More Thought on Incels.

Post Reply New Topic

Yes that is true the ones I know who are married and in relationships do walk tall for sure. If incels are not doing that typically, should they try then?

The ones you know who are a married and in relationships may actually be better looking than you think. To you, they mak look to be on par with the incels in the photos. To women, your pals may look passable in the eyes of the average woman; the incels that you think look comparable to them really look ugly in the eyes of women. Women make the decision, not men. Your eyes can't tell.


Non-handsome to you. See, I hate to say it, some men may be uglier than we think, others may be better looking than we think, even if they all look the same TO US. This is the Theory of Mind of looks that men don't understand or are in denial about. How you rate men's looks is irrelevant. Rather, doesn't translate into the eye of women the way you think it does.

Last edited by ezbzbfcg2 on 20 Aug 2021, 5:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

But are women really that specific on looks thought that you can have two guys that look very much alike, and one is much more better looking than the other? Like let's say a woman is attracted to black guys for example. Is a woman so specific that she would say, I want a guy who is at least 93 percent black, where as that guy is only 89% black, so he's unnatractive to me therefore.

Just an example, but are women that specific in what they find attractive in looks?

Percentage of blackness would be irrelevant, it would depend on how they look. To you, they're just two black guys. Maybe you can't even tell them apart (I don't know what you're trying to imply with his question). Regardless of how you see them, the woman who's interested in dating them may see one as more attractive facially than the other. To you, they look the same.

Two guys (of any race) who "look very much alike" to you may not look the same through the eyes of women. One may be decent looking, the other ugly.

Yes. This. We want a partner, not a project. We want a partner, not someone we need to organise and run around after picking up the pieces.

It's easier and more satisfying to be alone and get on with things than have a bloke who is basically a big kid who needs you to look after him.

I mean sure you want to take care of someone you love, but not as in being a care giver or in a parental way.

But even if incels goals is to work towards a long term gf, shouldn't they just start trying to get sex first, before working their way up to relationships? Baby steps? Like do incel men do not want to practice, and from a young age, just have this Romeo and Juliet romance fantasy that they need to find their soulmate here and now, no practice?

ok, i will concede your point, looks are highly subjective. then what about the popular [with women] men with sh***y personalities? [like they are rude to people and tactless in general, like to make trouble]

that is a big part of it, yes. in america it is hard and expensive to get a sex worker/surrogate, highly illegal most places.

Oh I meant why not just practice getting laid for free, before trying to seduce a woman into a relationship. Practice..

Again this discussion is going in circles.

Regardless of whether we are talking about Aspies, NTs or incels, all people should first develop solid friendships and relationships before pursuing sex.

The problem with incels is they watch their friends hookup and misattribute their friend's sexual success to the girls throwing themselves at any man except them. Believe me, I went through this phase as a 20 yr old christian. it's like there is something wrong with the world, its unfair. It took me 10 years to work out the problem was with me, not with the girls.

A good example is the two Canadian boys Kam McLeod and Bryer Schmegelsky who ended up being incel killers. They were not only good looking but according to classmates were popular and friends. They appeared (on the surface) to be quite normal. What nobody figured out is they were sexually frustrated. Probably they were both shy around girls. I imagine it must have galled them seeing guys who were not as good looking as them having great success dating. But that's not the girl's fault,

It's a pity a lot of these incels couldn't get a little bit of simple advice before going down the rabbit hole of 8chan and 4chan where they enter an echo chamber of angry young men who hate women. I remember saying things myself about girls when I was in my 20s that was totally irrational based on my personal frustrations. I was a good looking dude so how come none of these women want to talk to me?.

The trick is identifying these signs early in these boys when they are frustrated teens and working on their social skills and mental frameworks.

Well, if they can't attract women for a relationship, why would they be able to attract women for free sex? In order to get sex, OR into a relationship, the woman must find the man sexually attractive. If these men are that ugly or unappealing, they have no options.

Again, doesn't matter if you think they're okay looking. You don't know how women perceive male attractiveness.

All good points. If you don't tick the boxes then you work on yourself.

Looks are subjective on an individual level. Looks are also subjective on a group level. I'm saying a group of men we might see as decent looking may fail the the female test, en masse, as women's perceptions of beauty in men are lot different than what we assume.

Like the saying, you've met one Aspie, you've met one Aspie. We're all different. HOWEVER....there are cumulative experiences that put Autistic individuals on the spectrum in the first place. Same with looks. Some men fall below women's threshold, regardless of whether we as men don't/can't see it and think they look fine. They're on women's Ugly spectrum...even if we can't fathom this spectrum based on our opinions of their looks.

If a woman finds a man sexually attractive, ideally she'd want him to have a good personality. But she'd rather have a guy with a sh***y personality that she finds sexually attractive than some nice, well-behaved man who she finds ugly. Plus, those guys with passable looks and bad personality have plenty of validation. They're in the range of passable to most women, so they've had no trouble getting girlfriends and know they can do so...

Again, you're looking at it too intellectually. Sexual attraction is the first qualifying variable. You can't discern which men are/aren't sexually attractive to women as well as you think you can.

Now, on the converse, if a man is ugly, claiming he has a "bad personality" and that's why she's not attracted to him is a good 'out' for the woman instead of just admitting the truth, that he's not sexually attractive regardless of personality.

I think some of these men have decent looks and can work on themselves to improve. For others, no amount of self-improvement will get them out of the ugly zone.

that is precisely the problem. they can't get laid, they can't get friends. they are basically paralyzed with social r*t*rdation. they haven't got a road map to romance, and even if they did they lack the TOM and social smarts to be able to follow it properly.

The ones shooting up schools or serial killing seem to be decent looking.