gender views cause of incel.

There is no problem with the girls as they like whomever they like. The guy needs to find girls who like the quiet philosopher types rather than hating on other girls.

If he can't find anyone then the problem is either with him or it's just a problem in the sense that he wants girls and they don't want him. If he gives up wanting girls there is no problem otherwise he is going to have to be the one to change.

It's delusional to think that society is going to have to change rather than for you to have to adapt to society (on some level). You can be an outlier but a guarantee of a girl doesn't come with that option.

Just as there is freedom of speech, there is no guarantee that anyone will listen or that they have to like your speech. There is no right to have someone be sexually attracted to you.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That is more or less outside the scope of this thread.

The scope of this thread was about an american gender delusion, which is keeping males down and preventing them from being more attractive at large.

And secondly the human mind is brainwashed by america on several levels. For instance it is scientifically proven that pop music is garbage, most people say they like it and yet deep down they are not truly happy people, they are just brainwashed to believe shit is gold. And yes there is something deeply wrong with people who like modern pop, as it is absolutely bad music on a chemical level which does not heal the brain as other music does, similar of course from the switch from 432 to 440 hz, which is notably toxic and such a civilization built on a toxic foundation may very well approach collapse. Similar of course this is to toxic male values brainwashing males to believe they have to be drab emotionless, hyper hetero, divorced from their feminine side and wear drab clothes et all.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What does this have to do with "america"? Are you arguing that gender roles are more "evolved" in most of the rest of the world?

Regarding keeping males down and unattractive...what world are you living in?

The comments about music are nonsensical.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

point taken, gender views are stupid and backwards in most countries, human race are savages in the dark ages.

Second you shouldn't be so skeptical about my views of music.

 

I'm not defending pop music but the frequency and chemical stuff is not factual in the least regardless of your view regarding the tastefulness of the music.

Is there anything that you do like about anything?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Being unhappy or being happy to be unhappy is a choice but it seems like it would be a bit tiring as well.

 

Music can heal or harm.

Some days I feel physically ill, so I find music that soothes and heals me. One time I was shaking, had bad diarrea and nausea, listened to good celtic tunes to heal me by morning.

Pop music on the other hand, is the opposite, causing illness and mental distress and hysteria, social unrest as tensions rise.

Do not underestimate the power of music, it is how wars are fought and battles are won, it can turn cowards into braves and braves into cowards.

 

I don't underestimate the effects of music. It's like smell in that it goes directly into certain areas of the brain without being processed by other areas first.

There is no bad music however, just music that we don't happen to like.

 

[1/2]​

Okay, let's try it this way:

Of course you don't.

One question that comes to mind is whether you know how to talk to strangers at all.

Spoiler

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

xkcd #1961, by Randall Munroe, 28 February 2018​

Seriously—

—part of the reason nobody is quite certain what to tell you is that you describe an internal fantasy. When the point has to do with, "Emo guys in girly makeup, getting 30 girls obsessed with him", or "transsexuals getting a bunch of women interested in them", yeah, actually, that's the thing: What are those people talking about?

There's a bit in recent controversies where some men have been saying, "Treat a woman at work like you would a man", and while this isn't quite the best expression of their point, it's a start, and we know what it means, and we can ... er, okay, most of us think we know what it means, but then we meet someone like you, and part of it might just be the way you present yourself, but your narrative has the appearance of being ad hoc, extemporary, and reactionary, and as a result, is shot through with a hot mess of question marks.

I ask about talking to strangers at all because it is unclear from your posts whether you understand the substantive, experiential difference between talking to someone about the baseball game on television and not being able to have a conversation without some guy hitting on you. So the first thing is, when you go to the men's room, do you hit on the guy standing at the next urinal? Do you talk about the sports page tacked up for men to stare at while they piss? Do you say nothing? Okay, now you're belly up to the bar, it's the bottom of the sixth: Do you not talk to any of the men? Do you not have anything in your conversational repertoire that doesn't involve trying to find a woman?

That makes you perfectly human. It also means many, many things. (It seems we need to come back to this point, anyway, so we'll pick it up then.)

Spoiler

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Tweets by @hels, responding to Ross Douthat, 3 May 2018.​

As I said↗ in the other discussion: You really have no idea, do you?

I'll tell you a sick joke that never really was a joke in the way I'm telling it, but, rather, a prejudice from a quarter-century ago, largely still in place, in Oregon:

• How did the fat, ugly chick find so quickly someone to fuck? She went to a "Mexican" bar. How did she seduce that man? She showed up. How did she play her cards just right? She didn't say no when he hit on her. What confidence did she demonstrate? She walked up to the bar and tried to order a drink for herself, and he just wasn't going to let that happen. That wily bitch just played him because everybody knows a woman isn't supposed to order her own drink in a bar.​

The actual underlying prejudice in that was and remains well-known, a suggestion that many hispanic men prefer larger white women.

It's just one example, sure, but part of the problem is that you describe circumstances most of the people responding to you just don't seem to recognize. To wit, I asked you about talking to strangers; there's also a question of whether or not you know how men and women have sex with each other. Point 11 in your response fails to resolve the latter.

You perpetually complain about women. They're not the problem, here. Why show your contempt and resentment for the powers that be, most of which coincidentally happen to be male, by constantly bawling about women? Especially when you don't seem to have a clue what you're talking about?

Think of the idea of an answer I'm not giving you; that is, there's something I might try to explain, but no, I'm not going to because it is unclear at this time whether you are capable of understanding.

Such as this:

But your point was and is a fallacy.

Start with the basics: Do you actually know how men and women have sex with one another? Again, your prior address of these points does not actually establish that you do.

The functional problem is baked into your rhetoric. You clearly haven't a clue what you're on about, and as a result, people are uncertain where to start. Your argument was, "Ironically it is often hot girls who reject men and claim that men only lust for them, meanwhile these same hot girls only date people nearly as hot as they are." Do you see the word "only"? It's problematic in many ways. We come back to the question of talking to strangers in general. The other day, I had a not quite random conversation, in a pub, with a man (A) I had never met, before, and (B) there was between precisely and approximately zero chance I might have sex with him. We talked about beer. And baseball. What we did was proactively establish an increasing radius of acceptable discourse until we had a range in which we were comfortable just sitting back and drinking beer together. At the point we felt comfortable enough to crack a couple jokes about life in these United States, we had quasi-ritually established that we weren't about to get in a fistfight with one another. Beyond that? Seriously, there's a joke about his hair that goes here, but we can skip that, for now.

As to your point, then: If part of the problem is that the conversation never establishes a safe range, then she is less likely to feel safe among those men. This, however, has nothing to do with the question of why she would actively seek specifically displeasing or even dangerous companionship.

As a defense mechanism, it keeps her alive as best it can. You and your moral judgment about guilt remind that women are not the problem, here.

In order to establish that "moral hypocrisy", you must typecast men in a specifically denigrating aspect; as a matter of nature, there is nothing in the Universe that forbids the coincidence of someone aesthetically not displeasing, to the one, and who doesn't sound like a threat, to the other.

All you seem willing to deal with is hotness.

Well, okay. Something about defense mechanisms and perceptions of guilt goes here.

That could mean any number of things.

Let us be clear: You criticize straw men of your own invention.

The amount you focus on women, their perspective, and behavior, does actually demand consideration of women's perspectives.

As to yours? It's petulant, selfish, fallacious, objectifying, and supremacist. More directly, when you insistently attempt to project danger, people do notice.

Oh, well, trust me, you wouldn't.

[cont.]​

 

[2/2]​

How about, ignorant to the point of unbelievability?

Imagine that.

Right there, for instance. There it is.

No, seriously. Do you know why you're not doing them a favor? We'll come back to that in a moment.

Selfish, fallacious, and objectifying.

You still don't get it, do you?

You're not doing women a favor. We come back to the question of whether you understand the basic differences about how men and women have sex with each other.

Selfish, objectifying.

You are not qualified to decide what men are homosexual or not.

Let us know when you intend to start making sense.

But your projections of people you aren't have nothing to do with logic.

You do put effort into that chic ambience of dangerous incompetence.

The superficiality of your argument, on that occasion, is what stands out.

There's not enough coverup, rouge, mascara, or whatever else to hide an attitude problem like that.

Who did the peer review?

If the Nazi cures cancer, then a Nazi cures cancer; if the Nazis had achieved a deployable atomic bomb, then the Nazis would have achieved a deployable atomic bomb. That manner of science is what it is. But if someone tells me a Nazi has done a survey and figured out what's wrong with Jews, well, I actually have a hard time believing you need this basic difference explained to you.

You really don't have a clue.

After all this, you still don't get it.

You skipped over it, though, at 11, so let's revisit what you were responding to:

• I only ask because you make it relevant—Do you actually know how men and women have sex with one another?

Let's try this other role reversal: Okay, she's the man, you're the woman; have sex.

It's not quite funny; several months ago I found myself in a weird discussion with a couple of trendy mgtow poseurs who couldn't quite figure out the difference, either. And that actually puts me in mind of this chap I remember, from overseas, who, when actually pointed to the difference, still couldn't grasp the concept.​

It's not merely the lack of respect you show women; it's also the pretense of ignorance that goes into that dearth. The person you present to us, here, is dangerous.

Your question is fallacious insofar as it proposes {not X} because {Q}, but that not only presents a false circumstance, {Q} ("negate personality") when what it responds to considers {X} because of {A, B, C}, it also overlooks the basic relationship between what one identifies as and what that means to others.

Identifying according to a dangerous label does affect how people perceive you, especially in proximity to what that label regards.

There is a large number of people who aren't having sex. Not all of them choose to identify with an infamous social-identity movement whose defining aspects are antisocial.

This should not be difficult to figure out. If one decides to identify with white supremacists, people of color will take wary note, because one will have declared danger toward them. To wit, remember when you wrote↗, "If there is sexual frustration in a nation, I demand that an equal amount of women be as incel as men"? And, yes, we do notice you trying to separate yourself from incel before deciding to throw down this thread. You didn't do a very good job.

Your problem.

Well, if you're settling, then quit complaining.

The dating game is generally stacked against such exclusivity as you demand.

No, seriously. This is why.

Notice those other elements of society haven't started systematically purging heterosexual men. Next time, don't suggest they should.

Hey, just out of curiosity: Can you tell us one thing about the person you've shown, here at Sciforums, that a woman should find attractive?

It doesn't even matter at this point what you look like; I'm asking what reason your conduct here might have given any woman you might ever wish to fuck a reason to wonder what you look like.

Okay? She happens across this site, sees your writing, and what about the character you're presenting is going to give her that vulvic vibe, that twitchy twitch, them sloppy pants, you're after?

More directly, what isn't going to disgust her?

 

WTF, So Britney Spears is responsible for incels?

Toxic you say?

 

The problem is that people often talk to bodies, instead of brains.

Telling a woman that this is a wonderful day while staring at her breasts is not exactly establishing a relationship.

OTOH, if a man asks a woman if he can visit her mind and promises that he will be a good guest, while looking deep into her eyes, that usually peaks a woman's interest.......

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And if a woman tells a man that she is looking for a man with an active imagination, that'll usually peak his interest also, maybe in the wrong direction, but hey it's a start....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Seems that you have not been exposed to good music. Music that requires an appreciation for the Art, rather than base rhythm and volume.
Try some of this:

Close your eyes and "listen" to the musical poetry.

 

Earlier this week:

Spoiler

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Zach Weiner, Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, 2 July 2018​

[On update]

I suppose it's probably funnier with the next day's cartoon. Well, okay, it is for me, because this really is something I've been wondering about "men", in recent years.

Spoiler

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Zach Weiner, Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, 3 July 2018​

 

Here's an old tune to inspire to incels, like totally!

 

And here's one from someone who had better things to do than become an incel:

Spoiler

​

Sometimes it's hard to explain to someone how cynical and bitterly sarcastic the 80s were, but since we're in a revival:

Spoiler

​

(The raping cannibalism can probably wait for another day, but it should be noted I learned of the band because Tipper Gore complained about them, which had the effect of making sure a bunch of us bought the album. Still, if you can keep from simultaneously laughing and retching, the early Peter Steele in the middle is almost perfect.)

Oh! Oh oh oh oh oh!

Spoiler

​

You know this is only going downhill, right?

Spoiler

​

And, y'know, this actually reminds me of an important point: Start a band. Dude can be ugly as sin, can even be outsize as hell, can wear makeup, even lingerie and a dress, and chicks will line up for it. And, shit, given what passes for a band, these days, why sit around on the 'net complaining about women all day? If Messiah Marcolin can get chicks? And, hell, talk about an incel power fantasy, how about a chick in a tower whose job is to suffer↱? Oh, hey, what about TAD, for heaven's sake?

Spoiler

​

Anyway, we now return this thread to its regularly-scheduled disaster.

 

"Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response leading to thoughts of the noblest kind"

And the muses wept.

 

Gamelord, just listen to us, we'll get you laid. Submit a video of yourself, we'll tell you what is wrong with you

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

and how to fix it.

Maybe the bar scene isn't your scene. Don't worry, we'll fix all your problems.

 

I've been called an empath by several people. Allow me to explore your mind, I promise to be a good guest. I, myself have an active imagination.....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I think Gamelord needs to be more clear about who it is and what it wants. Until Tiassa quoted and replied to Gamelord (quotes that I hadn't seen) I was of the impression that Gamelord was a lesbian and possibly even Birch.

Now I'm unclear. Is Gamelord bisexual, a transexual who prefers females, just an effeminate guy who is comfortable in his effeminate guy body and who wants a female?

If these things aren't clear in this thread how confused much anyone who tries to communicate with it be?

 

Here's an entertaining crux: all those bands think Ozzy is God and Britney Spears can get more chicks then all of them combined.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

https://youtu.be/0aEnnH6t8Ts

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=if u seek amy