Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="GGWP" data-source="post: 45560" data-attributes="member: 93">Cringeworthy. Can&#039;t believe I wrote this only 6 months ago. My thoughts have changed a lot since then.Women are the center of a man&#039;s universe and vice versa. Masculine will exists purely to eventually snare a woman. It&#039;s all &#039;performative&#039;. A man&#039;s life is tantamount to Ishtar worship. All of your emotions and behavioral strategies are conditioned by the backdated breeding strategies of your ancestors. Even if you are a &#039;rebel&#039; you are a rebellious rube congruent to the servile, fecund archetype that women tide over, the rebel is a gnashing dog on a leash; the pious man a dog with no leash trained to wag about gaily by its owner. The incel is a free mongrel, but he has no master and no security and no purpose. In humans males are the dogs or racehorses on their species. Veneration of the masculine ideal or pursuit of self-actualization is strategic. I used to clown on Lacanian Jouissance and the pervasive fascination with sex that modern philosophy engenders, but now I understand.Thing is, why do incels denigrate women and call them callous, worthless or unworthy? Why do they care to make such statements? It is because incels are attempting to guilt-trip women. By expressing their grievances they are subconsciously hoping that a woman feels so guilty or alarmed that she offers herself up in compensation. It&#039;s just another breeding strategy unfurling.You cannot divorce human behaviour from sex. Even &#039;defection&#039; behaviours are probabilistically engineered to be sex-seeking.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GGWP, post: 45560, member: 93"] Cringeworthy. Can't believe I wrote this only 6 months ago. My thoughts have changed a lot since then. Women are the center of a man's universe and vice versa. Masculine will exists purely to eventually snare a woman. It's all 'performative'. A man's life is tantamount to Ishtar worship. All of your emotions and behavioral strategies are conditioned by the backdated breeding strategies of your ancestors. Even if you are a 'rebel' you are a rebellious rube congruent to the servile, fecund archetype that women tide over, the rebel is a gnashing dog on a leash; the pious man a dog with no leash trained to wag about gaily by its owner. The incel is a free mongrel, but he has no master and no security and no purpose. In humans males are the dogs or racehorses on their species. Veneration of the masculine ideal or pursuit of self-actualization is strategic. I used to clown on Lacanian Jouissance and the pervasive fascination with sex that modern philosophy engenders, but now I understand. Thing is, why do incels denigrate women and call them callous, worthless or unworthy? Why do they care to make such statements? It is because incels are attempting to guilt-trip women. By expressing their grievances they are subconsciously hoping that a woman feels so guilty or alarmed that she offers herself up in compensation. It's just another breeding strategy unfurling. You cannot divorce human behaviour from sex. Even 'defection' behaviours are probabilistically engineered to be sex-seeking. [/QUOTE]

Name

Verification

Layout Options

Color Schemes

Reply to thread