Venting Frustrated with incels

[FadingDawn]

I'm so fed up with incels/misogynists blaming specifically women for their issues when the real culprit is society and humans as a whole. Pretty privilege/lookism is something all genders have to deal with so I don't understand why they target women. Even if you have bad experiences with women, why does that make the majority or all women bad?

I also don't get why they act like only men experience this, when plastic surgery is dominated by women. [20 million cosmetic procedures were carried out worldwide in 2014, with women accounting for 86.3% of the total amount and men accounting for 13.7% according to the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery . My whole life I was taught and shown by people that men care only for looks (obviously this isn't true) but I used common sense and realised that everyone is different. Why can't incels realise this?

Finally, I've seen a lot of men online talking about how to become more attractive to get women [which is vain and people should focus on having hobbies instead] and I just want to say, all my friends date conventionally unattractive guys. Like my dads so ugly and old and broke and has been in so many relationships with beautiful women. I mean Jayz and Beyonce??
You don't need to be 6,7ft with a perfect jawline to get a partner or even to just have sex, literally 8 billion people in the world. Just have a decent personality and learn to be less superficial and vain, it's not worth it since we all age and become ugly anyway.

I have a lot of sympathy for incels. Actually, I believe that they are a product of our capitalistic and uncaring society , but ultimately they need a reality check and possibly a dating app.

Nah, incels are in your mind; these are all, I'm sure, some poor guys, who come from the manosphere -- which you know, supports like men's rights or something, so if you don't like them you're a misandrist lol .

"You're calling me fucked up for taking advantage of intoxicated women? Psssh, get over it snowflake. Are you perhaps triggered by me being a rapist? This is a PRIME EXAMPLE of the libs having their priorities twisted."

See, when I reply the exact same shit to incels or apologists, I just get a misandrist for not taking their petty feelings into considerations. "How dare you call me a liberal, or a cultural Marxist; I'll have you know hypergamy, as defined in the blackpill community, is a scientific fact"

 

[escape_from_hell]

Posting this now out of genuine concern and ask that the reader please give it a quick glance and consideration despite it being long. I am perfectly okay with anyone hating me for the following words of warning, I feel that's been the norm thru my life, but hope the thoughts might provide enough pause or faint 'what-if' to a degree that may spare you a possibly painful and unwelcome future experience.

Many of us, of ANY background or identity here, have suffered due to interactions with psychopaths/sociopaths/manipulators. This is for lack of better words, as we see here definitions have a way of losing coherence, but manipulator is probably the most apt to keep in mind and predation is what I am aiming to prevent.

Beware of supreme confidence, especially in moral rectitude.
It feels good to have your sentiments championed by another. Beware that there are dishonest actors out there, ones who will pretend to be your champion but truly do not have your best interests in mind.

Contrary to words for sociopaths like 'antisocial' keep in mind they can be quite verbose and effusive socialites with a lot of charm. If one is your biggest ally and it seems you can never be wrong, they will defend you against even the slightest disagreement, it may feel great but beware when this dedication to your cause is starting to break with reality, meet criticism with appeals, or seem fanatical.

There are zeitgeists. Popular notions of the now from which evaluation of all other things is widely accepted. Beware those who are resting on what 'everybody knows' or is 'obvious' and uses what could be considered the dominant moral and official assessments in a cultural moment as calls to action, blunt tools to paint others as they see fit in accordance with these 'social truths,' and inspire you to deepen your actions or viewpoints against others than would have been natural for you.

Beware calls to ignore the words or humanity of others from moralists telling you they have special insight and impeccable judgement of those others, discernment that is damning and unquestionable.

Beware especially when you are praised for aligning with these supreme arbiters. Ask yourself if proclamations firing up your passions and affirming you are genuine. You do not need to let supposed outspoken allies closer to you personally. If they are really your defenders, they won't need to be personally closer or ask or require much more from you.

There ARE times when an ugly personality is the reason a person is not getting sexual validation. Women definitely know this. Even the most hardcore misogynists, while thinking and announcing looks are everything, very likely know there are cases this is true deep down.

Please take pause when definitions are difficult to elucidate and make universally concrete, but are only worthwhile or valid when they come from the judgement of one who is the self-appointed bedrock of sanity and virtue. Ask yourself if the dancing and subjective assessments from one of these moral gods are really so obvious that you can readily understand every aspect of another person's character from a few words or phrase.

Why is any person with any level of disagreement always in a big category of bad, clear to any person of sound mind of course, and not only their enemy, but also your enemy, friend? Are questions posed to them really attacks against you, and you need to mobilize with them in fighting the evil?

"Looking back at the worst times, it always seems that they were times in which there were people who believed with absolute faith and absolute dogmatism in something. And they were so serious in this matter that they insisted that the rest of the world agree with them. And then they would do things that were directly inconsistent with their own beliefs in order to maintain that what they said was true."
-Richard Feynman

"The belief that there is only one truth, and that oneself is in possession of it, is the root of all evil in the world."
-Max Born

Didn't want to post anything more on this flavour of topics because engaging in antagonistic, emotionally charged debates destined to lead nowhere has not been good for my mental health and I'm trying to have as much peace as possible on my way out the door of life. But I did want to offer food for thought. But I see some patterns in language manipulators have used to fuck me up bad in the past, because they seemed to be on my side. Just because they say something good, does not make them good.

How is it some topics can never be put to rest but require constant vigilance from a trusted truth-haver on the matter? Is there always need to immediately accept all asks from a saviour to address an immediate crisis at hand, or can you address specific cases without a single sentiment implying broad association with everything evil in the world?

 

[SexyIncél]

Another thing, remember when Mr. Rogers said "Look for the helpers."?

Feel free to ignore/skim this. Just jotted some notes, for anyone addicted to the art of effectively intervening in the universe. Seems a nice place to post this, so I can refer to it in the future

Yesterday had a case study. It's public, so you can critique it. Bite-sized, but nontrivial; on that thread, one of my dear beloved haters here expressed "I don't know if there is anything you can do". And I said "Ho boy. This is hard." (Before providing a solution that the client liked)

Demonstrates common errors: no stalking researching the client's context, moving to a solution too quickly, one-size-fits-all advice, little probing to build a higher-res pic, zero relationship flair, no collecting constraints on solutions, no prototype solutions. Perhaps worst of all, it's about convincing a boyfriend — which means you gotta try to learn something about him

Leads to a low-quality job. Advice-seekers are best seen as employers — just without imaginary money points. And in any job (that isn't completely de-skilled like McD's), people are happy to give presentations on their work — case studies, mindsets, etc. They're constantly talking about how to do a better job — if they give a damn

---

Bigger problems

Is this an overly "small" problem? Well, we chop big problems down into little ones. If we solve enough little ones, with quality, then often we fucking win. Chip-chip-chip away until one day a major part of the problem cracks

We grind away at problems in OIDA loops: Observe, Imagine (possibilities), Decide, Act. Each "Act" is a question to the universe, and you listen in "Observe". Looping's important, beause people often quit after their first attempt gets them 90% of the way. But they only needed to turn around & walk the remaining 10%!

The "Imagine" phase may uncover risky possibilities. Simple risk analysis helps: imagine what could go wrong. And you will make mistakes. You can fix them: before they happen (preemption), before anyone notices, or when they're running amok. The earlier you fix, generally the cheaper it is

---

Theory-theory (the theory of theories)

"Social theories generally explain, predict, and permit intervention. All to a degree, not with perfect confidence, but with enough to be much more useful than just winging it, so to speak." — Michael Albert

Example theories: redpill, feminism, blackpill:

• Blackpill: interesting — it's anti-intervention, and predicts only gloomy outcomes. Many suicidal people are blackpillers, in the general doomer sense
• Feminism: very broad. Best to refer to specific sub-traditions. Otherwise you run into trouble with conflicting goals & concepts
• Redpill: geared to intervene, in many current societies. Many concepts look weird, yet help you predict/intervene surprisingly well in certain contexts. But their explanations are typically evo-psych mythologies

So for example, in my solution prototype, I tried to make a poem so schweeeeet , her boyfriend would no sooner breakup with her than punch a kitten. Testing that redpill saying: "Men see women, like women see children, and like children see animals". Thus activating his inner nurturer. I just needed to probe to determine whether he was the right kinda stoic/chill/loyal guy who actually works this way

Which is why I ask if people intervene, and if they have a basic understanding of these theories they speak of. Otherwise, theories become ideologies — never tested in battle, nor used for intervention. And if you don't use them, you only build skeletal theories, without all the musculature required to actually understand & get things done

Like martial artists who talk, yet can't do

Helps to learn multiple theories — even ones that look contradictory. For example, you can augment radical feminism with redpill, if you alter the parts of redpill that support patriarchy. Because theories are made of concepts. (Bits of the world we name & think are real.) And you can steal useful concepts from a theory, without committing to the whole shebang

Helps you become relentlessly resourceful