It's true that some men are simply just not meant to experience love and sex, but it's a fact that very, very few people are able to live peacefully

[SharpOrange]

tell to incels that, given women's free choice, some men simply won't be chosen, and that's a fact of reality. And i think they're right. Women, unlike men, are not attracted to most people of the opposite sex, and are way more unwilling to be with someone they do not like that much. This fact alone, in a society where women can freely choose their partners, will inevitably create incels.

The problem is: the vast, vast majority of the "unselected males" will simply not come to terms with this fact, ever. And how could they? Romantic love is seen as one of the best experiences in life; the sexual drive is one the strongest natural impulses we have, if not the strongest. In fact, for the average person, sex and love are what they live for, and most people are average. To let go of this is something that would require a lot, and a mean A LOT of effort; an effort that is unreasonable o expect from the avarage joe.

Of course, women would respond that the only possible solution would be to take away their right of free choice, and that would be unethical. And whether is unethical or not, obviously women would never agree to that, since it goes against their interests. So, even if there's some kind of ethical system you could summon to justify this proposal, women would simply never agree.

So what's the solution? Well, there's none, i guess. The conflict between the sexes will simply continue until one side wins by force, or society collapses.

source

 

[Enytraina]

Just rape or buy a prostitute, but most men give up too early anyway

 

[stamaster21]

tell to incels that, given women's free choice, some men simply won't be chosen, and that's a fact of reality. And i think they're right. Women, unlike men, are not attracted to most people of the opposite sex, and are way more unwilling to be with someone they do not like that much. This fact alone, in a society where women can freely choose their partners, will inevitably create incels.

The problem is: the vast, vast majority of the "unselected males" will simply not come to terms with this fact, ever. And how could they? Romantic love is seen as one of the best experiences in life; the sexual drive is one the strongest natural impulses we have, if not the strongest. In fact, for the average person, sex and love are what they live for, and most people are average. To let go of this is something that would require a lot, and a mean A LOT of effort; an effort that is unreasonable o expect from the avarage joe.

Of course, women would respond that the only possible solution would be to take away their right of free choice, and that would be unethical. And whether is unethical or not, obviously women would never agree to that, since it goes against their interests. So, even if there's some kind of ethical system you could summon to justify this proposal, women would simply never agree.

So what's the solution? Well, there's none, i guess. The conflict between the sexes will simply continue until one side wins by force, or society collapses.

source

interesting post and i somewhat agree, this mating dyanmic only has two options, either society slowly declines and collapes, or the men take womens mating right away. Crime also rises, as their becomes less step- fathers and men decide their not gonna protect women and children because they can't get their own. This thing cannot be fixed, arranged marrages will never work because the women will sneak off the suck and fuck the small pool of desired men in the city/state/village then try to cuck the husband into raising said children.
Basically the women want a society were certain men are assigned their special role and if those men say NO those men should be punished by the men in power aka government officals, high ranking police/military officals.

The roles are THE beta-husband- this guys gets sex maybe once a month and on hes birthday if lucky, has to jump hoops for sexual access and may have to be a step father to the children the women already has. THE Loser- This guy is almost useless to women or society women want almost nothing to do with these types, the only interaction women want is one where the loser gives what ever little resources he has, because hes useless for everything else, hes not attractive has no real skills or little to no money at all, and can't even be a step-father because he has no skills/qualities to pass down to the children.THE Lover-This guy is sexy and is physically attractive, sexually sitmulates women and gives them good sexual experiences, hes only role is to provide good sexual experiences or to give the women attractive children. THE ideal husband- This man is sexually attractive and checks off most of the womens boxes, and gives good sexual experiences, he makes a decent living at least. He is willing to invest long-term into the marriage, women,children, he is willing and ready to defend hes family and die for hes family, has values/skills to pass down to the children.

Folks then try to bring up morals and duty, and the women bring up up people should be punished for not helping, when what they really mean and afraid to say, is they want a law that will punish people for not helping but will target only MEN. You see when women can't get protection from the group of men their giving sexual access to they demand other men protect them and their children under some moral code of duty, and if that doesnt work they demand men in power positions punish said men, aka by putting them in jail or take away their jobs because the public believes their a morally bad person for not accepting their ROLE as a sucker.