Recommend books about incels (Incel book)

[Deleted member 14693]

Okay, I will recommend two:

"The Sorrow of a young Werther" by Goethe - About an incel getting rejected by his oneitis and crying about it.

"Metamorphosis" by Kafka - About a wageslave incel who decides to rot, rots to death in his room and his family throws him away.

Any other recommendations?

 

[Deleted member 23558]

The last temptation of christ - schizo incel who cant get it up for his oneitis and decides to become a messiah instead

notes for the underground- sensitive young neet escortcel who overthinks basic human interactions like @Marsik and is overall mysoginst and misanthropist

the night stalker - story of the man who gets worshipped by incels

kokoro - studycel chink falls in love and a disastrous fait awaits him

temple of the golden pavillion - ugly gook gets intimidated by beauty but at the same time drawn to it like a moth to a flame after his hs oneitis teases him and makes him feel like a cuckold

 

[Deleted member 43881]

i just remembered this thread while reading selective breeding and the birth of philosophy by costin alamariu

it basically says that the only value that exists on earth is sex and it’s derivatives

Spoiler: excerpts

Spoiler: 1

Social conservatives, among others, often remark on ancient man's or at least on the Bible's care for these matters, but reduce it very frequently to the formula "the family is the basic unity of society." Even if this were true, it is not the ultimate reason ancient legislators among the Hebrews, Romans, or Greeks three unusually monogamous societies in the ancient world-but also others, paid such attention to these types of laws. If an average man's natural desire were to be a good husband and father, then their work would have been easy. But in early Rome, for example, bachelorhood had to be forbidden by law. The problem with the view of the social conservative is that it assumes a man's duty to his wife and children is more natural, and therefore more easily enforced, than it actually is. — some would say oppression that had to be exerted to make women faithful wives and mothers. 10


Social liberals and feminists make the same mistake. They assume the problem is that men desire patriarchy and ownership over the wife and family, that men desire dominion over wife and children. They do not see these are, in part, methods some civilizations resorted to in order to induce men to accept the responsibilities of father and husband. Men deprived of patriarchy have no reason to accept duty or responsibility, nor the loss of freedom that goes with family life. Modern societies are faced with men who either reap the fruits of sexual liberation through easy copulation, or men who for any number of reasons won't or can't put up with the stress of this chase and instead become apathetic, at least so far as women are concerned. The problem, as social liberals and feminists are finding out, isn't that men seek by nature or education to dominate wives or children, but that men simply don't

It is very telling that, to solve this problem, both social conservatives and some feminists are resorting to shaming men into accepting the responsibilities of father and husband. Both often exhort, and even hector, unmarried men to "man up"; this happens so often that it's become a running joke or cliché in some circles. 12 The prospects of their successfully shaming men into the duties of husband and father are, however, very slim as things stand.


Octavian, as Emperor, tried to reestablish family life among the patrician class in Rome with far greater insight, far more power to shame, and far greater latitude to give rewards. But he failed. Alas, simply shaming men into being fathers and husbands is never going to work.

Spoiler: 2

Nazi Germany of course is notorious for its programs to euthanize the mentally impaired or disabled and the added justification that it was to be done out of compassion is seen as especially grotesque.


This may be so. And such actions are today seen as the pinnacle of evil by the modern liberal West. But parents or mothers in the modern liberal West are eliminating the existence of people with, for example, Down's syndrome, by aborting a very great percentage in the womb. Freedom and modern science has allowed a far more


"humane" method of eugenics, and also a far more thorough-going one, than could have ever been carried out by Nazi Germany although not a more efficient or effective one.25 It's easy to guess what will happen if, say, genes correlating with homosexuality are to be discovered soon with any certainty.26 There is an old saying, "if you cut off the left side of a log, it will still have a left side." What we call


"eugenics" with moral alarm is going to happen one way or another.


The only question is which way one prefers it to happen moderns have chosen a decentralized form that, through the morality of liberalism and through the methods provided by the latest science, puts this power in the hands of parents or mothers. That is fine, it may be superior: but recognize that, whichever way you have it, it will still happen.


It is the same in general with the problem of sex, marriage, and breeding. Substituting the remote and "political" classical orientation with the modern individualist and subjective orientation will still result in arrangements that are in the end, not egalitarian, not random, not a chance result of absolute individual freedom.