in the real world for an understanding of what the government has the right to make claims to. China and Japan aren't mandating marriage. They can only incentivize it because to mandate it would not be righteous. There is no argument justifying it, that's why they haven't done it yet and won't do it.
Come back to me when they start sending us to war, then.
The ownership of the groceries isn't the relevant part of the analogy. Remember what the question was: Shouldn't I be mad at someone for not fulfilling my needs? That makes about as much sense as getting mad at a grocery store for not feeding you. If you can't do that with the grocery store, you damn sure can't do that with human beings.
You are incorrect.
Oxymoron.
It was an exaggeration. Point is enough of them do it to cause a birth crisis like the one you suggested currently happening.
yet to come. And I never mentioned government assigning anyone anything. That is your own words. I just introduce a potential system where all must get married before the age of 19 unless they want to experience the consequences. Again I never said government should match them or assign them to each other. It is very different.
Also the main premise is your feminist dream is over. Either wake up now or fall into a nightmare. Because we are going to get what we want one way or another.
I am going to list them.
- Significant reduction in STDs
- Guarantee to families their daughters/granddaughters won’t be whoring around, and their boys will not become bitter incels who never want to contribute anything
- Captain of the football team no longer spoil all the potential candidates for other boys
- Incentives to all boys to maintain the civilization
- Progressing towards high trust society
- Girls will have a family and a husband to take care of them before they hit the wall and fail to settle
- Reduction in unnecessary spending and wasting resources on bullshit products used for nothing but attracting a partner(which free up the resources and decreases their prices)
- Significant reduction in pedophilia, rape and kidnapping
- Significant reduction in school shootings
- Significant reduction in suicide
- Significant reduction in psychological medication use(you probably wouldn’t want this, don’t you? You filthy psycucktrist )
- Birth crisis averted
- No longer need such a great number of immigrants
- Divorce rates plummets
- Academic excellence increases
- Lower inflation(since supply of skilled employment increases)
- More peaceful society over all
Come back to me when they ammend it to the constitution, then.
It might not be for you, it is for me.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
