Why do men assume that violence against women are incel behaviours? When, at least statistically, it's committed by men from all walks of life (not just incels)?
In fact, according to some of the same statistics, it's usually the who socially successful, outgoing, and even get the most dates, who are more likely to be violent towards the opposite sex (if not violent in general).
Because incels are the only ones who act like it's okay and have a woman hate thread up 24/7 justifying violence in response to sexual rejection.
>Because incels are the only ones who act like it's okay and have a woman hate thread up 24/7 justifying violence in response to sexual rejection.
Which is objectively not true. It's MEN, the GENDER, who think this is okay. And it's MEN, the GENDER, who see this behaviour as normal and acceptable. Not just specific men, but men in general. And their gender is the primary reason for this, not just certain ideologies or cultures of men (ex.: inceldom).
>Why do men assume that violence against women are incel behaviours?
I never assume that.
I don't care.
If the woman is someone i hold dear (family for example), i'll go beat up the man.
If the man is someone i hold dear, i'll help him cover himself and give him an alibi.
I don't mind violence, whether it's used against a soldier, a woman, a kid, an elderly or an animal.
If they start some shit, they entirely deserve it.
>If the woman is someone i hold dear (family for example), i'll go beat up the man.
>If they start some shit, they entirely deserve it.
Which are behaviours and mindsets that are (sadly) normal for your gender, and generally because of it.
>Which is objectively not true. It's MEN, the GENDER, who think this is okay. And it's MEN, the GENDER, who see this behaviour as normal and acceptable. Not just specific men, but men in general. And their gender is the primary reason for this, not just certain ideologies or cultures of men (ex.: inceldom).
That actually is worse for incels tho because now are they not only deluded copers but they're deluded copers who are innately evil, too.
>Which are behaviours and mindsets that are (sadly) normal for your gender, and generally because of it.
It isn't contradictory pal.
You should forget your set of moral values if you want to understand me.
For me, if it's useful to me or my kin = Good thing
If it isn't = bad thing.
I won't treat two people the same way if they're in the same circumstances if one is a family member and the other a stranger.
Simple as.
Because foids love dark triad men and hate nice guys so their logic is batshit crazy.
>this faggot who had no criminal record is a bigger threat to me than that criminal gangster I used to date who threatened my mom at gunpoint multiple times because uhhh GINA TINGLES
>My capacity for abstract thought is extremely limited
I love it when trads brag about being retarded like it's a good thing. I've already propagated my genes more than you ever will, Mr. Family Man.
>That actually is worse for incels tho because now are they not only deluded copers but they're deluded copers who are innately evil, too.
Again, you're describing the male gender in general rather than certain sub-cultures of it. "Men are inherently evil" is almost a common enough saying to make it cliche.
>It isn't contradictory pal.
Where in that post did it say it was?
Who said i was trad?
When i say my kin, i meant the people i hold dear.
My trusted friends and my family.
And i doubt you did.
I just assumed it was the intent behind the post quoting specifically those two sentences.
>And i doubt you did.
Tall white sperm donor with some other genetic goodies too. I'm also happily married and have two children. On top of all of the white kids I made possible, I'm also smart enough not to think my "kin" are morally different from anyone else.
Incel is just a default insult word like faggot or virgin. It has literally no meaning.
>I'm also smart enough not to think my "kin" are morally different from anyone else.
Not that smart frankly for what i've read.
I don't consider my kin to be morally different from anyone else.
I wouldn't cover for them because i believe them to be in the right.
For me it's common sense to protect and help your family, forget your nonsense about who's good or not. I don't even need to take it in consideration.
Even if my son would be Hitler 2.0, i would protect and cover him even if he murdered Jesus 2.0.
Meanwhile if Jesus 2.0 was my son, i would protect him against any stranger.
And if people are not related in any ways to me, i won't care if they give each others flowers or murder themselves in front of me.
usually the violent ones are the domestic abuse and those fuckers are all normies
You can love and support your son without also vowing sociopathic contempt towards people who are not your son, you know. It's a very common moral position to care about strangers but still care about your family more.
It's common knowlede that women can only be trained by beating them. They are equal to dogs (that's why they fuck them), and like dogs they can only realize their behavior is negative by receiving negative feelings. The swiftest form of delivering such feelings being a backhand, or open palmed smack across the face.
But now it is unfortunately shamed by society to keep your stupid whore on it's leash. You're expected to be a good cuck and let your dumb little whore piss and shit all over your life and be grateful for the oppurtunity.
>You can love and support your son without also vowing sociopathic contempt towards people who are not your son, you know.
If they haven't done anything to me, there's no contempt. Only indifference.
> It's a very common moral position to care about strangers but still care about your family more.
And i told you to stop trying to view my mindset with your "very common moral values". If you're so clever, can't you do it?
I don't care about strangers. I don't have enough time, energy or ressources to think about them and if I did, i'd rather do even more for myself and my family.
I know i'm an asshole but at least i'm honest.
yeah well you made us this way, maybe if you foids slept with the calm nice guy instead of chad the psychopath evolution would have made men more civil and moral
hahahaha I love this board, based and redpilled user
>If they haven't done anything to me, there's no contempt. Only indifference.
Others being indifferent while you suffer is tantamount to contempt. Your motive for not helping is not materially or ethically relevant.
>And i told you to stop trying to view my mindset with your "very common moral values". If you're so clever, can't you do it?
The fact that your values are uncommon does not make them useful or valuable.
>I don't care about strangers. I don't have enough time, energy or ressources to think about them and if I did, i'd rather do even more for myself and my family.
But ten seconds of attention for a stranger with a billion dollars would do more for your family than you ever could. We want strangers to care about each other because we're not made equal and the people who can help are not related necessarily to the people who need help the most.
>I know i'm an asshole but at least i'm honest.
Yeah, but you could be both honest and not an asshole instead, likely without any practical change to your life at all. Choosing to die on the hill of how little you care about strangers suggests you're fundamentally dysgenic.