Redpill/PUA scammers

submitted by JosephDeMaistre from self.RealIncels

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Caamib_ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

its not a novelty of modern West, it was simply formerly repressed

So even if it was just repressed the only difference is a fucking technicality (was repressed vs women are agnostic towards male behavior). What matters is that it didn't happen.

whilst completely ignoring what I just stated is the most important predictor of sexual success

I'm ignoring it because it isn't true. You're just a stupid fanatic and it's good that you not spread your disgusting genes.

Also, if your "evil immoral moron" theory were true, then you personally would be swimming in pussy, because you support incest and pedophilia and are rather stupid as well.

And even here you can't even pick up my ideas correctly while calling me stupid, you idiot. I support incest and pedophilia only towards modern Western women, not all women, unless you think having sex with reproductively capable females under 18 is "pedophilia". You're the one to call somebody stupid when you can't even describe their ideas correctly, lol ! Go die alone and stop selling hopelessness to young males who might still live normal lives without your poison.

[–]JosephDeMaistre[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, the idea that you'd fuck your own 12 year old daughter because she's "modern" or "feminist" or whichever way you put it just shows what a vile shit you are and also demonstrates your stupidity. Because how can you ascertain a 12 year old kid is "feminist"??? You're evil, moronic and immoral and according to your own theory you should be very attractive to modern women. Well, maybe that explains why you, after all, have had some short relationships and don't have to beg your mommy for sex all the time lol ;)

Secondly, there was no "technicality". Your idea that women are agnostic towards looks (THIS is what I was referring to) is BS directly contradicted by science. If you choose to reject science - as you just admitted - and prefer to live in your own mental "Co-Alpha" ghosttown, go on. "Agnostic towards male behaviour" (you inserted this) is likewise wrong: the female preference for dominant, aggressive men dates to stoneage and has obvious evolutionary reasons. It was like that 200 years ago, but the Dark Triad preference was often "outsmarted" by tough life.

However, this doesn't mean a Dark Triad-related Fisherian Runaway isn't taking place nowadays: this simply hasn't been studied in depth.