1 2 3 4 5 | bottom
Quote# 139807

Betabux

A betabux, for 'beta bucks', or beta provider', is a man who missed out on sex during his prime years, so in desperation he uses his wealth to attract a post-prime golddigging slut who rode the cock carousel during her prime years.

The archaetypal beta provider

Timothy is the archaetypal beta provider. Timothy is a 35 year old engineer with a good career. Timothy is also ugly and a kissless virgin. Timothy marries Jenny, a fat 36 year old woman who has 3 kids. Jenny used to be attractive in her teenage years and early 20s, but is no longer due to poor diet, and excessive partying and drinking during her prime years. Jenny used to spend lots of time getting fucked by only good looking tall alpha jocks, but none of them were willing to settle down with her. She ended up with 3 kids as a result of one night stands with random alphas. Jenny realized she needs a source of income to provide for her and her kids, so she married Timothy the beta provider. Although she does not tell Timothy this, Jenny has no intentions of having any children by Timothy - she only wants to use him to leech off his money.

Incel Wiki, Incel Wiki 4 Comments [8/14/2018 1:35:57 PM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139806

Cultmaxxxing?

Just join a cult and have sex with a brainwashed foid. There are definitely some crazy women there that will fuck anything JACK! Also, for those trad boys who aren't into all of that wishy washy eastern sex cultish stuff. There's a place in Siberia where people seem pretty trad, almost as if a guy is obligated to marry and have kids. Might move here, seems like a pretty good life.

janoycresva, incels.me 0 Comments [8/14/2018 1:35:00 PM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139794

[Note: Comments in the thread "Actually, no, I won't date or waste my energy on "Trans Men" or "Non Binaries"." by ToughTelephone]

(scienceisarealthing)
Where? Your sentiment is hardly new. It gets posted here daily. What you say is true, but I don’t see anyone here supporting TIFs unquestioningly. I see people pointing out that young GNC lesbian women are victims of transactivism and patriarchy, but that’s not the same thing.
Radical feminism is about tearing out the roots of oppression, and the root is patriarchy, not female victims of the system. Fuck Aunts and handmaidens, but they are the symptom, not the disease. This isn’t letting them off the hook, it’s just not playing the patriarchy’s game for it by never looking beyond the puppets to the dudes pulling the strings.


OP is right, unfortunately I don't have specific links but I have seen often on this sub where women here are berated for not being sympathetic to misogynistic TIF's or considering them our "sisters". It's not tearing down female victims of the system to not sympathize with women who actively harm other women.

The vast majority of women have some level of misogyny just from living under patriarchy. I wish all women could wake up from it and question those beliefs. I am sympathetic to confused women who are told to transition without being given other option for healing. The system is broken, thanks to the idiot activists and those in the medical industry wanting to profit. I’m sympathetic to people who suffer from all kinds of illness.

I’m not sympathetic to people who think they are better than other women because they are men now.

I have not seen someone being berated for not accepting a TIF. what kinds of threads does it come up?


I agree we should have sympathy for gnc women who are socially pressured into transitioning or felt they had no other option. I've seen threads (sorry don't have specific links) where women were told they were infighting, tearing apart the sisterhood, or being manipulated by the patriarchy, (and other things along those lines) for not supporting sexist, maladjusted TIF's.

To me, it seems like guilting women into performing emotional labor for misogynists with personality disorders, and I think it's a symptom of female socialization to have endless sympathy towards people who hate us and even want us dead. I think we can all agree we want feminism to benefit all women, even the horrible ones, but there's a limit to the amount of patience & attention women should give to manipulative, harmful people.

(georgiaokeefesgrotto)
Not from me. I've seen the Tifs and their idea of women as 'junk and udders'. I welcome them back into womanhood if they smarten up but many are cruder than truckers in a rest room on a long haul. Eff them.

(1984stardusta)
"“The only reason everybody is talking about transgenders is because white men want to do it.”

Chappelle received lots of criticism for rhis joke, and more, for pointing that Mexicans or blacks wouldn't get the same treatment, genderism is a white problem.

I see no problem in people dressing up or behaving like the opposite sex, this is far from new, but I can't accept a bunch of privileged white men endorsing violence against women they will rebrand as TERFs and advocate for punching into silence. Normally women who identify as men won't do the same, so it is easier to talk with women.

But I can't start a conversation with anyone who will acuse me of feeling hate against a whole group, this is a coward accusation, without burden of proof, deeply ingrained in privilege of narrative and self entitlement from whom is so spoiled by their lack of real problems that they need to turn any dissenting voice into an imaginary enemy, they need to destroy competition, they need to be the leader of oppression Olympics even if it means to demean women.

So, being a person of color is a hard life, adding to the equation the false accusation that black women are killing white men when we don't say they are women whenever they feel like to be called so is unbearable.

Right? As a woman I’m tired of being silenced for saying anything about the trans community that isn’t “these people are the best people in the world”. This has a horrible effect on my mental health and view of self. Why are these bizarre new groups that everyone wants to talk about protected to the point that it’s hate speech to criticize or even question anything about them or what they say and do?


About transcommunity?

I can't say anything about myself.

When I say I am a biological woman I am offensive to who is not a woman and wants not only self identify as such, but also take leadership, precedence and dominance over my objective reality. On the same vein I should not use words as menstruation, breastfeeding and vagina but I need to accept meekly to be called a menstruator, and listen about chest feeding and fronthole.

I need to teach my kids to hide what they know about human biology, because I was taught it was replaced by wishful thinking.

I need to teach them to hide their knowledge, and shrink their passion about this subject to fit obscurantism.

And I need to pretend that black women and black men are subjected to more likelihood of being murdered then white men, even when they wear dresses.

I

(SCREECHES_AT_HERSELF)
I couldn't agree more. In my experience, trans men & female nonbinaries are commonly emotionally abusive, narcissistic, and hold some really gross beliefs. Some FTMs even go as far as to become stereotypical "women have it easy, it's men who suffer!" MRAs.

People like that are not worthy of my energy. They might be biologically female but that doesn't mean I owe them anything.

As for dating... I'm not attracted to male secondary sex characteristics (even if they're artificial) so no, I'm not interested in trans men. Plus the whole misogyny and "your personality dictates your sex" things are huge dealbreakers anyway.

Begone with this stupid belief that us women should have unwavering compassion for everyone, especially people who view us as lesser. No, I won't support trans men. No, being nonbinary is no better. No, I'm not going to get on my knees and kiss the toes of that "gender critical TIM" that people all think is such a gift to feminism.

(greynose_algebra)
I transitioned several years before I discovered radical feminism and became gender critical. I don't know if you would rather not hear what I have to say, but for what it's worth, I think your points are valid and I get where you're coming from.

No one is obligated to include trans people in their dating pool. No one is obligated to support/lift up/perform emotional labor for anyone at all.

No one should have to waste their time or energy on emotional vampires, no matter what their sex or gender-feelz.

You're not a bad feminist.

(Enjolraic)
It would depend on their beliefs on gender. I'm Internet friends with a TIF and she believes that biological sex is real and she's against calling women TERFs or advocating for violence against us. Basically she's a gender critical trans person. But she's a Marxist, and ideologically sound Marxists are hard to come by these days. Most TIFs seem to believe in tumblr politics, hate radfems and expect gay men to date them just because they cut their hair. Even if I was physically attracted to one, I would want nothing to do with someone with a completely different world view to mine.

I'd never want anything to do with NBs. It's one thing to have dysphoria about your sexual characteristics or be transed because of homophobia, but the entire notion of 'non-binary' is based purely on sexist stereotypes.

(Lemortjoyeux)
Some of them are just predatory as TIMs, usually the GAI BOIZ type who are basically straight women who wanted more oppression points or were so obessed by yaoi they decided to live out this fantasy. They get angry when only other TIFs date them because gay men don't take that bullshit. Local horrible TIF in my city is also a YouTuber spewing lies and distracting from others arguments because she doesn't have any argument other than "not accepting my gender identity hurts my feelings". God I hate her and she's one of the main reasons I don't associate with the local gay community.

(thewilloftheuniverse)
The only Transman i personally know was a friend from high school, who is a second generation Desi. I was especially struck at the fact that the male name she took was "Todd," exchanging her Indian female name for a white male name.

At the time it only made me confused and sad for her. Now it makes me angry too.

(Burnbookburner)
I know a Todd TIF... do you think they realize any grown man named Todd is a huge red flag?

(CatLadyActually)
How so? Is it like Chad?

various TERFs, r/GenderCritical 1 Comments [8/13/2018 4:24:12 PM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 139793

Actually, no, I won't date or waste my energy on "Trans Men" or "Non Binaries".

That seems to be a way for people to make themselves more palatable to gender believers, to be a 'Good TERF' - "it's just Trans Women I have an issue with, I'd totally date a Trans Men or Non Binary Person, I fight for them too". Well, not me.

Are they biologically female? Yes. Have they also chosen to massively and offensively degrade biological femaleness and throw all other women under the bus because they are Not Like Other Girls 2.0? Yes.

I'm a lesbian, I'm also a working class second generation Desi immigrant. I have no time for these people that are overwhelmingly White and seemingly entirely middle class or rich. Nor do I see it as safe to encourage or shame women into dating them under the "well technically" guise and I can only imagine so many people here do because they never have and have no real intention of actually doing so - or else you might actually realise how emotionally and homophobically abusive that situation is to lesbians, to be expected to include in their dating pool people who actively disparage and disown the very idea of femaleness.

These people are just as dangerous as the Trans Women this sub discusses. Maybe not to you with the luxury of Whiteness or middle class opportunities, but to those of us that are poor or non White? Women who are struggling to survive off of food banks, single mothers trying to raise children while their benefits get taken away, girls who cannot go to school because they do not have menstrual products, WOC navigating a racist Western society and their own ethnic communities, we literally do not have the time or resources. It is specifically our rights and our voices and our safety as poor women and WOC that are ignored and are the first to be sacrificed. And not just by Trans Women, by Trans Men and Non Binaries too, because they all want to take our places in organisations and divert attention and funding away from us in favour of themselves, and none of them will ever understand what it is to be us. Especially as we are under represented in this conversation anyway because we are under represented full stop and aren't the ones being transed in huge numbers - if you are a poor woman, especially poor WOC, you know that's what you are, you know you cannot identify out of that because the rest of the world makes sure you know. But yet there are plenty of people on this sub who would berate us for not supporting our "sisters" who are so comparatively privileged and self-obsessed they had to make up an oppression to feel special and would have the nerve to say that the women working three jobs, these mothers struggling to support their children, these girls who can't afford school supplies, victims of forced marriage etc., are the real privileged ones.

No. Just no. Maybe you can afford to fight that fight and if so go ahead, that's your prerogative. But the sheer racist, classist gall you have to have to try and tell other women that we should too lest be we be bad women or bad feminists.

ToughTelephone, r/GenderCritical 4 Comments [8/13/2018 4:23:50 PM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139787

There's probably better ways to break someone's feefees than outright physical assault.

Employ a longterm villainous plan to bankrupt them. Then, when they are at their most destitute, proffer your penis as a way to suck themselves into a meal they desperately need. Requiem for a Dream that whore.

Dogs can't look up, Kiwi Farms 5 Comments [8/13/2018 3:12:28 PM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139784

I dont think women have emotions

I think the only thing on their mind 24/7 is sex. The only thing they care about is bragging about the dick they get. They are truly scum and see no evil in getting defiled by 30 men, and even still expect to get wifed up after that. Females are truly retarded and i want to take them on "dates" and act all lovey and then proceed to slut shame them and make them cry.

ItheIthe, incels.me 13 Comments [8/13/2018 10:08:01 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139783

I Think its Funny that Women Think Guys Care About Them

Women (Aka used up sluts) oftentimes feel convinced that their "boyfriend" loves them, which is funny. I hang out with a lot of different guys so I know them well.

Newsflash bitches: Guys dont care about you if they know youve fucked other men. Ive had these very conversations with multiple dudes. Its honestly hilarious how bitches are stupid enough to think that guys have feelings for them when in reality most men just see these sluts as sex objects.

You think any stable man sees a scantily clad slut "hooking up" with random fags at parties and feels his heart beating with opportunity? No, men see that and figure its something to bust a nut in, and maybe keep around for a short while if the sex is good. And then bitches cry and bemoan their life when they get pumped and dumped for the 11th time. Its honestly funny and entertaining.

ItheIthe, incels.me 6 Comments [8/13/2018 10:07:39 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139782

The biology of female sexuality

I was thinking and reading about this a lot, also going undercover to female forums and I have built a theory which still has some plot holes but I want to know your opinion.

So, biologically males need to impregnate the most females, and females need the best mate (i.e. Chad). And most of the people still live by biological instincts. Incels who want a wife are superior in this case (or just desperate).

I know for a fact that very few females can get an orgasm from sex. I was lurking into female forums and they were seriously asking each other how to masturbate and what orgasm feels like. I went undercover as a female in some beauty forum and one foid told she could cum for the first time from masturbating at like 23 after having 7-8 partners, but still couldn't cum from sex. I mean the whole discovery was incredible to me, just as when I found out in high school that females too get horny. As far as I understood very few get orgasm from thrusts only, most orgasms come from clitoris which is usually unengaged during sex.

So my theory is that modern females don't want to have kids and families due to peer pressure and propaganda like "job, career, travel" but their bodies tell them they need to be pregnant so they find sex with Chad but can't get orgasms so they need more and more incoming. Their conscious brain thinks everything is fine but their subconscious brain is so fucking surprised they are not pregnant yet so it tells them they need to fuck more because their biology didn't account for condoms or birth control pills.

The conclusion is pretty popular in this forum: it will benefit everyone if females marry young and get pregnant. It will distract them for 5-7 years, and then they must get pregnant again.

Still don't know whether foids have sex because their body makes them pregnant or because they want to cum or maybe it's connected somehow.

znbox, incels.me 6 Comments [8/13/2018 10:07:17 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139761

A 14-year-old Afghan mother washing her new baby


I'm gonna play devil's advocate and defend Afghan culture. Here come the downvotes.

14 years old is not the same there as it here. Their whole whole conception of what it means to be an adult and a child are completely different than ours. They don't have arbitrary lines defining when it's ok to vote (18), to drive (16), to drink (21), etc... because they don't have any of those things. They also don't have mandatory public school or college like we do, so they don't see a 14 year old as a "child" like we do. A 12 year old girl probably has all the same responsibilities in a household as an adult woman would have because she has nothing else to do. Now, I'm not defending sex with pre-pubescent girls, but if you want to understand what they're thinking, you have to understand their surroundings.

This can't be blamed completely on Islam. This type of thing is also partly (in my opinion, mostly) due to living in a tribal culture with no real law, institutions, media, education, etc... If you go to any backwards tribal culture you will see things that horrify you. I personally think the stuff that goes on in China is much more horrifying than this.

It's common to hear Westerners say things like that men over there "hate" women, "oppress" women, etc... You can disagree with how men treat women over there, but in their mind they think they are protecting and loving women. Now, once again, you can disagree with what they're doing, but ascribing it to evil motivations is wrong in my opinion.

I may be wrong, but this type of thing isn't common. I think this only happens in the most rural, uneducated, tribal areas. Educated city dwellers don't live like this, so it's not right to stereotype their entire region based on stuff like this.

Here's my most controversial defense: women are ready to have sex when they hit puberty. They're gonna do it no matter what. The American way is to have sex with people your own age clandestinely, oftentimes without your parents knowing or approving, and teenage pregnancy and disease is rampant here. At least there when they hit puberty they enter into a "loving" (you can obviously judge for yourself how loving those marriages are) relationship with a committed partner with approval from their friends and family. Girls in America get dumped a million times before they are 25, have sex with multiple partners, suffer emotional damage and self-esteem issues, etc... I'm not saying the way they do it is better, but it does have some positives that we overlook because we are so confident our way is better.

ChocolateHead, reddit 4 Comments [8/13/2018 10:02:41 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139769

Re: Reminder we’re on these cucks minds all day



(NormiesSuckAtRating)
Holy fuck. These people aren't normal and that's coming from someone like myself. Imagine being this obsessed with incels you talk about it with your partner.

RENT FREE.

(Incelebrity)
They wouldn't do it if we were merely a delusional group. They could be talking about pedophiles, other kind of criminals, terrorists, but no - us, because what we represent is the truth and they deep down know it but try to suppress it. It bothers them to the very core. They are tryign to bond with eachother by putting as down all the while reassuring they are not like us. I'm glad their tiny minds occupy over us, let them.

(ThotSlayer44)
r/inceltears is obsessed with attacking us because white liberals only care about things that affects them directly. That's why they attack us, because we threaten feminism and the gynocentric western matriarchy where women have sex with alphas in their youth before settling for a beta provider.

It's also why they got the fatpeoplehate sub banned (most white liberals are fat soyboys and "body positive" fat feminists) but they never say a peep about the white supremacist subreddits on this site of which there are several calling for literal ethnic cleansing.

(GazzaRowe)
White liberals are even more hated than incels. Minorities hate them, socialists hate them, the right hates them, everyone except themselves hates them. Most of those people don't know we exist. They have better things to do than browse forums for depressed virgins.

(WahmenMustDIe)
Another reminder: IT Landwhales can still get boyfriends without any trouble. Foids can never be Incels.

(fuckbitchesman)
Do they really think we care that a bunch of landwhales and soyboy cucks are laughing at us?

This ain't highschool you retards and you're definitely not the cool kids.

various incels, r/Braincels 6 Comments [8/13/2018 5:20:31 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 139768

Re: Femcels don't want cha...



(throwawayirl3)
Best believe she gets plenty of free opportunities, just not from Chad

(whatdoinamethiscrap)
She can get all the things she described from lots of men that looksmatch her. But she needs Chad so much she'll pay for him.

(ThotSlayer44)
This. Chad will pump and dump her but not treat her like a princess. If she wanted this pampering treatment she'd need to date an average looking guy but most women would rather die than date their looksmatch.

(ascend2pajeet)
They literally had a thread 2 days ago that said incels are bad people because they're ugly and Chads are good people because they are hot and they were serious. JFL "LOOKISM ISN'T REAL BRO"

(AnyReference)
JFL a lot of incels go for femcels who later reject them and yet they say that incels only want stacy...

(WahmenMustDIe)
And yet again these so called Femcels proved that they are nothing more than Chad chasing whores.

(kin_o)
"female incels" would rather buy Chad's time for a nice fucking, than to even be associated with you and your "baggage"

It's over.

(ThotSlayer44)
I just got banned from r/trufemcels for telling the girl who made that thread to make a Tinder account instead of paying for escorts.

Lmao women are the meme gender.

various incels, r/Braincels 6 Comments [8/13/2018 5:19:24 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139763

lets not kid ourselves. the best looking pussy is 14-22 depending on how hard she hit puberty. tits dont magically appear when she turns 18. pedophiles like girls who are PRE-pubescent, that term is just used to shame you for having a hot 19 year old girl. just-developed (or in the process) is the biological prime. the whole 18 thing is government sanctioned prime based on how long it takes to finish school in the United States, to keep girls from getting pregnant while she still in high school (outdated laws from pre-birthcontrol times). old enough to bleed, old enough to breed. bonus points if she dresses provocatively or posts suggestive selfies, means she is fully aware and knows what to do with it. ironically, here in the US the high school stock is fitter and tighter cos we have a thriving athletic culture. but by the time they go to college they are left to their own devices, eat like crap, and no longer active. get her while she's ripe and she'll stay fresh for that much longer. unless you have a fit bunny or a very petite slow grower, you will see early signs of the wall as early as 21. for short term enjoyment, fuck the youngest girls your country or state allows. however, keep in mind that that the younger she blooms, the sooner and harder she hits the wall. big tits at 13 lead to big thighs/arms at 17, to big belly at 22, to big face and used meat by 25. plus an entitled attitude, as she spent her formative years being "the hot one" who got all the attention. a wise long-term investment is to find the youngest legal girl who was an "ugly duckling" but became hot.

2FAMOUS, reddit 0 Comments [8/13/2018 4:55:21 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 139757

The cock carousel has a rich Crimson Pill history.

The seeds of America’s decline were already evident in the sexual abandon of women unleashed by mid-20th Century. What we’re dealing with now is a post-patriarchal culture set in motion many decades ago.

...

As with all post-patriarchal cultures, demise is guaranteed because abandoning benevolent patriarchy violates fundamental sexual polarity rules which govern relational dynamics between the sexes.

As a reader put it, “Men adapt to nature. Women adapt to man.”

CH, Chateau Heartiste 4 Comments [8/12/2018 11:35:57 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 139756

A countdown was started on August 18, 1920.



On August 18, 1920, The first snowflake that would later form the snowball that is the collapse of the west and return to the dark ages was formed. We’re nearing the end of the countdown. Brace yourselves.

I don’t say this to be hyperbolic or anything.. this was planet earths biggest fuckup. Too many generations of “men” living too comfortable lives fed too many comfortable “truths” didn’t consider why women were kept subservient for all of history. Didn’t take a second to think about it. They fucked up big time. Whether the masses acknowledge it at all is irrelevant. This is the great blackpill of the 21st century. The most taboo topic on earth. The shit you can’t even discuss without being publicly executed.

Don’t believe it the end of times? How about a reminder than a degenerate woman with a degenerate agenda almost became leader of the free world and the powerful person on earth.. we NARROWLY extended the west’s life by maybe a few years. That’s how close we are.. this is a dangerous game.. people need to wake the fuck up and do something about it.

Unrestricted female hypergamous sexual nature is the most destructive force in the world.

Just know that the next step is harems becoming “trendy”.. just wait until some instagram famous guy has 2+ girls that he treats equally (I.e. not main chick/side chick).. once that catches on, it will become normal very soon as that is the default nature of our species. We are literally a few instagram posts away from finally severing the last string that ties us to the developed world and reverting back to life in the jungle..

and then we only a few years after that at most. What a time to be alive.


(Emphasis original)

SchrodingersDick, incels.me 8 Comments [8/12/2018 9:30:15 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139749

[Part 3/end, goddammit Jim]

At the time of Jesus, it was the temple, and Jesus famously abrogated this. But the rabbis of the time were engaged in a holiness spiral, which holiness spiral Jesus often vehemently denounced, which holiness spiral led them into suicidal war with the Romans, literally suicidal as they wound up murdering each other and killing themselves, as holiness spirals so frequently end, so we cannot take temple practice at the time of Jesus as indicative of the will of Gnon, or the practice of earlier times. Jesus said no, and they perished. Both of these are good indicators that you are not following the will of Gnon.

What we can take as indicative of the family law of earlier times of those peoples who survived is the wisdom books of earlier times, in particular the Book of Proverbs. Wisdom books were issued by governments to advise their subjects about the private and quasi private incentives for good behavior that were in effect – hence “the wisdom of Solomon”. And according to the section of the Book of Proverbs that claims to have been issued by the court of King Solomon, the incentive for not sleeping with someone else’s women was not that the government would kill you, nor that the temple would kill you, but that the rightful owner of that woman’s sexual and reproductive capability might kill you, and would have every right to do so, legally and openly. So, the Wisdom of Solomon (and of subsequent Kings that repeatedly re-issued that book) is that honor killing is fine. Which is a good indicator of the will of Gnon, since that is a people that survived and of the will of God, since that is the way that Old Testament law on adultery was implemented.

The book of Proverbs has different sections, as it was re-issued by King after King, government after government. But none of the sections threaten state or temple penalties for sexual misconduct, nor do any of the sections drop the Solomonic privately administered death penalty for sexual misconduct, indicating laws on sexual conduct that gave the maximum sexual possible liberty to men, short of allowing one man to tread on another man’s toes, and the minimum possible sexual liberty to women. Since, to form families, men need to conquer, and women to be conquered, such laws are optimal for family formation and reproduction. Such also prevent conflict within the elite (King George the Fourth) and between the elite and the people, by preventing men from competing for women’s favors, by preventing women from giving such favors, thus are optimal for social cohesion. Hence peoples with such laws are apt to invade, and not themselves be invaded. Which is handy if you have high elite fertility as a result of such laws.

So, in Old Testament times, if a man abducted a woman who was not married or betrothed, he was allowed to keep her, and if she was virgin before the abduction, required to keep her, and if she ran away to some other man, he was allowed to kill her and that other man. This is consistent with observed present day behavior of men and women, which indicates descent from populations with severe restraint on female sexual choice, and weak restraint on male sexual choice – indicates that we are descended from peoples who had laws like that, and that peoples more tolerant of female sexual choice failed to reproduce or were conquered and genocided. Our biological character indicates that among the populations from which we are descended male sexual choice was only restricted to the extent necessary to prevent one man’s choice from impinging on another man’s choice, while female sexual choice was almost nonexistent, indicating that Old Testament law, as interpreted and applied by the wisdom of Solomon in the Book of Proverbs, is the will of Gnon, the will of Nature and of Nature’s God.

The Book of Proverbs goes on about sexual misconduct at considerable length. And it describes the reality that I see, not the reality that people keep gaslighting me with. In the Book of Proverbs, sexual misconduct is primarily the result of lustful women manipulating naive men in order to obtain socially disruptive sex. There are no grooming gangs in the Book of Proverbs. Women sexually manipulate men in order to obtain sex in socially disruptive and damaging ways. Men do not sexuality manipulate women. Though the dance is pursuit and predation, conquest and surrender, as if lustful men were imposing themselves on sexless angels, that is the dance not the reality. The reality is that women and girls are lustfully manipulating men and their social environment to obtain social outcomes that in some ways superficially resemble lustful men imposing themselves on sexless angels. That is what the Book of Proverbs depicts, and that is what I see in front of my nose. And yet I live in a world where everyone with astonishing confidence and enormous certainty reports a very different world, a world of men sexually harassing and raping women, a world where male sexual predators lure innocent sexless female children. When I report the world that I see and experience, which is the world depicted in the Book of Proverbs, which is the world that the famous Wisdom of Solomon depicts, some people get very angry.

I have been writing this post over a couple of days. Last night I threw a big expensive party, at which party I played the role of the big high status male, and the highest status male guest, a colleague of my girlfriend’s father, very courteously played along. This morning one of the party girls, who is fertile age but only very recently fertile age, and unfortunately very closely connected to my current girlfriend and that high status male, was still around. This morning, after this post was mostly written and the remaining guests mostly sober, I left for the beach for a swim with my girlfriend. And by coincidence, party girl just happened to decide to put on a bikini that she only recently came to need, and to take a swim shortly after I and my girlfriend left, joining us at the beach. And whenever I remained stationary and facing in a particular direction for any length of time, this young party girl, dressed in a bikini, would find some reason to hang around in that line of vision. You may recall that in my posts on testosterone and weight loss, I have frequently remarked that I have difficulty out-staring a pizza and a pitcher of Mountain Dew.

For men to cooperate effectively, as for example in genociding their less cooperative neighbors and taking their land, they have to keep their hands off each other’s women, and enforce keeping each other’s hands off each other’s women. And since women are notoriously apt to find clever ways to give sneaky fuckers a chance, particularly sneaky fuckers in authority, in order to enforce keeping each other’s hands off each other’s women, they have to enforce each other’s authority over each other’s women. That is why when a group of males moves in on a group of women to attempt a pickup, they first have to agree in advance which of them is going to score which girl so that the girls cannot play them off against each other.

Conversely, the first thing a sneaky fucker in authority or in a position of status is going to do is undermine other men’s authority over their women, even though this strategy is apt to backfire on himself, as it backfired on King George the Fourth.

Romance is an escape hatch out of the tenth commandment. Supposedly it is OK to fuck other men’s women if that is what they want. Tingles supposedly make sex holy, and a woman should supposedly always get whatever man gives her tingles. So a woman can have sex with every man who gives her tingles, which is apt to be a disturbingly large number of men, and stop having sex with any man who stops giving her tingles, who is apt to be the father of her children.

Well I have bad news: Your women, including your daughters starting at a startlingly early age, always want to fuck some strange man because there is always some man higher status than you, so this escape hatch out of the tenth commandment is always going to burn you. Therefore any group of men that allows this escape hatch out of the tenth commandment is always going to perish in the long run. And any time someone claiming high status tells you that your women are not going to be tempted to fuck some high status male, provided you are sufficiently holy, or sufficiently progressive, or sufficiently manly, sufficiently patriarchal, or sufficiently antisexist, or sufficiently loving, is more interested in sneak fucking your wife than in the survival of the group to which he belongs.

These are the real optics: Nobody likes the weak horse, white knighting women and girls as sexless angels looks weak, and sneaky fuckers need killing even if, like William Duke of Acquitaine, they are far from weak.

Jim, Jim's Blog 2 Comments [8/12/2018 9:27:30 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 139748

[Part 2 of the previous Jim quote]

To be more precise, white knighting fails as a strategy for men with women. It works as a cover for defecting on your fellow males. If one tells a woman one is supporting and protecting her, she will despise one. If one tells a man one is supporting and protecting his wife and his daughters, it will likely persuade him to refrain from killing one.

White knighting works as a sneaky fucker strategy for high status males. If a male is acting in a role that makes him higher status than you, as for example a preacher, he is in a good position to fuck your women. If, in that high status role, he preaches that women are higher status than himself, that is going to impair his chances. But if, in that role, he preaches that your women are pure and chaste (and therefore your women would never have sex with him)) and also preaches that women are higher status than you, that is going to improve his chances. “Domestic violence” laws are a white knight strategy targeting men who are low status in the male hierarchy but high status in female perception, because violent. People in authority are pissed that women like are criminals and men with no income, and so push “domestic violence””in an effort to undermine the authority of those men over their women, with the unfortunate effect of undermining the authority of all men over all women. The correct way to reduce the propensity of women to hang out with stone broke criminals and ignore the guy with the corner office in the skyscraper is to support male authority over females, but only for males in good standing, as the Mormon Church does. Of course, that has the effect that people in authority don’t get to fuck the women of men in good standing, which is why this strategy is so frequently unpopular with men in authority.

Which is how we got into this mess. King George the fourth slept with the wives of aristocrats. His own wife slept around. He tried to divorce her, revealing himself as powerless and cuckolded. The power of Kings went away, and anglosphere fertility has been falling ever since, with a temporary recovery between first wave and second wave feminism. The elite go after each other’s women, lose social cohesion, and social disorder ensues.

Recollect my story about the first men inventing chastity and monogamy: The leader of the first men assigns one woman to each of his followers who is any use, and a dozen to himself. Noticing that some of that dozen are apt to be frisky, he issues a commandment that marriage is eternal. If a woman has sex with a man, she may only have sex with that one man all her days. Further, if a woman does have sex with another man, it is absolutely fine for her husband to kill her and/or that man, and the rest of the tribe should support him in that endeavor.

Time passes, and the leader of the first men is getting a bit frail. A new leader is rising, and this new leader has as yet only one woman. As his power an status rises, he notices other men’s women giving him the eye. The new leader announces that women are chaste and virtuous, and it is important to protect them. That works for him in the short run, but it is going to be bad for all the other men in the tribe.

I call them the first men, because they were smart enough to have laws and commandments, and likely smart enough to attribute those commandments to God, but looked like upright apes. It seems likely that they looked like upright apes, because women find male apes sexually attractive, while men do not find female apes sexually attractive, which indicates that in our evolutionary history, men have been exercising sexual choice, but women in the lines that we are descended from did not get to exercise sexual choice since the days we looked like apes. Which indicates that populations that allow female sexual choice die out, and explains the female propensity to make very bad sexual choices.

It is unlikely that males would have been able to coordinate well enough to prevent female sexual choice till smart enough to have laws and commandments (which is smarter than some present day peoples) so this implies a population with human intelligence and human social order but apelike appearance.

You cannot suppress female sexual choice except you have laws and commandments that prevent men from defecting on other men, from which I conclude that we are descended from a very long line of populations that had the law:

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor’s.


in effect, that though entire peoples kept falling away from such laws, peoples that fall away from those laws disappear from history.

That females are severely maladapted to an environment of female sexual choice, while men can accurately assess female fertility at thirty paces in seven seconds tells me that we are descended from peoples that were pretty relaxed about male choice, while forcefully suppressing female choice, people who only restricted males from impinging on the other male’s property rights in female sexuality, and were otherwise fine with it being open season for male predation. So if we look back in history to the family law of a people that did survive, this is what we should see. Open go for male predation, except that other men’s wives and fiancees are very much off limits, death penalty for women who sleep with one man, then cheerfully sleep with another man while the first man still lives.

And this is in fact what we do see. The biblical penalty for rape or seduction of an unbetrothed virgin was … shotgun marriage. The biblical penalty for rape or seduction of a betrothed woman, was death. Which implies that if someone raped an unbetrothed woman, kept her around, fed her, looked after her, and she nonetheless sneaked off when he was not looking, the penalty was death, both for her and for whichever man she sneaked off to.

So who killed the offenders? The state, the temple, or the man whose property rights in women’s sexual and reproductive capabilities were violated?

Jim, Jim's Blog 0 Comments [8/12/2018 9:27:27 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 139747

[Splitting this into multiple submissions because it's long as fuck but all of it is fundie]

There is a lot of bad female behavior. It gets worse as they get older, but it starts very young indeed, typically around four years below fertile age, with a great deal of variance, much more variance than occurs in males.

People complain that when I notice sexual misbehavior in very young girls, that this is “bad optics”.

I say that there is severe and widespread female misconduct getting right in our faces, that we need to stop them, and that we need start stopping them very young.

People then claim I advocate raping little girls, and that this is “bad optics”.

I say that female consent is always unclear and ambiguous, and is usually foolish and given to very bad men with very bad consequences, and that therefore such decisions need to be made by the parent or guardian.

People then claim that I say that I should be allowed to have sex with other men’s children and they should not be allowed to stop me, even though that is exactly the opposite of what I am saying.

These claims make no logical or factual sense. But equally obviously, they make emotional sense if you are badly cucked.

Suppose someone genuinely fails to see women behaving badly. Then, if he disagrees with me, the natural response is

“No you are wrong, women are not behaving badly, they don’t need to be controlled”


But instead I hear

“horrible men need to be controlled and you are a horrible man, you rape other men’s daughters and seduce other men’s wives”


Which makes emotional sense if those making the accusation see what I see, but are frightened, weak, and impotent. It only makes emotional sense if one sees bad behavior, and, unable to address the bad behavior directly (because that would be domestic violence, hostile work environment, sexual harassment, mansplaining, and rape) displaces one’s rage. If one does not see what I see, if one does not see a great deal of very bad behavior, it makes neither logical nor emotional sense to accuse me of these absurd views. For someone to make these angry hostile denunciations is displacement of anger and pain, thus only makes emotional sense if female misbehavior is causing him anger and pain, thus only makes emotional sense if he sees what I see.

Blaming men for female misconduct is fear, weakness and white knighting. People say that speaking the truth about women is “bad optics”, but weakness is the worst optics. We are the strong horse.

I am indeed saying that women, starting at a horrifyingly young age, like sex, like rape, and rather like brutal rape. To conclude from this that I am arguing in favor of brutal rape, one has to attribute to me the white knight position that women should get what they want. But that is an implausible position to attribute to someone who is arguing that women want very bad things, wicked, foolish, and self destructive things, and who frequently says in the plainest possible words that women should not be allowed to get what they want. Chastity and monogamy are a plot by men against women and needs to be imposed on women with a stick. Monogamy and chastity were first invented when one band of ape men wiped out the ape men of another band, killed their mothers, killed their children, and divided up the women among themselves.

When I talk about nine year old girls finding an older male to fuck them, I say “but she does not want to fuck someone like you – she is going to fuck a heavily tattooed forty year old motorcycle gang leader and drug dealer.” When a heavily tattooed drug dealer is my example of youthful female hypergamy in action it is unreasonable to attribute to me the argument “This is what little girls want, and therefore giving it to them should be fine.” What I say is that this is indeed what little girls want, and therefore they need to be whacked with a stick and in some cases shotgun married. We need to deal with this problem with domestic discipline and the threat of early shotgun marriage, not by doubling down on prohibitions against men, prohibitions that are only effective against respectable men, and thus wind up reinforcing the little girl’s feeling that bad men are higher status.

Attributing to me outrageous and absurd positions only makes emotional sense as emotional displacement, and emotional displacement only makes sense if a problem is hurting one badly, and one is powerless and afraid to do anything about it.

Blaming men for the behavior of women is weakness and fear, and smells to everyone like weakness and fear. When people see the strong horse and the weak horse, naturally they will prefer the strong horse.

There is an enormous epidemic of extremely bad female behavior right in front of your face. That this epidemic starts at a very early age is just a small part of what people are refusing to see, and this small part is no different from the rest of it. Mostly what we see is bad female behavior in college and in the workplace, and it is in the workplace that most of the economic damage from female sexual misconduct happens.

...

Now suppose instead the boss bulls his way through, and insists on talking about X, ignoring her gentle steering towards Y? Well, chances are that at first the interruptions become considerably less helpful, less respectful, less friendly and less supportive, more openly hostile and disruptive. But maybe, indeed very likely, her stiffening resistance will suddenly collapse, and she will accept the boss talking about X. In which case he has passed the shit test, and when he wins and when she capitulates to his verbal domination you will see her emit some subtle or not so subtle body language that signals that if he were to try some physical domination on her for size, maybe that might well go down similarly. Which was, of course the whole point of the exercise, the whole point of disrupting the bosses talk and attempting to silence him. The dance is pursuit and predation, conquest and surrender. To reproduce successfully, men and women have to form stable families, which means that men have to conquer, and women have to surrender. She is provoking him to aggress against her, so that he can conquer her. She never actually cared one way or the other whether the boss talked about X or Y.

Now you might suppose you can stay out of trouble by always capitulating, by losing to every shit test, by white knighting. Accepting defeat, accepting the higher status of your adversary, works in a conflict with a fellow male. It fails catastrophically in a conflict with a woman. Male conflicts are resolved by establishing hierarchy. Female conflicts ae resolve by eliminating the losers. If you submit to male dominance, he would like to keep you around. If you submit to female dominance, she will casually destroy you. Men reproduce most successfully by ruling, females reproduce most successfully by being ruled, thus are maladapted to rule. White knighting fails.

Jim, Jim's Blog 0 Comments [8/12/2018 9:27:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 139717

i am absolutely haunted by how ugly men are allowed to be and still get hot girlfriends

truly seeing that female socialization in action when these gorgeous women are willing to let these fucking goblins lay hands on them

dyke-fibers, Tumblr 8 Comments [8/11/2018 1:47:40 PM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: The Reptilian Jew

Quote# 139723

Becky



Beckys are a variant of femoids directly subordinate to Stacies in terms of looks and social status. Despite their lower position on the social totem pole, they will nonetheless pursue the top 20% of males while ignoring their looksmatches. This sexual jockeying often puts them at odds with both each other as well as with Stacies. Although they will gleefully fuck Chad, Beckys will often end up settling for Brad or a high-tier normie when she begins to approach The Wall.

Incel Wiki, Incel Wiki 11 Comments [8/11/2018 6:14:11 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139720

Since the beginning of the “Me, too!” movement, “patriarchy”—and the very idea that females prefer to be feminine—is under attack as never before. The Swedish capital Stockholm has banned ads that portray female stereotypes [Stockholm bans “sexist” and “degrading” adverts from public spaces, By Sara Malm, Daily Mail, 13 June 2018]. An Austrian museum about James Bond will cut out “sexist” aspects of the movie series about the Alpha male and his assorted scantily-dressed Bond girls [Not Licensed to Offend, By Tim Walker, Guardian, June 11, 2018]. On Father’s Day, fathers were supposed to receive “feminist” gifts, to undermine the patriarchal undertones of the celebration [9 Feminist Father’s Day 2017 Gifts For The Dad Who Believes In Equality, By Lindsay Mack, Romper, 7 June 2017, ].

But if a theory recently presented by two female researchers from Britain is correct, then patriarchy only evolved because of the male need to give women what they wanted, females are literally evolved to like and accept the patriarchal system, and, by implication, we’d have no civilization if it hadn’t developed.

...

Grant and Montrose argued that patriarchy is, therefore, entirely understandable in evolutionary terms. In China, women’s feet were bound so they couldn’t run away and have affairs. In the Islamic world, women are concealed in public so that no potential cuckolder can be attracted to them. Religions render these traditions—as well as general obedience to the male will—as the desire of the gods, making it even more likely to be obeyed.

And females who fail to obey risk severe punishment, including simply being killed to restore the families’ honour. There are, the authors report, about 300 honour killings in Pakistan annually, with sentences being very lenient compared to those for other murders. In the Middle East, women are killed for actual or alleged adultery, for refusing arranged marriage, for not being virgins when they get married and for being raped, as this implies that they were not being chaperoned by a male relative as mandated. Most societies give daughters far less freedom than sons. Not only are daughters worth more—in the sense that their child will definitely be your grandchild—but we’ve been selected to control them.

The fascinating result of this, argue the authors, is that females are literally evolutionarily selected to accept patriarchy. Those who refuse to have their feet bound, or be circumcised so they can’t enjoy sex, will not be able to get married and so won’t pass on their genes. Such refusal to obey the rules also elevates the likelihood that they’ll be ostracised—in societies where laws make it very hard to be an independent female—or directly killed. Grant and Montrose argue that abortion is particularly problematic in patriarchal societies because it allows women far too much control over themselves.

What this system means is that males—trusting that their investment in the female and her offspring will be worth it—can afford to be less violent, less jealous and more cooperative. They will invest more of their energy in looking after their children, making these children less short-term oriented, able to create stronger social bonds, and likely to be more cooperative.

And so a civilization will duly be able to develop.

This is a compelling theory and the authors also present some clear ways that future researchers can test it: Cuckoldry rates should be lower, and fertility higher, in more patriarchal societies and fundamentalist sub-cultures; the more fundamentalist and patriarchal a society the faster growing its population will be, as women will have no control over their bodies and no option but motherhood; and patriarchy will be stronger in polygamous systems, like Islam, because there will be more women for a husband to control.

Anecdotally, at least, this all these seems to be the case.

So, reducing these findings down to their basics, patriarchy is a result of the evolved psychology and physiology of females. Its development has, in turn, pushed females, for biological reasons, towards being more accepting of patriarchy.

Could it be that the rise in “feminism” is not just due to the collapse of patriarchy but, more profoundly, due to weakened Darwinian selection, due to the less harsh life created by the Industrial Revolution? (See Social Epistasis Amplifies the Fitness Costs of Deleterious Mutations, Engendering Rapid Fitness Decline Among Modernized Populations, By Michael Woodley of Menie et al., Evolutionary Psychological Science, June 2017).

This would mean more “mutant genes” not being removed through high child mortality or spinsterhood for “undesirable” women, such as those which might make people challenge patriarchy?

The authors insist “It’s a Man’s World” but it only became that way due to the power women have over men to force them to bend to their evolved desires for investment and status, as evidence of the ability to invest in resources in their children.

“It’s a Man’s World”—and it’s Women’s Fault?

Lance Welton, Unz 1 Comments [8/11/2018 6:13:39 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 139678

Foids can't be interested in male hobbies

Face it guys, foids won't be interested in the same hobbies we're interested in such as video games or anime. Foids are driven by the sole purpose of raising and maintaining their own value, and the foids who do things like play video games is for an ulterior motive of raising their SMV to increase orbiters.

Anonymous MG, Blackpill.online 21 Comments [8/10/2018 9:25:38 AM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139676

The collapse of civilization is happening in your lifetime. Feminism caused it. There is no coming back from this. Long post.

Expanded upon another post of mine in another thread.. been meaning to post this for you all. I kinda suck at writing so it might be all over the place. There’s a TL;DR down below but I put a lot of effort into this so I’d appreciate if you took the time to read.

For the cucktears lurkers, before you shit on this, Take a step back and look at the world in the context of just another sexually dimorphic mammal species to understand the following.

Civilization is inherently a patriarchy. They are the same thing. One cannot exist without the other. In order for a civlization to exist, female sexual nature (hypergamous genetics-based mate selection) must be kept in check, for men to be treated equally and fairly, to allow for all members to have hope that if they contribute, they can be rewarded with guanrateed breeding right over a female of their choosing. In this sense, it is necessary for the success of a civilization that women be sexually oppressed.. this developed world is a man’s thing and will only ever cater to men. It is our creation for the benefit of all, but mostly genetically subpar, men. It’s all built at the expense of women’s vaginas. Any society in which women have free mate selection can not function. In tribal times, there was 1 sexually successful man for every 17 sexually successful women.. assuming a 100% female sexual success rate, that leaves 94% of men sexless. This is important. If it weren’t for this fact, we wouldn’t have a problem and this site wouldn’t exist. We need to replace genetic currency with something else in order to appease all men and make it possible for everyone to contribute and build something great.. Money was invented. Money must represent survival in order to be worth anything. It must replace the baseline definition of survival meaning a big strong male able to kill other males in a fight. Well we have a police force for that now so no need to worry. But most importantly, it must be able to be used as leverage to purchase pussy under the guise of survival. That’s the only way to keep the male population happy. Without it, women have to reason to mate with subpar men.. This system is inherently oppressive to women. Unfortunately for them, this system favors survival over reproductive success. Everyone survives and procreates but at the expense of females carrying and birthing inferior DNA. Survival is not enough for them. The idea of 1:1 male to female mate pairings guarantees that all the females not paired with a high SMV male with be with a low SMV male and produce genetically poor kids (which is why they are repulsed by low SMV men, which is why rape only exists with low SMV men, but you knew this already, no need to expand), something that disgusts them on a primitive level. It’s a system they need to get rid of.. hence the sexual liberation, fighting for rights, fighting for a right to work, etc. no matter how hard men try to keep a society strong and prosperous, women will actively try and tear it all down.

This snowball formed when women were given rights.. it started a snowball effect. Now there are several things that compounded with each other make for a nightmare scenario for the world.

1: women in the work place. Women earn their own money now. A Man’s resources cannot be used as leverage to purchase reproductive rights with a female. Thus his contributions to the tribe are meaningless as his reward holds no value.

2: genetic misrepresentation and contraception. Estrogen frauding Makeup, plastic surgeries, gym to build a high estrogen ass.. all these things are being used to falsely elevate women’s sexual dimorphism, perceived serum estrogen concentration, age, fertility, etc. notice how every foid does makeup the same way. Thin narrow nose bridge, shadows under the zygos to show zygo projection, rounded chin makeup, eyeliner to fraud thick eyelashes (health indicator).. women are walking around looking like top tier specimens the likes of which would make your caveman ancestors balls explode. Tbh they should bow down to partiarchy that they’re able to walk around like this alone and not immediately be gangraped when they step out of the house looking like they sweat pure estrogen and fertility. And lastly contraception.. things like birth control, condoms and abortion make casual sex and being a whore consequence-free. It’s the reason the cock carousel exists.

3: easy access to a global sexual market. The tribe is no longer a handful of guys and girls with the top guy doing all the fucking. Smartphones, Tinder, Instagram, cars, planes, buses, etc all help make the sexual marketplace a global thing.. in essence it’s an 8 billion member tribe, with easy access to all types of chad dick. Far more competition among males and a far lower sexual success rate among the male population.

4: destruction of religion. Religion isn’t really a thing anymore. It was once a powerful tool to convince women that 1:1 mate pairings are what’s to be expected, no sex before marriage, shit like that (had other reasons too. Keeps men’s testosterone at bay, thou shall not kill, steal, etc. keeps things civil) .. They had a reason to abide and ignore their primal instincts. It did a pretty good job.. now that’s gone, and there’s virtually no way of enforcing monogamy and chastity. Which funny enough, is also the only prerequisite for a woman to get married.. just be a virgin. They can’t even manage that yet a bunch of captain save a hoes are quick to wife em up, and these hoes will wear white on their wedding day symbolizing their purity.. jfl

Compound these 4 new phenomenon together, and you can quickly see that the sexual market is fucked, and a society with a SMP like this cannot sustain itself.. This is a world that belongs to women now. This world automatically excludes all men unfit for reproduction. In this case, it’s likely over 99% of men. What will these men do once they realize money doesn’t buy pussy? Once they realize that if there’s truly no hope for them, they can rely on government assistance, or work a menial bottom tier job just to make enough to survive. If these men even have the drive to go to work, they will have no drive to innovate, get promotions, invent something, become millionaires, etc. you’ll have a lot of complacent men with no motivation to contribute anything. Best hope automation can replace the entire workforce, and if not, then you got a work force made up of 99% women and just lmao if you think that’s gonna take us anywhere. Women have no incentive to make money other than to rid men of their only leverage and open up their prospective mating options. Same deal with them.. they’ll just aim to make the minimum amount to survive and genefraud enough to land 6’4” chad.

This results is a catalysmic shift of the world as we know it.. there will be a total collapse once the number of men who drop out of society reaches critical mass. But until then, you will see a shitload of people dependent on government assistance, the rich being taxed out the ass, who now have even less incentive to keep perusing high paying careers, more people coping with drugs/alcohol, a spike in suicides and mass shootings, high SMV men forming harems, etc.. basically 2018 x10.

For this to happen, It’s not even necessary for the masses to swallow the blackpill.. it’s only necessary for them to realize money doesn’t mean anything anymore. That’s all it takes. Put simply, one’s contributions to society are no longer worth the effort. It’s basically slave labor at that point.

So there you have it. All the causes are there and cannot be reversed.. things have already been set in motion. just wait till the effects of them become painfully obvious. This cannot be fixed since nobody is gonna accept that women’s vaginas are the reason for this. Maybe next time around men don’t fuck up and start the civilization off strong with commoditized pussy. This will all go down in documented history so a mistake like this likely won’t repeat itself. That’s the good news.

This should be lifefuel for you all. You are witnessing the collapse of the most successful civilization on earth in YOUR lifetime. Pretty cool. So ditch your ER plans, untie your ropes, and Sit back and watch the world burn.

TL;DR; a couple rights here and there and a few apps destroyed the world. Patriarchy, religion, and commoditization and sexual oppression of women are paramount to the existence and survival of any civilization. We lack all 4. It’s over. Bunker up and stockpile food and ammo. We’re going back to the jungle.

SchrodingersDick, incels.me 7 Comments [8/10/2018 5:45:56 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
Submitted By: Pharaoh Bastethotep

Quote# 139669

on brock turner


A young intoxicated male college student making out with a young intoxicated female college student should not be accused of rape. It is going to get to the point where our sons needs to take vital signs and give females breathalyzer tests. Did she fondle his penis b4 passing out? If so, is she a rapist? Take some responsibility ladies.
One more thing, if a child is a high achiever great athelete, is white and was raised in an upper middle class family why is he being penalized and stereotyped? He's an easy target. It's no longer correct to hate on African Americans, gays, transgendered people, or women. So, bam Brock turner is it.

Randironda, reddit 8 Comments [8/10/2018 5:45:35 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 139662

Am I a rapist?

Earlier this year I went back to a city I used to live and work in in my early twenties. I hung out with my old friends and went to some of the bars we used to go to. Whilst I was in one of these bars I bumped into a girl that I had history with and suddenly, the moment I saw her, I remembered that by #MeToo standards I had probably raped her. She didn't seem mad or bring it up or anything, we actually talked all night and had a cool time. She had been hot before but she's even hotter now. She's put on weight in a good way, I've put on weight in a bad way, so unfortunately nothing happened.

Anyway this is what happened with her in the old days when I lived in that city.

Her and I worked for the same company but in different branches. The young people from all the (4) branches in the city used to generally get together and have a good time (get hammered) a lot. There was a lot of shenanigans. Anyway, she developed a reputation for getting blackout drunk and shagging random guys, including one of my best friends. It was a very, VERY well deserved reputation. She also told everyone that she was in love with me and would frequently fling herself at me. If we were in a club she would basically molest me, if I got with another girl she would cry, even though we had no past at that time and actually she didn't know me well at all. At the time I was in much better shape than I am now and I was not averse to the odd bit of rumpy-pumpy so people who knew me and her casually had no idea why I wouldn't shag this girl, as she was hot. Everyone that knew her well knew exactly why I wouldn't. She was the village bike.

Anyway one night we were all out, she was trying to get with me as usual, and the girl I had hoped was going to join us cancelled. So I thought, 'fuck it' and took the drunk girl who was apparently in love with me home. We got back to my apartment and we started shagging. She was incredibly drunk and went to sleep half way through. I continued anyway.

I don't feel guilty as I know she was super keen on me, tried to shag me constantly and slept like a starfish, taking up all of the bed.

When I saw her earlier this year she looked even hotter than before (and I have to admit she was hot before, she just repulsed me because of her behaviour) and had calmed down a lot, everyone says she is like a different person. Cruelly, I'm fat and balding now and shes no longer interested.

So.

Am I a rapist?

mate, Kiwi Farms 10 Comments [8/9/2018 1:49:42 PM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 139655

No one, no one actually thinks transwomen are women. That's what drives me crazy. Even when I was trans-inclusive I didn't believe that (I wasn't being asked to chant it either, probably would've peak transed me a lot sooner).

NO ONE thinks they are female/women. They think they should be allowed to play pretend, to have everyone else play pretend too, and the cost to actual women is not important.

jelliknight, r/GenderCritical 11 Comments [8/9/2018 10:46:01 AM]
Fundie Index: 8
Submitted By: Katie
1 2 3 4 5 | top