/lit/ - Literature

That comic doesn't understand incels.

>>22594702
I think being an incel is quite different from hating women.

>>22594698
>make tinder account
>zero matches after 3 months

>>22594698
>scenarios that happen

>>22594709
There is an increasing correlation

>>22594709
Not to mention that Schopenhauer had more pussy than that whole subreddit combined kek.

>>22594698
Ahem
MY DIARY DESUUU

>>22594698
the thing about this comic is that the second panel never happens

>>22594730
It does. Fat women in their 30’s will have you

>>22594734
>Fat *single mothers in their 30's will have you
ftfy

>>22594698
Unironically nothing is less attractive than a woman who likes you first. Even if she doesn't look bad, all it means is that I'll be obligated to respond to her feelings eventually and either let her down easy or play along with whatever her idea of me as a person is. Would rather pine for an art hoe for the rest of my life than go on one date with a girl that wants me.

>>22594734
But ya gotta deal with the kids.
I legit had a decent looking lady hit me up out of nowhere asking if I knew her from a different town like 10 years ago and sure enough, she's a single mom with like three kids. Noped outta that.

>>22594711
that's what you get for dating out of your league

>>22594698
>I'll love you!
>dumps me the moment she gets to know the real me
I am cursed to suffering.
It can only be broken by killing the person who caused such a curse: myself.

>>22594740
I understand you, you will come to the realization that you hate your true self and crave your own suffering soon enough

Majority of classics are about incels, people only act like it's something new because it's usefull for capitalists
women were always chad chasing whores and choosing to be single mothers to Chad and most men were always incels except for a brief time post world wars

>>22594698
normalfaggots literally can't understand that some people go through life without being noticed by women. it's a completely foreign concept to their minds

>>22594757
>except for a brief time post world wars
What changed then? (Besides the wars)

I want a girl with a personality I like just a tiny bit. I understand they're all animals and a lot of their horrid womanishnes is inborn and am at peace at that, but even then there's not a single one that has a redeemable quality to save her life. Not my problem all women are vile parasites

>>22594757
>most men were always incels
No

>>22594757
literally every single male ancestor you have is not an incel

>>22594713
ledditors are incel but are simps and feminists
really, misogynist and simp are two sides of the same coin

>>22594766
tons of men died so there were finally enough women for guys to form relationship with, then everything just went back to natural state of women becoming single moms to 1% of guys and ignoring everyone else
>>22594779
all of them would be if they lived in modern day

>>22594757
>most men were always incels
yea no
in the past the only thing you had to do to get a woman was have a job

The only woman that ever showed blatant interest in me immediately did an about-face and started insulting my character when I made it clear I wasn't attracted to her. And it wasn't subtle, she literally scowled when we crossed paths and gossiped about me at parties despite us having never spoken more than roughly four sentences between one another. All I ever did was scoot closer to her on a bench in case someone else wanted to sit there, and she assumed this was some esoteric romantic gesture. The only other times I've had women be attracted to me were when I was already with someone (raw jealousy, the most unsexy thing in a woman) and when I cucked my roommate (an act of petty revenge, but at what cost?)

>>22594779
But what about all the dead ends? Those oddball uncles who never got married, that weirdo cousin who never the left the farm etc.
I had a great uncle and and great aunt (bro and sis) who literally never married and lived with each other until they died in their nineties. Dunno if there was weird on the dl banging or something, but thwy were some strange ones.

>>22594709
It is, but incel is the millenial and zoomer way of saying misogynist.

>>22594794
Maybe that's evolution experimenting with different mutations

>>22594798
Incel is the woman way of saying sexually undesirable man.

>>22594790
>When I cucked my roomate
Damn, and you still have the guts to be a judge of character?

>>22594704
Nobody wants to understand incels so they make shit up.

>>22594821
He slept with her in our dorm and made sure to keep me awake the whole time. That's a violation of the NAP. I could have done much worse than take his sweetheart.

>>22594810
Women don't have sexual desires

>>22594702
Schopenhauer wasn't really using an evopsych explanation here. He's saying that women being weaker are psychologically more prone to using "ruses" (I don't think he means straight up lying, but the kind of passive aggressive social games that they play).

I don't agree with Schopenhauer on women, I think female nature is noble when it is in its right place, ie. submitting to a man. There are many great female-specific virtues which are necessary. When I first let my girlfriend into my house she got to work like an ant or some kind of instinct-driven creature, putting everything in order and taking care of me in ways that I didn't even know had to be done. They are great homemakers, nurturers, and companions. It is when a woman is "independent" and has nobody to put her in her place that she becomes ignoble.

>>22594709
It's an an assumption that misogynistic men are that way from heartbreak

A few months ago I had a dream I had a gf who slept with my coworker and became pregnant with his kid and planned to keep it. I can't even win in my dreams.

>>22594870
breathtaking cope

>>22594876
>female nature is noble when it is in its right place, ie. submitting to a man
What’s noble about being a slave?
>They are great homemakers, nurturers, and companions
That’s his entire point. Their whole raison d’etre is to be a man’s rib; something that holds him from falling apart.

Schopenhauer doesn’t hate women per se, but the “Teutonico-Christian stupidity” of how we treat them as anything but. They’re dogs. You don’t enroll dogs in universities, give them jobs, promote them into upper echelons, etc. You keep them in their kennels and call them good boys for being loyal to you. He praises Ancient Greeks, Romans, and contemporary “Orientals” for not falling for this Enlightenment bullshit and keeping women in line. The fact that normies think him pointing out something as obvious as “you can’t make a man out of a woman no matter how you try” is somehow “hateful” speaks more about our Western society than anything else. There is nothing “progressive” of demonizing women for their virtues and making them conform to men’s virtues instead. It’s dehumanizing instead.

>>22595052
>What’s noble about being a slave?
It is noble to submit to one who possesses true authority. Hence many will say without the least shame that they are slaves to God. Or, for instance, the submission which we customarily display towards our parents, judges, kings, professors, bishops, martial arts teachers, military men of high rank, etc. is a mark of the greatest nobility. Indeed, a refusal to show due respect to such persons is an infallible sign that one is anti-social and likely a scoundrel, rebellious, 'left-wing', the sort of blue-hair-dye individual who respects no authority.
A woman who submits to her husband in due proportion and raises a family with him is noble. In fact, a virtuous man in the presence of such a woman will show her the greatest possible respect, will refrain from discussing coarse matters, cursing, or being in any way ungentlemanly in her presence. Such is the primordial respect inherent within us for this womanly/motherly symbol which we see in her.

>Their whole raison d’etre is to be a man’s rib; something that holds him from falling apart.
Or the heart, which though lower than the head is nevertheless essential to the functioning of the body.

>You don’t enroll dogs in universities, give them jobs, promote them into upper echelons, etc.
They should be educated separately, and it is indeed absurd that we have allowed them to be leaders in business and politics.

El túnel by Sabato is pretty incel. I'm litterally Juan Pablo Castel desu

>>22594698
The highest virtue a woman can attain is being hot. For if she is hot all the men around her have that much more of an incentive to compete and become better men in order to highten their chances of getting such a woman.
Ugly fat feminist dikes rob the of all incentive to compete and they just end up sucking each other off.

http://www.denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm

>Alice Eagly’s research has compiled mountains of data on the stereotypes people have about men and women, which the researchers summarized as “The WAW effect.” WAW stands for “Women Are Wonderful.” Both men and women hold much more favorable views of women than of men. Almost everybody likes women better than men. I certainly do.

>The first big, basic difference has to do with what I consider to be the most underappreciated fact about gender. Consider this question: What percent of our ancestors were women?

>It’s not a trick question, and it’s not 50%. True, about half the people who ever lived were women, but that’s not the question. We’re asking about all the people who ever lived who have a descendant living today. Or, put another way, yes, every baby has both a mother and a father, but some of those parents had multiple children.

>Recent research using DNA analysis answered this question about two years ago. Today’s human population is descended from twice as many women as men.

>I think this difference is the single most underappreciated fact about gender. To get that kind of difference, you had to have something like, throughout the entire history of the human race, maybe 80% of women but only 40% of men reproduced.

>Right now our field is having a lively debate about how much behavior can be explained by evolutionary theory. But if evolution explains anything at all, it explains things related to reproduction, because reproduction is at the heart of natural selection. Basically, the traits that were most effective for reproduction would be at the center of evolutionary psychology. It would be shocking if these vastly different reproductive odds for men and women failed to produce some personality differences.

>For women throughout history (and prehistory), the odds of reproducing have been pretty good. Later in this talk we will ponder things like, why was it so rare for a hundred women to get together and build a ship and sail off to explore unknown regions, whereas men have fairly regularly done such things? But taking chances like that would be stupid, from the perspective of a biological organism seeking to reproduce. They might drown or be killed by savages or catch a disease. For women, the optimal thing to do is go along with the crowd, be nice, play it safe. The odds are good that men will come along and offer sex and you’ll be able to have babies. All that matters is choosing the best offer. We’re descended from women who played it safe.

>Nature has designed women with what is called in theater terms a “striking effect,” for she endows them for a few years with a richness of beauty and a fulness of charm, at the expense of the rest of their lives; so that they may during these years ensnare the fantasy of a man to such a degree as to make him rush into taking the honourable care of them, in some kind of form, for a lifetime—a step which would not seem sufficiently justified if he only considered the matter.

>Accordingly, Nature has furnished woman, as she has the rest of her creatures, with the weapons and implements necessary for the protection of her existence and for just the length of time that they will be of service to her; so that Nature has proceeded here with her usual economy. Just as the female ant after coition loses her wings, which then become superfluous, nay, dangerous for breeding purposes, so for the most part does a woman lose her beauty after giving birth to one or two children; and probably for the same reasons.
Schopenhauer

>>22594709
incel = misogynist
zoomer = someone younger than me
boomer = someone older than me
language evolution was a mistake

>>22594876
All psychology falls in two categories. Evopsych and nonsense by hysterical women.
If you're saying something about psychology and can't trace it back to evolutionary biology you're not saying anything. You're just an idiot making noise.

>>22595193
The problem is that you can make anything up through evopsych. It's all ad-hoc

>>22595201
You're a retarded propagandist. A cancer on human progress. People can make more shit up up if they don't need to explain how it's adaptive.

>>22595212
What happened in 1998? Did Star Wars nerds get cucked by Nsync and Backstreet Boys?

>>22595106
you're awful at arguing your position. stop being on my side

>>22594704
It unironically does understand incels. They complain yet are picky.
Every incel could go down to their local adult bookstore gloryhole right now and immediately have sex.
But beggars can be choosers apparently.

>inb4 gloryholes aren’t legal!

Yes they are, retard.

>inb4 but the person behind the glory hole might be a guy and I’m not gay!

Then shut the fuck up. Beggars can’t be choosers.

Incel problem unironically solved if they would all just go to gloryholes and not be picky faggots about “B-But it might be a dude sucking muh dick!”

It’s a fucking gloryhole. If you’re going to bitch about not getting laid then don’t bitch and say you’re too good for an easy solution.

>>22595257
Gloryholes don't provide love or validation.
The supreme gentleman wants to be recognized as superior. He is too far gone to really care about sex or procreation. He could have raped those girls like a relatively healthy ape might do but he killed them instead.

>>22595257
It's funny. When I saw posts like this 10 years ago I felt obliged to argue with them because I felt like women were "winning" the game rigged in their favor. Now that I've seen the absolute hell that is being prepared for the vast majority of atheist women, being alone and childless after 30, I just don't even feel the need to argue anymore. Women have created a nightmare for themselves and it's just around the corner.

>>22594704
It does though

>>22595278
Same with immigration. They drank the cool-aid and supported the import of around 300k orcs a year into their midst, while calling anyone looking at this rationally a nazi. Now they reap what they sow and I cant help but smile when another one got raped and killed.

>>22595244
That's not an argument.
>>22595215
>People can make more shit up up if they don't need to explain how it's adaptive.
The theory of evolution is itself a product of the human psychology. It is a symbol.

Anyway, let me give you an example of the ad-hoc nature of evolutionary explanations. I have heard people argue that the reason human beings don't have body hair is that they migrated from jungle to the desert, and therefore would've overheated. But this is just a completely made up explanation that tries to justify what happened in reference to the theory, ie. it is ad-hoc.

>>22594761
There's something wrong with you if you went your entire life without a woman being interested in you. It's not your looks of course. It's something else.

Schopenhauer wasn't an incel (he fucked way more than the average 4chan pseud, although he wasn't a playboy or anything), though he did have that mindset, primarily due to his fractious relationship with his mother. Later in life though he mellowed out and wanted to revisit his thoughts about women, but he died.

>>22595278
Are you implying I’m an atheist woman? I’m a religious guy.

>>22595312
That would be true prior to 1980, when women weren't deranged whores whose entire lives revolve around being a 20 year old hedonist slut until they're dead.

>>22595314
This is circumstantial ad hominem, typical Freudian shit only Jews and women would resort to. His mother was a dumb proto-thot. His points on women stand and are objectively correct.

>>22595316
There's still something wrong with you. Chris Chan has fangirls and isn't a virgin. Have you considered autismmaxxing?

>>22595310
>But this is just a completely made up explanation
You are a braindead idiot. This is one of these posts with so many levels of delusion and ignorance that there's no way to find a place to begin and even if I did you would just misrepresent everything I say like you misrepresent the entire field of biology.
We attempt to roughly model the world around us using clues we gather along the way. You do the same thing. An appeal to a clue you don't like is not some special exception.

You can't think about any subject. You don't know anything about any subject. You're the cancer that repeats twitter memes that undermine the possibility of ever understanding anything.

>>22595052
>something that holds him from falling apart.
That's terrible in its own way

>>22595216
That would mean that most of the young women are digging for gold

>>22595326
You should be worried that an absolute majority of young men are identifying as single and as having no stake in a society that can't provide them with a family. You are in danger. Enjoy the next 20 years. I'm sure things are about to get more feminist, not less. You really made good use of your "freedom."

>>22595320
>"I have not yet spoken my last word about women. I believe that if a woman succeeds in withdrawing from the mass, or rather raising herself above the mass, she grows ceaselessly and more than a man."
The only real grain of truth in his points on women is the fallacy of holding "womanhood" up on a pedestal. Many women are childish and frivolous but many are not. Viewing things in the lens of biology/reproduction was of course fairly revolutionary at the time but his conclusions are 100% marred by his personal relationship with his mother. That's just a fact.

>>22595316
The feral flesh still recognizes competence. An anxious dog calms down when he finds someone worth following.

>>22595347
His personal relationship with his mother wasn't that interesting. She was an absolute retard and a dumb frivolous whore. My sister is a big retarded whore and has contributed somewhat to my understanding of women, as very likely to become dumb whores if not given a moral backbone by men. That isn't a "mar." That's just normal.

I'm sure the 0.0000000001% of women who aren't exactly like every other woman are capable of growth:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis
I just don't have much hope of meeting that one woman per generation. I guess Paglia is our current One Good Woman.

>>22595356
>Paglia
Paglia rapes little boys in the backroom of colleges and universities
Even a roastie whore is more moral than she is

>>22595340
You could troon out and join a polycule.

>>22595257
You don't understand incels at all

>>22595340
What realistically will occur is that the boomers will create a total war and then claim the remaining young women for themselves while you go out to fight and kill Muslims Jews or Russians or Ukrainians or whatever other area they will stir up next

>>22595384
They are not a homogeneous group; some seem jealous of Chad getting "laid" but some want relationships instead of gloryhole

>>22595392
No matter what happens, women lose and this retarded experiment will never be tried again.

>>22595369
Trannies are hilarious because they mostly thrived because of women enabling them, not men. Yet another instance of women preparing their own misery for themselves. Now every female space is flooded with trannies and you can never escape from them. Every space that gives you comfort as a woman online also has to bow and kowtow to trannies, and you never know if you're even really talking to another woman. Or else it has to be a fringe marginalized space full of bitter old cunts, and it still gets infiltrated by trannies anyway since they take it as a challenge. Enjoy that.

>>22595329
If you had an argument you wouldn't have to resort to this sort of personal attack.

Evolutionary theory does not predict that human beings would be furless. In fact, people take the fact that human beings are furless and then furnish an explanation using evolutionary theory to justify why that would be. Evolutionary explanations are therefore ad-hoc, since instead of proceeding from theory to prediction they proceed from the prediction and then try to integrate it into the theory.

That paragraph above is my main argument, could you respond on an intellectual level?

Evolutionary theory is a symbol, and therefore as a psychological symbol it cannot be used to explain psychology. It was created in the 19th century in England as an analogue for liberalism in nature. Evolution is primarily a political symbol, which represents the idea of order emerging bottom-up by an unguided process identical to the capitalist free market. It is the same principle behind freedom of experimentation, or "the marketplace of ideas", the idea that by natural selection, without God, without a guide or an imposing authority, order would be discovered.

Evolution is a product of psychology; how can it then be used to explain psychology?

>>22595384
see
>>22595307

>be me
>volcel
>get called an incel on /pol/
>manage to get a gf just to prove to myself that I’m indeed a voluntary celibate
>live like a normie
>forced to go to the ice rink and movie theater
>grin and bear it
>dump her before we could have sex
I have the texts and all. No one can call me an incel ever again.

>>22595403
Haven't (ugly plus shy) women already lost? Not all women choose to be that way; only the feminists who try to gain weight
If a woman was born ugly a thousand years ago she would still get to reproduce and yet not be a single mom because her dad would sell her to a chubby farmer
Today men have free access to pretty bar hoppers or the illusion that they have free access. Men chase them for "free" sex with no responsibility all their youth but only Chad gets it and the remaining men become embittered and angry
In the end no one wants to marry a lady who looks like this >>22595429
At best she gets a man to sleep with her and becomes a ridiculed single momma
I've known a lot of women like this and they are not happy

>>22595398
Jealousy is just healthy. Rodgers level resentment is something different.
>>22595413
>Evolutionary theory does not predict that human beings would be furless.
It's the only theory that gives us elements to use to give an account for fur and furlessness.
Stubborn ignorance with the exact same structure as ranting about a "missing link" to undermine any attempts to understand the world is not an "argument". You're a dishonest subversive idiot, just barely smart enough to lie to yourself.
We don't know all history, any model of any of it using any reasonable premises is "ad-hoc". We fit our model with the data and given premises. If the model can't be made consistent with both then that suggests either are flawed. You're not doing that, you're attacking the very concept of modelling anything and the foundations of all thought.
>Evolution is primarily a political symbol
What brain disease causes you to just say shit like this? It's the basic premise behind all biology. Without it you have basically no account for anything in nature.

Why are you spreading deranged political propaganda as if it's reasonable? Who infected you with this AIDS?

>>22594702
If I had to live surrounded by niggers or by redditors I would pick the nigs.

>>22594709
Maybe irl but not on 4chan

>>22595466
The evolutionary worldview is a symbol, and one to which you are very sentimentally attached, as evidenced by your fierce defence of it.
It is linked to the idea of “progress” (evolving from less complex to more complex life forms), a parallel with the technological, economic, and (supposed) moral progress that liberalism and the Industrial Revolution were supposed to bring in.
It is also linked to the idea of antediluvianism. The idea that we can find something about ourselves by looking back to the “primordial human” in the savannah desert whom evolutionists treat as having a more evolutionarily real existence than ours. For example we can discover why women prefer tall men by consulting the purely fabricated image in our minds of a hairy-chested hunter gatherer tribe in the savannah who “hundreds of thousands of years ago” found this trait beneficial. Pure mythology, of course.
It is a direct symbol for the capitalist free market, and selects for optimisations in the species via an unguided process much in the same way that competition and free trade optimise the economy spontaneously without need for government intervention. Lifeforms die without reproducing and thus are weeded out by natural selection; businesses take losses and go bust and thus bad practices are weeded out by the market. The most important characteristic of this worldview is that it, like liberalism, believes in the emergence of order bottom-up through competition, innovation (mutation), and natural selection. The classical liberal of today will declare, “Let there be no restrictions on free speech! The bad ideas will die out on their own, and the good ones will flourish!” That is evolution.
It is also an inherently materialistic and nominalistic worldview. Human beings are “just animals”, and actually there is no Form of the Species which the individual instantiates. All there is is the individual, which over time morphs into something unrecognisable. Body parts lose their inherent telos. The penis now is no longer something fashioned for vaginal penetration for reproduction, but is merely a sort of weird mutated deformity that has attached itself to man through random mutation, and which man over the course of his history has coincidentally happened to use for the purposes of reproduction. God no longer matters as an imminent feature of reality; since even if there were a God he is merely the guy who set off the big self-moving self-subsistent machine of evolution, and needs to take no further part in it.
It is no coincidence that Darwin arose in 19th century England at the height of the mania surrounding the Industrial Revolution and the new ideals of “progress”, “science”, free market economics, and materialism. It is no coincidence he was thoroughly acquainted with the then-burgeoning field of economics, which he took inspiration from.

Fat women are disgusting, they have nothing to offer.
Hell most women I interact with have nothing interesting to say, and can not do anything.
I am also a married man lol.

>>22595435
Incel

>>22594698
Incel by ARX Han
Came out recently, very well written

>>22594704
Incels are societal refuse. Dalits. No one cares about you because you're useless and harmless.

>>22595636
You don't understand how to put together anything resembling a structured thought.
You talk about "ad-hoc" being not allowed and then make up these deranged stories based on absolutely nothing.

>>22595221
kek

>>22595715
I read my post over and while it’s not the best thing I ever wrote naturally it nevertheless seems clear to me what the arguments are. Thus I find your accusation unfounded.

>>22595732
>it nevertheless seems clear to me what the arguments are
It's just a story. We can make up these stories to support anything, which was your original criticism of evolutionary models. You don't like the idea of evolution so you shopped around for premises you can build anti-evolution stories on. If you believe this counts as thinking you can convince yourself of anything.

A simple set of premises allows complex stories that can account for many of the things we see without needing to add additional complexity with appeals to new premises. If you understand how evolution works an eye can be explained to you without you needing any new concepts introduced.
There's no need to dogmatically accept the premises but they're still the best we have right now. Rejecting the tools available means you can't model shit, but I can. Empirically you're incompetent and I have more power over the world.

None of this has anything to do with theology btw. No American has ever grasped any theology.

>>22596001
Well, when you look at it as a symbol, a worldview, and you also study the Industrial Revolution in English society (Karl Polanyi’s The Great Transformation is a good book here), and get yourself familiar with the kind of cultural milieu which produced Darwin, it becomes clear that Darwinism is nothing but biological modernism. By which I mean, the tenets of the modern worldview (materialism, nominalism, the idea of progress, the distrust of authority & interventionism, liberal free market economics, free speech and the “marketplace of ideas”, etc.) distilled and put into biological terms. And evolutionary psychology specifically is built upon the psychological symbol of the “true primordial man” (whose lifestyle we infer from bone fragments) that supposedly lived hundreds of thousands of years ago in the savannah desert and had an evolutionarily more “real” existence than ours since we apparently derive all of our notions from him.
But ultimately this worldview, if you take it as a serious theory, is clearly self-defeating, since evolution cares only about survivability and not truth, and thus there is no guarantee that your evolved brain is wired to see the truth; thus your very discovery of evolution is up for doubt, thus refuting itself.

>>22594702
>wannabe nietzsche

>>22594698
https://www.amazon.ca/City-Singles-Jason-Bryan/dp/0991825705

Jason Bryan 100% predicted this shit

why are people incapable of understanding that men have troubles and it's not all our problem?

>>22596108
That the Bible can be placed in a historical context does not undermine the ideas within. The same standard applies to these newer ideas. It doesn't matter if my tool is made by the worst person in the world if it's the best tool.
If you're not aware that your biology is concerned with survival over truth you won't be aware of how you fool yourself like you're fooling yourself with this cope.
The Bible knows the flesh is weak and the material world is a fallen one.

>>22595732
Your writing style is so pretentious

>>22594734
Fat women hit on me thinking I’ll break them off like every sex addict normgroid. If anything they’re the shallow ones since I’m a six foot tall white guy with muscles. It does a number to my confidence though that’s for sure.

>>22595435
Incel.

The only way to prove that you're a volcel is to date a women, have sex with her, marry her, get her pregnant and then reveal that al this time you used a dildo and cum stolen from the cocks sucked by OP and dump her.

>>22595221
whore

>>22594745
The only exception for single mothers should be if they're widowed and the kids could conceivably be others (so no mixed-race, obviously).

I'm 20 and I do ask out women sometimes but I have to find it within myself to actually do it. I don't meet women irl outside of just being in the same area so all women are strangers to me. I haven't been in the mood to do it for a few months now. There's a lot of hyping myself up and honestly I have nothing to say to them other than I want to go out with them. I'm not about to say they are pretty or cute or something faggoty like that but then I drop the ball like a retard and get nowhere. In total I've asked out 12 girls, two said ok to contacting me and only one date which I fucking hated. This is over a 2 year period, by the way.

>>22596940
Yeah the idea of just asking out strange women never ever sat right with me. I just feel like it's so unnatural. You have nothing to go on besides their appearance and you are venturing outside the bounds of social normality by moving from small talk to asking them something serious. It's just so abrupt and weird, and they so often act surprised and weirded out even if they end up into it. It's just such an awkward thing.

>>22595708
>Incels are societal refuse.... No one cares about you because you're useless and harmless.
Almost everything you wrote is wrong. Incels are now the majority of young men and a huge chunk of the labor force. Nor are they considered "harmless." Strange mix of tropes you have in your mind.

>>22595221
god the japanese are based

>>22594702
>why hasn’t he been erased from academia?
Nobody in academia talks about Schopenhauer. What a delusional cunt.

>>22594716
Even the women?

>>22594713
You could say the same thing about feminism and man hating.

>>22594768
Getting Aphex Twin vibes from that pic

>>22595180
Probably explains why misogyny is abhorrent to most people. Not that I care.

>>22595257
>beggars can’t be choosers
I’m pretty sure rapists don’t care.

>>22595340
>more feminist
No, no it won’t, backlash is always inevitable.

>>22596977
>Incels are now the majority of young men
Absolutely delusional

>>22596977
>Incels are now the majority of young men
>Source : /pol/, /r9k/

>>22597231
I farted

>>22595193
>he thinks evolutionary psychology isn't nonsense

>>22595106
>It is noble to submit to one who possesses true authority.

>>22596205
Oh they understand but don't want to do anything unless it gets really bad for them.

>>22594794

It's very common. In the past those men would have joined the priesthood or the military (back when there were no women, and you actually had to live in a barracks the entire time). Maybe even moved out to the colonies to make their fortune or die trying. Now Western societies have no social role for single, unattached males. They're despised by the system because they're an ever-present source of instability, and treated as though they're morally suspect.

>>22594698
>i can love on command
>i'm shallow
match made in heaven

>>22595052
>What’s noble about being a slave?
Men will be slaves to sin if they are not slaves to righteousness.

I legit don’t understand the desire to be touched. I had sex once just to not be a virgin anymore and I hated every second of it.

>>22597714
That's just because you've ascended.

The reason there are incels in this thread arguing that evolution is false is because it suits them

If evolution is true then the reason they're invalid and unfit to be selected as mates is in-born, if evolution is false then someone did this to them and it's unfair

Shitty people resent their DNA being faulty and want some other power they can blame and demonize. They would rather reform the gods than reform themselves. Elementary really!

>>22597714
You're probably just autistic

I don't say that judgementally, I am also autistic, but the variant that likes being touched and touching other people

>>22597714
>>22597738
Another sperg here, can confirm. Had a gf for a year, objectively a hot one in the Gianna Michaels slampig sort of way, but always had to drink at least 5 cocktails or smoke some bongs before sex because all the awkward contact, movement, noises and smells make me freak out while sober Haven't really bothered to get another gf since then, needless to say.

>>22594698
I don't want someone hot, I want someone I'm attracted to in any way at all. No, I'm not attracted to morbidly obese smokers. No, I won't enter into a relationship with someone who causes gag reflex when I smell them enter a room.

>>22597159
It's true. But they're usually not the ones you see around. There is a massive underclass of manual labourers who are rarely seen in the more privileged areas, like the 1800s except less materially impoverished.

>>22595312
No shit, dumbass

it's healthy to hate whores, ie all women

>>22595312
It's pretty much always looks. Even serial killers get masses of women interested in them. Even attractive but socially retarded introverts get women hunting them down.

>>22597769
It's also the ones you see around. Most average normal guys. Literally the majority of young men polled are single and have not had sex in the last year

>>22597815
Kek

To be happy you must live in agreement with your nature. The whole and sole perk of being a male is that nobody will care about you. Whereas the sole perk of being a vagina is that all the men will be desperate to talk to you and give you free stuff spontaneously.The male nature is to be forever alone. On the female side, it is not all rosy, women hate to have a flock of ugly orbiters, and they hate it even more when there is physical contact with those. In other words women hate that too much men care about them. So everybody is unhappy, especially the men. Thanks to a twist, women are actually happy because, doing it for free, the chad orbiters will beat up the ugly orbiters for the sake of the women.
So to be happy as a male you must rejoyce in being a loser. This is the only truth in the universe.

>>22597115
Most of the reason why rape is frowned upon is from a point in history where women were expected to stay virgins until marriage, where a rape would bring incredible dishonor to a woman and her future husband.

This becomes irrelevant when a woman is a floozie who sleeps around and has no intention of saving herself for marriage.

if everyone itt posts twice you can act like you're at a poetry reading

>>22594698
This comic is grossly moronic, perhaps it makes sense if the male and female were reversed, but doubtlessly the author is either a woman, or a man who would be too frightened to criticise women, he suffers from an over-adoration of them... regardless, this thread is stupid, some retard wants to bait people into a discussion on "incels", it has nothing to do with books.

>>22594704
comic but accurate

>>22598255
It's easy to be "strategic" when you have diamonds between your legs

>>22594698
extension du domaine de la lutte or something like that

>>22598293
Same guy.