Need more members

lordoftheincels

Well-Known Member
Staff Member
We need more people to flock from incel.me and migrate over to here. The mods of incel.me are fascist, traitorous scum not fit for the end of my boot.
 
vcel im incel newcomer i think i have the right to speak out the truth against gynocentrism and blue pillers who dont know the suffering of life like me rejection from females and shaming tactics
 

vcelguy

Administrator
Staff member
AlenRomanesen said:
vcel im incel newcomer i think i have the right to speak out the truth against gynocentrism and blue pillers who dont know the suffering of life like me rejection from females and shaming tactics
sure thing, but don't troll please.
 
AlenRomanesen said:
vcel im incel newcomer i think i have the right to speak out the truth against gynocentrism and blue pillers who dont know the suffering of life like me rejection from females and shaming tactics
What's gynocentrism?
 

tremor

Well-Known Member
Staff Member
lordoftheincels said:
The mods of incel.me are fascist, traitorous scum not fit for the end of my boot.
Off topic, but what's wrong with them anyway?
 

Isol8

Active Member
lordoftheincels said:
We need more people to flock from incel.me and migrate over to here. The mods of incel.me are fascist, traitorous scum not fit for the end of my boot.
the mods suck here too. I"m going to check incel.me because half my posts here are deleted. If i get philosophical or intellectual on any level, the post is deleted. I don't know why I'm even creating this post, it will be deleted. Funny. This is the only forum I've ever experienced filtering of posts; and it's an incel forum, elliot rodger's goal in life was to become a despot, could be a link between control and incelism. you should let all the posts through, it would be helpful to your psychology to let go.
 

fashi

Member
vcelguy said:
SonOfAgony said:
incel** doesn't exist anymore :p but we need more people yeah
Just moved.
IK this isn't how you do it but needed your attention and to ask where .me migrated too. I remember perusing this forum a couple of weeks months back and you saying how you private messaged someone. Have always had ѕhit luck with mods so if this is a serious ban material im sorry.

Pls dont ban.
 

vcelguy

Administrator
Staff member
Isol8 said:
lordoftheincels said:
We need more people to flock from incel.me and migrate over to here. The mods of incel.me are fascist, traitorous scum not fit for the end of my boot.
the mods suck here too. I"m going to check incel.me because half my posts here are deleted. If i get philosophical or intellectual on any level, the post is deleted. I don't know why I'm even creating this post, it will be deleted. Funny. This is the only forum I've ever experienced filtering of posts; and it's an incel forum, elliot rodger's goal in life was to become a despot, could be a link between control and incelism. you should let all the posts through, it would be helpful to your psychology to let go.
Cut the crap, you have 20 total posts and 18 are live.
First:
November 9th, 2018
This place seems cool, but there's such little activity / discussion. Any other sites with more incels?

Second:
lordoftheincels said:
Incels are not worthless, most of them probably have higher IQs than most Chad's on average. Mostly its women who make them so depressed they never realize their full potential. Most chad's have no potential, women are basically reversing the evolution of the human race.
There's no way to tell if this is true currently. as our environment changes so does the relative fitness of it's inhabitants. Since natural selection takes a long time to mold organisms to fit their environments, we are all 'suited' for an ancient environment. evolution is always behind as it takes natural selection a long period of time to purge the population of unfit characteristics.

There will be changes, and it may be towards the direction, not of the incel, but to the intelligent. Just because you are an incel doesn't mean you are intelligent, and just because you are a chad doesn't mean you have a lower iq or are less conscientious. I would assume success in the workplace would be the future of the fit male. It's not difficult for a male to impregnate a female, so a big dick won't be valued / give a woman a vaginal physiological reward in the future. the depth at which a man deposits his sperm into the vagina, or into a vagina that has had an orgasm or two before ejaculation, does not increase the woman's chance of being fertilized. But outgoingness and assertiveness - does this give someone's offspring a higher chance of survival, a higher chance than intelligence and conscientiousness? I don't know, but these are important questions. And if the future attention of women belongs to the intelligent and conscientious, evolution is still moving in the right direction, and women may still be attracted to males most fit to the environmental challenges of 10,000 years ago. But then again, men are just as guilty of this. How many of the men here are masturbating to large breasted women, all of them. Even though large breasts no longer has an evolutionary advantage for offspring, as most babies are fed 'formula' and no longer rely on caloric resources directly from their mothers luscious melons, men are still attracted to them, and want to put their penis between them.

I'll let it slide for once. You were warned.
Lemme tell ya a secret, reddit and other "incel" themed boards are filled(and even operated) with trolls and females making incel-like posts. I'm doing my best to keep those buggers out, moderation politics will remain unchanged.
 

lordoftheincels

Well-Known Member
Staff Member
Isol8 said:
There's no way to tell if this is true currently. as our environment changes so does the relative fitness of it's inhabitants. Since natural selection takes a long time to mold organisms to fit their environments, we are all 'suited' for an ancient environment. evolution is always behind as it takes natural selection a long period of time to purge the population of unfit characteristics.

There will be changes, and it may be towards the direction, not of the incel, but to the intelligent. Just because you are an incel doesn't mean you are intelligent, and just because you are a chad doesn't mean you have a lower iq or are less conscientious. I would assume success in the workplace would be the future of the fit male. It's not difficult for a male to impregnate a female, so a big dick won't be valued / give a woman a vaginal physiological reward in the future. the depth at which a man deposits his sperm into the vagina, or into a vagina that has had an orgasm or two before ejaculation, does not increase the woman's chance of being fertilized. But outgoingness and assertiveness - does this give someone's offspring a higher chance of survival, a higher chance than intelligence and conscientiousness? I don't know, but these are important questions. And if the future attention of women belongs to the intelligent and conscientious, evolution is still moving in the right direction, and women may still be attracted to males most fit to the environmental challenges of 10,000 years ago. But then again, men are just as guilty of this. How many of the men here are masturbating to large breasted women, all of them. Even though large breasts no longer has an evolutionary advantage for offspring, as most babies are fed 'formula' and no longer rely on caloric resources directly from their mothers luscious melons, men are still attracted to them, and want to put their penis between them.
Congratulations, you made the literal cuckiest post of the internet. I believe in freedom of speech, but honestly this post makes me sick to my stomach.


Your definition of fitness is strangely sickening, you define fitness as the ability to be beta and a "yes" man, an obedient blue pilled beta of the global plantation, who obeys all the rules and is obedient and politically correct at all times. Apparently buzzfeed beta cucks are the prime males. Hoorah for open borders and a world of loving thy neighbor, even if your neighbor hates your guts and could care less if you die an incel.

I'm not going to ignore that there are some trends going on that are similar to this. But this is classified as "runaway selection". Females selecting males in such a way that it causes species extinction.

Also the jokes on you, because universal income is going to make being an obedient slave of the plantation obsolete, people will be able to get a house, car and the things that males need to entice a female with, without having to resort to being a politically correct feminiѕt drone.
 

Isol8

Active Member
I don't agree with and have never heard of the definition of fitness you are proposing is my definition, 'being a beta / yesman. I posed a hypothesis that characteristics that would lead to a higher salary / success in the workplace, would be the fittest males evolutionary speaking. And the 2 biggest predictors of success in the workplace is intelligence and conscientiousness. Being a yes man / obedient man is neither of those things and would not lead to success / money / fitness. I never said anything close to what you're saying. You're rightfully calling this idea ridiculous and arguing against it, but I never posed an idiotic idea like "beta male / yes man are the most evolutionary fit" But I'm going to go to reddit now if i'm looking for debate, this is a site to discuss the frustrations about being rejected sexually by women, and I would like to remain a part of it.
 

tremor

Well-Known Member
Staff Member
Isol8 said:
I don't agree with and have never heard of the definition of fitness you are proposing is my definition, 'being a beta / yesman. I posed a hypothesis that characteristics that would lead to a higher salary / success in the workplace, would be the fittest males evolutionary speaking. And the 2 biggest predictors of success in the workplace is intelligence and conscientiousness.
You wish. Bosses promote either mediocre but good looking guys who wouldn't challenge their authority but would make everyone work or their friends/relatives. They want control, not excellence, because more and more modern jobs require little to no hard skills anyway. If you are in an occupation where they are needed, then yes, it might be true, but not necessarily.
 

lordoftheincels

Well-Known Member
Staff Member
Isol8 said:
I don't agree with and have never heard of the definition of fitness you are proposing is my definition, 'being a beta / yesman. I posed a hypothesis that characteristics that would lead to a higher salary / success in the workplace, would be the fittest males evolutionary speaking. And the 2 biggest predictors of success in the workplace is intelligence and conscientiousness. Being a yes man / obedient man is neither of those things and would not lead to success / money / fitness. I never said anything close to what you're saying. You're rightfully calling this idea ridiculous and arguing against it, but I never posed an idiotic idea like "beta male / yes man are the most evolutionary fit" But I'm going to go to reddit now if i'm looking for debate, this is a site to discuss the frustrations about being rejected sexually by women, and I would like to remain a part of it.

You are clearly delusional. All the modern workplace is is an sjw shitlib breeding ground of quasi-homosexual beta numales. You know the types of guys you see on modern commercials? Like the one's who's voice somehow manages to sound more effeminate than actual transsexuals? Like the guys in those cell phone commercials? Those are the type of guys I'm talking about. All it is is a sjw shitfest where flirting with a girl is a bannable offense. Saying a politically incorrect joke is a bannable offense. 2 years from now, doing a microaggression is a bannable offense. No real alpha would ever tolerate being in such an environment or being bossed around by other men and women. Masculine males tend to have shitty blue collar jobs. The only exception are people like Elon Musk who by some miracle rise to the top.
tremor said:
Isol8 said:
I don't agree with and have never heard of the definition of fitness you are proposing is my definition, 'being a beta / yesman. I posed a hypothesis that characteristics that would lead to a higher salary / success in the workplace, would be the fittest males evolutionary speaking. And the 2 biggest predictors of success in the workplace is intelligence and conscientiousness.
You wish. Bosses promote either mediocre but good looking guys who wouldn't challenge their authority but would make everyone work or their friends/relatives. They want control, not excellence, because more and more modern jobs require little to no hard skills anyway. If you are in an occupation where they are needed, then yes, it might be true, but not necessarily.
Correct.
 

Isol8

Active Member
tremor said:
Isol8 said:
I don't agree with and have never heard of the definition of fitness you are proposing is my definition, 'being a beta / yesman. I posed a hypothesis that characteristics that would lead to a higher salary / success in the workplace, would be the fittest males evolutionary speaking. And the 2 biggest predictors of success in the workplace is intelligence and conscientiousness.
You wish. Bosses promote either mediocre but good looking guys who wouldn't challenge their authority but would make everyone work or their friends/relatives. They want control, not excellence, because more and more modern jobs require little to no hard skills anyway. If you are in an occupation where they are needed, then yes, it might be true, but not necessarily.
there are some companies / bosses like this, but the good one's aren't. Good managers don't want control, they want their employees to grow and do well and their departments to be productive and quantifiable success. a boss who can't handle good employees will get demoted. There's so much research on the correlation between IQ and professional success.
 
Top