Sexual liberation for thee not for me.

The bottom male on the right should have a rope around his neck.

this is why prostitution should be legalized. men need an outlet for their sexual energy or else they will become dangerous.

I'd say we need government assigned wives and strict anti-adultery laws or something rather than just a whore, I want actual intimacy without being overcharged for it.

Okay well that’s too extreme

What other option would there be realistically though? I wouldn't be happy with just a prostitute.

Your solution is not realistic at all

...I mean that is true.

But you would be happy with a woman captive who hates you?

As long as she'd pretend to love me.

Why would she do that? She's been assigned by the government. Been to a govt department lately? You can't even get politeness there.

If she's cut off from everyone else she'd probably be desperate and I'm big enough to be intimidating.

Desperate enough to poison you maybe?

Would you rather die in prison or be in a loving relationship for someone you have no mutual feelings for? I'm pretty sure I know the answer.

Obviously I would try to get away with it. But there's no loving relationship here. You'd be kidnapped and imprisoned by a rapist.

Kidnapped to the government and assigned to a possibly loving husband and contained, not kidnapped and imprisoned by a rapist, that's a pretty big difference. An even bigger difference once girls start being brought up with that being the idea of how they will live.

You sound like a rapist, not a loving husband. And grooming girls from a young age to put up with it, doesn't sound like an improvement.

Well that's just your opinion. wording it as grooming makes it sound creepy.

Because it is creepy. How would you like to be brought up to be a gay guys boy toy?

...That is completely different, most women are either straight or bisexual.

5% are lesbians.

So that example is only similar for 5% of women, and even then it would be less severe due to upbringing.

You're still willing to ruin someone's life so they can be your servant.

Are you talking about lesbians specifically? In the case of straight women in all honesty how fulfilling would their lives have been anyway? I at least I'd give mine love(in a noncreepy way) I know it sounds dehumanizing but think of it more as a pet but human. I realize I'm digging myself deeper in this whole in some ways but it makes sense if you remove the creepy connotations from it

How fulfilling would their life be, trapped in a house with a weird guy who doesn't care what they're really like as a person, he just want his free girlfriend experience pet? Yes, it's probably mildly worse for lesbians but it's probably pretty bad for any woman.

Most people like free will and self determination.

Most guys who would participate in a program like that wouldn't be weird because most guys would participate in it so that would be like saying most guys are weird. They would be allowed to leave the house with their man(like women in some of the more progressive ancient societies were). Don't call it a "girlfriend experience" or a pet, that makes it sound like you're intentionally trying to make it seem like prostitution, a kink, or looking at them as not being human. I agree that with high quality participants it would be only mildly worse for lesbians.

If they thought that they had as much free will and self determination as they could ever have don't you think they would be content with that?

I agree that with high quality participants it would be only mildly worse for lesbians.

I was more thinking that the straight women wouldn't be attracted to you either. There's a reason women were thought to be asexual for centuries.

It is like prostitution, the forced kind where women have no choice because you won't let them work, which they would prefer.

I think better of men than you do though. I don't think most men would participate in this 'lets pretend it's not rape and kidnapping with indoctrination.'

If they thought that they had as much free will and self determination as they could ever have don't you think they would be content with that?

There's a whole movement against, so no I don't think they'd be content.

I was more thinking that the straight women wouldn't be attracted to you either. There's a reason women were thought to be asexual for centuries.

I'd honestly be more attracted to a woman I thought was asexual(trying not to sound creepy), much better than one I think of as a whore. How exactly do you know women would actually prefer to work as opposed to being housewives?

I don't think it seems like rape or kidnapping though.

There's a whole movement against, so no I don't think they'd be content.

Not sure what you mean.

You said the government assigns them, you're going to cut her off from everything she knows and she might be able to leave the house with you. Sounds very much like a kidnapping to me. Then, presumably, despite her not liking you at all, you presumably expect sex and companionship from her.

You also want young girls brought up so that this is the best they can expect from life.

The movement is feminism.

You said the government assigns them, you're going to cut her off from everything she knows and she might be able to leave the house with you. Sounds very much like a kidnapping to me. Then, presumably, despite her not liking you at all, you presumably expect sex and companionship from her.

Yeah it sounds creepy and like kidnapping but its to help with companionship so it's for a good cause. I'd want them to be taught from a young age, not just kidnapping random women.

Women don't know what they want, once they succeed with pushing femism they will decide they dont want it.

Maybe it's men who don't know what they want and they should be brought up from a young age to believe that they don't deserve anything just for being born a man and if they wish to attract a spouse they need to have some quality that makes being with him look better than ending up a childless 40yo cat lady.

they should be brought up from a young age to believe that they don't deserve anything just for being born a man and if they wish to attract a spouse they need to have some quality that makes being with him look better than ending up a childless 40yo cat lady.

They are already are brought up that way, I was taught my whole life if I wanted a girlfriend I need money, and I need decent money. But from my slight catfishing it seems that even slightly above average income isn't enough for women anymore.

Perhaps you should have been taught to be interesting and compassionate instead.

And where would that get me? How the fuck can someone even be taught to be interesting? I'm already compassionate.

Not judging by your replies in this post. You have no concern for women other than why aren't they serving you.

I'm showing compassion for lonely dudes and I mentioned that there should still be laws on how women are to be treated, I'm not saying they should be sex slaves tied up in the basement on a short leash and be beaten without a valid reason. I already mentioned that I think I'd treat a woman well.

Forcing her to have sex with you, or even stay with you when she doesn't want to, even without violence, isn't treating her well.

Why don't lonely dudes befriend each other if they want friendship. You've said you want more than sex but no unwilling woman will give you that willingly.

Forcing her to have sex with you, or even stay with you when she doesn't want to, even without violence, isn't treating her well.

I mean if I actually had a girlfriend I'd treat her well, and if I lived in a world where things worked like I mentioned I'd love my assigned wife and treat her right as well.

But she would be sitting there cringing as some guy she hates paws at her.

That's why upbringing is important, to teach her to like whatever she gets.

If any me wants to know why you incels have a bad reputation, it’s people like this.

Do you at least agree with some sort of anti-adultery laws? I was really pissed off when I wrote that.

Um no? Why does the government have any business there?

Well what the fuck are you supposed to do when your wife cheats on you? harassment and slander are illegal, physical violence is as well of course, if you cheat on her it doesn't matter because she has someone else so she won't care. There needs to be a legal way to get back at women for it.

Lmao at chadlites having to settle for the bottom 20%

DELETE THIS

btw do you think there is there a difference between upper tier normie and chadlite?

Upper tier normie is 6.5 while chadlite is 7

In my brother's flat at uni they have everyone's names on pieces of paper on the wall and a tally of how many girls each one has hooked up with.

Two guys are on 1 or 2 girls, and my brother is on 10+ already.

This has always been true. Feminism just made it a little more honest.

Disagreed. Ugly girls used to have it hard back in the day, now there only struggle is finding a better chad to fuck

This revisionist history that always pops up on reddit is downright bizzare.

Women used to be punished harshly for fucking outside of marriage and they couldn't get on tinder to get a new daddy to pay for it. In some times and countries they were stoned to death for this behavior.

This has always been true.

Desire does not equal action. We're not all incapable of thought.

No one is less informed than the redditors who insist "it was always like that" or "because evolution." No one. Even the feminist have ostensibly been outside before.

Women used to be punished harshly for fucking outside of marriage

Not really, even when it was unlawful the laws usually weren't enforced. Fuck there is a reason why the symbol for love is the outline of a silphium plant seed.

Not really, even when it was unlawful the laws usually weren't enforced.

What are you talking about?

Being confident isn't the same as being correct. This isn't a group of women where we're looking toward who feels the most right. Laws aren't the same as social mores. Social groups were arranged differently with different priorities and values before you were born, though that is clearly difficult to imagine. The more human behavior changes, the more people like you insist it doesn't and hasn't changed at all because you confuse base impulses with what they lead to, which is the product of a simple mind. Women wanting to cheat isn't the same as them going through with it, nor is it the same as the behavior being condoned. Someone wanting to rob you but not robbing you isn't them robbing you because they want to.

What are you talking about?

The fact that even when women were prohibited from sex outside marriage the laws were rarely enforced. Now WTF are you talking about?

Women used to be punished harshly for fucking outside of marriage and they couldn't get on tinder to get a new daddy to pay for it. Lack of social support was death for them and fucking outside of marriage meant lack of social support. In some times and countries they were stoned to death for this behavior.

That's how it SHOULD be.

Why? You think women are lesser than yourself?

I don't think women should go around fucking every chad they see. How does that make me a piece of shit?

Why was that bad?

Honest question, what's wrong with people being with who they want to be with? I don't think this picture is accurate, but if it was, why would you want to force someone to have sex with someone they didn't want to have sex with?

because you end up with a large percentage of the male population going without and that causes problems.

Because by not forcing people to have sex with people they don't want to have sex with leaves billions of men alone.

Billions.

I'm pretty sure a very large portion of men die as virgins.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/03/on-late-in-life-virginity-loss/284412/

that's fucking depressing... I hate how fucking slutty women are and how it's impossible for a normal guy like me to get one. I'm betting most of the dudes who lost their virginity were just from prostitutes.

I've talked to you before. Your view of the world is warped. You gotta stop blaming women. It's probably better for you to just to visit a couple of prostitutes and focus on making friends and having productive (non internet) hobbies.

My view of the world seems fine, it usually is womens fault. Prostitutes won't help as you can tell by the escortcels that keep coming back here, I don't know how to make friends and I don't really have hobbies I want to get into.

My view of the world seems fine

Says the person who thinks billions of males die virgins, blames women for their personal decisions, and self admits they don't know how to make friends or have hobbies they want to get into.

After going to this sub, I actually am a believer that incels exist. That some people out there are way too damn ugly to have a chance, and it'll take a miracle to overcome their physical handicaps. However, a lot of people in this sub just have shitty attitudes and personalities, and want to blame everything else.

You even admit you're taller than most incels and not as ugly. That means its your own damn fault you're alone. Own it and improve.

In the last ten years there has probably easily been billions of men who died virgins. What personal decision have I blamed women for exactly?

There's plenty in life to do that's fun and exciting. Stop blaming life, and start looking at yourself. We live in a culture that coddles people from the time they are in kindergarten and I think that's partially to blame for incel culture. It's time most incels face the truth, and the truth is that they can only blame themselves. Hell, you even admit you're taller than most incels and not as ugly. You have a shitty personality and that's why you're alone. Own it and improve yourself.

Okay what exactly does being coddled have to do with having an extremely boring life? There really isn't anything in life that's fun or exciting. I don't even know what you mean by needing to look at myself because I don't see how I could do things differently, I just deal with the options I"m presented and I don't have many options.

Why are the women slutty but you have no problem with the men? Men also have multiple sexual partners. Am I a slut for being with 4-5 different girls over the past decade? Are those girls sluts because they’re with other men now? No.

Because it actually at least takes effort for a guy to have sex, but yes I'm against them as well just not as much because I can repect the effort.

Forcing anyone to have sex is rape, which leaves people traumatized.

I hope your reply was sarcasm.

It isn't rape or traumatizing depending on circumstances, for example if she needs to have sex to stay in a relationship that she needs to maintain in order to maintain her social and financial position and if she goes along with it it isn't rape or traumatizing, she wouldn't want to have sex, but she'd be(somewhat) forced to.

Huh, so if I need to have the shit beat out of me to maintain my relationship (and hence my social status), that's totally cool?

No, that's insanely fucked up. It's a good thing women don't need men to maintain their social status anymore, because this is apparently what would happen (and has happened in the past).

No, women not needing men to maintain their social status has lead to them being whores. and yeah if you need to have the shit beat out of you you probably deserved it.

What's wrong with people having sex with the people they want to have sex with?

Because women have the gall not to be having it with him! /s

It leaves almost everyone(especially men) as virgins because they wouldn't ever be able to get with someone they want to have sex with.

I disagree. The reason there are so many incels is more because of cultural and personality issues.

Cultural issues: especially how women are so afraid of being slut-shamed and taught from a young age that sex is incredibly sacred. They either become over-conservative and settle down young, or they become hyper-liberal and live for short pleasures instead of meaningful relationships.

Personality issues: Well yeah, no woman wants to have sex with a man who thinks she should be treated as property. /u/network9897 said it well.

Cultural issues: especially how women are so afraid of being slut-shamed and taught from a young age that sex is incredibly sacred. They either become over-conservative and settle down young,

That bit isn't an issue, that's how girls SHOULD be and their should be laws to try to force that on them.

I mean I'm not even going to lie and say I dont think of women as property, when I was typing recently I almost refered to them as property on accident because I wasn't thinking about it enough.

Should according to whom? According to evolution they're doing the right thing by avoiding low quality men.

According to societal and cultural norms, there is a difference between avoiding low quality guys and only going after the cream of the crop, if they only go for the cream of the crop consistently then in very small communities that will quickly lead to incest

And judging by statistics, most men are being chosen. Only a small percentage are missing out.

And not all of them even have that bad of features.

While I don't really believe in what I'm about to say, did you ever consider incels just having sex with each other? If it's such an important need for ya'll then that seems like a solution that doesn't tread on anyone's autonomy. I personally think that is also a horrible idea, but it's a better idea then forcing women into unwanted relationships.

I also wonder why you want to direct the negativity at women for being 'sluts', ignoring the fact that in this diagram the "Chads" are the ones hoarding women. In fact, in this picture each of these women only has ONE sexual partner, but the man at the top has FOUR. Why aren't you blaming him more? Seems to me like the women in this diagram aren't being sluts at all, and it's actually the "Chad".

Correct me if I am off, but what I sense is this: You are pissed off because you can't have sex, and would prefer to blame it on women because if you start to blame the Chads it may come back around that men aren't more of the problem... which might open a door for you having to take responsibility for your own disgusting POV.

While I don't really believe in what I'm about to say, did you ever consider incels just having sex with each other? If it's such an important need for ya'll then that seems like a solution that doesn't tread on anyone's autonomy. I personally think that is also a horrible idea, but it's a better idea then forcing women into unwanted relationships.

I mean that's kinda in the same line of advice as "Just go gay bro! I know you aren't attracted to them, you don't want people to judge you, you only want to give and never receive and forget about any religious morals you have! it's easy bro, just ignore the voice and body and pretend it's a woman!" Honestly a lot of incels probably would have a better chance as gays and playing up their feminine features but most aren't willing to go to that point especially if we are straight.

This diagram is not what I was refering to, and secondly I'm pretty sure each person is meant to represent their looks category rather than representing a singular person, for example the top man and women would represent a 10/10. I fully admit to having double standards, but women being sluts affects me much more directly and they are still half the problem. Women also like to visibly look like they are sluts so I can't even go down the street without looking own on every woman I see.

Don't get me wrong, some chads are huge part of the problem, if they aren't judgemental enough about how their partner actually looks and her body type, but I can't fully blame them because makeup can make a 4/10 go to a 8/10, No before you ask men wearing makeup wouldn't even fix the problem, attractive traits on a woman in her face is more about the softer features caused much in part due to fat and muscle which is easier to make look "softer" in terms of features, with men it's deeper and lies more in bone structure.

I am far from a chad so I wouldn't have to take responsibility even if I blamed them for.

Yeah, I agree. Telling people to "go gay" isn't a good solution. But why resort to trying to force women to be with someone they don't want to be with?

Sexual desire isn't something that you can force. Even if I can't have the person I want, I can't just magically get wet for someone else. Just like you can't just "go gay" because you can't have a woman. That means that just like I shouldn't be forced to have sex with you, you shouldn't be forced to have sex with anyone you don't want either.

Some people on this subreddit have suggested otherwise, saying that women SHOULD have sex with men who are of the same level of attractiveness as them, even though most women would rather just not have sex at all if put in that situation. As far as I can tell this is just as degrading as me suggesting that incels should go gay if they can get what they want.

Do you see what I am getting at?

Yeah, I agree. Telling people to "go gay" isn't a good solution. But why resort to trying to force women to be with someone they don't want to be with?

Because I believe if they are brought up to just love who ever they ed up with it would be mostly fine.

Sexual desire isn't something that you can force. Even if I can't have the person I want, I can't just magically get wet for someone else. Just like you can't just "go gay" because you can't have a woman. That means that just like I shouldn't be forced to have sex with you, you shouldn't be forced to have sex with anyone you don't want either.

Women's standards are absolutely insane, it's reasonable for them to go for someone in their leage rather than only going for chads, how the fuck is that as degrading as telling someone to change their sexuality, are women REALLY just that turned off by men who aren't model level? I don't think most women would prefer not to have sex if put in that situation and if they aren't willing to settle for their looks match they deserve to be alone.

As a woman, I don't think that I only go after "model-level" men. In fact, most of the guys I've been with are hot to me, but probably considered to be in the range of 5/10-8/10 to people in general. It could be that my perception is wrong and that I am dating out of my league, or that I am an exception to your claim, or it could be that your claim is wrong. I actually would have a lot of doubt about pursuing an excessively sexy guy because 1) I mentally expect that sexy people are more likely to be promiscuous, and 2) I'd feel like he's (physically) out of my league.

Because I believe if they are brought up to just love who ever they ed up with it would be mostly fine.

Wanting someone to love who they are with is extremely different from forcing someone to be with someone they aren't attracted to.

If girls didn't want modellevel looks why don't any want to spend time around me?

Wanting someone to love who they are with is extremely different from forcing someone to be with someone they aren't attracted to.

I mean it isn't much different than some forms of arranged marriage.

women are so afraid of being slut-shamed

Being a slut is bad in every culture, which means being a slut is bad for society. If every woman is a slut then no man will want to commit. This is already happening with plummeting marriage rates.

Well yeah, no woman wants to have sex with a man who thinks she should be treated as property.

Wrong. A lot of women want to be treated as property, as long as her owner is desirable.

Wrong. A lot of women want to be treated as property, as long as her owner is desirable.

What's your evidence for that statement? My observation is that women very strongly want to be treated as equals to men, in being able to vote, own property, work jobs, and even small things like legally being allowed to wear pants. If most women didn't care about these things, why was there ever a woman's rights movement?

Women want to be treated equally under the law and have equal right. As they should, I agree with that.

Most women don't want to be treated as an equal in romantic relationships with men. They want the man to take charge and they want to be sexually dominated in the bedroom. I'm sure there are exceptions, but I'm talking about the majority here.

They want the man to take charge and they want to be sexually dominated in the bedroom.

Is there something wrong with a person having a particular romantic or sexual preference? Like most women, I do enjoy when a man plays the more dominant roles in a relationship (at least romanticall/sexually speaking), however I am cognizant of the fact that some men who I may want to be with find 'taking that role' to be very energy consuming (as opposed to the men who consider that role to be enjoyable and energizing). As a result I make it a point to push for communication so that both me and my partners needs are known and understood (and hopefully reasonably met). Woman totally should put more effort into the initial establishment of a relationship, but once two people are dating it's their business what type of relationship they want to have.

Is there something wrong with a person having a particular romantic or sexual preference?

Not at all.

Like most women, I do enjoy when a man plays the more dominant roles in a relationship

That's all I was trying to say.

Some guys naturally take the lead (Alphas), some guys need to fake it (Betas). Not so clear cut, but that's what it boils down to. Most women would want to lock down an alpha, but because there is a high demand for him there is constant competition from other women. Most of the time it's easier to settle for a beta.

Women totally should put more effort into the initial establishment of a relationship

I think women put a lot of effort into initiating relationships. It's not direct so it's harder to see, but women certainly spends a lot of time trying to get the guy she wants.

So what is the problem then?

Is it a problem that women aren't choosing the 'right' men, or is the problem actually that 'chad' type men are hoarding women? (This question comes from my observations in this group).

To me, the actual problem is more about openness and empathy. In a world where more people gave a shit about each other, no one would have to get stuck in an endless cycle of self-hate and sexual frustration. However our current culture supports mystery and game-playing as the 'right' way to romantic relationships, which results in the current imbalances we see, which include things like incel culture as well as women who are involved in unsatisfying sexual relationships and think "that's just the way it is".

So what is the problem then?

The problem is there's never going to be a situation where everyone is happy.

It's not that Chads are hoarding women, there is no need. Women want Chads and they and have huge number of women available. So women can either try to lock down a Chad and risk being pumped and dumped, or settle for a beta. When monogamous marriage was a social priority, women usually settle for betas. Were they happy? Probably not. Are women happier now days when they end up single at 30 after being pumped and dumped by Chads in her 20s? Probably not. A lot of studies show women are actually a lot less happy now days.

To me, the actual problem is more about openness and empathy.

It would be nice if people gave a shit about each other. No argument there. I just don't think it's realistic to expect such a huge change to human nature. People have never gave a shit about each other.

The problem is there's never going to be a situation where everyone is happy.

I'm optimistic that we can increase the overall happiness though. While I do believe in personal responsibility for each person's actions, it is a danger to society when there is a significantly sized group of people who are unhappy. So in that sense it's in everyone's best interest to limit the number of people who are unhappy.

So women can either try to lock down a Chad and risk being pumped and dumped, or settle for a beta.

To be this is an obvious area that can be improved, and the solution is not to try to control women. The solution is to help women to work through the baggage that causes them to continue to pick POS men and to not make better choices. I don't want this to sound arrogant, but I can say that every time I've had a problem in a romantic situation, I learned from it and intentionally did my best to avoid that particular problem in the future. Many women struggle with this. They meet a guy who acts amazing at first and then turns into a total ass, eventually they break up, and then the woman meets another guy who puts on the same show. This goes on and on, and often times it seems like they never learn. I'm not an expert, but based on what I have read I think it's a result of social conditioning. Women trying to find "Price Charming" and "Happily Ever After". No woman gets into a relationship with a man hoping that he's going to cheat and/or dump her. It's just that many women are stuck in a psychological trap where they are obsessed with the idea that they will meet some perfect guy. Eventually this turns to lowering their standards or continuing with the serial monogamy until they get lucky or give up. I think for me the solution was realizing that men are people too, and they can't magically be your "everything", but that doesn't mean they don't deserve love, care, and patience.

I do think it's realistic to expect people to give a shit about each other. I'm on this board because I want to connect with the people here and better understand where they come from. It does make me feel nervous and tense, but I figure if I can get through that maybe I can use what I learn to encourage people in my social circle to be more loving to people who they don't understand.

Then tell us why liberalising sex has only made even more incels. Did you miss the whole point of the article above?

0.3 percent of Americans are virgins by 40 years old. So no it’s not almost everybody. Just the worthless dregs of humanity that can’t reproduce. That’s how it should be.

That percentage goes down a lot thanks to prostitutes and suicide.

What’s wrong with being racist?

I post in this sub because I genuinely feel for the incels here. I was a late bloomer although I am happily married now, and my brother is a late bloomer as well. I know a lot of guys out there who are lonely aren't bad people, but just socially awkward who need help coming out of their shell. A lack of confidence and rejection creates a vicious self propagating cycle that only causes less confidence and more rejection...

However, you're just genuinely a piece of shit. You're alone because you're a fucked up person with fucked up beliefs. People can do whatever the fuck they want, whether its like pineapple on pizza, enjoy rock n roll, or have casual sex. People don't deserve to be treated like property or beaten.

You're a terrible person, and as long as you remain a terrible person, I hope no woman has any contact with you.

I was just saying that a lot of abuse doesn't happen without reason, and a lot of the abuse that does happen with little reason is a method to vent when they really need to and would end up breaking their other property or going on a drive and getting in a wreck.

I'm against people being able to do whatever they want, I think people should be judged heavily for what they do.

I'm not a terrible person, I've just had no success with women.

I actually mean no insult when I say this, but you need a therapist.

Therapists are useless.

Look dude, I went through your comment history.

You're not a good person, you're not a nice guy, you're not someone any reasonable person would want to associate with. I don't know how much of you being shitty is because you're a shitty person, and how much of you being shitty is because of your experiences, although I would like to believe it's the latter, you've said some deeply disturbing things.

You show very low to little capacity for empathy. You think when women get beat, you say they deserved it. You judge women heavily for doing things that have no affect on you whatsoever, such as having casual sex. You also think you should be assigned a sex slave by the government, with complete disregard that women are people to who are capable of feeling emotions, desires, and have hopes and dreams like any other person.

You're not an incel because you're 6 feet tall and I'm assuming you're average looking. You have bad luck with women because you are a deranged, creepy person and women can see right through you. Your self image is incredibly inaccurate, you need to see yourself for who you truly are, and you desperately need help. Get off this subreddit because this subreddit is terrible for someone who is in your mental state.

Youre 20-21 years old which means you don't know shit about the world, therapists aren't useless. Go get help. If you aren't capable of overcoming your stubbornness, your life will continue to be miserable, and you will only have yourself to blame. I hope you can swallow your pride and take a good look at yourself and get the help you need.

I blame my experiences.

You show very low to no capacity for empathy. You think when women get beat, you say they deserved it. You judge women heavily for doing things that have no affect on you whatsoever, such as having casual sex. You also think you should be assigned a sex slave by the government, with complete disregard that women are people to who are capable of feeling emotions, desires, and have hopes and dreams like any other person.

Thinking that when women get beat they usually deserved it is in a way part of the just world fallacy many incels mock and assuming that violence is often provoked. Being against casual sex is a moral thing, and not an uncommon stance especially among religious people or even people who would want a loyal partner. there is nothing wrong with being against casual sex especially considering it does effect me because those same women will be my dating pool. I don't disregard that women are people, most hopes, dreams and desires don't matter and unless they are assigned to someone abusive(yes I would still want them to be reasonably protected from abuse believe it or not) they would probably be assigned to someone caring and if raised from a young age with that being all they could imagine doing I don't imagine it would be that bad for them. I don't completely lack empathy.

I think of myself as slightly below average and if my self image of myself is so off what makes you think I'm not worse looking than I think? I know some things I do and say are a bit creepy but I'm just being honest without thinking too much or desperate(when approaching girls). Therapy hasn't helped me in the past, I doubt it would if I tried again.

I feel like I just need some kind of social life...

Huh, so if I need to have shut beat out of me to maintain my citizenship, that’s totally cool?

The simple fact of the matter is because of deregulation of the economy and various external factors like offshoring and automation it has become an economic reality that women for the most part are required to work.

It is capitalism that has allowed women economic independence. There is no shadowy conspiracy. To the present day capitalist state it is better to have as much consumer spending as possible.

Did you mean to reply to someone else?

I am simply explaining to you the realities of the world post 1980 as far as women being dependent on men.

Women simply don't need men. This is better for the capitalist class because its more spending in the economy.

There needs to be heavy anti-adultery and anti-casual sex laws, the state of society and women is disgusting.

Forcing anyone to pay tax to support women’s welfare programs is theft, which leaves people traumatised. I hope your reply was sarcasm.

Same reason completely unregulated capitalism would lead to disaster.

Oh my god you’re insane. So you think you have a right to have sex or a relationship? If no one wants to have sex or a relationship with you, too fucking bad.

Also you’re suggesting that the rich get richer when it comes to partners. Well polygamy isn’t legal in the US and almost all people settle down to be less sexually active. It’s not like one man accumulates all the women you dunce.

If no one wants to give you a home and food, too fucking bad. M-mmmuh bootstraps. Fucking eat my shit.

That is LITERALLY what happens you mongoloid, it's in the OP. "All people settle down" yes, almost all females settle down with betas after riding the cock carousel and we're don't want to take that shit anymore. The sexual revolution fucked over all men except Chads and we're not happy with that. I know you want us to accept it like good little beta cucks but we're not gonna do that shit so fuck you.

Ah yes I forgot a home and food were equivalent to sex or relationship. You’re so delusional.

They're not because a lack of them "DOESN'T KILL YOUUUU" amirite?

You do realize that sex and affection are human needs, right?

You can get that from friends and family and just because it’s a need for you doesn’t mean some woman should be forced to be with you, you absolute cunt. If you don’t have friends and can’t get a woman than tough shit. Get your act together. Stop being a piece of shit. Even ugly people have friends. It’s your shit personality and uninteresting life that repel people.

I'm not the guy you were replying to. No need to assume that I want women to be force into relationships and call me names.

There is nothing wrong with it, it's just that woman essentially won't date their looksmatch, so while women are dating up men are dating down leaving the bottom rung (incels) with no woman willing to date them at all. So you end up with a society where 20% of men are consistently having sex with 80% of women. It's just that while men are more willing to settle women are more willing to do whatever it takes for Chad to settle with them.

Honest question, what’s wrong with the majority of people being unemployed?

Such an inequality would lead to an excess of lonely, unhappy men, which some have argued has negative effects on society:

https://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21688587-young-single-idle-males-are-dangerous-work-and-wedlock-can-tame-them-men-and-mayhem

Any system that produces a surplus of single men is likely to be unstable. Polygamous societies suffer “higher rates of murder, theft, rape, social disruption, kidnapping (especially of females), sexual slavery and prostitution,” note Joseph Henrich, Robert Boyd and Peter Richerson in “The Puzzle of Monogamy”.

So, each man should get a woman who is forced to have sex with him, just so men don't cause trouble?

My perspective: Maybe these men need to stop being babies and learn how to be decent members in society despite their needs not being met. Do you know for how many centuries women were forced into unwanted marriages with shitty sex (i.e. sex where only the man gets off), and how they still managed to be good mothers and members of society?

You shouldn't blame women for denying a man sex and him partaking in "murder, theft, rape, social disruption, kidnapping (especially of females), sexual slavery and prostitution" as a result. And if you are, then you should seriously reconsidering allowing men to have any kind of authority power at all in a society, because they implies that men are incredibly dangerous and unstable.

Maybe these men need to stop being babies and learn how to be decent members in society despite their needs not being met.

Maybe those niggers need to stop being so uppity and stop committing so many crimes if they don't want to be racially profiled

I'm not referring to a group as a whole. I am referring to specific men who commit crimes because they can't have sex. If I was talking about people of color, I would be referring to specifically those who are committing crimes, and not those who are trying to live a decent life.

In my observations, most incels are pretty decent human beings. However there are definitely some who are not. I am directing attention to these individuals because they are a bigger problem to achieving a peaceful society that maximizes happiness.

First off, I'm not fully endorsing the conclusions in that article. I haven't done enough research to speak with authority on the subject, but I just came across the article recently and thought it would be interesting to share.

So, each man should get a woman who is forced to have sex with him, just so men don't cause trouble?

No, I don't support that at all. However, there are ways to encourage beneficial behavior without forcing it upon anyone. For example, things like the media or social movements can have significant influence on a population's values.

Beauty standards, attitudes toward monogamy, the things we find attractive, the things we value in relationships -- these things can all be changed by society (and have in the past), and I don't think that is the same as a government forcing people to do anything.

My perspective: Maybe these men need to stop being babies and learn how to be decent members in society despite their needs not being met.

Sure, the men need to take accountability for their actions to some extent, but it's also reasonable to recognize the role of external factors and to help people where we can.

You shouldn't blame women for denying a man sex and him partaking in "murder, theft, rape, social disruption, kidnapping (especially of females), sexual slavery and prostitution" as a result.

I don't blame women for that. There's a difference between understanding the factors that lead people to do bad things (and wanting to reduce them), and pushing the blame onto those factors (and absolving the wrongdoers of any guilt). For example, suppose a kid grows up in a in a poor neighborhood full of crime, with no positive influences, joins a gang and falls into a life of crime because that's all he's ever known...If that kid robs a store, we can recognize that he's done something morally wrong and deserves punishment under the law, but we can also understand why he did it and we can want to clean up these environments and help people who grow up in these conditions.

I completely agree. Thank you for your carefully written and well-thought response.

I don't want anyone in the world to have to miss out on the basic joys of being a human being, but it's hard to not get emotional when some people suggest doing horrible things to one demographic group in order to alleviate the pains of another demographic group.

Social/cultural change is the way to go.

Yeah bro it doesn't matter you're not fulfilling your physiological needs bro just don't be a baby bro just don't be an internet misogynist bro as long as you rot peacefully I'm fine bro god damn bro these incels are killing me bro

I was merely pointing out the implications of suggesting that the reason that men need to have sex is so that they "don't cause trouble". If we assume that men are such animals that they will just cause chaos when they don't get their well, that makes them fall to the level of children or infants and then they should be treated as such.

Fortunately I have a well-balance view and know that men are't actually like that. But it should be brought up when someone tries to use that as a defense for why men need to have sex.

The real reason that EVERYONE deserves a satisfying sex life is that human happiness is important, and having sex is a major contributor to human happiness. However, forcing someone to have sex with someone they don't want will reduce that happiness, so we need to look at it another way. For me, the answer is teaching people to be more open to connecting with each other so that the bonding-type relationships that cause people to genuinely want to have sex will happen more often. This is a problem that is particularly obvious in the incel community, but happens basically everywhere.

Yea bro I have no issue with men bro it doesn't matter the suicide rate for men to women is 3.6:1 bro as long as they shut up about it bro can't have these silly men complaining about their sad and lonely life bro men deserve to be happy but they don't deserve it THAT much bro

suicide rate for men to women is 3.6:1

You do realize that the reason more men succeed at suicide than women is because men tend to take more lethal approaches to suicide? (e.g. more likely to use a gun than a drug overdose)

That unfortunately supports the idea that men are more likely to take rash, aggressive action when their needs are not met. Versus women who (on average) take more passive, gentle action.

can't have these silly men complaining about their sad and lonely life bro men deserve to be happy but they don't deserve it

Everyone deserves to be happy. But you can't solve one groups happiness by destroying the happiness of another group.

men are incredibly dangerous and unstable

Yes, we are. Women have been good at keeping men under control, but when you have too many single men shit will start hitting the fan.

you should seriously reconsider allowing men to have any kind of authority power at

Who's going to stop men from doing that? An army of women? Women's power come from society, when society breaks down into violence women will have no power at all.

Maybe these men need to stop being babies and learn how to be decent members in society despite their needs not being met.

Maybe women need to stop being babies and learn how to be decent wives despite their needs not being met.

That feels wrong. You can't just force somebody to marry you. You lose half of your money and the marriage will be a sham

Honestly, I think it's just you. You are a perfect example of what is wrong with society. I am not surprised you have a hard time finding women to have sex with you.

I hope that you can recover and learn to actually love another human being so that you can experience what being human is actually about, instead of dwelling in bitterness and hate because you can't get what you want.

I don't hate anyone, I was just making some observations about the world. If you disagree I would love to hear your opinions. Very harsh judgements about me from just a few sentences, and I don't think they are correct.

I am sorry if I judged you too quickly. It can be difficult to have this sort of conversation online because our minds tend to fill in the blanks, and you have said some pretty intense sounding things (at least in the way they are interpreted in my brain).

I can see also how my comments could be interpreted differently from how I meant them, so let me try to clarify. I responded rather intensely because I felt attacked by the situation presented (which suggests that women are both heartless and ruthless sluts), and I wanted to aggressively point out that suggesting that "men will cause trouble" is not a very good defense for why we need to ensure that mens (and everyones) sexual needs are reasonable met in society.

I do also feel offended by some of the ways you were talking, but I recognize that this may be merely because you were responding to my harsh words, or because my current mindset is aggressive that I am interpreting everything more harshly. So I'm sorry for that. This circumstance pisses me off too. I don't like it when people unnecessarily suffer.

"men will cause trouble" is not a very good defense for why we need to ensure that mens (and everyones) sexual needs are reasonable met

I agree. However, I don't think anyone suggested that we should force women to have sex with incels besides you.

When men can't find partners for long periods of time it's very damaging to their mental state. It's no surprise when every culture has some sort of marriage institution. Social stability requires it. When marriage breaks down in a society, you naturally get hypergamy and a huge group of males without partners. I'm not saying women are whores and sluts, even if they are it's not inherently bad. Historically, only 30% of men passed on their genes, this is evident when you analyzed human DNA. Hypergamy must have its evolutionary benefits. But more most of human history, people only associated in small tribe. Huge societies evolved social rules like marriage out of necessity.

I don't know what the solution is. I don't think any form of coercion is desirable or even effective.

So, each man should get a woman who is forced to have sex with him, just so men don't cause trouble?

That's called a false dilemma fallacy. The rest of your comment is based off that fallacy. Your comment is garbage.

Mamma mia fucking rekt

Please elaborate or I'll assume you don't actually know what you're talking about. If you disagree and want to have a logical discussion, you need to actually explain what your disagreement is instead of just throwing out a "fallacy" and claiming I've made it.

The point of my response was that it's a bad argument to suggest that all men need to have someone to have sex with merely so that they don't cause trouble, which is what I interpreted /u/kta2 as suggesting. /u/kta2 very intelligently responded to me and cleared up my misunderstanding.

That said, I still stand by my comment that it's a bad idea to suggest that men have to have sexual partners just so that they don't cause trouble, particularly because it's obvious that women are able to live decently in society without having their sexual needs met (which to me implies that men should be capable of exercising the same restraint, or else they are positioning themselves as too immature for authority).

that women are able to live decently in society without having their sexual needs met (which to me implies that men should be capable of exercising the same restraint

Women don't behave decently in society when their sexual needs aren't met just as much as men. You don't know how upset women get when they are rejected by an attractive guy. Also men have more testosterone and higher sex drive. Men generally get hornier more often than women. Read some science on biology and psychology regarding differences between males and females please.

Women and men typically have the same levels of horniess, but women are more likely to surpress and ignore these feelings because of social pressure to not be sluts and to be pure. On the contrast, men are expected to want sex all the time, so men can bluntly express their horniness without fear of being called a slut. This board is a perfect example of societal slut-shaming of women.

Women don't behave decently in society when their sexual needs aren't met just as much as men.

I'd like you to elaborate on this. From what I've seen, men are much more likely to act in violent in abusive ways as a reaction of not having their sexual needs met. Women on the other hand are more like to just accept that this is the way life is when they have a boyfriend who can't get them off, because they don't want to hurt his ego. You completely overlook the fact that men orgasm during sex way more than women do. Most men define sex as penetration despite the fact that most women get the most pleasure from other acts.

Don't get high on yourself, I know plenty about biology and psychology, and how they link to sexuality. If you want to argue with me, at least elaborate on your points instead of making a short and simple comment because you don't agree.

men are much more likely to act in violent in abusive ways as a reaction of not having their sexual needs met.

Nah men get rejected all the time. I get rejected all the time and my friends get rejected all the time. None of us have ever been violent or abusive. I've never seen any man in life react that way. Women on the other hand react very poorly to rejection. Since they barely ever initiate, when they actually do they think they deserve anything they want. They don't face rejection as often as men so when they actually do it hurts them a lot more. They become verbally abusive and talk shit. Obviously they don't become physically abusive but they still get really nasty. There's a saying "Hell hath no fury like a women scorned," and it's a saying for a reason.

The only men I've gotten angry and verbally bitter with are the ones who I am already very close to. While I don't think that makes my behavior ok, it comes from a different place to become defensive when someone you are very vulnerable to makes you feel insecure. I do not believe that most women get aggressive at a man who asks them out once. If you ask her out multiple times despite her saying no, then you are being ridiculous and asking for it though. If it is true, that women attack you for only asking a reasonable question once, then I am sorry. You do not deserve to be mistreated like that. All I can say is that I am skeptical, but I don't know your experiences.

For data purposes, I've been rejected by half of the men who I've asked out. On the contrary, I've only once said no to a genuine first date request from a guy, and in that case it was because I didn't know who he was and he didn't make much effort to know who I was beyond how I look. So yeah, maybe my odds are better than yours, but I (as a female) reject a lot less than I get rejected. Such is the world of dating. When people tell me no, I just assume they have their reasons and move on. If they change their mind, they can figure out how to find me.

Do you know for how many centuries women were forced into unwanted marriages with shitty sex

Oh really? Then why did most men in history not even reproduce? I wonder where their babies went...

I am going to have sex with who I want to and buy a gun. Preferable to having sex with some lunatic who will go around breaking shit and killing people if someone doesn't have sex with him.

What's wrong is that men who fail to attract a woman are punished in a variety of ways for it. If you want to phrase it as something that is wrong "with" people being with who they want to be with, then it is wrong for people being with who they want to be with because they are essentially making personal choices for which some other people (i.e. unattractive men, incels and the like) end up being punished.

Ultimately, unattractive men are punished for not being chosen by women, or, conversely, punished for the choices of women. Since it's not in any way acceptable to punish one person for another person's action and choices (not to mention ultimately detrimental to any society), the only possible solutions are to either regulate women's choices or to relieve unattractive men of the penalties. I personally lean towards the latter, but given that even the most progressive societies currently on the planet still are much more averse to the latter than to the former, it's also plain to see why regulation of women's choice seems like a more achievable goal.

What's wrong is that men who fail to attract a woman are punished in a variety of ways for it. If you want to phrase it as something that is wrong "with" people being with who they want to be with, then it is wrong for people being with who they want to be with because they are essentially making personal choices for which some other people (i.e. unattractive men, incels and the like) end up being punished.

So, is it wrong for me to win an Olympic event, despite having the capacity to do so, just because I am taking that medal away from other athletes who also worked very hard to get there?

Ultimately, unattractive men are punished for not being chosen by women, or, conversely, punished for the choices of women.

Another analogy: If we're all at the same dessert table but there's only one of each type of dessert, is it wrong for me to take the cheesecake because I got there first? I suspect the incel-related explanation of this analogy would be that some people are taking more than one dessert, which means that the people who 'arrive late' (i.e. incels) don't get any. The issue with this perspective is that the blame still falls on the Chads (or the men who are pursuing more than one woman) than it does on the women. So the social answer seems more like to tell certain men (Chads) to stop being sluts, rather than anyone else. If the women who are left want to have someone, they'll pick from everyone else available and then the problem is solved. You could say that women can still enforce these rules, and while yes true, that only works if the woman actually knows that she isn't the only partner. There are a lot of shitheads who go above and beyond to hide the fact that they have multiple partners. Anecdote: a personal friend of mine found out last year that her ex-boyfriend was seeing nine other women. While I can say that I was able to tell he was a shithead from the start (and yes I tried to warn her), I don't think she was able to see it because she was in the infatuation fog. Anyway, what's your perspective on that analogy?

regulate women's choices

Is this implying forced marriage? or something else?

relieve unattractive men of the penalties.

What does this entail? I'm not sure that I'm familiar with what you mean.

So, is it wrong for me to win an Olympic event, despite having the capacity to do so, just because I am taking that medal away from other athletes who also worked very hard to get there?

No. The punishment enacted upon unattractive men goes far beyond simply not getting rewarded for being attractive. And I'm sure you're aware of that to, so your attempt to dismiss is it does nothing but reveal your hateful attitude towards such men.

is it wrong for me to take the cheesecake because I got there first?

If the other person is going to get tortured for not getting there first, yes, it's wrong of you. You either don't take it and endure the torture together, or you find a way to help them avoid the torture. At the very least, there is nothing noble, glorious or otherwise deserving of praise in getting that cheesecake.

So the social answer seems more like to tell certain men (Chads) to stop being sluts, rather than anyone else.

No, actually, if you go the way of regulating sexual desire, the only viable option is regulation women's desires. If you regulate Chad's choices, that just leaves a lot of women who can choose to simply not get together with anyone, leaving a lot of incels still incel and still judged, ridiculed and stripped of certain rights. That's why the only viable alternatives are what I listed - either regulating women's choices specifically, or eliminating virgin shaming.

It's also notable how you jumped to attempting to look for a way of reforming things that would both allow women easy access to high quality men regardless of those women's attractiveness AND would similarly preserve virgin shaming.

it does nothing but reveal your hateful attitude towards such men.

I am having a hard time understanding how this would imply that I have a hateful attitude toward men. Can you elaborate?

If the other person is going to get tortured for not getting there first, yes, it's wrong of you.

Okay, so we are saying that men are tortured when they don't get to have sex? Meaning, social torture? Because society shuns male virgins? And also I presume physical torture, because being devoid of sexual/romantic love is painful?

If you regulate Chad's choices, that just leaves a lot of women who can choose to simply not get together with anyone, leaving a lot of incels still incel and still judged, ridiculed and stripped of certain rights.

So basically, we have to strip women of rights so men can have their "right to have sex with women"? Is that what you are saying? So women don't deserve bodily autonomy?

It sounds a lot to me like your view is "make women suffer so incels don't have to". Correct me if I am wrong.

Updated for 2018

Even if this picture was accurate, it's not like 20 percent of dudes get 80 percent of women. Unless you live in some backwards culture it's still one guy per one girl, so those 3 women in the middle there aren't going to get any guys either, same as the 3 men in the middle right.

And that's according to this chart, which isn't based in any scientific research at all and comes from an incredibly biased source.

Like, maybe women have higher standards, but the same percentage of women end up alone as guys either way you look at it, so I don't get the point of this chart.

You're forgetting that Chad has a harem

Trickle down economics doesn't exist in the sexual marketplace. Certain high tier males aka top 20% get access to 80% of females. During females youth (age 18-25) they are fuckbuddies with Chads. One Chad has multiple fuckbuddies (redpillers call it "spinning plates").

When the roasties are saggy and used up at age 30 they say they are "done dating bad boys and ready to settle down with a nice guy" and the beta gets Chads sloppy seconds then ends up on r/deadbedrooms 1 year into his marriage because his wife never got over the dopamine rush Chads brought her and isn't satisfied with her beta looksmatched husband.

So why are there no incel women then?

There are, check out r/nicegirls.

Here's a sneak peek of /r/Nicegirls using the top posts of the year!

#1: A Message to All Nice Girls Who Might Have A Screw Loose | 246 comments
#2: Not sure if this counts but... | 388 comments
#3: Girl I used to talk to, glad I dodged that bullet a while ago | 355 comments

^{I'm a bot, beep boop | Downvote to remove | Contact me | Info | Opt-out}

WHAT PEOPLE THINK IT MEANS

Literally no one ever thought that. People who developed the Pill and Tinder didn't think it would get them all the pussy in the world.

This is such a stupid manosphere meme.

Literally no one ever thought that. People who developed the Pill and Tinder didn't think it would get them all the pussy in the world.

Female suffrage, the pill, abortion, removal of religion from public schools, welfare, etc, all sold by feminists and accepted by cucks along the lines that women would be free and willingly to spread the sex around.

My brother is at uni and they have a tally of how many girls each guy has hooked up so far.

His flat mates are on one or two girls. My brother is on 10+. He has multiple girls he could message right now to come over and fuck him.

Fuck me, this shit better be fake.

He even sent me a picture of girl 10 signing it haha

Fuck. Good job I didn't go to uni because I would've fucking pulled a Robin Williams on everyone and hang myself in the toilet

that's fucking depressing... I hate how fucking slutty women are and how it's impossible for a normal guy like me to get one. I'm betting most of the dudes who lost their virginity were just from prostitutes.

DELETE THIS

btw do you think there is there a difference between upper tier normie and chadlite?

As long as she'd pretend to love me.

According to societal and cultural norms, there is a difference between avoiding low quality guys and only going after the cream of the crop, if they only go for the cream of the crop consistently then in very small communities that will quickly lead to incest

Because it actually at least takes effort for a guy to have sex, but yes I'm against them as well just not as much because I can repect the effort.

I am sorry if I judged you too quickly. It can be difficult to have this sort of conversation online because our minds tend to fill in the blanks, and you have said some pretty intense sounding things (at least in the way they are interpreted in my brain).

I can see also how my comments could be interpreted differently from how I meant them, so let me try to clarify. I responded rather intensely because I felt attacked by the situation presented (which suggests that women are both heartless and ruthless sluts), and I wanted to aggressively point out that suggesting that "men will cause trouble" is not a very good defense for why we need to ensure that mens (and everyones) sexual needs are reasonable met in society.

I do also feel offended by some of the ways you were talking, but I recognize that this may be merely because you were responding to my harsh words, or because my current mindset is aggressive that I am interpreting everything more harshly. So I'm sorry for that. This circumstance pisses me off too. I don't like it when people unnecessarily suffer.

Either that or stop punishing and penalizing unattractive men for failing to attract women.

Can you clarify how men are punished for failing to attract women? I literally do not know what you mean.

I would also like you to go back and notice that you never answered all of my questions before you start claiming that I'm lacking in mental effort. My observation is that you are making high-level claims and then not really elaborating on them.

So let me ask it again, what do you mean by "regulating women's choices", and what do you mean by "relieving men of the penalties" of not having a romantic partner? We can't have this conversation if you can't define what you mean by these things, because the reality is that I am not familiar with what you are talking about. Until you clarify, all I can do is keep asking and guessing. But I don't want to guess, I want you to elaborate on what you mean.

The best I can gather from what you said was to "eliminate virgin shaming". If this is enough for you, then I have a feeling your goals are not inline with most incels. It also perplexes me because I thought out society was beyond that, at least once people get to be adults. Most teenagers are jerks and idiots in many ways, far beyond just virgin shaming. But I don't know any mature adults that would judge someone for being a virgin. In fact, in the part of rural America that I am from it's prized, even for men. Perhaps we just come from different parts of the world.