How do we manage the incel epidemic?

[Page]

A man is free to "give up" and stay single if he truly wants that, but it is a mistake to generalize literally half the human species based on one's experience with only a few women. I assume you would disagree with a woman who assesses men as a gender to be abusive because she has had experiences with a few abusive men.

There aren't studies proving that in general men are abusive as a trend that could justify women going out with pepper spray, for instance. Empathy on the other hand... As a default, do not put effort into empathizing with women until they demonstrate a commitment to doing so, otherwise you will be wasting your energy more times than not.

"Please take my blackpill lite or much worse people on my side will hurt you! I swear I'm the good guy here!"

They're not on my side.
Nazis and communists both understand capitalism is shite, they merely draw different conclusions.

Your position is that women as a gender are less empathetic than men? And you believe there is substantial enough evidence to verify this hypothesis?

There is quite a lot more evidence that one's level of empathy is a matter of nurture rather than nature.

[Grapasia]

Aren't all great apes pretty sexually dimorphic? When you factor in that their intelligence developed around existing in groups and having simple hierarchies, it makes sense that the mentalities of a more developed human man and a woman would be farther apart than the mentalities of a male and female chimpanzee. This is just a hunch though.

We are more sexually dimorphic than chimps (our closest relatives) but less so than gorillas, iirc.

There are also slight differences in sexual dimoprhism among human populations.

It must have to do with how much hierarchy is piled onto sex, same reason chimps have bigger balls than us, they're more promiscuous, whereas gorillas have small testicles because there isn't competition between multiple gorillas gangbanging to inseminate the female like there is with chimps. Humans, being monogamous a majority of the time but polygynous some of the time and with designed male expendability, are somewhere inbetween. It makes sense now that sexual liberals want to exist in a world where men and women are exactly the same, and most monogamy worshipping tradcucks secretly want to exist in a world where women are fleshlights stuck to dishwashers

[Cekoviu]

Getting people to stop believing in NoFap bullshit, for starters.

[Bear Stearns]

There aren't studies proving that in general men are abusive as a trend that could justify women going out with pepper spray, for instance. Empathy on the other hand... As a default, do not put effort into empathizing with women until they demonstrate a commitment to doing so, otherwise you will be wasting your energy more times than not.



They're not on my side.
Nazis and communists both understand capitalism is shite, they merely draw different conclusions.

Your position is that women as a gender are less empathetic than men? And you believe there is substantial enough evidence to verify this hypothesis?

There is quite a lot more evidence that one's level of empathy is a matter of nurture rather than nature.

Altruism has a large genetic component to it.

[Chestaan]

Ideologies and worldviews are not passed on genetically. Socialists do not have socialism in their genes and they don't breed intrinsically socialist offspring. Christians don't have kids who are born believing in Jesus of Nazareth as the son of god.

Incel ideology is toxic and its spread has nothing to do with procreation.

No, not ideologies, but maybe, even if unlikely, personalities. Also, the nurture aspect can often encourage children to follow the ideology of their parents.

Ah eugenics, lovely

[Des-Bal]

So if there's genuinely a problem with people not getting into relationships it's probably people having more chance to avoid developing social skills. I have been in a position to see very abusive people find relationships that lasted very long periods of time. Consider the following:

Are you failing to meet women?
Are you failing to approach women?
Are you failing to relate to women?

Because if it's all coming down to women not wanting you then on the balance being with you is worse than being punched in the face.

[Bear Stearns]

No, not ideologies, but maybe, even if unlikely, personalities. Also, the nurture aspect can often encourage children to follow the ideology of their parents.

Ah eugenics, lovely

Personalities have a large genetic component, and is strongly affected by traits such as hormone balances, temperament, and time preference, and fight or flight instincts (all of which are genetic).

[Ostroeuropa]

It's a matter of men taking control and agency over the situation they find themselves in rather than pleading for the cooperation of their oppressors.

To quote someone a lot smarter than me:

Your problem is your brain has been filled with conflict theory/marxist drivel about there necessarily being an oppressor and oppressed class rather than there being a social problem that needs solving.

I wonder what happened to him.

I disagree it's bigotry. Again, you haven't demonstrated how not caring about something is the same as hating them or whatever.

As an MRA, I imagined you'd be well acquainted with how open indifference towards an entire gender is a form of bigotry.

Eh, you've got a point here in terms of the extent i've been advocating.

But the direction remains valid. Less concern for women and so on seems to be necessary, even if you're right that it shouldn't reduce to zero.

[Grapasia]

We manage it by closing borders looking for a cure first then later reopening borders after having the cure globally produced without patient and only reopen border for those people with that type epidemic others infection will currently working on cure if cure is found then we reopen our borders to secure our people from infection.

based and redpilled

[Ostroeuropa]

There aren't studies proving that in general men are abusive as a trend that could justify women going out with pepper spray, for instance. Empathy on the other hand... As a default, do not put effort into empathizing with women until they demonstrate a commitment to doing so, otherwise you will be wasting your energy more times than not.



They're not on my side.
Nazis and communists both understand capitalism is shite, they merely draw different conclusions.

Your position is that women as a gender are less empathetic than men? And you believe there is substantial enough evidence to verify this hypothesis?

There is quite a lot more evidence that one's level of empathy is a matter of nurture rather than nature.

My position is that women are given more empathy than men, and that women are the worst offenders of this, and that all available evidence concludes this is the case.

I agree it's nurture rather than nature.

Moreover my position is that due to gynocentrism and feminism, society has become warped to the point where people are expected to dedicate themselves to womens wellbeing even at the expense of their own.

[Bear Stearns]

We are more sexually dimorphic than chimps (our closest relatives) but less so than gorillas, iirc.

There are also slight differences in sexual dimoprhism among human populations.

It must have to do with how much hierarchy is piled onto sex, same reason chimps have bigger balls than us, they're more promiscuous, whereas gorillas have small testicles because there isn't competition between multiple gorillas gangbanging to inseminate the female like there is with chimps. Humans, being monogamous a majority of the time but polygynous some of the time and with designed male expendability, are somewhere inbetween. It makes sense now that sexual liberals want to exist in a world where men and women are exactly the same, and most monogamy worshipping tradcucks secretly want to exist in a world where women are fleshlights stuck to dishwashers

haha

[Liriena]

They're not on my side.
Nazis and communists both understand capitalism is shite, they merely draw different conclusions.

You really shouldn't have used that analogy.

3. We're building a coalition, here. I'm happy to deal with whoever it takes to eliminate the progressive deadlock on power. It's quite simple. You've blocked MRAs from entering institutions and political discourse and routinely lie about us. We're taking allies as a consequence. I've already been pretty explicit in the past about how we successfully lobbied the republicans and trump on some issues and how I endorsed Trump on that basis. I am a mercenary. This is what I do. I'm telling you this because yes, we've known eachother a while.

Your movement has made a lot of enemies. Expecting us not to join up is foolhardy. If it takes smiling and dealing with KIA to break your movements power, then that's what i'll do. Let's not forget the feminist response to a domestic abuser being outed was to defend her against her critics here, and lobby to have her victim gagged by a court order, in that context, that naturally inclines me towards the other side of that particular clash in the culture wars. (Gamergate and Quinn.). If you don't want fascists and so on getting more prominent, maybe you shouldn't have become an oppressive hegemon that makes people feel we need to ALL band together to oppose you and your grip on power. I'm simply not interested, sorry. Progressives are the enemy. They are preventing our issues being discussed. They are lying about us and suppressing our attempts to organize. They have closed down fucking mens shelters and groups dealing with suicide because it pissed them off.

I just. Don't. Care.

Your criticism of my allies? I don't care. It's a Hitlerite whining about Stalin to Churchhill.
We'll get to them. Right now, you're the problem. You're the ones who need to be stopped. You're the ones making things worse, and you're the ones who are in danger of winning permanently and perpetually fucking up society.

If hitler invaded hell.

Your movement thought it could make enemies without consequences. That was foolish. You began this war with the MRM on the assumption you could bomb london and you wouldn't get bombed back.

I'm being honest to you. I am a mercenary. When you capitulate, then we can talk about Stalin. But hurry up and surrender unconditionally on this western front, or Berlin and your east might be in trouble, you daft buggers, because I don't quite fancy partitioning your power with the alt-right more than is necessary. You made war on EVERYONE, and then point out that the people you've attacked are on the same side?

That's not OUR fucking problem mate. It's yours. Acting like we can win this war without Stalin (We can't.) and should fight you fair and square so a bunch of anti-white racists and anti-male sexists have a shot at winning?
Saying that to an MRA?

That's lunacy. Ofcourse I like KIA. They're fighting you. You're the enemy. You're the ones who attacked us and suppressed us. Happy to lend-lease, comrade.

We're building a coalition. This should not be shocking. It is basic politics. Progressives declared war on everyone not a progressive. We're fighting you. That should not come as a shock.

This entire shpeel progressives use is just the tantrum of Hitlerites whining that Britain are stupid meanies for not letting them roll over Poland and France and spitting forth vitriolic fury about how they're going to hand victory to the communists, ignoring all the while this wouldn't be happening if they hadn't made enemies of the entire planet.

No we won't hand victory to the communists. We'll get to them, we're confident.
Surrender.

[Des-Bal]

Your position is that women as a gender are less empathetic than men? And you believe there is substantial enough evidence to verify this hypothesis?

There is quite a lot more evidence that one's level of empathy is a matter of nurture rather than nature.

My position is that women are given more empathy than men, and that women are the worst offenders of this, and that all available evidence concludes this is the case.

I agree it's nurture rather than nature.

Moreover my position is that due to gynocentrism and feminism, society has become warped to the point where people are expected to dedicate themselves to womens wellbeing even at the expense of their own.[/quote]

I've solved the problem: Nurture a child and teach it not to be a bastard. If everybody does this eventually there will be very few bastards remaining.

[The South Falls]

In what way does it wreak havoc?

It warps ideas of how sex works, ruins a persons libido and in the worst cases causes you to seek out gradually more and more extreme porn to keep getting off, causes physical addicition etc etc.

and I would think one-night allows people more partners, giving more people chances.

iirc with the more partners you've had there's a greater chance of divorce or just never getting into a stable relationship

The above, true. The latter is just due to the law of large numbers, and the latter, latter point is just due to mental effects.

[Cekoviu]

They're not on my side.
Nazis and communists both understand capitalism is shite, they merely draw different conclusions.

You really shouldn't have used that analogy.

-snip-

This is juicy as shit.

[Liriena]

But the direction remains valid

[X]

[Page]

Your position is that women as a gender are less empathetic than men? And you believe there is substantial enough evidence to verify this hypothesis?

There is quite a lot more evidence that one's level of empathy is a matter of nurture rather than nature.

Altruism has a large genetic component to it.

Why is it then that psychopaths were so often raised by abusive parents? If that were largely genetic, psychopaths would not have abusive parents at a greater rate than non-psychopaths.

[Ostroeuropa]

They're not on my side.
Nazis and communists both understand capitalism is shite, they merely draw different conclusions.

You really shouldn't have used that analogy.

3. We're building a coalition, here. I'm happy to deal with whoever it takes to eliminate the progressive deadlock on power. It's quite simple. You've blocked MRAs from entering institutions and political discourse and routinely lie about us. We're taking allies as a consequence. I've already been pretty explicit in the past about how we successfully lobbied the republicans and trump on some issues and how I endorsed Trump on that basis. I am a mercenary. This is what I do. I'm telling you this because yes, we've known eachother a while.

Your movement has made a lot of enemies. Expecting us not to join up is foolhardy. If it takes smiling and dealing with KIA to break your movements power, then that's what i'll do. Let's not forget the feminist response to a domestic abuser being outed was to defend her against her critics here, and lobby to have her victim gagged by a court order, in that context, that naturally inclines me towards the other side of that particular clash in the culture wars. (Gamergate and Quinn.). If you don't want fascists and so on getting more prominent, maybe you shouldn't have become an oppressive hegemon that makes people feel we need to ALL band together to oppose you and your grip on power. I'm simply not interested, sorry. Progressives are the enemy. They are preventing our issues being discussed. They are lying about us and suppressing our attempts to organize. They have closed down fucking mens shelters and groups dealing with suicide because it pissed them off.

I just. Don't. Care.

Your criticism of my allies? I don't care. It's a Hitlerite whining about Stalin to Churchhill.
We'll get to them. Right now, you're the problem. You're the ones who need to be stopped. You're the ones making things worse, and you're the ones who are in danger of winning permanently and perpetually fucking up society.

If hitler invaded hell.

Your movement thought it could make enemies without consequences. That was foolish. You began this war with the MRM on the assumption you could bomb london and you wouldn't get bombed back.

I'm being honest to you. I am a mercenary. When you capitulate, then we can talk about Stalin. But hurry up and surrender unconditionally on this western front, or Berlin and your east might be in trouble, you daft buggers, because I don't quite fancy partitioning your power with the alt-right more than is necessary. You made war on EVERYONE, and then point out that the people you've attacked are on the same side?

That's not OUR fucking problem mate. It's yours. Acting like we can win this war without Stalin (We can't.) and should fight you fair and square so a bunch of anti-white racists and anti-male sexists have a shot at winning?
Saying that to an MRA?

That's lunacy. Ofcourse I like KIA. They're fighting you. You're the enemy. You're the ones who attacked us and suppressed us. Happy to lend-lease, comrade.

We're building a coalition. This should not be shocking. It is basic politics. Progressives declared war on everyone not a progressive. We're fighting you. That should not come as a shock.

This entire shpeel progressives use is just the tantrum of Hitlerites whining that Britain are stupid meanies for not letting them roll over Poland and France and spitting forth vitriolic fury about how they're going to hand victory to the communists, ignoring all the while this wouldn't be happening if they hadn't made enemies of the entire planet.

No we won't hand victory to the communists. We'll get to them, we're confident.
Surrender.

Incels aren't nearly active enough politically to be valuable in this fight.

[Liriena]

You really shouldn't have used that analogy.

3. We're building a coalition, here. I'm happy to deal with whoever it takes to eliminate the progressive deadlock on power. It's quite simple. You've blocked MRAs from entering institutions and political discourse and routinely lie about us. We're taking allies as a consequence. I've already been pretty explicit in the past about how we successfully lobbied the republicans and trump on some issues and how I endorsed Trump on that basis. I am a mercenary. This is what I do. I'm telling you this because yes, we've known eachother a while.

Your movement has made a lot of enemies. Expecting us not to join up is foolhardy. If it takes smiling and dealing with KIA to break your movements power, then that's what i'll do. Let's not forget the feminist response to a domestic abuser being outed was to defend her against her critics here, and lobby to have her victim gagged by a court order, in that context, that naturally inclines me towards the other side of that particular clash in the culture wars. (Gamergate and Quinn.). If you don't want fascists and so on getting more prominent, maybe you shouldn't have become an oppressive hegemon that makes people feel we need to ALL band together to oppose you and your grip on power. I'm simply not interested, sorry. Progressives are the enemy. They are preventing our issues being discussed. They are lying about us and suppressing our attempts to organize. They have closed down fucking mens shelters and groups dealing with suicide because it pissed them off.

I just. Don't. Care.

Your criticism of my allies? I don't care. It's a Hitlerite whining about Stalin to Churchhill.
We'll get to them. Right now, you're the problem. You're the ones who need to be stopped. You're the ones making things worse, and you're the ones who are in danger of winning permanently and perpetually fucking up society.

If hitler invaded hell.

Your movement thought it could make enemies without consequences. That was foolish. You began this war with the MRM on the assumption you could bomb london and you wouldn't get bombed back.

I'm being honest to you. I am a mercenary. When you capitulate, then we can talk about Stalin. But hurry up and surrender unconditionally on this western front, or Berlin and your east might be in trouble, you daft buggers, because I don't quite fancy partitioning your power with the alt-right more than is necessary. You made war on EVERYONE, and then point out that the people you've attacked are on the same side?

That's not OUR fucking problem mate. It's yours. Acting like we can win this war without Stalin (We can't.) and should fight you fair and square so a bunch of anti-white racists and anti-male sexists have a shot at winning?
Saying that to an MRA?

That's lunacy. Ofcourse I like KIA. They're fighting you. You're the enemy. You're the ones who attacked us and suppressed us. Happy to lend-lease, comrade.

We're building a coalition. This should not be shocking. It is basic politics. Progressives declared war on everyone not a progressive. We're fighting you. That should not come as a shock.

This entire shpeel progressives use is just the tantrum of Hitlerites whining that Britain are stupid meanies for not letting them roll over Poland and France and spitting forth vitriolic fury about how they're going to hand victory to the communists, ignoring all the while this wouldn't be happening if they hadn't made enemies of the entire planet.

No we won't hand victory to the communists. We'll get to them, we're confident.
Surrender.

Incels aren't nearly active enough politically to be valuable in this fight.

You sure find them valuable enough to recruit them into the "contempt for women" cult, though.

[Ostroeuropa]

Incels aren't nearly active enough politically to be valuable in this fight.

You sure find them valuable enough to recruit them into the "contempt for women" cult, though.

Part of incel ideology is biotrutherism. If they start believing social change is possible, they cease to be incels.

[Cekoviu]

Incels aren't nearly active enough politically to be valuable in this fight.

You sure find them valuable enough to recruit them into the "contempt for women" cult, though.

N-no, his masculist alliance d-definitely doesn't have any incels!

[Bear Stearns]

Altruism has a large genetic component to it.

Why is it then that psychopaths were so often raised by abusive parents? If that were largely genetic, psychopaths would not have abusive parents at a greater rate than non-psychopaths.

Psychopathy is largely genetic, but it does not usually manifest itself violently. It can take an environmental trigger for those genes to be expresse (rough home environment), much how a child born to extremely tall parents can still grow up to be short if malnourished during formative stages.

Most psychopaths were not raised by abusive parents, but psychopaths are more likely to have had psychopathic parents, which suggests an increased likelihood of being abuse by their parents.

On psychopaths in general, they are more likely to be low-functioning members of society, and more likely to be criminals and less successful in life, all factors that contribute to a rough home environment when they eventually have kids, and thus the cycle continues.

[Grapasia]

You sure find them valuable enough to recruit them into the "contempt for women" cult, though.

Part of incel ideology is biotrutherism. If they start believing social change is possible, they cease to be incels.

hold up, there's a difference between being involuntarily celibate and being blackpilled.

[Ostroeuropa]

You sure find them valuable enough to recruit them into the "contempt for women" cult, though.

N-no, his masculist alliance d-definitely doesn't have any incels!

Ofcourse it doesn't. Both Incel and Red Pill oppose the MRM and think we're wasting our efforts.

Part of incel ideology is biotrutherism. If they start believing social change is possible, they cease to be incels.

hold up, there's a difference between being involuntarily celibate and being blackpilled.

There's a difference between not wanting a girlfriend and being MGTOW, too.

[Cekoviu]

Part of incel ideology is biotrutherism. If they start believing social change is possible, they cease to be incels.

hold up, there's a difference between being involuntarily celibate and being blackpilled.

Maybe initially, but they quickly converge after people spend time in the dank garbage pit of the incelosphere.