NEW FORUM RULES

lordoftheincels

Incels.Net Master
Do you agree that rapepill = patriarchy or do you have some different understanding of the rapepill? It's only recently in history that all forms of rаpe, as we know it today, have been banned in the western world, although I hesitate to even say that this process is complete, because there will probably be new forms of rаpe banned in the future as the definition continues to broaden.

"rаpe" is a subjective term anyway; chicks will open their legs to their husband and then later feel like they were ripped off in the marriage (he said he was going to get a better job so they could move into a nicer place and she could have babies, but that didn't happen, so therefore she was rаped, because she didn't consent to have sex with a loser, she consented to have sex with an ambitious husband who had some upward mobility).
Rapepill is not a good choice of words. You have a history of being a pedophile who had plans to rаpe your own daughter, and then you try to convince us that "rapepill" does not have loaded baggage to it and that we are the crazy ones. Upside down world.
 
Last edited:

Sicklecel

Incels.Net Master
Exactly, but that's how they think. They believe they have a birthright to be married off to a decent guy, and hey, why shouldn't they expect that? Not their fault that society was dumb enough to set up a feminiѕt system that gave them the ability to choose Mr. Wrong, rather than having Mr. Right chosen for them.
Even if the father chose mr. wrong by mistake it should also not be considered rаpe if she later regrets the sex and time she wasted on him. But fathers are much less likely to choose mr. wrong than a foid.
 

Leucosticte

Incels.Net Master
Rapepill is not a good choice of words. You have a history of being a pedophile who rаped your own daughter
I'm pretty sure if I'd done that, I'd remember it vividly

and then you try to convince us that "rapepill" does not have loaded baggage to it and that we are the crazy ones. Upside down world.
"Rapepilled patriarchy" could be considered a more precise term than either "rapepill" by itself or plain "patriarchy". Idk, do you have a better term?
 
Last edited:

Che

وسيرت رحلي بركب جليل .. الى القدس يمضي أنار السبيل

lordoftheincels

Incels.Net Master
I'm pretty sure if I'd done that, I'd remember it vividly



"Rapepilled patriarchy" could be considered a more precise term than either "rapepill" by itself or plain "patriarchy". Idk, do you have a better term?
My bad, I read it wrong. What it said was you had plans to rаpe your daughter, thats still pretty awful though.
 

MotherMary

Femoid
Sicklecel said:
Oh, does he really justify rаpe and suіcіde tho? It doesn't seem like he's 100% serious most the time.
From a libertarian perspective, it would arguably be aggression to forcibly stop a man from committing suіcіde. I thought most incels were also pro-choice on the suіcіde issue, viewing it as rational from a blackpilled perspective, in which one is a lonely genetic dead end?

At RGIF, we used to have a lot of bait posts about rаpe, but here I've just stuck to the rapepill, which includes ideas/realities such as, (1) a lot of feminine foids are really into rаpe fantasies, (2) marital rаpe was legal until a few decades ago, and women didn't complain too much; banning it was not a high priority on the feminiѕt agenda because women could just avoid it by not getting married to men they didn't want to have sex with, and (3) young women tend to make horrible mate choices when their fathers aren't making those decisions for them.

The rapepill is ultimately just another word for patriarchy, i.e. letting a woman's owner make her sexual choices for her, so that we can have an orderly society where important decisions are made by rational men of intelligence rather than the childishly emotional femoid, whose nature is submissive anyway, causing her to desire to be led, and even to be dominated, rather than to bear the responsibility of her own decisions.
Do you suggest that the men in this forum are not emotional most of the time? That they are the 'rational' men we should have making decision for us?
 

MotherMary

Femoid
MotherMary said:
Do you suggest that the men in this forum are not emotional most of the time? That they are the 'rational' men we should have making decision for us?
Maybe it's just when they run into feral chicks or other provocations that their emotions get triggered.
That's the exact time to keep your cool. I'd say that men are run by emotions most of the time, as are women. Only the one emotion allowed men is usually anger, and that's because men don't see anger as an emotion. But it is. ;)
 

Leucosticte

Incels.Net Master
That's the exact time to keep your cool. I'd say that men are run by emotions most of the time, as are women. Only the one emotion allowed men is usually anger, and that's because men don't see anger as an emotion. But it is. ;)
I hope you're not trying to make some excuse for why you shouldn't be ruled over by a male owner; it would be inconvenient for us men if we couldn't just force women to do whatever we want.

One theory is that feminism benefits the elite men, like Donald Trump, who can do stuff like grab married women by the pusѕy because their husbands aren't empowered to claim those women as property. But as Trump admitted on the bus, that married chick rejected him anyway even after he "moved on her like a bitch." So it sounds like even he isn't really benefiting all that much from this system; he even had to pay one chick $1 million just to get rid of her. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/06/marla-maple-prenup-donald-trump-marriage
 

MotherMary

Femoid
MotherMary said:
That's the exact time to keep your cool. I'd say that men are run by emotions most of the time, as are women. Only the one emotion allowed men is usually anger, and that's because men don't see anger as an emotion. But it is. ;)
I hope you're not trying to make some excuse for why you shouldn't be ruled over by a male owner; it would be inconvenient for us men if we couldn't just force women to do whatever we want.

One theory is that feminism benefits the elite men, like Donald Trump, who can do stuff like grab married women by the pusѕy because their husbands aren't empowered to claim those women as property. But as Trump admitted on the bus, that married chick rejected him anyway even after he "moved on her like a bitch." So it sounds like even he isn't really benefiting all that much from this system; he even had to pay one chick $1 million just to get rid of her. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/06/marla-maple-prenup-donald-trump-marriage
I am not making excuses for anyone. I have a hard time seeing me with an 'owner' though, since I am taking care of business all by myself and doing it pretty well. Not saying I wouldn't want a male partner - I have been married (he didn't think he 'owned' me though; I wouldn't have married him if he did) and I am not opposed to getting married again, but it's not foremost on my mind.
 

lordoftheincels

Incels.Net Master
I hope you're not trying to make some excuse for why you shouldn't be ruled over by a male owner; it would be inconvenient for us men if we couldn't just force women to do whatever we want.

One theory is that feminism benefits the elite men, like Donald Trump, who can do stuff like grab married women by the pusѕy because their husbands aren't empowered to claim those women as property. But as Trump admitted on the bus, that married chick rejected him anyway even after he "moved on her like a bitch." So it sounds like even he isn't really benefiting all that much from this system; he even had to pay one chick $1 million just to get rid of her. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/06/marla-maple-prenup-donald-trump-marriage
I think a rational compromise is always needed. Upstanding chicks shouldn't be made slaves. What about junkies and thieves though? Maybe they can choose between prison, or having an owner who teaches them discipline and such. It would be consensual of course, they could choose between being a prison lesbo or just, having a male owner to do heterosex (mostly sodomy of course, we dont want these low grade women actually becoming pregnant, spreading their junkie genes around.)
 

pandabaer6

ALL Incels Unifier
Sicklecel said:
Oh, does he really justify rаpe and suіcіde tho? It doesn't seem like he's 100% serious most the time.
From a libertarian perspective, it would arguably be aggression to forcibly stop a man from committing suіcіde. I thought most incels were also pro-choice on the suіcіde issue, viewing it as rational from a blackpilled perspective, in which one is a lonely genetic dead end?

At RGIF, we used to have a lot of bait posts about rаpe, but here I've just stuck to the rapepill, which includes ideas/realities such as, (1) a lot of feminine foids are really into rаpe fantasies, (2) marital rаpe was legal until a few decades ago, and women didn't complain too much; banning it was not a high priority on the feminiѕt agenda because women could just avoid it by not getting married to men they didn't want to have sex with, and (3) young women tend to make horrible mate choices when their fathers aren't making those decisions for them.

The rapepill is ultimately just another word for patriarchy, i.e. letting a woman's owner make her sexual choices for her, so that we can have an orderly society where important decisions are made by rational men of intelligence rather than the childishly emotional femoid, whose nature is submissive anyway, causing her to desire to be led, and even to be dominated, rather than to bear the responsibility of her own decisions.

Bingo!

It was the biblist deal - as logical asset to the monopolisation of the man - that married women had to tolerate sex not only in the wedding night. Marital rаpe was never legal. But it was only punishable as coercion with low sentences or fines. On the other hand, the man could force aliment free divorce, if the woman refused sex.

It is very good, that bluepills are watched closely and banned in bluepilled forum, or if they are undercover saboteurs, banned completly. On the other hand redpilled should not be discriminated. That would not only impact the quality but also the quantity in the incelsboard. The last thing Incelsboard need is a stiring up to a war between redpills and blackpills with tolerated instead of cleaned attacks to the person instead of discussons of the matters….
 

pandabaer6

ALL Incels Unifier
logan said:
he runs a suіcіde forum if you didnt know. nathan larson also advocates rаpe, pedophilia etc
Most of my platforms, such as my blog and forums, have been taken down, and I haven't advocated any illegal acts here, so I don't know that you can really say that I'm currently advocating for that stuff.

It ist an usual modus operandi of diverson, to attack the person or what she did in the past (fe Blaseys alledgedly blowjob), instead of keeping in the matter. They even wont dictate you, with whom you should not have contact.

Adenauer had a good awnser against this:

"What intrests me my gossip of yeserday?"....
 

pandabaer6

ALL Incels Unifier
logan said:
he runs a suіcіde forum if you didnt know. nathan larson also advocates rаpe, pedophilia etc
Most of my platforms, such as my blog and forums, have been taken down, and I haven't advocated any illegal acts here, so I don't know that you can really say that I'm currently advocating for that stuff.

I see no advantage in the outing personal matters in the Incelsboard. It doesent help the discussion of the matter but disturbs it.

For victims it could be better, to click report, than reply or even confirm personal issues. In the street, most people avoid, to contact dogshit….
 

Saint Escortcel

Major
Leucosticte said:
Well, where does the buck stop; are you allowing him to make these decisions, or are you going to have the final say? Is "Party's Over" an official statement of where you stand as well?
It doesn't mean you should promote "rapepill" and i completely agree with @lordoftheincels . what else? Be reasonable and don't break the rules.
p.s. We won't ban you for your old posts
Any problems.with .m.
 

pandabaer6

ALL Incels Unifier
Humans, who are hungry, have absolutely perverse phantasies of what they woud eat. After a plane crash in high mountains. they even really ate human flesh from relatives.

Even "normal" too long time Incels have perverse phantasies which can go until to have sex with the own daughter. Only a very few are doing it. Despite it is very easier to open the daughters bedroomdoor at home, then to go hunting outside. Enemies of Incels - also as undercover not only as bluepilled but even as lounge members - can and want not distinguish between only fantasts and real offenders.

Redpilled are for free choice for women, whom they want to serve (also) sexually. But they have to hold what contracted, or pay the price for breaking the contract. And for an also free speech to tell dreams and awake dreams. Without to be censored or even mistreated as real offenders.

Redpilled and Blackpilled could coexist and even collaborate an should not let saboteuses and diverters separate them.

Redpilled could promote a modern marriage, with free araound f*cking, full separation of goods, revenues, etc. With only break even divorces: No more serving the man, no more money from the man.

Blackpilled could promote a papist model with equality instead of women privileges. Women are serving only one man. Men has to satisfy basic needs of the woman, and for during of the marriage splitting the contribution to social security. Divorce in law break even, with possibility - but not contraint - to get money for ongoing services….
 

pandabaer6

ALL Incels Unifier
Leucosticte said:
I hope you're not trying to make some excuse for why you shouldn't be ruled over by a male owner; it would be inconvenient for us men if we couldn't just force women to do whatever we want.

One theory is that feminism benefits the elite men, like Donald Trump, who can do stuff like grab married women by the pusѕy because their husbands aren't empowered to claim those women as property. But as Trump admitted on the bus, that married chick rejected him anyway even after he "moved on her like a bitch." So it sounds like even he isn't really benefiting all that much from this system; he even had to pay one chick $1 million just to get rid of her. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/06/marla-maple-prenup-donald-trump-marriage
I think a rational compromise is always needed. Upstanding chicks shouldn't be made slaves. What about junkies and thieves though? Maybe they can choose between prison, or having an owner who teaches them discipline and such. It would be consensual of course, they could choose between being a prison lesbo or just, having a male owner to do heterosex (mostly sodomy of course, we dont want these low grade women actually becoming pregnant, spreading their junkie genes around.)

Prisons should not be normal hells and paradise for lesbian and even homos. In Europe, a minor offender was exposed to a homo lust murderer who was in endless custody because outside too dangerous. Even also after complaint of the victim over sexual harassment. Shortly before his dismissal he was lust murdered. No adequate penal or disciplinary action was taken against the prison responsables.
Following laws before new feudalism an exposure like this was simply impossible.

Except parental it should never been legal private power over people, except really consensual contracted ones. The legal and contracted private power should be limited by law to human treatment and end contract with no or only very short notice time for the power submitted. Parental power and power over weak people should be sharply supervised by state authorities. Weakness can be admitted for "normal" women only three month before and nine month after birth of a child....
 
Top