Serious THE EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL POLICY AND RESEARCH ARE CURRENTLY INVESTIGATING ME, US & THE MAINSTREAMING OF THE BLACKPILL!

I'll let the forum know.
I'll send her an email as well once I do a closer read of the paper.
If you're retarded enough to diss her or say anything rude to her, that's not necessary. She's doing what she believes is her job and you can help her understand us better by briefly correcting any false assumptions, as I plan on doing with her critique of my viral Tiktoks.
Also, this. Dissing her through email will just affirm her confirmation bias of incels. Gotta tiptoe around these types of topics for anyone else that plans on sending a well written email.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 6128 and enchanted_elixir
"your looks are the problem"

The discrepancy between women's standards and one's looks is the problem.

Also in the modern world, due to popularity of social media and male horniness/lack of standards, women are constantly bombarded with offers from 1000s, if not, more men.

As a result of this, women can't help but select for the one's they find the most attractive, thereby creating hypergamy and giga increased standards, compared to pre-social media era.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Skywalker, humanoidsub7, Av0nr and 3 others
The link can be found here:

Solea, A.I., Sugiura, L. Mainstreaming the Blackpill: Understanding the Incel Community on TikTok. Eur J Crim Policy Res 29, 311–336 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-023-09559-5

The only author who left her email is Anda Iulia Solea from School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Portsmouth in the United Kingdom.
If you'd like to contact her, please email her at Anda.Solea@port.ac.uk.

If you're retarded enough to diss her or say anything rude to her, that's not necessary. She's doing what she believes is her job and you can help her understand us better by briefly correcting any false assumptions, as I plan on doing with her critique of my viral Tiktoks.

I find this article to be very interesting (because she critiqued it) and funny (in the sense that our stuff made it here lol).
Here are some snippets.

Abstract

"Incels (involuntary celibates), a subgroup of the so called ‘manosphere,’ have become an increasing security concern for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners following their association with several violent attacks. Once mostly contained on niche men’s forums, redpilled and blackpilled communities and theories are gaining prominence on mainstream social media platforms. However, whilst previous research considerably enhanced our understanding of the incel phenomenon and their presence on Reddit and secluded incel forums, incel’s presence on mainstream social media platforms is understudied and their presence on TikTok is yet to be addressed. The present paper examines the incel subculture on TikTok, through an analysis of incel accounts, videos and their respective comments, to understand the role mainstream social media platforms play in the ‘normiefication’ and normalisation of incel ideology and discourse. The findings suggest that on TikTok the expression of incel ideology takes a covert form, employing emotional appeals and pseudo-science to disseminate common incelosphere tropes. Further, we demonstrate how the process of mainstreaming incel beliefs is facilitated by their interconnectedness with wider sexism and structural misogyny. The harms generating from this association are conducive to the normalisation of blackpill beliefs and the reinforcement of misogyny, sexism and justification of rape culture."

As I read the article, I quickly came to see that the authors don't really know where to draw the line between blackpill and redpill, neither do they really understand them fully. This doesn't surprise me since it's hard to understand phenomena from an outsider's perspective.

The focus of the critiques below are solely on correcting perceptual mistakes about my content's message on TikTok and perceptual mistakes about the blackpill. Also, when I say "we" I mean (the vast majority of blackpillers).

It would have been better if she tried to understand the perspective of a blackpiller before saying anything to maximize accuracy.

She also doesn't realize that most blackpillers are self-hating, self-loathing people who are desperate to look better, moderate/indifferent on feminism, love toxic humor, insecure and see looksmaxing as salvation to their self-hate and lackluster social and dating life. If anything, we congratulate women for the sexual liberation movement so now they won't breed with mediocre men and create pathetic short and ugly incels that get bullied at school. Most users here also support gender equality and probably have suicidal thoughts because they're ugly, short, wrong phenotype, etc.

Most people on here aren't misogynistic, some are but most just hate themselves for not being good enough for women. Sounds familiar? Teenage women!

They also have to realize there is a minority of mentally ill (as in neurotic, angry, and psychologically disturbed) people here who say heinous things that even we disagree with, so discard their opinions, they're minority and foolish opinions.

Blackpillers may have different beliefs on things but some of the things we all agree on is.
  • Looks are primary in dating and in generating attraction and plays an important role in maintaining attraction. Other factors only matter after you've passed the looks test, and the importance of these factors are almost always inferior to the importance of looks (unless you're noticeably neurodivergent)
  • Women aren't entitled or evil, you're just ugly and they want nothing to do with you sexually and romantically.
  • Women want to date men they find attractive and they treat them very well, even to the degree of literal worship.
Blackpill is focused on the proposition that you (and your aesthetic inadequacies) are the problem, not women. That's why a fair amount of people here hate themselves.

As a former redpiller, redpillers believe that things like
  • Confidence
  • Money
  • Status
  • Being assertive, and "asserting yourself the right way"
  • Masculine behavior
  • Game, Charisma and Pickup Skills
...are of most importance and that looks are secondary or even irrelevant.

Redpill is very focused on the proposition that feminism and modern women have corrupted the dating market and have created degenerate women and creating very unequal dating markets - that proposition composites the majority of the problem and their inadequacies are a minority (they do acknowledge this).

These guys are the anti-feminists, believe that women are entitled and that feminism has ruined the dating market and through those things listed above, you'll survive the shit show. They have an elevated but not certain or high possibly (I wasn't) a male supremacist. They are the ones that want to go back to "muh traditional dating market". They are the ones who either misogynists or mistrustful of women (I didn't hate women but was mistrustful when I used to be a redpiller)

These guys think feminism & modern women are the problem, more than they are.

This is very important. This "modern women are the problem" thinking has the slim chance of leading to events like the shooting Elliot Rodger committed. Blackpill's "your lack of physical attractiveness are the problem" thinking on the other hand, wouldn't cause you to exterminating others, it would make you prone to exterminating yourself because you're too ugly to be alive, and the treatment you get isn't worth enduring if looksmaxing can't save you.

Watch Fresh & Fit, Donovan Sharpe, and Alpha Male Strategies on YouTube if you want to understand the redpill better.

"Alpha male strategies", "High value man"
Cracking Up Lol GIF by HULU

Go looksmax, you dumb redpill roach.

Any "blackpiller" that believes in any redpill-pickup artist or bluepill rhetoric are immediately mocked on this forum.

🔴 "Just be confident bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴"Just say this magically scientifically proven line and she'll get wet bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔵 "Just buy her gifts even though she's not attracted to you bro! She'll see how valuable you are then bro!" - That's called simping and it doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴 "Just be rich bro"- Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you, and you're now just a gold digging oppurtunity.
🔴 "Just have status bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you. Average woman doesn't craves Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk because they are famous.
🔵"Just be funny bro" - She'll love spending time with you because you're funny, not because she's attracted to you (she isn't attracted to you). Speaking from direct experience.
🔵 "Just have a great personality bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.

If you're curious about the strategy of the three dating philosophies strategies to get women, here they are.

Bluepill strategy - being nice, respectful, female-worshipping and being simpish generates attraction.

Of course, it's important to be nice and respectful, but if not paired with physical attractiveness, it's useless. It's like dividing a number by zero.

View attachment 2553323
View attachment 2553379

Redpill-PUA strategy - Use your elite game, and other insignificant factors and get women.



Blackpill strategy - Looksmax and become attractive, and the women will come.
View attachment 2553330

View attachment 2553332
View attachment 2553333
All of those gestures she asked him to do was to verify that he was a real person

View attachment 2553338
She'll wear anything this guy tells her, I wonder why?

View attachment 2553346
She's mad that Chad didn't kiss her. Unlike my most viral video, the recipient wasn't interested, therefore it's a form of sexual-romantic assault.

View attachment 2553380
notice who she's staring at

View attachment 2553382


Sadly, they are correct about the fact that few mentally ill people here think rape is ok, but that's (mostly) old and was a small minority of users who aren't really active anymore. That belief is held by so few people here. It's not a widespread belief.

There's so much to say because the whole scientific article is almost 100,000 characters (very large)
Anyways, I own a TikTok account called lookism.tiktok and they cited it in their article boyos holy shit!
Here it is if you want to see it: https://www.tiktok.com/@lookism.tiktok

Anyways, here's my critique of their critique of my TikToks.


" The Stylistic Framing of Incel Content on TikTok​

Whilst both TikTok accounts were chosen because they espoused blackpill and incel ideology, the two accounts differ in the stylistic presentation of this ideology. The name of the first TikTok account (Lookism.tiktok) demonstrates the focus on the issue of lookism, stating in the account’s description:

Looks determine your dating life as a man. Fuck the redpill 🔴& the bluepill 🔵

Account1 videos include repurposed and collated viral internet videos and pictures to demonstrate women’s lookist nature. The account creator provides little explanations in his videos, no narration, and relies on sensationalised titles and brief overlay text commentaries to make his point (see Fig. 1)."

Lookism and the Unjust Sexual Market​

Account1’s video content is unsurprisingly focused on lookism. Women are depicted as preferring men with traditional masculine characteristics, with handsome facial features and height above 6 ft. For example, in Video3 a typical pick-up artist meeting is depicted where a male dating guru presents an ‘unattractive’ man to an ‘attractive’ woman asking her if from a ‘feminine perspective’ she would be sexually attracted to this man. The woman instantly rejects the man. The overlay text argues “The real problem here is that he’s unattractive and she is repulsed by his presence....” The hyperbolic choice of language for (mis)interpreting the woman’s reaction as ‘repulsed’ at the man’s mere presence is aimed at inducing a negative emotional reaction from the viewers. Subsequently, the message of this video and several videos on this account is not just exposing women’s lookist nature but also their ‘cruel rejection’ methods and propensity to humiliate men that do not fit hegemonic masculinity standards. It is also noteworthy that the emphasis is on women's ‘cruel rejection,’ and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility.

My response to the above text: Yes, I did use hyperbolic language but I didn't misinterpret it, she literally said he isn't attractive.
Also, the purpose of that video is to mock the man for being ugly, hense "repulsive". She has the right to reject such a pathetic male. We not only laugh but encourage it since such a pickup retard should know that looks determine your dating life as a man. My account description perfectly describes the message of my account. The focus is absolutely on the humiliation of the pickup artist (autist). The goal was not in any way to absolve responsibility on the men, I need men to not only notice my account's message but inspire them through fostering insecurity to do something about it (responsibility). That fatass who fell for the PUA scam should looksmax or give up on dating.

When the blackpill was forming, there was a website called puahate.com, PUA stands for pickup artist. We PUA's are dumb, maybe dislike or even hate these guys for falsely making others believe that "just say the magic line and it won't matter what you look like bro" nonsense. I used to fall for that.

View attachment 2553299

"...and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility."

My response to the above text: In no way are we going to save a PUA or try to make a PUA free from responsibility :ROFLMAO:


"This was reflected within the comments sections, where debates around attractiveness and lookism represented the most frequently discussed theme. The commenters claimed women solely desire men that are traditionally good looking (i.e., attractive face/body) and tall. A recurrent argument was that men need to conform to women’s strict aesthetic standards to qualify for sex and relationships “it all basically comes down to how good you look”; “Step 1: be attractive Step 2: don’t be unattractive”. Height was also a deciding factor in men’s sexual or romantic success, with women portrayed as despising short men to the extent of regarding them as non-existent- “Short guys literally don’t exist to the average woman. it’s sad”; “How sad they shamed and laughed at a man that can’t control his height, this still goes on to this day and they say men are the toxic ones”.

My response to the above text: They nailed it. This is "looks theory" or that looks are the primary factor when it comes to dating. You don't even have to be Chad necessarily, all that matters is that you're considered good-looking to women around you or to the woman you want, and if not, it's over. Of course, the "strict" dating standards is an extreme point of view I had at the time. Of course, looks theory is very real, but the strictness depends. Some individuals believe in higher strictness, or lower strictness, some believe it depends on the woman, environment, context, or a combination of these, but they got this right.

I'd personally disagree with this comment a user left on the TikTok: "...and they say men are the toxic ones”. Everyone assesses people based on appearance and it's not just men, it sounds like the user who wrote that thinks men do it more than women.

Women’s lookist nature is further framed within the videos as being conducive to a constant ritual of men's humiliation. This is evident in several Account1 videos. For example, one video showcases a woman on an online meeting shouting “You are ugly as fuck” to the man on the other end of the call; another video presents a woman verbally abusing a police officer because he was short “Why did the police let this short man join? Who the fuck is he gonna hurt? Look at this munchkin, look at this baby ass bitch”; and a third video of a man recounting his experiences with online dating stating that he was told he should kill himself because he is short “Why is it ok for women to say—Oh you are 5 ft on a dating site? You should be dead!—that’s ok?”. According to these, the habitual rejection and humiliation leads men to feeling dehumanised as suggested by a video with an insect staring at a wall over which sad music is played—the caption reads “Non-chads after realizing only team tinder wants to date them…”. The insect represents unattractive men, or ‘non-chads’, who come to the realisation that women will never be interested in them and they will be forever dateless and celibate, demonstrating the hopeless perpetuity of the incel condition."

My response to the above text:
I love watching those videos, the brutality of the situation faced by those guys :lul: Love watching ugly men get savagely rejected by women, especially redpillers and pickup artists. Funniest stuff ever!

"Account1 further builds upon the notion of women’s privileged status, arguing that it is not just women’s entitlement that is problematic but also women’s nefarious and hypocritical nature. This is ‘evidenced’ by women’s supposed preference and idolisation of ‘bad’, abusive and even ‘criminal’ men, chosen at the detriment of ‘nice guys’ with less appealing physical characteristics. An example of this is Video2 titled “Watch what it takes to get girls as a short guy!” which presents a short man on a dating competition show getting repeatedly rejected by all the women candidates. When questioned as to what it would take to pick the short man, the women stated they would only pick him if the other four candidates were convicted murderers. An overlay text appears on the screen informing the viewers that “Even now they are lying. They would rather be with a tall murderer Chad than a manlet”. According to this video, women’s immorality and lookist nature are so pervasive that they would prefer a good-looking murderer to a decent short man, but women are hypocritical and would never admit to this ‘fact’. This is expanded by clips showcasing ‘hybristophilia’ (2023)—women’s sexual attraction to mass murderers, violent criminals, rapists and even paedophiles. For example, two videos depict the adoration women have for Ted Bundy and Jeremy Meeks, two infamous and attractive convicted criminals. The text overlay on the Ted Bundy video states “Chad can get hoards of women despite being a rapist and a murderer”.

My response to the above text: We don't believe women are entitled, nefarious, hypocritical and problematic. That's a redpill belief. Don't get it mixed up with the blackpill. I believe Stew's height is problematic and worthy of ridicule, very worthy 🤣🤣🤣

Also, I didn't say or imply that women like criminals, of course this is my fault for not being clear but what I was saying is women will usually rank looks as more important even if the attractive male has a criminal record. A criminal record can (not always) be excused if he's hot enough.

"Women’s preference for abusive attractive men at the detriment of unattractive betas or incels is further implied in the most viewed video on Account1 (video1). In this clip, a woman is approached and kissed without consent by a young man characterised as a Chad, which the woman says she is happy with. The video then switches to a second clip in which a group of armed police agents break down a door and enter an apartment. The text added above this video reads “Meanwhile… You’d go to prison for “attempted r**e”. The message of this video is that Chads have free access to women’s bodies, yet betas or incels do not enjoy the same entitlements. This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It implies that it is not the nature of the acts themselves that constitute sexual assault, but rather women’s reception, which is influenced by the attractiveness of the perpetrator. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"


My response to the above text: Chads aren't entitled to women, but they do get easy access to women. Entitlement is "I deserve it". Easy access is "I don't have to do anything, or much to get what I want". Unattractive men almost always have zero access to women, because they're unattractive. The acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Also, ugly and average looking incels aren't entitled to shit. They should looksmax like hell to deserve anything.


"This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"

My response to the above text: They think I'm encouraging rape culture and that sexual assault shouldn't be taken seriously. I didn't say explicitly or implicitly imply anything else besides the fact that the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Sexual assault and related crimes are serious but like the Amber Heard case proved, not always valid because some women may interpret something like a non-attractive man grabbing a woman's shoulder and accidentally touching her breasts in an attempt to save her from a speeding truck as sexual assault and get the man imprisoned.

Obviously, some dude just grabbing her and doing it while she's screaming stop is obviously and validly a violation and the perpetrator should be imprisoned.

"Rape culture and justification of sexual assault are further amplified within the comments. Here, women are portrayed as a homogenous group rather than as individuals and described as hypocritical, liars and promiscuous. It is suggested that women’s double standards and hypocrisy are most obvious when it comes to sexual advances—unattractive men are rejected and found ominous whereas the same type of behaviours are encouraged and desired by women from attractive men “The difference between creepy and sexy is how attractive you are
10610_2023_9559_Figc_HTML.png
”; “women dont get mad at advances, they are just selective on who is doing it”. Additionally, commenters debated the importance of consent. Whilst a small number of comments argued that sexual assault has serious repercussions, the consensus was that women’s claims of sexual assault or harassment are subjective. According to this, Chads can have their way with women and do not need consent from women to engage in sexual behaviours with them. Attractive men are therefore viewed as having ‘handsome privilege’ entitling them to women’s bodies and protecting them from repercussions “That’s called pretty privilege”; “Difference between flirting and assault is how attractive you are”. "


The notion of consent is used to support the trope of male victimhood, with commenters stating that unattractive men would be prosecuted for the same acts Chads/attractive men are entitled to “Wait what happened to the “Me Too” outrage? Oh that’s right… he’s HOT so never mind.”; “Just goes to show, it’s usually more about regret than consent….”; “If he was ugly it would be a felony”. The complicity of the criminal justice system is also implied by the commenters who claim that “Different rules depending on attractiveness” because “if she didn't think he was attractive he'd be in prison now”. Whilst women are the primary instigators, the law is also seen as skewed against men, suggesting we live in a gynocentric society, where rape charges, convictions and even life in prison are ascribed by women based on looks - “good looking pasts rape charges
10610_2023_9559_Figd_HTML.png
”. Thus, women are seen as taking advantage of a system biased against men, and therefore, women’s claims of sexual assault cannot or should not be taken seriously “This is why women can’t be taken seriously. It’s good for one but not the other. You want change? Try being consistent.”; ”If he was ugly it’s sex assault and he would be classified as creepy that’s why women are sick”.


My response to the above text: Men aren't victims, some of these guys are ugly and deserve their treatment. If a blackpiller has a victim mentality, I guarantee you, it's towards themselves (their genetics, their face, their height, phenotype, etc.) as blackpill is a self-critical ideology, unlike redpill which is a mostly environment-critical ideology. The rest of the sexual assaunt stuff is merely a continuation of her reasoning. I gave my input on that reasoning a while back.

Just letting you know guys, I'm only critiquing what I see as very necessary, of course, she's right about some of this stuff but she's wrong on others, since it's hard to understand someone's POV from an outsider's perspective.

The video content, along with the accompanying comments, contribute to the proliferation and normalisation of the fallacious belief that women derive pleasure from sexual assault. Furthermore, it portrays women as utilising allegations of sexual assault as a means to pursue legal action and discriminate against men deemed less desirable, taking advantage of the inherent biases within the criminal justice system. Consequently, these narratives not only reinforce the notion of male victimhood but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault.

No Way Wtf GIF by Harlem


My response to the above text: We don't hate women, want to sexually assault them, or rape them. We are very prone to hating ourselves for not being attractive enough for women. Women have the right to weed us out of the dating market if we're not good enough. Your line of reasoning starts from the axiom that blackpillers hate women and blame external factors and that we should harm women for what they have done to us. If this line of reasoning was valid, we wouldn't be seeming body dysmorphia and self hating all across blackpill communities and @Schery6 wouldn't have killed himself for "being too ugly to be alive"



"...but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault."

My response to the above text: She must think I'm an angry redpill roach lol.

"Many videos within our sample (especially the Account1 videos) relied on emotion-based arguments to further the idea that unattractive men are discriminated against based on their looks, whilst women are entitled and privileged."

My response to the above text: She is very solid on the first point, but the second point, the women are priviliged is false in the sense that she misinterpreted what the message of that video was. She's focusing on the women, I'm focusing on the belittlement of the retarded men who thought learning pickup skills and daygame, displaying their abhorrently funny daygame is ok for their ugly or short selves lol. That woman should reject him, it's obvious and the right thing to do.

"Commenters trivialised sexual violence by claiming that women incite and deserve to be subjected to such acts, demonstrating the pervasiveness of a ‘non-consent’ rhetoric and the embracement of rape culture (Powell & Sugiura, 2018), linking blackpilled beliefs with normalised sexual violence (Kelly, 1987). This is conducive of what Jane (2017) terms as ‘Rapeglish,’ discourse portraying women as promiscuous and deserving of non-consensual sexual acts, often issued via rape threats. However, the language employed on TikTok can be understood as borderline (GIFCT, 2022), in the sense that it was sufficiently implicit to escape content moderation, yet apparent enough to be harmful and perpetuate rape culture."

Steve Harvey Reaction GIF
Nick Young Wtf GIF


Jesus.

As I said, the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.


My overall response:

The purpose of my TikTok Account was to
use sensational, brutal, drastic, attention-grabbing, ego-destroying, and extremely emotional examples of lookism to convince those hard headed bluepillers, pickup artists, redpillers and the everyday male that looks determine your dating life as a man. Nothing more, nothing less.

The conclusions made are founded upon false axioms, such as the blackpill ideology is a female-hating ideology, blackpillers want retribution for their mistreatment or lack of dating options, and mixing blackpill and redpill rhetoric together.

Remember that it's redpillers solely that are converting to Islam, and we know how the West sees Muslim's treatment of women.

Now if this was an analysis on the redpill, it would actually be much more (although not completely) accurate.
Also, we love using hyperbolic language because blackpilled toxic humor is funny 🤣 We love "brutal" humor.

Also, the blackpilled videos we post here or on social media is not to show men that "you're oppressed, see!! you should probably hurt and do heinous things to women for oppressing you". You'd be so far off the mark thinking like this.

The message is "hahahahahaha you're less than (especially to women) if you're deficient in this area, and you should do something to escape it so women and people treat you the way you want to be treated." or even "hahah i am worshipped/treated nicely/treated like a person for having this trait and you don't, so you're subhuman" or even "hahah you're ugly, you're short, can't you see how important is it to be tall and handsome if you want women to love you hahaha" aka toxic humor




IF CNN OR BBC SEE THIS,
The link can be found here:

Solea, A.I., Sugiura, L. Mainstreaming the Blackpill: Understanding the Incel Community on TikTok. Eur J Crim Policy Res 29, 311–336 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-023-09559-5

The only author who left her email is Anda Iulia Solea from School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Portsmouth in the United Kingdom.
If you'd like to contact her, please email her at Anda.Solea@port.ac.uk.

If you're retarded enough to diss her or say anything rude to her, that's not necessary. She's doing what she believes is her job and you can help her understand us better by briefly correcting any false assumptions, as I plan on doing with her critique of my viral Tiktoks.

I find this article to be very interesting (because she critiqued it) and funny (in the sense that our stuff made it here lol).
Here are some snippets.

Abstract

"Incels (involuntary celibates), a subgroup of the so called ‘manosphere,’ have become an increasing security concern for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners following their association with several violent attacks. Once mostly contained on niche men’s forums, redpilled and blackpilled communities and theories are gaining prominence on mainstream social media platforms. However, whilst previous research considerably enhanced our understanding of the incel phenomenon and their presence on Reddit and secluded incel forums, incel’s presence on mainstream social media platforms is understudied and their presence on TikTok is yet to be addressed. The present paper examines the incel subculture on TikTok, through an analysis of incel accounts, videos and their respective comments, to understand the role mainstream social media platforms play in the ‘normiefication’ and normalisation of incel ideology and discourse. The findings suggest that on TikTok the expression of incel ideology takes a covert form, employing emotional appeals and pseudo-science to disseminate common incelosphere tropes. Further, we demonstrate how the process of mainstreaming incel beliefs is facilitated by their interconnectedness with wider sexism and structural misogyny. The harms generating from this association are conducive to the normalisation of blackpill beliefs and the reinforcement of misogyny, sexism and justification of rape culture."

As I read the article, I quickly came to see that the authors don't really know where to draw the line between blackpill and redpill, neither do they really understand them fully. This doesn't surprise me since it's hard to understand phenomena from an outsider's perspective.

The focus of the critiques below are solely on correcting perceptual mistakes about my content's message on TikTok and perceptual mistakes about the blackpill. Also, when I say "we" I mean (the vast majority of blackpillers).

It would have been better if she tried to understand the perspective of a blackpiller before saying anything to maximize accuracy.

She also doesn't realize that most blackpillers are self-hating, self-loathing people who are desperate to look better, moderate/indifferent on feminism, love toxic humor, insecure and see looksmaxing as salvation to their self-hate and lackluster social and dating life. If anything, we congratulate women for the sexual liberation movement so now they won't breed with mediocre men and create pathetic short and ugly incels that get bullied at school. Most users here also support gender equality and probably have suicidal thoughts because they're ugly, short, wrong phenotype, etc.

Most people on here aren't misogynistic, some are but most just hate themselves for not being good enough for women. Sounds familiar? Teenage women!

They also have to realize there is a minority of mentally ill (as in neurotic, angry, and psychologically disturbed) people here who say heinous things that even we disagree with, so discard their opinions, they're minority and foolish opinions.

Blackpillers may have different beliefs on things but some of the things we all agree on is.
  • Looks are primary in dating and in generating attraction and plays an important role in maintaining attraction. Other factors only matter after you've passed the looks test, and the importance of these factors are almost always inferior to the importance of looks (unless you're noticeably neurodivergent)
  • Women aren't entitled or evil, you're just ugly and they want nothing to do with you sexually and romantically.
  • Women want to date men they find attractive and they treat them very well, even to the degree of literal worship.
Blackpill is focused on the proposition that you (and your aesthetic inadequacies) are the problem, not women. That's why a fair amount of people here hate themselves.

As a former redpiller, redpillers believe that things like
  • Confidence
  • Money
  • Status
  • Being assertive, and "asserting yourself the right way"
  • Masculine behavior
  • Game, Charisma and Pickup Skills
...are of most importance and that looks are secondary or even irrelevant.

Redpill is very focused on the proposition that feminism and modern women have corrupted the dating market and have created degenerate women and creating very unequal dating markets - that proposition composites the majority of the problem and their inadequacies are a minority (they do acknowledge this).

These guys are the anti-feminists, believe that women are entitled and that feminism has ruined the dating market and through those things listed above, you'll survive the shit show. They have an elevated but not certain or high possibly (I wasn't) a male supremacist. They are the ones that want to go back to "muh traditional dating market". They are the ones who either misogynists or mistrustful of women (I didn't hate women but was mistrustful when I used to be a redpiller)

These guys think feminism & modern women are the problem, more than they are.

This is very important. This "modern women are the problem" thinking has the slim chance of leading to events like the shooting Elliot Rodger committed. Blackpill's "your lack of physical attractiveness are the problem" thinking on the other hand, wouldn't cause you to exterminating others, it would make you prone to exterminating yourself because you're too ugly to be alive, and the treatment you get isn't worth enduring if looksmaxing can't save you.

Watch Fresh & Fit, Donovan Sharpe, and Alpha Male Strategies on YouTube if you want to understand the redpill better.

"Alpha male strategies", "High value man"
Cracking Up Lol GIF by HULU

Go looksmax, you dumb redpill roach.

Any "blackpiller" that believes in any redpill-pickup artist or bluepill rhetoric are immediately mocked on this forum.

🔴 "Just be confident bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴"Just say this magically scientifically proven line and she'll get wet bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔵 "Just buy her gifts even though she's not attracted to you bro! She'll see how valuable you are then bro!" - That's called simping and it doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴 "Just be rich bro"- Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you, and you're now just a gold digging oppurtunity.
🔴 "Just have status bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you. Average woman doesn't craves Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk because they are famous.
🔵"Just be funny bro" - She'll love spending time with you because you're funny, not because she's attracted to you (she isn't attracted to you). Speaking from direct experience.
🔵 "Just have a great personality bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.

If you're curious about the strategy of the three dating philosophies strategies to get women, here they are.

Bluepill strategy - being nice, respectful, female-worshipping and being simpish generates attraction.

Of course, it's important to be nice and respectful, but if not paired with physical attractiveness, it's useless. It's like dividing a number by zero.

View attachment 2553323
View attachment 2553379

Redpill-PUA strategy - Use your elite game, and other insignificant factors and get women.



Blackpill strategy - Looksmax and become attractive, and the women will come.
View attachment 2553330

View attachment 2553332
View attachment 2553333
All of those gestures she asked him to do was to verify that he was a real person

View attachment 2553338
She'll wear anything this guy tells her, I wonder why?

View attachment 2553346
She's mad that Chad didn't kiss her. Unlike my most viral video, the recipient wasn't interested, therefore it's a form of sexual-romantic assault.

View attachment 2553380
notice who she's staring at

View attachment 2553382


Sadly, they are correct about the fact that few mentally ill people here think rape is ok, but that's (mostly) old and was a small minority of users who aren't really active anymore. That belief is held by so few people here. It's not a widespread belief.

There's so much to say because the whole scientific article is almost 100,000 characters (very large)
Anyways, I own a TikTok account called lookism.tiktok and they cited it in their article boyos holy shit!
Here it is if you want to see it: https://www.tiktok.com/@lookism.tiktok

Anyways, here's my critique of their critique of my TikToks.


" The Stylistic Framing of Incel Content on TikTok​

Whilst both TikTok accounts were chosen because they espoused blackpill and incel ideology, the two accounts differ in the stylistic presentation of this ideology. The name of the first TikTok account (Lookism.tiktok) demonstrates the focus on the issue of lookism, stating in the account’s description:

Looks determine your dating life as a man. Fuck the redpill 🔴& the bluepill 🔵

Account1 videos include repurposed and collated viral internet videos and pictures to demonstrate women’s lookist nature. The account creator provides little explanations in his videos, no narration, and relies on sensationalised titles and brief overlay text commentaries to make his point (see Fig. 1)."

Lookism and the Unjust Sexual Market​

Account1’s video content is unsurprisingly focused on lookism. Women are depicted as preferring men with traditional masculine characteristics, with handsome facial features and height above 6 ft. For example, in Video3 a typical pick-up artist meeting is depicted where a male dating guru presents an ‘unattractive’ man to an ‘attractive’ woman asking her if from a ‘feminine perspective’ she would be sexually attracted to this man. The woman instantly rejects the man. The overlay text argues “The real problem here is that he’s unattractive and she is repulsed by his presence....” The hyperbolic choice of language for (mis)interpreting the woman’s reaction as ‘repulsed’ at the man’s mere presence is aimed at inducing a negative emotional reaction from the viewers. Subsequently, the message of this video and several videos on this account is not just exposing women’s lookist nature but also their ‘cruel rejection’ methods and propensity to humiliate men that do not fit hegemonic masculinity standards. It is also noteworthy that the emphasis is on women's ‘cruel rejection,’ and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility.

My response to the above text: Yes, I did use hyperbolic language but I didn't misinterpret it, she literally said he isn't attractive.
Also, the purpose of that video is to mock the man for being ugly, hense "repulsive". She has the right to reject such a pathetic male. We not only laugh but encourage it since such a pickup retard should know that looks determine your dating life as a man. My account description perfectly describes the message of my account. The focus is absolutely on the humiliation of the pickup artist (autist). The goal was not in any way to absolve responsibility on the men, I need men to not only notice my account's message but inspire them through fostering insecurity to do something about it (responsibility). That fatass who fell for the PUA scam should looksmax or give up on dating.

When the blackpill was forming, there was a website called puahate.com, PUA stands for pickup artist. We PUA's are dumb, maybe dislike or even hate these guys for falsely making others believe that "just say the magic line and it won't matter what you look like bro" nonsense. I used to fall for that.

View attachment 2553299

"...and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility."

My response to the above text: In no way are we going to save a PUA or try to make a PUA free from responsibility :ROFLMAO:


"This was reflected within the comments sections, where debates around attractiveness and lookism represented the most frequently discussed theme. The commenters claimed women solely desire men that are traditionally good looking (i.e., attractive face/body) and tall. A recurrent argument was that men need to conform to women’s strict aesthetic standards to qualify for sex and relationships “it all basically comes down to how good you look”; “Step 1: be attractive Step 2: don’t be unattractive”. Height was also a deciding factor in men’s sexual or romantic success, with women portrayed as despising short men to the extent of regarding them as non-existent- “Short guys literally don’t exist to the average woman. it’s sad”; “How sad they shamed and laughed at a man that can’t control his height, this still goes on to this day and they say men are the toxic ones”.

My response to the above text: They nailed it. This is "looks theory" or that looks are the primary factor when it comes to dating. You don't even have to be Chad necessarily, all that matters is that you're considered good-looking to women around you or to the woman you want, and if not, it's over. Of course, the "strict" dating standards is an extreme point of view I had at the time. Of course, looks theory is very real, but the strictness depends. Some individuals believe in higher strictness, or lower strictness, some believe it depends on the woman, environment, context, or a combination of these, but they got this right.

I'd personally disagree with this comment a user left on the TikTok: "...and they say men are the toxic ones”. Everyone assesses people based on appearance and it's not just men, it sounds like the user who wrote that thinks men do it more than women.

Women’s lookist nature is further framed within the videos as being conducive to a constant ritual of men's humiliation. This is evident in several Account1 videos. For example, one video showcases a woman on an online meeting shouting “You are ugly as fuck” to the man on the other end of the call; another video presents a woman verbally abusing a police officer because he was short “Why did the police let this short man join? Who the fuck is he gonna hurt? Look at this munchkin, look at this baby ass bitch”; and a third video of a man recounting his experiences with online dating stating that he was told he should kill himself because he is short “Why is it ok for women to say—Oh you are 5 ft on a dating site? You should be dead!—that’s ok?”. According to these, the habitual rejection and humiliation leads men to feeling dehumanised as suggested by a video with an insect staring at a wall over which sad music is played—the caption reads “Non-chads after realizing only team tinder wants to date them…”. The insect represents unattractive men, or ‘non-chads’, who come to the realisation that women will never be interested in them and they will be forever dateless and celibate, demonstrating the hopeless perpetuity of the incel condition."

My response to the above text:
I love watching those videos, the brutality of the situation faced by those guys :lul: Love watching ugly men get savagely rejected by women, especially redpillers and pickup artists. Funniest stuff ever!

"Account1 further builds upon the notion of women’s privileged status, arguing that it is not just women’s entitlement that is problematic but also women’s nefarious and hypocritical nature. This is ‘evidenced’ by women’s supposed preference and idolisation of ‘bad’, abusive and even ‘criminal’ men, chosen at the detriment of ‘nice guys’ with less appealing physical characteristics. An example of this is Video2 titled “Watch what it takes to get girls as a short guy!” which presents a short man on a dating competition show getting repeatedly rejected by all the women candidates. When questioned as to what it would take to pick the short man, the women stated they would only pick him if the other four candidates were convicted murderers. An overlay text appears on the screen informing the viewers that “Even now they are lying. They would rather be with a tall murderer Chad than a manlet”. According to this video, women’s immorality and lookist nature are so pervasive that they would prefer a good-looking murderer to a decent short man, but women are hypocritical and would never admit to this ‘fact’. This is expanded by clips showcasing ‘hybristophilia’ (2023)—women’s sexual attraction to mass murderers, violent criminals, rapists and even paedophiles. For example, two videos depict the adoration women have for Ted Bundy and Jeremy Meeks, two infamous and attractive convicted criminals. The text overlay on the Ted Bundy video states “Chad can get hoards of women despite being a rapist and a murderer”.

My response to the above text: We don't believe women are entitled, nefarious, hypocritical and problematic. That's a redpill belief. Don't get it mixed up with the blackpill. I believe Stew's height is problematic and worthy of ridicule, very worthy 🤣🤣🤣

Also, I didn't say or imply that women like criminals, of course this is my fault for not being clear but what I was saying is women will usually rank looks as more important even if the attractive male has a criminal record. A criminal record can (not always) be excused if he's hot enough.

"Women’s preference for abusive attractive men at the detriment of unattractive betas or incels is further implied in the most viewed video on Account1 (video1). In this clip, a woman is approached and kissed without consent by a young man characterised as a Chad, which the woman says she is happy with. The video then switches to a second clip in which a group of armed police agents break down a door and enter an apartment. The text added above this video reads “Meanwhile… You’d go to prison for “attempted r**e”. The message of this video is that Chads have free access to women’s bodies, yet betas or incels do not enjoy the same entitlements. This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It implies that it is not the nature of the acts themselves that constitute sexual assault, but rather women’s reception, which is influenced by the attractiveness of the perpetrator. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"


My response to the above text: Chads aren't entitled to women, but they do get easy access to women. Entitlement is "I deserve it". Easy access is "I don't have to do anything, or much to get what I want". Unattractive men almost always have zero access to women, because they're unattractive. The acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Also, ugly and average looking incels aren't entitled to shit. They should looksmax like hell to deserve anything.


"This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"

My response to the above text: They think I'm encouraging rape culture and that sexual assault shouldn't be taken seriously. I didn't say explicitly or implicitly imply anything else besides the fact that the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Sexual assault and related crimes are serious but like the Amber Heard case proved, not always valid because some women may interpret something like a non-attractive man grabbing a woman's shoulder and accidentally touching her breasts in an attempt to save her from a speeding truck as sexual assault and get the man imprisoned.

Obviously, some dude just grabbing her and doing it while she's screaming stop is obviously and validly a violation and the perpetrator should be imprisoned.

"Rape culture and justification of sexual assault are further amplified within the comments. Here, women are portrayed as a homogenous group rather than as individuals and described as hypocritical, liars and promiscuous. It is suggested that women’s double standards and hypocrisy are most obvious when it comes to sexual advances—unattractive men are rejected and found ominous whereas the same type of behaviours are encouraged and desired by women from attractive men “The difference between creepy and sexy is how attractive you are
10610_2023_9559_Figc_HTML.png
”; “women dont get mad at advances, they are just selective on who is doing it”. Additionally, commenters debated the importance of consent. Whilst a small number of comments argued that sexual assault has serious repercussions, the consensus was that women’s claims of sexual assault or harassment are subjective. According to this, Chads can have their way with women and do not need consent from women to engage in sexual behaviours with them. Attractive men are therefore viewed as having ‘handsome privilege’ entitling them to women’s bodies and protecting them from repercussions “That’s called pretty privilege”; “Difference between flirting and assault is how attractive you are”. "


The notion of consent is used to support the trope of male victimhood, with commenters stating that unattractive men would be prosecuted for the same acts Chads/attractive men are entitled to “Wait what happened to the “Me Too” outrage? Oh that’s right… he’s HOT so never mind.”; “Just goes to show, it’s usually more about regret than consent….”; “If he was ugly it would be a felony”. The complicity of the criminal justice system is also implied by the commenters who claim that “Different rules depending on attractiveness” because “if she didn't think he was attractive he'd be in prison now”. Whilst women are the primary instigators, the law is also seen as skewed against men, suggesting we live in a gynocentric society, where rape charges, convictions and even life in prison are ascribed by women based on looks - “good looking pasts rape charges
10610_2023_9559_Figd_HTML.png
”. Thus, women are seen as taking advantage of a system biased against men, and therefore, women’s claims of sexual assault cannot or should not be taken seriously “This is why women can’t be taken seriously. It’s good for one but not the other. You want change? Try being consistent.”; ”If he was ugly it’s sex assault and he would be classified as creepy that’s why women are sick”.


My response to the above text: Men aren't victims, some of these guys are ugly and deserve their treatment. If a blackpiller has a victim mentality, I guarantee you, it's towards themselves (their genetics, their face, their height, phenotype, etc.) as blackpill is a self-critical ideology, unlike redpill which is a mostly environment-critical ideology. The rest of the sexual assaunt stuff is merely a continuation of her reasoning. I gave my input on that reasoning a while back.

Just letting you know guys, I'm only critiquing what I see as very necessary, of course, she's right about some of this stuff but she's wrong on others, since it's hard to understand someone's POV from an outsider's perspective.

The video content, along with the accompanying comments, contribute to the proliferation and normalisation of the fallacious belief that women derive pleasure from sexual assault. Furthermore, it portrays women as utilising allegations of sexual assault as a means to pursue legal action and discriminate against men deemed less desirable, taking advantage of the inherent biases within the criminal justice system. Consequently, these narratives not only reinforce the notion of male victimhood but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault.

No Way Wtf GIF by Harlem


My response to the above text: We don't hate women, want to sexually assault them, or rape them. We are very prone to hating ourselves for not being attractive enough for women. Women have the right to weed us out of the dating market if we're not good enough. Your line of reasoning starts from the axiom that blackpillers hate women and blame external factors and that we should harm women for what they have done to us. If this line of reasoning was valid, we wouldn't be seeming body dysmorphia and self hating all across blackpill communities and @Schery6 wouldn't have killed himself for "being too ugly to be alive"



"...but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault."

My response to the above text: She must think I'm an angry redpill roach lol.

"Many videos within our sample (especially the Account1 videos) relied on emotion-based arguments to further the idea that unattractive men are discriminated against based on their looks, whilst women are entitled and privileged."

My response to the above text: She is very solid on the first point, but the second point, the women are priviliged is false in the sense that she misinterpreted what the message of that video was. She's focusing on the women, I'm focusing on the belittlement of the retarded men who thought learning pickup skills and daygame, displaying their abhorrently funny daygame is ok for their ugly or short selves lol. That woman should reject him, it's obvious and the right thing to do.

"Commenters trivialised sexual violence by claiming that women incite and deserve to be subjected to such acts, demonstrating the pervasiveness of a ‘non-consent’ rhetoric and the embracement of rape culture (Powell & Sugiura, 2018), linking blackpilled beliefs with normalised sexual violence (Kelly, 1987). This is conducive of what Jane (2017) terms as ‘Rapeglish,’ discourse portraying women as promiscuous and deserving of non-consensual sexual acts, often issued via rape threats. However, the language employed on TikTok can be understood as borderline (GIFCT, 2022), in the sense that it was sufficiently implicit to escape content moderation, yet apparent enough to be harmful and perpetuate rape culture."

Steve Harvey Reaction GIF
Nick Young Wtf GIF


Jesus.

As I said, the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.


My overall response:

The purpose of my TikTok Account was to
use sensational, brutal, drastic, attention-grabbing, ego-destroying, and extremely emotional examples of lookism to convince those hard headed bluepillers, pickup artists, redpillers and the everyday male that looks determine your dating life as a man. Nothing more, nothing less.

The conclusions made are founded upon false axioms, such as the blackpill ideology is a female-hating ideology, blackpillers want retribution for their mistreatment or lack of dating options, and mixing blackpill and redpill rhetoric together.

Remember that it's redpillers solely that are converting to Islam, and we know how the West sees Muslim's treatment of women.

Now if this was an analysis on the redpill, it would actually be much more (although not completely) accurate.
Also, we love using hyperbolic language because blackpilled toxic humor is funny 🤣 We love "brutal" humor.

Also, the blackpilled videos we post here or on social media is not to show men that "you're oppressed, see!! you should probably hurt and do heinous things to women for oppressing you". You'd be so far off the mark thinking like this.

The message is "hahahahahaha you're less than (especially to women) if you're deficient in this area, and you should do something to escape it so women and people treat you the way you want to be treated." or even "hahah i am worshipped/treated nicely/treated like a person for having this trait and you don't, so you're subhuman" or even "hahah you're ugly, you're short, can't you see how important is it to be tall and handsome if you want women to love you hahaha" aka toxic humor




News letters will prob see this. If BBC or CNN see this put my face in news fr.
3757846 doxproof pic
3757849 doxproof pic 3
 
  • JFL
Reactions: OGJBSLAYER, Deleted member 16275, enchanted_elixir and 3 others
She'll love spending time with you because you're funny, not because she's attracted to you (she isn't attracted to you).
made me giggle.


top-tier thread brother
 
  • +1
Reactions: enchanted_elixir
The link can be found here:

Solea, A.I., Sugiura, L. Mainstreaming the Blackpill: Understanding the Incel Community on TikTok. Eur J Crim Policy Res 29, 311–336 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-023-09559-5

The only author who left her email is Anda Iulia Solea from School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Portsmouth in the United Kingdom.
If you'd like to contact her, please email her at Anda.Solea@port.ac.uk.

If you're retarded enough to diss her or say anything rude to her, that's not necessary. She's doing what she believes is her job and you can help her understand us better by briefly correcting any false assumptions, as I plan on doing with her critique of my viral Tiktoks.

I find this article to be very interesting (because she critiqued it) and funny (in the sense that our stuff made it here lol).
Here are some snippets.

Abstract

"Incels (involuntary celibates), a subgroup of the so called ‘manosphere,’ have become an increasing security concern for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners following their association with several violent attacks. Once mostly contained on niche men’s forums, redpilled and blackpilled communities and theories are gaining prominence on mainstream social media platforms. However, whilst previous research considerably enhanced our understanding of the incel phenomenon and their presence on Reddit and secluded incel forums, incel’s presence on mainstream social media platforms is understudied and their presence on TikTok is yet to be addressed. The present paper examines the incel subculture on TikTok, through an analysis of incel accounts, videos and their respective comments, to understand the role mainstream social media platforms play in the ‘normiefication’ and normalisation of incel ideology and discourse. The findings suggest that on TikTok the expression of incel ideology takes a covert form, employing emotional appeals and pseudo-science to disseminate common incelosphere tropes. Further, we demonstrate how the process of mainstreaming incel beliefs is facilitated by their interconnectedness with wider sexism and structural misogyny. The harms generating from this association are conducive to the normalisation of blackpill beliefs and the reinforcement of misogyny, sexism and justification of rape culture."

As I read the article, I quickly came to see that the authors don't really know where to draw the line between blackpill and redpill, neither do they really understand them fully. This doesn't surprise me since it's hard to understand phenomena from an outsider's perspective.

The focus of the critiques below are solely on correcting perceptual mistakes about my content's message on TikTok and perceptual mistakes about the blackpill. Also, when I say "we" I mean (the vast majority of blackpillers).

It would have been better if she tried to understand the perspective of a blackpiller before saying anything to maximize accuracy.

She also doesn't realize that most blackpillers are self-hating, self-loathing people who are desperate to look better, moderate/indifferent on feminism, love toxic humor, insecure and see looksmaxing as salvation to their self-hate and lackluster social and dating life. If anything, we congratulate women for the sexual liberation movement so now they won't breed with mediocre men and create pathetic short and ugly incels that get bullied at school. Most users here also support gender equality and probably have suicidal thoughts because they're ugly, short, wrong phenotype, etc.

Most people on here aren't misogynistic, some are but most just hate themselves for not being good enough for women. Sounds familiar? Teenage women!

They also have to realize there is a minority of mentally ill (as in neurotic, angry, and psychologically disturbed) people here who say heinous things that even we disagree with, so discard their opinions, they're minority and foolish opinions.

Blackpillers may have different beliefs on things but some of the things we all agree on is.
  • Looks are primary in dating and in generating attraction and plays an important role in maintaining attraction. Other factors only matter after you've passed the looks test, and the importance of these factors are almost always inferior to the importance of looks (unless you're noticeably neurodivergent)
  • Women aren't entitled or evil, you're just ugly and they want nothing to do with you sexually and romantically.
  • Women want to date men they find attractive and they treat them very well, even to the degree of literal worship.
Blackpill is focused on the proposition that you (and your aesthetic inadequacies) are the problem, not women. That's why a fair amount of people here hate themselves.

As a former redpiller, redpillers believe that things like
  • Confidence
  • Money
  • Status
  • Being assertive, and "asserting yourself the right way"
  • Masculine behavior
  • Game, Charisma and Pickup Skills
...are of most importance and that looks are secondary or even irrelevant.

Redpill is very focused on the proposition that feminism and modern women have corrupted the dating market and have created degenerate women and creating very unequal dating markets - that proposition composites the majority of the problem and their inadequacies are a minority (they do acknowledge this).

These guys are the anti-feminists, believe that women are entitled and that feminism has ruined the dating market and through those things listed above, you'll survive the shit show. They have an elevated but not certain or high possibly (I wasn't) a male supremacist. They are the ones that want to go back to "muh traditional dating market". They are the ones who either misogynists or mistrustful of women (I didn't hate women but was mistrustful when I used to be a redpiller)

These guys think feminism & modern women are the problem, more than they are.

This is very important. This "modern women are the problem" thinking has the slim chance of leading to events like the shooting Elliot Rodger committed. Blackpill's "your lack of physical attractiveness are the problem" thinking on the other hand, wouldn't cause you to exterminating others, it would make you prone to exterminating yourself because you're too ugly to be alive, and the treatment you get isn't worth enduring if looksmaxing can't save you.

Watch Fresh & Fit, Donovan Sharpe, and Alpha Male Strategies on YouTube if you want to understand the redpill better.

"Alpha male strategies", "High value man"
Cracking Up Lol GIF by HULU

Go looksmax, you dumb redpill roach.

Any "blackpiller" that believes in any redpill-pickup artist or bluepill rhetoric are immediately mocked on this forum.

🔴 "Just be confident bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴"Just say this magically scientifically proven line and she'll get wet bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔵 "Just buy her gifts even though she's not attracted to you bro! She'll see how valuable you are then bro!" - That's called simping and it doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴 "Just be rich bro"- Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you, and you're now just a gold digging oppurtunity.
🔴 "Just have status bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you. Average woman doesn't craves Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk because they are famous.
🔵"Just be funny bro" - She'll love spending time with you because you're funny, not because she's attracted to you (she isn't attracted to you). Speaking from direct experience.
🔵 "Just have a great personality bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.

If you're curious about the strategy of the three dating philosophies strategies to get women, here they are.

Bluepill strategy - being nice, respectful, female-worshipping and being simpish generates attraction.

Of course, it's important to be nice and respectful, but if not paired with physical attractiveness, it's useless. It's like dividing a number by zero.

View attachment 2553323
View attachment 2553379

Redpill-PUA strategy - Use your elite game, and other insignificant factors and get women.



Blackpill strategy - Looksmax and become attractive, and the women will come.
View attachment 2553330

View attachment 2553332
View attachment 2553333
All of those gestures she asked him to do was to verify that he was a real person

View attachment 2553338
She'll wear anything this guy tells her, I wonder why?

View attachment 2553346
She's mad that Chad didn't kiss her. Unlike my most viral video, the recipient wasn't interested, therefore it's a form of sexual-romantic assault.

View attachment 2553380
notice who she's staring at

View attachment 2553382


Sadly, they are correct about the fact that few mentally ill people here think rape is ok, but that's (mostly) old and was a small minority of users who aren't really active anymore. That belief is held by so few people here. It's not a widespread belief.

There's so much to say because the whole scientific article is almost 100,000 characters (very large)
Anyways, I own a TikTok account called lookism.tiktok and they cited it in their article boyos holy shit!
Here it is if you want to see it: https://www.tiktok.com/@lookism.tiktok

Anyways, here's my critique of their critique of my TikToks.


" The Stylistic Framing of Incel Content on TikTok​

Whilst both TikTok accounts were chosen because they espoused blackpill and incel ideology, the two accounts differ in the stylistic presentation of this ideology. The name of the first TikTok account (Lookism.tiktok) demonstrates the focus on the issue of lookism, stating in the account’s description:

Looks determine your dating life as a man. Fuck the redpill 🔴& the bluepill 🔵

Account1 videos include repurposed and collated viral internet videos and pictures to demonstrate women’s lookist nature. The account creator provides little explanations in his videos, no narration, and relies on sensationalised titles and brief overlay text commentaries to make his point (see Fig. 1)."

Lookism and the Unjust Sexual Market​

Account1’s video content is unsurprisingly focused on lookism. Women are depicted as preferring men with traditional masculine characteristics, with handsome facial features and height above 6 ft. For example, in Video3 a typical pick-up artist meeting is depicted where a male dating guru presents an ‘unattractive’ man to an ‘attractive’ woman asking her if from a ‘feminine perspective’ she would be sexually attracted to this man. The woman instantly rejects the man. The overlay text argues “The real problem here is that he’s unattractive and she is repulsed by his presence....” The hyperbolic choice of language for (mis)interpreting the woman’s reaction as ‘repulsed’ at the man’s mere presence is aimed at inducing a negative emotional reaction from the viewers. Subsequently, the message of this video and several videos on this account is not just exposing women’s lookist nature but also their ‘cruel rejection’ methods and propensity to humiliate men that do not fit hegemonic masculinity standards. It is also noteworthy that the emphasis is on women's ‘cruel rejection,’ and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility.

My response to the above text: Yes, I did use hyperbolic language but I didn't misinterpret it, she literally said he isn't attractive.
Also, the purpose of that video is to mock the man for being ugly, hense "repulsive". She has the right to reject such a pathetic male. We not only laugh but encourage it since such a pickup retard should know that looks determine your dating life as a man. My account description perfectly describes the message of my account. The focus is absolutely on the humiliation of the pickup artist (autist). The goal was not in any way to absolve responsibility on the men, I need men to not only notice my account's message but inspire them through fostering insecurity to do something about it (responsibility). That fatass who fell for the PUA scam should looksmax or give up on dating.

When the blackpill was forming, there was a website called puahate.com, PUA stands for pickup artist. We PUA's are dumb, maybe dislike or even hate these guys for falsely making others believe that "just say the magic line and it won't matter what you look like bro" nonsense. I used to fall for that.

View attachment 2553299

"...and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility."

My response to the above text: In no way are we going to save a PUA or try to make a PUA free from responsibility :ROFLMAO:


"This was reflected within the comments sections, where debates around attractiveness and lookism represented the most frequently discussed theme. The commenters claimed women solely desire men that are traditionally good looking (i.e., attractive face/body) and tall. A recurrent argument was that men need to conform to women’s strict aesthetic standards to qualify for sex and relationships “it all basically comes down to how good you look”; “Step 1: be attractive Step 2: don’t be unattractive”. Height was also a deciding factor in men’s sexual or romantic success, with women portrayed as despising short men to the extent of regarding them as non-existent- “Short guys literally don’t exist to the average woman. it’s sad”; “How sad they shamed and laughed at a man that can’t control his height, this still goes on to this day and they say men are the toxic ones”.

My response to the above text: They nailed it. This is "looks theory" or that looks are the primary factor when it comes to dating. You don't even have to be Chad necessarily, all that matters is that you're considered good-looking to women around you or to the woman you want, and if not, it's over. Of course, the "strict" dating standards is an extreme point of view I had at the time. Of course, looks theory is very real, but the strictness depends. Some individuals believe in higher strictness, or lower strictness, some believe it depends on the woman, environment, context, or a combination of these, but they got this right.

I'd personally disagree with this comment a user left on the TikTok: "...and they say men are the toxic ones”. Everyone assesses people based on appearance and it's not just men, it sounds like the user who wrote that thinks men do it more than women.

Women’s lookist nature is further framed within the videos as being conducive to a constant ritual of men's humiliation. This is evident in several Account1 videos. For example, one video showcases a woman on an online meeting shouting “You are ugly as fuck” to the man on the other end of the call; another video presents a woman verbally abusing a police officer because he was short “Why did the police let this short man join? Who the fuck is he gonna hurt? Look at this munchkin, look at this baby ass bitch”; and a third video of a man recounting his experiences with online dating stating that he was told he should kill himself because he is short “Why is it ok for women to say—Oh you are 5 ft on a dating site? You should be dead!—that’s ok?”. According to these, the habitual rejection and humiliation leads men to feeling dehumanised as suggested by a video with an insect staring at a wall over which sad music is played—the caption reads “Non-chads after realizing only team tinder wants to date them…”. The insect represents unattractive men, or ‘non-chads’, who come to the realisation that women will never be interested in them and they will be forever dateless and celibate, demonstrating the hopeless perpetuity of the incel condition."

My response to the above text:
I love watching those videos, the brutality of the situation faced by those guys :lul: Love watching ugly men get savagely rejected by women, especially redpillers and pickup artists. Funniest stuff ever!

"Account1 further builds upon the notion of women’s privileged status, arguing that it is not just women’s entitlement that is problematic but also women’s nefarious and hypocritical nature. This is ‘evidenced’ by women’s supposed preference and idolisation of ‘bad’, abusive and even ‘criminal’ men, chosen at the detriment of ‘nice guys’ with less appealing physical characteristics. An example of this is Video2 titled “Watch what it takes to get girls as a short guy!” which presents a short man on a dating competition show getting repeatedly rejected by all the women candidates. When questioned as to what it would take to pick the short man, the women stated they would only pick him if the other four candidates were convicted murderers. An overlay text appears on the screen informing the viewers that “Even now they are lying. They would rather be with a tall murderer Chad than a manlet”. According to this video, women’s immorality and lookist nature are so pervasive that they would prefer a good-looking murderer to a decent short man, but women are hypocritical and would never admit to this ‘fact’. This is expanded by clips showcasing ‘hybristophilia’ (2023)—women’s sexual attraction to mass murderers, violent criminals, rapists and even paedophiles. For example, two videos depict the adoration women have for Ted Bundy and Jeremy Meeks, two infamous and attractive convicted criminals. The text overlay on the Ted Bundy video states “Chad can get hoards of women despite being a rapist and a murderer”.

My response to the above text: We don't believe women are entitled, nefarious, hypocritical and problematic. That's a redpill belief. Don't get it mixed up with the blackpill. I believe Stew's height is problematic and worthy of ridicule, very worthy 🤣🤣🤣

Also, I didn't say or imply that women like criminals, of course this is my fault for not being clear but what I was saying is women will usually rank looks as more important even if the attractive male has a criminal record. A criminal record can (not always) be excused if he's hot enough.

"Women’s preference for abusive attractive men at the detriment of unattractive betas or incels is further implied in the most viewed video on Account1 (video1). In this clip, a woman is approached and kissed without consent by a young man characterised as a Chad, which the woman says she is happy with. The video then switches to a second clip in which a group of armed police agents break down a door and enter an apartment. The text added above this video reads “Meanwhile… You’d go to prison for “attempted r**e”. The message of this video is that Chads have free access to women’s bodies, yet betas or incels do not enjoy the same entitlements. This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It implies that it is not the nature of the acts themselves that constitute sexual assault, but rather women’s reception, which is influenced by the attractiveness of the perpetrator. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"


My response to the above text: Chads aren't entitled to women, but they do get easy access to women. Entitlement is "I deserve it". Easy access is "I don't have to do anything, or much to get what I want". Unattractive men almost always have zero access to women, because they're unattractive. The acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Also, ugly and average looking incels aren't entitled to shit. They should looksmax like hell to deserve anything.


"This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"

My response to the above text: They think I'm encouraging rape culture and that sexual assault shouldn't be taken seriously. I didn't say explicitly or implicitly imply anything else besides the fact that the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Sexual assault and related crimes are serious but like the Amber Heard case proved, not always valid because some women may interpret something like a non-attractive man grabbing a woman's shoulder and accidentally touching her breasts in an attempt to save her from a speeding truck as sexual assault and get the man imprisoned.

Obviously, some dude just grabbing her and doing it while she's screaming stop is obviously and validly a violation and the perpetrator should be imprisoned.

"Rape culture and justification of sexual assault are further amplified within the comments. Here, women are portrayed as a homogenous group rather than as individuals and described as hypocritical, liars and promiscuous. It is suggested that women’s double standards and hypocrisy are most obvious when it comes to sexual advances—unattractive men are rejected and found ominous whereas the same type of behaviours are encouraged and desired by women from attractive men “The difference between creepy and sexy is how attractive you are
10610_2023_9559_Figc_HTML.png
”; “women dont get mad at advances, they are just selective on who is doing it”. Additionally, commenters debated the importance of consent. Whilst a small number of comments argued that sexual assault has serious repercussions, the consensus was that women’s claims of sexual assault or harassment are subjective. According to this, Chads can have their way with women and do not need consent from women to engage in sexual behaviours with them. Attractive men are therefore viewed as having ‘handsome privilege’ entitling them to women’s bodies and protecting them from repercussions “That’s called pretty privilege”; “Difference between flirting and assault is how attractive you are”. "


The notion of consent is used to support the trope of male victimhood, with commenters stating that unattractive men would be prosecuted for the same acts Chads/attractive men are entitled to “Wait what happened to the “Me Too” outrage? Oh that’s right… he’s HOT so never mind.”; “Just goes to show, it’s usually more about regret than consent….”; “If he was ugly it would be a felony”. The complicity of the criminal justice system is also implied by the commenters who claim that “Different rules depending on attractiveness” because “if she didn't think he was attractive he'd be in prison now”. Whilst women are the primary instigators, the law is also seen as skewed against men, suggesting we live in a gynocentric society, where rape charges, convictions and even life in prison are ascribed by women based on looks - “good looking pasts rape charges
10610_2023_9559_Figd_HTML.png
”. Thus, women are seen as taking advantage of a system biased against men, and therefore, women’s claims of sexual assault cannot or should not be taken seriously “This is why women can’t be taken seriously. It’s good for one but not the other. You want change? Try being consistent.”; ”If he was ugly it’s sex assault and he would be classified as creepy that’s why women are sick”.


My response to the above text: Men aren't victims, some of these guys are ugly and deserve their treatment. If a blackpiller has a victim mentality, I guarantee you, it's towards themselves (their genetics, their face, their height, phenotype, etc.) as blackpill is a self-critical ideology, unlike redpill which is a mostly environment-critical ideology. The rest of the sexual assaunt stuff is merely a continuation of her reasoning. I gave my input on that reasoning a while back.

Just letting you know guys, I'm only critiquing what I see as very necessary, of course, she's right about some of this stuff but she's wrong on others, since it's hard to understand someone's POV from an outsider's perspective.

The video content, along with the accompanying comments, contribute to the proliferation and normalisation of the fallacious belief that women derive pleasure from sexual assault. Furthermore, it portrays women as utilising allegations of sexual assault as a means to pursue legal action and discriminate against men deemed less desirable, taking advantage of the inherent biases within the criminal justice system. Consequently, these narratives not only reinforce the notion of male victimhood but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault.

No Way Wtf GIF by Harlem


My response to the above text: We don't hate women, want to sexually assault them, or rape them. We are very prone to hating ourselves for not being attractive enough for women. Women have the right to weed us out of the dating market if we're not good enough. Your line of reasoning starts from the axiom that blackpillers hate women and blame external factors and that we should harm women for what they have done to us. If this line of reasoning was valid, we wouldn't be seeming body dysmorphia and self hating all across blackpill communities and @Schery6 wouldn't have killed himself for "being too ugly to be alive"



"...but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault."

My response to the above text: She must think I'm an angry redpill roach lol.

"Many videos within our sample (especially the Account1 videos) relied on emotion-based arguments to further the idea that unattractive men are discriminated against based on their looks, whilst women are entitled and privileged."

My response to the above text: She is very solid on the first point, but the second point, the women are priviliged is false in the sense that she misinterpreted what the message of that video was. She's focusing on the women, I'm focusing on the belittlement of the retarded men who thought learning pickup skills and daygame, displaying their abhorrently funny daygame is ok for their ugly or short selves lol. That woman should reject him, it's obvious and the right thing to do.

"Commenters trivialised sexual violence by claiming that women incite and deserve to be subjected to such acts, demonstrating the pervasiveness of a ‘non-consent’ rhetoric and the embracement of rape culture (Powell & Sugiura, 2018), linking blackpilled beliefs with normalised sexual violence (Kelly, 1987). This is conducive of what Jane (2017) terms as ‘Rapeglish,’ discourse portraying women as promiscuous and deserving of non-consensual sexual acts, often issued via rape threats. However, the language employed on TikTok can be understood as borderline (GIFCT, 2022), in the sense that it was sufficiently implicit to escape content moderation, yet apparent enough to be harmful and perpetuate rape culture."

Steve Harvey Reaction GIF
Nick Young Wtf GIF


Jesus.

As I said, the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.


My overall response:

The purpose of my TikTok Account was to
use sensational, brutal, drastic, attention-grabbing, ego-destroying, and extremely emotional examples of lookism to convince those hard headed bluepillers, pickup artists, redpillers and the everyday male that looks determine your dating life as a man. Nothing more, nothing less.

The conclusions made are founded upon false axioms, such as the blackpill ideology is a female-hating ideology, blackpillers want retribution for their mistreatment or lack of dating options, and mixing blackpill and redpill rhetoric together.

Remember that it's redpillers solely that are converting to Islam, and we know how the West sees Muslim's treatment of women.

Now if this was an analysis on the redpill, it would actually be much more (although not completely) accurate.
Also, we love using hyperbolic language because blackpilled toxic humor is funny 🤣 We love "brutal" humor.

Also, the blackpilled videos we post here or on social media is not to show men that "you're oppressed, see!! you should probably hurt and do heinous things to women for oppressing you". You'd be so far off the mark thinking like this.

The message is "hahahahahaha you're less than (especially to women) if you're deficient in this area, and you should do something to escape it so women and people treat you the way you want to be treated." or even "hahah i am worshipped/treated nicely/treated like a person for having this trait and you don't, so you're subhuman" or even "hahah you're ugly, you're short, can't you see how important is it to be tall and handsome if you want women to love you hahaha" aka toxic humor




HEY BITCH IF UR READING THIS FUCK YOU!
 
  • JFL
Reactions: enchanted_elixir
FUCK YOU BITCH
 
  • JFL
Reactions: ducktruck and enchanted_elixir
There are two kinds of users on .org: the incel rotters (who, despite their supposed hatred of women, still raise them on a pedestal) and the actual looksmaxxers, who recognize aesthetics as a separate end unto itself. We would be better off without the former, and it is because of them that they make the mistake of conflating the two.
 
  • +1
  • WTF
  • Love it
Reactions: Deleted member 6128, Deleted member 31497, enchanted_elixir and 4 others
Dnrd tbh

Tldr? Am i going to be Tyrone’s bitch boi in prison?

I have an account on here to actually looksmax, improve myself and shitpost, I’m not an incel/don’t hate women and i’m not planning to do any crimes
 
  • +1
Reactions: GunDevilHybrid and Av0nr
You joined 2 months ago. I've been here (as a lurker) since 2021. Most dudes here are insecure, hate themselves and really want to look better.

I barely... wait, almost never see misogynistic threads on here. Racist threads, sure but sexist ones, never.
Cope plenty of “misogyny” on this forum.
 
DNRD + COPE
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Banasura and horizontallytall
The new user and bp tiktokers are mix of blackpill and redpill they are more of a misogynist rather than self hating for their subhuman looks. Women will always choose a attractive person instead of them. Traditional dating scenario can't be reversed because of many factors and women are not the one who should be blamed for all that. I agree women can be evil sometimes and should get hate for that but the blackpill accounts on tiktok and YouTube promote misogany and the masses are influenced by them.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Av0nr and horizontallytall
Jfl nigga wrote a best selling novel (that got 0 sells and no molecules read) then self pinned it and jerked off in the corner while the bull fucked his mom
 
  • JFL
  • Woah
Reactions: OGJBSLAYER, SonOfDarkseid, moggathon and 5 others
Jfl nigga wrote a best selling novel (that got 0 sells and no molecules read) then self pinned it and jerked off in the corner while the bull fucked his mom

I agree the whole essays are useless but what is worrying is this bitch might persay political policy setters that's the issue other than that I don't talk to normies I don't care about normies but at the same time if this bitch influence policy makers it will effect you much more than you think @enchanted_elixir bro this jusitifation is useless ive seen online debates it's 99 percent of the time character assassinations and appealing to emotion debate won't convince these people all it will do is that it will act as ammunition to be used against us look at what happened with @BrendioEEE his ideas were cherry picked by vice subhumans selectively omitting many scenes from his argument.

Anyways read this essay don't my point are made
 
  • +1
Reactions: AngryShortMale, horizontallytall and enchanted_elixir
You joined 2 months ago. I've been here (as a lurker) since 2021. Most dudes here are insecure, hate themselves and really want to look better.

I barely... wait, almost never see misogynistic threads on here. Racist threads, sure but sexist ones, never.
You can't be serious lmao
 
  • +1
Reactions: horizontallytall and enchanted_elixir
The link can be found here:

Solea, A.I., Sugiura, L. Mainstreaming the Blackpill: Understanding the Incel Community on TikTok. Eur J Crim Policy Res 29, 311–336 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-023-09559-5

The only author who left her email is Anda Iulia Solea from School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Portsmouth in the United Kingdom.
If you'd like to contact her, please email her at Anda.Solea@port.ac.uk.

If you're retarded enough to diss her or say anything rude to her, that's not necessary. She's doing what she believes is her job and you can help her understand us better by briefly correcting any false assumptions, as I plan on doing with her critique of my viral Tiktoks.

I find this article to be very interesting (because she critiqued it) and funny (in the sense that our stuff made it here lol).
Here are some snippets.

Abstract

"Incels (involuntary celibates), a subgroup of the so called ‘manosphere,’ have become an increasing security concern for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners following their association with several violent attacks. Once mostly contained on niche men’s forums, redpilled and blackpilled communities and theories are gaining prominence on mainstream social media platforms. However, whilst previous research considerably enhanced our understanding of the incel phenomenon and their presence on Reddit and secluded incel forums, incel’s presence on mainstream social media platforms is understudied and their presence on TikTok is yet to be addressed. The present paper examines the incel subculture on TikTok, through an analysis of incel accounts, videos and their respective comments, to understand the role mainstream social media platforms play in the ‘normiefication’ and normalisation of incel ideology and discourse. The findings suggest that on TikTok the expression of incel ideology takes a covert form, employing emotional appeals and pseudo-science to disseminate common incelosphere tropes. Further, we demonstrate how the process of mainstreaming incel beliefs is facilitated by their interconnectedness with wider sexism and structural misogyny. The harms generating from this association are conducive to the normalisation of blackpill beliefs and the reinforcement of misogyny, sexism and justification of rape culture."

As I read the article, I quickly came to see that the authors don't really know where to draw the line between blackpill and redpill, neither do they really understand them fully. This doesn't surprise me since it's hard to understand phenomena from an outsider's perspective.

The focus of the critiques below are solely on correcting perceptual mistakes about my content's message on TikTok and perceptual mistakes about the blackpill. Also, when I say "we" I mean (the vast majority of blackpillers).

It would have been better if she tried to understand the perspective of a blackpiller before saying anything to maximize accuracy.

She also doesn't realize that most blackpillers are self-hating, self-loathing people who are desperate to look better, moderate/indifferent on feminism, love toxic humor, insecure and see looksmaxing as salvation to their self-hate and lackluster social and dating life. If anything, we congratulate women for the sexual liberation movement so now they won't breed with mediocre men and create pathetic short and ugly incels that get bullied at school. Most users here also support gender equality and probably have suicidal thoughts because they're ugly, short, wrong phenotype, etc.

Most people on here aren't misogynistic, some are but most just hate themselves for not being good enough for women. Sounds familiar? Teenage women!

They also have to realize there is a minority of mentally ill (as in neurotic, angry, and psychologically disturbed) people here who say heinous things that even we disagree with, so discard their opinions, they're minority and foolish opinions.

Blackpillers may have different beliefs on things but some of the things we all agree on is.
  • Looks are primary in dating and in generating attraction and plays an important role in maintaining attraction. Other factors only matter after you've passed the looks test, and the importance of these factors are almost always inferior to the importance of looks (unless you're noticeably neurodivergent)
  • Women aren't entitled or evil, you're just ugly and they want nothing to do with you sexually and romantically.
  • Women want to date men they find attractive and they treat them very well, even to the degree of literal worship.
Blackpill is focused on the proposition that you (and your aesthetic inadequacies) are the problem, not women. That's why a fair amount of people here hate themselves.

As a former redpiller, redpillers believe that things like
  • Confidence
  • Money
  • Status
  • Being assertive, and "asserting yourself the right way"
  • Masculine behavior
  • Game, Charisma and Pickup Skills
...are of most importance and that looks are secondary or even irrelevant.

Redpill is very focused on the proposition that feminism and modern women have corrupted the dating market and have created degenerate women and creating very unequal dating markets - that proposition composites the majority of the problem and their inadequacies are a minority (they do acknowledge this).

These guys are the anti-feminists, believe that women are entitled and that feminism has ruined the dating market and through those things listed above, you'll survive the shit show. They have an elevated but not certain or high possibly (I wasn't) a male supremacist. They are the ones that want to go back to "muh traditional dating market". They are the ones who either misogynists or mistrustful of women (I didn't hate women but was mistrustful when I used to be a redpiller)

These guys think feminism & modern women are the problem, more than they are.

This is very important. This "modern women are the problem" thinking has the slim chance of leading to events like the shooting Elliot Rodger committed. Blackpill's "your lack of physical attractiveness are the problem" thinking on the other hand, wouldn't cause you to exterminating others, it would make you prone to exterminating yourself because you're too ugly to be alive, and the treatment you get isn't worth enduring if looksmaxing can't save you.

Watch Fresh & Fit, Donovan Sharpe, and Alpha Male Strategies on YouTube if you want to understand the redpill better.

"Alpha male strategies", "High value man"
Cracking Up Lol GIF by HULU

Go looksmax, you dumb redpill roach.

Any "blackpiller" that believes in any redpill-pickup artist or bluepill rhetoric are immediately mocked on this forum.

🔴 "Just be confident bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴"Just say this magically scientifically proven line and she'll get wet bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔵 "Just buy her gifts even though she's not attracted to you bro! She'll see how valuable you are then bro!" - That's called simping and it doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴 "Just be rich bro"- Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you, and you're now just a gold digging oppurtunity.
🔴 "Just have status bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you. Average woman doesn't craves Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk because they are famous.
🔵"Just be funny bro" - She'll love spending time with you because you're funny, not because she's attracted to you (she isn't attracted to you). Speaking from direct experience.
🔵 "Just have a great personality bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.

If you're curious about the strategy of the three dating philosophies strategies to get women, here they are.

Bluepill strategy - being nice, respectful, female-worshipping and being simpish generates attraction.

Of course, it's important to be nice and respectful, but if not paired with physical attractiveness, it's useless. It's like dividing a number by zero.

View attachment 2553323
View attachment 2553379

Redpill-PUA strategy - Use your elite game, and other insignificant factors and get women.



Blackpill strategy - Looksmax and become attractive, and the women will come.
View attachment 2553330

View attachment 2553332
View attachment 2553333
All of those gestures she asked him to do was to verify that he was a real person

View attachment 2553338
She'll wear anything this guy tells her, I wonder why?

View attachment 2553346
She's mad that Chad didn't kiss her. Unlike my most viral video, the recipient wasn't interested, therefore it's a form of sexual-romantic assault.

View attachment 2553380
notice who she's staring at

View attachment 2553382


Sadly, they are correct about the fact that few mentally ill people here think rape is ok, but that's (mostly) old and was a small minority of users who aren't really active anymore. That belief is held by so few people here. It's not a widespread belief.

There's so much to say because the whole scientific article is almost 100,000 characters (very large)
Anyways, I own a TikTok account called lookism.tiktok and they cited it in their article boyos holy shit!
Here it is if you want to see it: https://www.tiktok.com/@lookism.tiktok

Anyways, here's my critique of their critique of my TikToks.


" The Stylistic Framing of Incel Content on TikTok​

Whilst both TikTok accounts were chosen because they espoused blackpill and incel ideology, the two accounts differ in the stylistic presentation of this ideology. The name of the first TikTok account (Lookism.tiktok) demonstrates the focus on the issue of lookism, stating in the account’s description:

Looks determine your dating life as a man. Fuck the redpill 🔴& the bluepill 🔵

Account1 videos include repurposed and collated viral internet videos and pictures to demonstrate women’s lookist nature. The account creator provides little explanations in his videos, no narration, and relies on sensationalised titles and brief overlay text commentaries to make his point (see Fig. 1)."

Lookism and the Unjust Sexual Market​

Account1’s video content is unsurprisingly focused on lookism. Women are depicted as preferring men with traditional masculine characteristics, with handsome facial features and height above 6 ft. For example, in Video3 a typical pick-up artist meeting is depicted where a male dating guru presents an ‘unattractive’ man to an ‘attractive’ woman asking her if from a ‘feminine perspective’ she would be sexually attracted to this man. The woman instantly rejects the man. The overlay text argues “The real problem here is that he’s unattractive and she is repulsed by his presence....” The hyperbolic choice of language for (mis)interpreting the woman’s reaction as ‘repulsed’ at the man’s mere presence is aimed at inducing a negative emotional reaction from the viewers. Subsequently, the message of this video and several videos on this account is not just exposing women’s lookist nature but also their ‘cruel rejection’ methods and propensity to humiliate men that do not fit hegemonic masculinity standards. It is also noteworthy that the emphasis is on women's ‘cruel rejection,’ and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility.

My response to the above text: Yes, I did use hyperbolic language but I didn't misinterpret it, she literally said he isn't attractive.
Also, the purpose of that video is to mock the man for being ugly, hense "repulsive". She has the right to reject such a pathetic male. We not only laugh but encourage it since such a pickup retard should know that looks determine your dating life as a man. My account description perfectly describes the message of my account. The focus is absolutely on the humiliation of the pickup artist (autist). The goal was not in any way to absolve responsibility on the men, I need men to not only notice my account's message but inspire them through fostering insecurity to do something about it (responsibility). That fatass who fell for the PUA scam should looksmax or give up on dating.

When the blackpill was forming, there was a website called puahate.com, PUA stands for pickup artist. We PUA's are dumb, maybe dislike or even hate these guys for falsely making others believe that "just say the magic line and it won't matter what you look like bro" nonsense. I used to fall for that.

View attachment 2553299

"...and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility."

My response to the above text: In no way are we going to save a PUA or try to make a PUA free from responsibility :ROFLMAO:


"This was reflected within the comments sections, where debates around attractiveness and lookism represented the most frequently discussed theme. The commenters claimed women solely desire men that are traditionally good looking (i.e., attractive face/body) and tall. A recurrent argument was that men need to conform to women’s strict aesthetic standards to qualify for sex and relationships “it all basically comes down to how good you look”; “Step 1: be attractive Step 2: don’t be unattractive”. Height was also a deciding factor in men’s sexual or romantic success, with women portrayed as despising short men to the extent of regarding them as non-existent- “Short guys literally don’t exist to the average woman. it’s sad”; “How sad they shamed and laughed at a man that can’t control his height, this still goes on to this day and they say men are the toxic ones”.

My response to the above text: They nailed it. This is "looks theory" or that looks are the primary factor when it comes to dating. You don't even have to be Chad necessarily, all that matters is that you're considered good-looking to women around you or to the woman you want, and if not, it's over. Of course, the "strict" dating standards is an extreme point of view I had at the time. Of course, looks theory is very real, but the strictness depends. Some individuals believe in higher strictness, or lower strictness, some believe it depends on the woman, environment, context, or a combination of these, but they got this right.

I'd personally disagree with this comment a user left on the TikTok: "...and they say men are the toxic ones”. Everyone assesses people based on appearance and it's not just men, it sounds like the user who wrote that thinks men do it more than women.

Women’s lookist nature is further framed within the videos as being conducive to a constant ritual of men's humiliation. This is evident in several Account1 videos. For example, one video showcases a woman on an online meeting shouting “You are ugly as fuck” to the man on the other end of the call; another video presents a woman verbally abusing a police officer because he was short “Why did the police let this short man join? Who the fuck is he gonna hurt? Look at this munchkin, look at this baby ass bitch”; and a third video of a man recounting his experiences with online dating stating that he was told he should kill himself because he is short “Why is it ok for women to say—Oh you are 5 ft on a dating site? You should be dead!—that’s ok?”. According to these, the habitual rejection and humiliation leads men to feeling dehumanised as suggested by a video with an insect staring at a wall over which sad music is played—the caption reads “Non-chads after realizing only team tinder wants to date them…”. The insect represents unattractive men, or ‘non-chads’, who come to the realisation that women will never be interested in them and they will be forever dateless and celibate, demonstrating the hopeless perpetuity of the incel condition."

My response to the above text:
I love watching those videos, the brutality of the situation faced by those guys :lul: Love watching ugly men get savagely rejected by women, especially redpillers and pickup artists. Funniest stuff ever!

"Account1 further builds upon the notion of women’s privileged status, arguing that it is not just women’s entitlement that is problematic but also women’s nefarious and hypocritical nature. This is ‘evidenced’ by women’s supposed preference and idolisation of ‘bad’, abusive and even ‘criminal’ men, chosen at the detriment of ‘nice guys’ with less appealing physical characteristics. An example of this is Video2 titled “Watch what it takes to get girls as a short guy!” which presents a short man on a dating competition show getting repeatedly rejected by all the women candidates. When questioned as to what it would take to pick the short man, the women stated they would only pick him if the other four candidates were convicted murderers. An overlay text appears on the screen informing the viewers that “Even now they are lying. They would rather be with a tall murderer Chad than a manlet”. According to this video, women’s immorality and lookist nature are so pervasive that they would prefer a good-looking murderer to a decent short man, but women are hypocritical and would never admit to this ‘fact’. This is expanded by clips showcasing ‘hybristophilia’ (2023)—women’s sexual attraction to mass murderers, violent criminals, rapists and even paedophiles. For example, two videos depict the adoration women have for Ted Bundy and Jeremy Meeks, two infamous and attractive convicted criminals. The text overlay on the Ted Bundy video states “Chad can get hoards of women despite being a rapist and a murderer”.

My response to the above text: We don't believe women are entitled, nefarious, hypocritical and problematic. That's a redpill belief. Don't get it mixed up with the blackpill. I believe Stew's height is problematic and worthy of ridicule, very worthy 🤣🤣🤣

Also, I didn't say or imply that women like criminals, of course this is my fault for not being clear but what I was saying is women will usually rank looks as more important even if the attractive male has a criminal record. A criminal record can (not always) be excused if he's hot enough.

"Women’s preference for abusive attractive men at the detriment of unattractive betas or incels is further implied in the most viewed video on Account1 (video1). In this clip, a woman is approached and kissed without consent by a young man characterised as a Chad, which the woman says she is happy with. The video then switches to a second clip in which a group of armed police agents break down a door and enter an apartment. The text added above this video reads “Meanwhile… You’d go to prison for “attempted r**e”. The message of this video is that Chads have free access to women’s bodies, yet betas or incels do not enjoy the same entitlements. This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It implies that it is not the nature of the acts themselves that constitute sexual assault, but rather women’s reception, which is influenced by the attractiveness of the perpetrator. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"


My response to the above text: Chads aren't entitled to women, but they do get easy access to women. Entitlement is "I deserve it". Easy access is "I don't have to do anything, or much to get what I want". Unattractive men almost always have zero access to women, because they're unattractive. The acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Also, ugly and average looking incels aren't entitled to shit. They should looksmax like hell to deserve anything.


"This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"

My response to the above text: They think I'm encouraging rape culture and that sexual assault shouldn't be taken seriously. I didn't say explicitly or implicitly imply anything else besides the fact that the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Sexual assault and related crimes are serious but like the Amber Heard case proved, not always valid because some women may interpret something like a non-attractive man grabbing a woman's shoulder and accidentally touching her breasts in an attempt to save her from a speeding truck as sexual assault and get the man imprisoned.

Obviously, some dude just grabbing her and doing it while she's screaming stop is obviously and validly a violation and the perpetrator should be imprisoned.

"Rape culture and justification of sexual assault are further amplified within the comments. Here, women are portrayed as a homogenous group rather than as individuals and described as hypocritical, liars and promiscuous. It is suggested that women’s double standards and hypocrisy are most obvious when it comes to sexual advances—unattractive men are rejected and found ominous whereas the same type of behaviours are encouraged and desired by women from attractive men “The difference between creepy and sexy is how attractive you are
10610_2023_9559_Figc_HTML.png
”; “women dont get mad at advances, they are just selective on who is doing it”. Additionally, commenters debated the importance of consent. Whilst a small number of comments argued that sexual assault has serious repercussions, the consensus was that women’s claims of sexual assault or harassment are subjective. According to this, Chads can have their way with women and do not need consent from women to engage in sexual behaviours with them. Attractive men are therefore viewed as having ‘handsome privilege’ entitling them to women’s bodies and protecting them from repercussions “That’s called pretty privilege”; “Difference between flirting and assault is how attractive you are”. "


The notion of consent is used to support the trope of male victimhood, with commenters stating that unattractive men would be prosecuted for the same acts Chads/attractive men are entitled to “Wait what happened to the “Me Too” outrage? Oh that’s right… he’s HOT so never mind.”; “Just goes to show, it’s usually more about regret than consent….”; “If he was ugly it would be a felony”. The complicity of the criminal justice system is also implied by the commenters who claim that “Different rules depending on attractiveness” because “if she didn't think he was attractive he'd be in prison now”. Whilst women are the primary instigators, the law is also seen as skewed against men, suggesting we live in a gynocentric society, where rape charges, convictions and even life in prison are ascribed by women based on looks - “good looking pasts rape charges
10610_2023_9559_Figd_HTML.png
”. Thus, women are seen as taking advantage of a system biased against men, and therefore, women’s claims of sexual assault cannot or should not be taken seriously “This is why women can’t be taken seriously. It’s good for one but not the other. You want change? Try being consistent.”; ”If he was ugly it’s sex assault and he would be classified as creepy that’s why women are sick”.


My response to the above text: Men aren't victims, some of these guys are ugly and deserve their treatment. If a blackpiller has a victim mentality, I guarantee you, it's towards themselves (their genetics, their face, their height, phenotype, etc.) as blackpill is a self-critical ideology, unlike redpill which is a mostly environment-critical ideology. The rest of the sexual assaunt stuff is merely a continuation of her reasoning. I gave my input on that reasoning a while back.

Just letting you know guys, I'm only critiquing what I see as very necessary, of course, she's right about some of this stuff but she's wrong on others, since it's hard to understand someone's POV from an outsider's perspective.

The video content, along with the accompanying comments, contribute to the proliferation and normalisation of the fallacious belief that women derive pleasure from sexual assault. Furthermore, it portrays women as utilising allegations of sexual assault as a means to pursue legal action and discriminate against men deemed less desirable, taking advantage of the inherent biases within the criminal justice system. Consequently, these narratives not only reinforce the notion of male victimhood but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault.

No Way Wtf GIF by Harlem


My response to the above text: We don't hate women, want to sexually assault them, or rape them. We are very prone to hating ourselves for not being attractive enough for women. Women have the right to weed us out of the dating market if we're not good enough. Your line of reasoning starts from the axiom that blackpillers hate women and blame external factors and that we should harm women for what they have done to us. If this line of reasoning was valid, we wouldn't be seeming body dysmorphia and self hating all across blackpill communities and @Schery6 wouldn't have killed himself for "being too ugly to be alive"



"...but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault."

My response to the above text: She must think I'm an angry redpill roach lol.

"Many videos within our sample (especially the Account1 videos) relied on emotion-based arguments to further the idea that unattractive men are discriminated against based on their looks, whilst women are entitled and privileged."

My response to the above text: She is very solid on the first point, but the second point, the women are priviliged is false in the sense that she misinterpreted what the message of that video was. She's focusing on the women, I'm focusing on the belittlement of the retarded men who thought learning pickup skills and daygame, displaying their abhorrently funny daygame is ok for their ugly or short selves lol. That woman should reject him, it's obvious and the right thing to do.

"Commenters trivialised sexual violence by claiming that women incite and deserve to be subjected to such acts, demonstrating the pervasiveness of a ‘non-consent’ rhetoric and the embracement of rape culture (Powell & Sugiura, 2018), linking blackpilled beliefs with normalised sexual violence (Kelly, 1987). This is conducive of what Jane (2017) terms as ‘Rapeglish,’ discourse portraying women as promiscuous and deserving of non-consensual sexual acts, often issued via rape threats. However, the language employed on TikTok can be understood as borderline (GIFCT, 2022), in the sense that it was sufficiently implicit to escape content moderation, yet apparent enough to be harmful and perpetuate rape culture."

Steve Harvey Reaction GIF
Nick Young Wtf GIF


Jesus.

As I said, the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.


My overall response:

The purpose of my TikTok Account was to
use sensational, brutal, drastic, attention-grabbing, ego-destroying, and extremely emotional examples of lookism to convince those hard headed bluepillers, pickup artists, redpillers and the everyday male that looks determine your dating life as a man. Nothing more, nothing less.

The conclusions made are founded upon false axioms, such as the blackpill ideology is a female-hating ideology, blackpillers want retribution for their mistreatment or lack of dating options, and mixing blackpill and redpill rhetoric together.

Remember that it's redpillers solely that are converting to Islam, and we know how the West sees Muslim's treatment of women.

Now if this was an analysis on the redpill, it would actually be much more (although not completely) accurate.
Also, we love using hyperbolic language because blackpilled toxic humor is funny 🤣 We love "brutal" humor.

Also, the blackpilled videos we post here or on social media is not to show men that "you're oppressed, see!! you should probably hurt and do heinous things to women for oppressing you". You'd be so far off the mark thinking like this.

The message is "hahahahahaha you're less than (especially to women) if you're deficient in this area, and you should do something to escape it so women and people treat you the way you want to be treated." or even "hahah i am worshipped/treated nicely/treated like a person for having this trait and you don't, so you're subhuman" or even "hahah you're ugly, you're short, can't you see how important is it to be tall and handsome if you want women to love you hahaha" aka toxic humor





Dnr dance



This is a fucking novel nigga; I barely read my college textbooks as is; how the hell do you expect anyone to read more than a paragraph?
 
  • JFL
Reactions: enchanted_elixir
It's so over for us
 
  • +1
Reactions: enchanted_elixir
This would only scare non-truecel posters from europe. Truecels have nothing to lose!
 
  • JFL
Reactions: horizontallytall and enchanted_elixir
What do they mean by incel community on tiktok
 
"your looks are the problem"

The discrepancy between women's standards and one's looks is the problem.


Also in the modern world, due to popularity of social media and male horniness/lack of standards, women are constantly bombarded with offers from 1000s, if not, more men.

As a result of this, women can't help but select for the one's they find the most attractive, thereby creating hypergamy and giga increased standards, compared to pre-social media era.
Similar message pal
 
You can't be serious lmao
Deadass, that's my experience anyways
People usually will call people other people subhuman in threads or critique blacks, whites, Indians, etc. but I don't see that with women.
Remember the @Floda situation? That showed that a sizeable amount of us are cucks for women.

If you're talking about guys belittling women for being ugly, that's lookism bhai, not misogyny. That happens on the forum.
Even if you're a dude and you're ugly, people are going to mock you for it for fun
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: Zonar
made me giggle.


top-tier thread brother
I know this from experience with my "gAmE" I had when I was still doing that pickup nonsense through text.
 
  • JFL
Reactions: pneumocystosis
There are two kinds of users on .org: the incel rotters (who, despite their supposed hatred of women, still raise them on a pedestal) and the actual looksmaxxers, who recognize aesthetics as a separate end unto itself. We would be better off without the former, and it is because of them that they make the mistake of conflating the two.
I think most incel rotters are depressed, overly negative and possibly self hating. Any hate they have towards others is almost always at blacks, whites, jews, etc.
 
  • +1
Reactions: pneumocystosis
I think most incel rotters are depressed, overly negative and possibly self hating. Any hate they have towards others is almost always at blacks, whites, jews, etc.
Dont forget the large amount of JBmaxxers like myself. 21yo women are middle age and not good enough.

Age of consent be lowered to 10. They should petition that in parlement
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Zonar, horizontallytall and enchanted_elixir
Dont forget the large amount of JBmaxxers like myself. 21yo women are middle age and not good enough.

Age of consent be lowered to 10. They should petition that in parlement
You're trolling :lul: no way you're serious
 
  • JFL
Reactions: MoggerGaston
damage control from a system
Nothing more than this.
Another recently popular thing in academics, which is rather disturbing, is censoring scientific results if they don't match the narrative, or trying to sugarcoat them or make an alternative interpretation.
Dealing with underlying problems is too complex from a political point of view and it's easier to assign some label.
 
  • +1
Reactions: horizontallytall, Outlier and enchanted_elixir
The link can be found here:

Solea, A.I., Sugiura, L. Mainstreaming the Blackpill: Understanding the Incel Community on TikTok. Eur J Crim Policy Res 29, 311–336 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-023-09559-5

The only author who left her email is Anda Iulia Solea from School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Portsmouth in the United Kingdom.
If you'd like to contact her, please email her at Anda.Solea@port.ac.uk.

If you're retarded enough to diss her or say anything rude to her, that's not necessary. She's doing what she believes is her job and you can help her understand us better by briefly correcting any false assumptions, as I plan on doing with her critique of my viral Tiktoks.

I find this article to be very interesting (because she critiqued it) and funny (in the sense that our stuff made it here lol).
Here are some snippets.

Abstract

"Incels (involuntary celibates), a subgroup of the so called ‘manosphere,’ have become an increasing security concern for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners following their association with several violent attacks. Once mostly contained on niche men’s forums, redpilled and blackpilled communities and theories are gaining prominence on mainstream social media platforms. However, whilst previous research considerably enhanced our understanding of the incel phenomenon and their presence on Reddit and secluded incel forums, incel’s presence on mainstream social media platforms is understudied and their presence on TikTok is yet to be addressed. The present paper examines the incel subculture on TikTok, through an analysis of incel accounts, videos and their respective comments, to understand the role mainstream social media platforms play in the ‘normiefication’ and normalisation of incel ideology and discourse. The findings suggest that on TikTok the expression of incel ideology takes a covert form, employing emotional appeals and pseudo-science to disseminate common incelosphere tropes. Further, we demonstrate how the process of mainstreaming incel beliefs is facilitated by their interconnectedness with wider sexism and structural misogyny. The harms generating from this association are conducive to the normalisation of blackpill beliefs and the reinforcement of misogyny, sexism and justification of rape culture."

As I read the article, I quickly came to see that the authors don't really know where to draw the line between blackpill and redpill, neither do they really understand them fully. This doesn't surprise me since it's hard to understand phenomena from an outsider's perspective.

The focus of the critiques below are solely on correcting perceptual mistakes about my content's message on TikTok and perceptual mistakes about the blackpill. Also, when I say "we" I mean (the vast majority of blackpillers).

It would have been better if she tried to understand the perspective of a blackpiller before saying anything to maximize accuracy.

She also doesn't realize that most blackpillers are self-hating, self-loathing people who are desperate to look better, moderate/indifferent on feminism, love toxic humor, insecure and see looksmaxing as salvation to their self-hate and lackluster social and dating life. If anything, we congratulate women for the sexual liberation movement so now they won't breed with mediocre men and create pathetic short and ugly incels that get bullied at school. Most users here also support gender equality and probably have suicidal thoughts because they're ugly, short, wrong phenotype, etc.

Most people on here aren't misogynistic, some are but most just hate themselves for not being good enough for women. Sounds familiar? Teenage women!

They also have to realize there is a minority of mentally ill (as in neurotic, angry, and psychologically disturbed) people here who say heinous things that even we disagree with, so discard their opinions, they're minority and foolish opinions.

Blackpillers may have different beliefs on things but some of the things we all agree on is.
  • Looks are primary in dating and in generating attraction and plays an important role in maintaining attraction. Other factors only matter after you've passed the looks test, and the importance of these factors are almost always inferior to the importance of looks (unless you're noticeably neurodivergent)
  • Women aren't entitled or evil, you're just ugly and they want nothing to do with you sexually and romantically.
  • Women want to date men they find attractive and they treat them very well, even to the degree of literal worship.
Blackpill is focused on the proposition that you (and your aesthetic inadequacies) are the problem, not women. That's why a fair amount of people here hate themselves.

As a former redpiller, redpillers believe that things like
  • Confidence
  • Money
  • Status
  • Being assertive, and "asserting yourself the right way"
  • Masculine behavior
  • Game, Charisma and Pickup Skills
...are of most importance and that looks are secondary or even irrelevant.

Redpill is very focused on the proposition that feminism and modern women have corrupted the dating market and have created degenerate women and creating very unequal dating markets - that proposition composites the majority of the problem and their inadequacies are a minority (they do acknowledge this).

These guys are the anti-feminists, believe that women are entitled and that feminism has ruined the dating market and through those things listed above, you'll survive the shit show. They have an elevated but not certain or high possibly (I wasn't) a male supremacist. They are the ones that want to go back to "muh traditional dating market". They are the ones who either misogynists or mistrustful of women (I didn't hate women but was mistrustful when I used to be a redpiller)

These guys think feminism & modern women are the problem, more than they are.

This is very important. This "modern women are the problem" thinking has the slim chance of leading to events like the shooting Elliot Rodger committed. Blackpill's "your lack of physical attractiveness are the problem" thinking on the other hand, wouldn't cause you to exterminating others, it would make you prone to exterminating yourself because you're too ugly to be alive, and the treatment you get isn't worth enduring if looksmaxing can't save you.

Watch Fresh & Fit, Donovan Sharpe, and Alpha Male Strategies on YouTube if you want to understand the redpill better.

"Alpha male strategies", "High value man"
Cracking Up Lol GIF by HULU

Go looksmax, you dumb redpill roach.

Any "blackpiller" that believes in any redpill-pickup artist or bluepill rhetoric are immediately mocked on this forum.

🔴 "Just be confident bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴"Just say this magically scientifically proven line and she'll get wet bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔵 "Just buy her gifts even though she's not attracted to you bro! She'll see how valuable you are then bro!" - That's called simping and it doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴 "Just be rich bro"- Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you, and you're now just a gold digging oppurtunity.
🔴 "Just have status bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you. Average woman doesn't craves Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk because they are famous.
🔵"Just be funny bro" - She'll love spending time with you because you're funny, not because she's attracted to you (she isn't attracted to you). Speaking from direct experience.
🔵 "Just have a great personality bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.

If you're curious about the strategy of the three dating philosophies strategies to get women, here they are.

Bluepill strategy - being nice, respectful, female-worshipping and being simpish generates attraction.

Of course, it's important to be nice and respectful, but if not paired with physical attractiveness, it's useless. It's like dividing a number by zero.

View attachment 2553323
View attachment 2553379

Redpill-PUA strategy - Use your elite game, and other insignificant factors and get women.



Blackpill strategy - Looksmax and become attractive, and the women will come.
View attachment 2553330

View attachment 2553332
View attachment 2553333
All of those gestures she asked him to do was to verify that he was a real person

View attachment 2553338
She'll wear anything this guy tells her, I wonder why?

View attachment 2553346
She's mad that Chad didn't kiss her. Unlike my most viral video, the recipient wasn't interested, therefore it's a form of sexual-romantic assault.

View attachment 2553380
notice who she's staring at

View attachment 2553382


Sadly, they are correct about the fact that few mentally ill people here think rape is ok, but that's (mostly) old and was a small minority of users who aren't really active anymore. That belief is held by so few people here. It's not a widespread belief.

There's so much to say because the whole scientific article is almost 100,000 characters (very large)
Anyways, I own a TikTok account called lookism.tiktok and they cited it in their article boyos holy shit!
Here it is if you want to see it: https://www.tiktok.com/@lookism.tiktok

Anyways, here's my critique of their critique of my TikToks.


" The Stylistic Framing of Incel Content on TikTok​

Whilst both TikTok accounts were chosen because they espoused blackpill and incel ideology, the two accounts differ in the stylistic presentation of this ideology. The name of the first TikTok account (Lookism.tiktok) demonstrates the focus on the issue of lookism, stating in the account’s description:

Looks determine your dating life as a man. Fuck the redpill 🔴& the bluepill 🔵

Account1 videos include repurposed and collated viral internet videos and pictures to demonstrate women’s lookist nature. The account creator provides little explanations in his videos, no narration, and relies on sensationalised titles and brief overlay text commentaries to make his point (see Fig. 1)."

Lookism and the Unjust Sexual Market​

Account1’s video content is unsurprisingly focused on lookism. Women are depicted as preferring men with traditional masculine characteristics, with handsome facial features and height above 6 ft. For example, in Video3 a typical pick-up artist meeting is depicted where a male dating guru presents an ‘unattractive’ man to an ‘attractive’ woman asking her if from a ‘feminine perspective’ she would be sexually attracted to this man. The woman instantly rejects the man. The overlay text argues “The real problem here is that he’s unattractive and she is repulsed by his presence....” The hyperbolic choice of language for (mis)interpreting the woman’s reaction as ‘repulsed’ at the man’s mere presence is aimed at inducing a negative emotional reaction from the viewers. Subsequently, the message of this video and several videos on this account is not just exposing women’s lookist nature but also their ‘cruel rejection’ methods and propensity to humiliate men that do not fit hegemonic masculinity standards. It is also noteworthy that the emphasis is on women's ‘cruel rejection,’ and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility.

My response to the above text: Yes, I did use hyperbolic language but I didn't misinterpret it, she literally said he isn't attractive.
Also, the purpose of that video is to mock the man for being ugly, hense "repulsive". She has the right to reject such a pathetic male. We not only laugh but encourage it since such a pickup retard should know that looks determine your dating life as a man. My account description perfectly describes the message of my account. The focus is absolutely on the humiliation of the pickup artist (autist). The goal was not in any way to absolve responsibility on the men, I need men to not only notice my account's message but inspire them through fostering insecurity to do something about it (responsibility). That fatass who fell for the PUA scam should looksmax or give up on dating.

When the blackpill was forming, there was a website called puahate.com, PUA stands for pickup artist. We PUA's are dumb, maybe dislike or even hate these guys for falsely making others believe that "just say the magic line and it won't matter what you look like bro" nonsense. I used to fall for that.

View attachment 2553299

"...and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility."

My response to the above text: In no way are we going to save a PUA or try to make a PUA free from responsibility :ROFLMAO:


"This was reflected within the comments sections, where debates around attractiveness and lookism represented the most frequently discussed theme. The commenters claimed women solely desire men that are traditionally good looking (i.e., attractive face/body) and tall. A recurrent argument was that men need to conform to women’s strict aesthetic standards to qualify for sex and relationships “it all basically comes down to how good you look”; “Step 1: be attractive Step 2: don’t be unattractive”. Height was also a deciding factor in men’s sexual or romantic success, with women portrayed as despising short men to the extent of regarding them as non-existent- “Short guys literally don’t exist to the average woman. it’s sad”; “How sad they shamed and laughed at a man that can’t control his height, this still goes on to this day and they say men are the toxic ones”.

My response to the above text: They nailed it. This is "looks theory" or that looks are the primary factor when it comes to dating. You don't even have to be Chad necessarily, all that matters is that you're considered good-looking to women around you or to the woman you want, and if not, it's over. Of course, the "strict" dating standards is an extreme point of view I had at the time. Of course, looks theory is very real, but the strictness depends. Some individuals believe in higher strictness, or lower strictness, some believe it depends on the woman, environment, context, or a combination of these, but they got this right.

I'd personally disagree with this comment a user left on the TikTok: "...and they say men are the toxic ones”. Everyone assesses people based on appearance and it's not just men, it sounds like the user who wrote that thinks men do it more than women.

Women’s lookist nature is further framed within the videos as being conducive to a constant ritual of men's humiliation. This is evident in several Account1 videos. For example, one video showcases a woman on an online meeting shouting “You are ugly as fuck” to the man on the other end of the call; another video presents a woman verbally abusing a police officer because he was short “Why did the police let this short man join? Who the fuck is he gonna hurt? Look at this munchkin, look at this baby ass bitch”; and a third video of a man recounting his experiences with online dating stating that he was told he should kill himself because he is short “Why is it ok for women to say—Oh you are 5 ft on a dating site? You should be dead!—that’s ok?”. According to these, the habitual rejection and humiliation leads men to feeling dehumanised as suggested by a video with an insect staring at a wall over which sad music is played—the caption reads “Non-chads after realizing only team tinder wants to date them…”. The insect represents unattractive men, or ‘non-chads’, who come to the realisation that women will never be interested in them and they will be forever dateless and celibate, demonstrating the hopeless perpetuity of the incel condition."

My response to the above text:
I love watching those videos, the brutality of the situation faced by those guys :lul: Love watching ugly men get savagely rejected by women, especially redpillers and pickup artists. Funniest stuff ever!

"Account1 further builds upon the notion of women’s privileged status, arguing that it is not just women’s entitlement that is problematic but also women’s nefarious and hypocritical nature. This is ‘evidenced’ by women’s supposed preference and idolisation of ‘bad’, abusive and even ‘criminal’ men, chosen at the detriment of ‘nice guys’ with less appealing physical characteristics. An example of this is Video2 titled “Watch what it takes to get girls as a short guy!” which presents a short man on a dating competition show getting repeatedly rejected by all the women candidates. When questioned as to what it would take to pick the short man, the women stated they would only pick him if the other four candidates were convicted murderers. An overlay text appears on the screen informing the viewers that “Even now they are lying. They would rather be with a tall murderer Chad than a manlet”. According to this video, women’s immorality and lookist nature are so pervasive that they would prefer a good-looking murderer to a decent short man, but women are hypocritical and would never admit to this ‘fact’. This is expanded by clips showcasing ‘hybristophilia’ (2023)—women’s sexual attraction to mass murderers, violent criminals, rapists and even paedophiles. For example, two videos depict the adoration women have for Ted Bundy and Jeremy Meeks, two infamous and attractive convicted criminals. The text overlay on the Ted Bundy video states “Chad can get hoards of women despite being a rapist and a murderer”.

My response to the above text: We don't believe women are entitled, nefarious, hypocritical and problematic. That's a redpill belief. Don't get it mixed up with the blackpill. I believe Stew's height is problematic and worthy of ridicule, very worthy 🤣🤣🤣

Also, I didn't say or imply that women like criminals, of course this is my fault for not being clear but what I was saying is women will usually rank looks as more important even if the attractive male has a criminal record. A criminal record can (not always) be excused if he's hot enough.

"Women’s preference for abusive attractive men at the detriment of unattractive betas or incels is further implied in the most viewed video on Account1 (video1). In this clip, a woman is approached and kissed without consent by a young man characterised as a Chad, which the woman says she is happy with. The video then switches to a second clip in which a group of armed police agents break down a door and enter an apartment. The text added above this video reads “Meanwhile… You’d go to prison for “attempted r**e”. The message of this video is that Chads have free access to women’s bodies, yet betas or incels do not enjoy the same entitlements. This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It implies that it is not the nature of the acts themselves that constitute sexual assault, but rather women’s reception, which is influenced by the attractiveness of the perpetrator. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"


My response to the above text: Chads aren't entitled to women, but they do get easy access to women. Entitlement is "I deserve it". Easy access is "I don't have to do anything, or much to get what I want". Unattractive men almost always have zero access to women, because they're unattractive. The acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Also, ugly and average looking incels aren't entitled to shit. They should looksmax like hell to deserve anything.


"This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"

My response to the above text: They think I'm encouraging rape culture and that sexual assault shouldn't be taken seriously. I didn't say explicitly or implicitly imply anything else besides the fact that the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Sexual assault and related crimes are serious but like the Amber Heard case proved, not always valid because some women may interpret something like a non-attractive man grabbing a woman's shoulder and accidentally touching her breasts in an attempt to save her from a speeding truck as sexual assault and get the man imprisoned.

Obviously, some dude just grabbing her and doing it while she's screaming stop is obviously and validly a violation and the perpetrator should be imprisoned.

"Rape culture and justification of sexual assault are further amplified within the comments. Here, women are portrayed as a homogenous group rather than as individuals and described as hypocritical, liars and promiscuous. It is suggested that women’s double standards and hypocrisy are most obvious when it comes to sexual advances—unattractive men are rejected and found ominous whereas the same type of behaviours are encouraged and desired by women from attractive men “The difference between creepy and sexy is how attractive you are
10610_2023_9559_Figc_HTML.png
”; “women dont get mad at advances, they are just selective on who is doing it”. Additionally, commenters debated the importance of consent. Whilst a small number of comments argued that sexual assault has serious repercussions, the consensus was that women’s claims of sexual assault or harassment are subjective. According to this, Chads can have their way with women and do not need consent from women to engage in sexual behaviours with them. Attractive men are therefore viewed as having ‘handsome privilege’ entitling them to women’s bodies and protecting them from repercussions “That’s called pretty privilege”; “Difference between flirting and assault is how attractive you are”. "


The notion of consent is used to support the trope of male victimhood, with commenters stating that unattractive men would be prosecuted for the same acts Chads/attractive men are entitled to “Wait what happened to the “Me Too” outrage? Oh that’s right… he’s HOT so never mind.”; “Just goes to show, it’s usually more about regret than consent….”; “If he was ugly it would be a felony”. The complicity of the criminal justice system is also implied by the commenters who claim that “Different rules depending on attractiveness” because “if she didn't think he was attractive he'd be in prison now”. Whilst women are the primary instigators, the law is also seen as skewed against men, suggesting we live in a gynocentric society, where rape charges, convictions and even life in prison are ascribed by women based on looks - “good looking pasts rape charges
10610_2023_9559_Figd_HTML.png
”. Thus, women are seen as taking advantage of a system biased against men, and therefore, women’s claims of sexual assault cannot or should not be taken seriously “This is why women can’t be taken seriously. It’s good for one but not the other. You want change? Try being consistent.”; ”If he was ugly it’s sex assault and he would be classified as creepy that’s why women are sick”.


My response to the above text: Men aren't victims, some of these guys are ugly and deserve their treatment. If a blackpiller has a victim mentality, I guarantee you, it's towards themselves (their genetics, their face, their height, phenotype, etc.) as blackpill is a self-critical ideology, unlike redpill which is a mostly environment-critical ideology. The rest of the sexual assaunt stuff is merely a continuation of her reasoning. I gave my input on that reasoning a while back.

Just letting you know guys, I'm only critiquing what I see as very necessary, of course, she's right about some of this stuff but she's wrong on others, since it's hard to understand someone's POV from an outsider's perspective.

The video content, along with the accompanying comments, contribute to the proliferation and normalisation of the fallacious belief that women derive pleasure from sexual assault. Furthermore, it portrays women as utilising allegations of sexual assault as a means to pursue legal action and discriminate against men deemed less desirable, taking advantage of the inherent biases within the criminal justice system. Consequently, these narratives not only reinforce the notion of male victimhood but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault.

No Way Wtf GIF by Harlem


My response to the above text: We don't hate women, want to sexually assault them, or rape them. We are very prone to hating ourselves for not being attractive enough for women. Women have the right to weed us out of the dating market if we're not good enough. Your line of reasoning starts from the axiom that blackpillers hate women and blame external factors and that we should harm women for what they have done to us. If this line of reasoning was valid, we wouldn't be seeming body dysmorphia and self hating all across blackpill communities and @Schery6 wouldn't have killed himself for "being too ugly to be alive"



"...but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault."

My response to the above text: She must think I'm an angry redpill roach lol.

"Many videos within our sample (especially the Account1 videos) relied on emotion-based arguments to further the idea that unattractive men are discriminated against based on their looks, whilst women are entitled and privileged."

My response to the above text: She is very solid on the first point, but the second point, the women are priviliged is false in the sense that she misinterpreted what the message of that video was. She's focusing on the women, I'm focusing on the belittlement of the retarded men who thought learning pickup skills and daygame, displaying their abhorrently funny daygame is ok for their ugly or short selves lol. That woman should reject him, it's obvious and the right thing to do.

"Commenters trivialised sexual violence by claiming that women incite and deserve to be subjected to such acts, demonstrating the pervasiveness of a ‘non-consent’ rhetoric and the embracement of rape culture (Powell & Sugiura, 2018), linking blackpilled beliefs with normalised sexual violence (Kelly, 1987). This is conducive of what Jane (2017) terms as ‘Rapeglish,’ discourse portraying women as promiscuous and deserving of non-consensual sexual acts, often issued via rape threats. However, the language employed on TikTok can be understood as borderline (GIFCT, 2022), in the sense that it was sufficiently implicit to escape content moderation, yet apparent enough to be harmful and perpetuate rape culture."

Steve Harvey Reaction GIF
Nick Young Wtf GIF


Jesus.

As I said, the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.


My overall response:

The purpose of my TikTok Account was to
use sensational, brutal, drastic, attention-grabbing, ego-destroying, and extremely emotional examples of lookism to convince those hard headed bluepillers, pickup artists, redpillers and the everyday male that looks determine your dating life as a man. Nothing more, nothing less.

The conclusions made are founded upon false axioms, such as the blackpill ideology is a female-hating ideology, blackpillers want retribution for their mistreatment or lack of dating options, and mixing blackpill and redpill rhetoric together.

Remember that it's redpillers solely that are converting to Islam, and we know how the West sees Muslim's treatment of women.

Now if this was an analysis on the redpill, it would actually be much more (although not completely) accurate.
Also, we love using hyperbolic language because blackpilled toxic humor is funny 🤣 We love "brutal" humor.

Also, the blackpilled videos we post here or on social media is not to show men that "you're oppressed, see!! you should probably hurt and do heinous things to women for oppressing you". You'd be so far off the mark thinking like this.

The message is "hahahahahaha you're less than (especially to women) if you're deficient in this area, and you should do something to escape it so women and people treat you the way you want to be treated." or even "hahah i am worshipped/treated nicely/treated like a person for having this trait and you don't, so you're subhuman" or even "hahah you're ugly, you're short, can't you see how important is it to be tall and handsome if you want women to love you hahaha" aka toxic humor




Bitch whore if youre reading tthis FUCK YOU!
 
FUCK U BITCH I KNOW YOURE READING THIS RIGHT NOW

I WANT TO STICK MY TONGUE IN YOUR ASS HOLE
 
"THE EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL POLICY AND RESEARCH"

What is that and where is the proof that they researching blackpill
 
"Incels (involuntary celibates), a subgroup of the so called ‘manosphere,’ have become an increasing security concern for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners following their association with several violent attacks. "


fuck of no lol blaming it on incels. why does anyone go on an attack. all of them are ugly men who were treated like shit all their life. just call them what they are. ugly men who have been treated like shit all their life. not incels. i hate that word.


incel is just a buzzword for the authorities to get away with degrading and dehumanising ugly abused men even more than they already have been so they can be genocided seeing as they serve no purpose to the slave system.
 
what is their to even email this woman, what shes doing makes no sense and is completely meaningless. shes just a tool of the system building up this machine that is making all of us suffer
 
  • +1
Reactions: Marsiere214
do you really think I'll waste time reading this lol
 
  • +1
Reactions: Marsiere214
Great a janny spreading the tiktok disease
 
good work on cleaning the image of the blackpill community, thank you for you attributions to the community
 
  • +1
Reactions: redmaxx
Don't you live in the UK?
I live in the UK and pretty close to the University. See, this is where if I had a looks halo, I would be assertive and give her an exclusive interview with a blackpilled incel, it would be bound to be taken well and give her a positive opinion of incels. But if I had a looks halo, it's quite possible I wouldn't be an incel, or here.

I can't believe I wasn't following you @enchanted_elixir. I just need to acknowledge how good your threads are. Probably takes hours to write these. So thanks for being like this duooode.
 
If there is 100k users here, that'll probably mean there are tens of millions of men who are blackpilled worldwide, even though they never heard the term blackpill before.
You think only one-in-a-thousand blackpilled men find their way here? I would suggest it was lower. But then again, the proportion of the eight-thousand new members since summer, it's got to be largely TikTokcels.
 
  • +1
Reactions: enchanted_elixir
The link can be found here:

Solea, A.I., Sugiura, L. Mainstreaming the Blackpill: Understanding the Incel Community on TikTok. Eur J Crim Policy Res 29, 311–336 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-023-09559-5

The only author who left her email is Anda Iulia Solea from School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Portsmouth in the United Kingdom.
If you'd like to contact her, please email her at Anda.Solea@port.ac.uk.

If you're retarded enough to diss her or say anything rude to her, that's not necessary. She's doing what she believes is her job and you can help her understand us better by briefly correcting any false assumptions, as I plan on doing with her critique of my viral Tiktoks.

I find this article to be very interesting (because she critiqued it) and funny (in the sense that our stuff made it here lol).
Here are some snippets.

Abstract

"Incels (involuntary celibates), a subgroup of the so called ‘manosphere,’ have become an increasing security concern for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners following their association with several violent attacks. Once mostly contained on niche men’s forums, redpilled and blackpilled communities and theories are gaining prominence on mainstream social media platforms. However, whilst previous research considerably enhanced our understanding of the incel phenomenon and their presence on Reddit and secluded incel forums, incel’s presence on mainstream social media platforms is understudied and their presence on TikTok is yet to be addressed. The present paper examines the incel subculture on TikTok, through an analysis of incel accounts, videos and their respective comments, to understand the role mainstream social media platforms play in the ‘normiefication’ and normalisation of incel ideology and discourse. The findings suggest that on TikTok the expression of incel ideology takes a covert form, employing emotional appeals and pseudo-science to disseminate common incelosphere tropes. Further, we demonstrate how the process of mainstreaming incel beliefs is facilitated by their interconnectedness with wider sexism and structural misogyny. The harms generating from this association are conducive to the normalisation of blackpill beliefs and the reinforcement of misogyny, sexism and justification of rape culture."

As I read the article, I quickly came to see that the authors don't really know where to draw the line between blackpill and redpill, neither do they really understand them fully. This doesn't surprise me since it's hard to understand phenomena from an outsider's perspective.

The focus of the critiques below are solely on correcting perceptual mistakes about my content's message on TikTok and perceptual mistakes about the blackpill. Also, when I say "we" I mean (the vast majority of blackpillers).

It would have been better if she tried to understand the perspective of a blackpiller before saying anything to maximize accuracy.

She also doesn't realize that most blackpillers are self-hating, self-loathing people who are desperate to look better, moderate/indifferent on feminism, love toxic humor, insecure and see looksmaxing as salvation to their self-hate and lackluster social and dating life. If anything, we congratulate women for the sexual liberation movement so now they won't breed with mediocre men and create pathetic short and ugly incels that get bullied at school. Most users here also support gender equality and probably have suicidal thoughts because they're ugly, short, wrong phenotype, etc.

Most people on here aren't misogynistic, some are but most just hate themselves for not being good enough for women. Sounds familiar? Teenage women!

They also have to realize there is a minority of mentally ill (as in neurotic, angry, and psychologically disturbed) people here who say heinous things that even we disagree with, so discard their opinions, they're minority and foolish opinions.

Blackpillers may have different beliefs on things but some of the things we all agree on is.
  • Looks are primary in dating and in generating attraction and plays an important role in maintaining attraction. Other factors only matter after you've passed the looks test, and the importance of these factors are almost always inferior to the importance of looks (unless you're noticeably neurodivergent)
  • Women aren't entitled or evil, you're just ugly and they want nothing to do with you sexually and romantically.
  • Women want to date men they find attractive and they treat them very well, even to the degree of literal worship.
Blackpill is focused on the proposition that you (and your aesthetic inadequacies) are the problem, not women. That's why a fair amount of people here hate themselves.

As a former redpiller, redpillers believe that things like
  • Confidence
  • Money
  • Status
  • Being assertive, and "asserting yourself the right way"
  • Masculine behavior
  • Game, Charisma and Pickup Skills
...are of most importance and that looks are secondary or even irrelevant.

Redpill is very focused on the proposition that feminism and modern women have corrupted the dating market and have created degenerate women and creating very unequal dating markets - that proposition composites the majority of the problem and their inadequacies are a minority (they do acknowledge this).

These guys are the anti-feminists, believe that women are entitled and that feminism has ruined the dating market and through those things listed above, you'll survive the shit show. They have an elevated but not certain or high possibly (I wasn't) a male supremacist. They are the ones that want to go back to "muh traditional dating market". They are the ones who either misogynists or mistrustful of women (I didn't hate women but was mistrustful when I used to be a redpiller)

These guys think feminism & modern women are the problem, more than they are.

This is very important. This "modern women are the problem" thinking has the slim chance of leading to events like the shooting Elliot Rodger committed. Blackpill's "your lack of physical attractiveness are the problem" thinking on the other hand, wouldn't cause you to exterminating others, it would make you prone to exterminating yourself because you're too ugly to be alive, and the treatment you get isn't worth enduring if looksmaxing can't save you.

Watch Fresh & Fit, Donovan Sharpe, and Alpha Male Strategies on YouTube if you want to understand the redpill better.

"Alpha male strategies", "High value man"
Cracking Up Lol GIF by HULU

Go looksmax, you dumb redpill roach.

Any "blackpiller" that believes in any redpill-pickup artist or bluepill rhetoric are immediately mocked on this forum.

🔴 "Just be confident bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴"Just say this magically scientifically proven line and she'll get wet bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔵 "Just buy her gifts even though she's not attracted to you bro! She'll see how valuable you are then bro!" - That's called simping and it doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴 "Just be rich bro"- Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you, and you're now just a gold digging oppurtunity.
🔴 "Just have status bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you. Average woman doesn't craves Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk because they are famous.
🔵"Just be funny bro" - She'll love spending time with you because you're funny, not because she's attracted to you (she isn't attracted to you). Speaking from direct experience.
🔵 "Just have a great personality bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.

If you're curious about the strategy of the three dating philosophies strategies to get women, here they are.

Bluepill strategy - being nice, respectful, female-worshipping and being simpish generates attraction.

Of course, it's important to be nice and respectful, but if not paired with physical attractiveness, it's useless. It's like dividing a number by zero.

View attachment 2553323
View attachment 2553379

Redpill-PUA strategy - Use your elite game, and other insignificant factors and get women.



Blackpill strategy - Looksmax and become attractive, and the women will come.
View attachment 2553330

View attachment 2553332
View attachment 2553333
All of those gestures she asked him to do was to verify that he was a real person

View attachment 2553338
She'll wear anything this guy tells her, I wonder why?

View attachment 2553346
She's mad that Chad didn't kiss her. Unlike my most viral video, the recipient wasn't interested, therefore it's a form of sexual-romantic assault.

View attachment 2553380
notice who she's staring at

View attachment 2553382


Sadly, they are correct about the fact that few mentally ill people here think rape is ok, but that's (mostly) old and was a small minority of users who aren't really active anymore. That belief is held by so few people here. It's not a widespread belief.

There's so much to say because the whole scientific article is almost 100,000 characters (very large)
Anyways, I own a TikTok account called lookism.tiktok and they cited it in their article boyos holy shit!
Here it is if you want to see it: https://www.tiktok.com/@lookism.tiktok

Anyways, here's my critique of their critique of my TikToks.


" The Stylistic Framing of Incel Content on TikTok​

Whilst both TikTok accounts were chosen because they espoused blackpill and incel ideology, the two accounts differ in the stylistic presentation of this ideology. The name of the first TikTok account (Lookism.tiktok) demonstrates the focus on the issue of lookism, stating in the account’s description:

Looks determine your dating life as a man. Fuck the redpill 🔴& the bluepill 🔵

Account1 videos include repurposed and collated viral internet videos and pictures to demonstrate women’s lookist nature. The account creator provides little explanations in his videos, no narration, and relies on sensationalised titles and brief overlay text commentaries to make his point (see Fig. 1)."

Lookism and the Unjust Sexual Market​

Account1’s video content is unsurprisingly focused on lookism. Women are depicted as preferring men with traditional masculine characteristics, with handsome facial features and height above 6 ft. For example, in Video3 a typical pick-up artist meeting is depicted where a male dating guru presents an ‘unattractive’ man to an ‘attractive’ woman asking her if from a ‘feminine perspective’ she would be sexually attracted to this man. The woman instantly rejects the man. The overlay text argues “The real problem here is that he’s unattractive and she is repulsed by his presence....” The hyperbolic choice of language for (mis)interpreting the woman’s reaction as ‘repulsed’ at the man’s mere presence is aimed at inducing a negative emotional reaction from the viewers. Subsequently, the message of this video and several videos on this account is not just exposing women’s lookist nature but also their ‘cruel rejection’ methods and propensity to humiliate men that do not fit hegemonic masculinity standards. It is also noteworthy that the emphasis is on women's ‘cruel rejection,’ and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility.

My response to the above text: Yes, I did use hyperbolic language but I didn't misinterpret it, she literally said he isn't attractive.
Also, the purpose of that video is to mock the man for being ugly, hense "repulsive". She has the right to reject such a pathetic male. We not only laugh but encourage it since such a pickup retard should know that looks determine your dating life as a man. My account description perfectly describes the message of my account. The focus is absolutely on the humiliation of the pickup artist (autist). The goal was not in any way to absolve responsibility on the men, I need men to not only notice my account's message but inspire them through fostering insecurity to do something about it (responsibility). That fatass who fell for the PUA scam should looksmax or give up on dating.

When the blackpill was forming, there was a website called puahate.com, PUA stands for pickup artist. We PUA's are dumb, maybe dislike or even hate these guys for falsely making others believe that "just say the magic line and it won't matter what you look like bro" nonsense. I used to fall for that.

View attachment 2553299

"...and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility."

My response to the above text: In no way are we going to save a PUA or try to make a PUA free from responsibility :ROFLMAO:


"This was reflected within the comments sections, where debates around attractiveness and lookism represented the most frequently discussed theme. The commenters claimed women solely desire men that are traditionally good looking (i.e., attractive face/body) and tall. A recurrent argument was that men need to conform to women’s strict aesthetic standards to qualify for sex and relationships “it all basically comes down to how good you look”; “Step 1: be attractive Step 2: don’t be unattractive”. Height was also a deciding factor in men’s sexual or romantic success, with women portrayed as despising short men to the extent of regarding them as non-existent- “Short guys literally don’t exist to the average woman. it’s sad”; “How sad they shamed and laughed at a man that can’t control his height, this still goes on to this day and they say men are the toxic ones”.

My response to the above text: They nailed it. This is "looks theory" or that looks are the primary factor when it comes to dating. You don't even have to be Chad necessarily, all that matters is that you're considered good-looking to women around you or to the woman you want, and if not, it's over. Of course, the "strict" dating standards is an extreme point of view I had at the time. Of course, looks theory is very real, but the strictness depends. Some individuals believe in higher strictness, or lower strictness, some believe it depends on the woman, environment, context, or a combination of these, but they got this right.

I'd personally disagree with this comment a user left on the TikTok: "...and they say men are the toxic ones”. Everyone assesses people based on appearance and it's not just men, it sounds like the user who wrote that thinks men do it more than women.

Women’s lookist nature is further framed within the videos as being conducive to a constant ritual of men's humiliation. This is evident in several Account1 videos. For example, one video showcases a woman on an online meeting shouting “You are ugly as fuck” to the man on the other end of the call; another video presents a woman verbally abusing a police officer because he was short “Why did the police let this short man join? Who the fuck is he gonna hurt? Look at this munchkin, look at this baby ass bitch”; and a third video of a man recounting his experiences with online dating stating that he was told he should kill himself because he is short “Why is it ok for women to say—Oh you are 5 ft on a dating site? You should be dead!—that’s ok?”. According to these, the habitual rejection and humiliation leads men to feeling dehumanised as suggested by a video with an insect staring at a wall over which sad music is played—the caption reads “Non-chads after realizing only team tinder wants to date them…”. The insect represents unattractive men, or ‘non-chads’, who come to the realisation that women will never be interested in them and they will be forever dateless and celibate, demonstrating the hopeless perpetuity of the incel condition."

My response to the above text:
I love watching those videos, the brutality of the situation faced by those guys :lul: Love watching ugly men get savagely rejected by women, especially redpillers and pickup artists. Funniest stuff ever!

"Account1 further builds upon the notion of women’s privileged status, arguing that it is not just women’s entitlement that is problematic but also women’s nefarious and hypocritical nature. This is ‘evidenced’ by women’s supposed preference and idolisation of ‘bad’, abusive and even ‘criminal’ men, chosen at the detriment of ‘nice guys’ with less appealing physical characteristics. An example of this is Video2 titled “Watch what it takes to get girls as a short guy!” which presents a short man on a dating competition show getting repeatedly rejected by all the women candidates. When questioned as to what it would take to pick the short man, the women stated they would only pick him if the other four candidates were convicted murderers. An overlay text appears on the screen informing the viewers that “Even now they are lying. They would rather be with a tall murderer Chad than a manlet”. According to this video, women’s immorality and lookist nature are so pervasive that they would prefer a good-looking murderer to a decent short man, but women are hypocritical and would never admit to this ‘fact’. This is expanded by clips showcasing ‘hybristophilia’ (2023)—women’s sexual attraction to mass murderers, violent criminals, rapists and even paedophiles. For example, two videos depict the adoration women have for Ted Bundy and Jeremy Meeks, two infamous and attractive convicted criminals. The text overlay on the Ted Bundy video states “Chad can get hoards of women despite being a rapist and a murderer”.

My response to the above text: We don't believe women are entitled, nefarious, hypocritical and problematic. That's a redpill belief. Don't get it mixed up with the blackpill. I believe Stew's height is problematic and worthy of ridicule, very worthy 🤣🤣🤣

Also, I didn't say or imply that women like criminals, of course this is my fault for not being clear but what I was saying is women will usually rank looks as more important even if the attractive male has a criminal record. A criminal record can (not always) be excused if he's hot enough.

"Women’s preference for abusive attractive men at the detriment of unattractive betas or incels is further implied in the most viewed video on Account1 (video1). In this clip, a woman is approached and kissed without consent by a young man characterised as a Chad, which the woman says she is happy with. The video then switches to a second clip in which a group of armed police agents break down a door and enter an apartment. The text added above this video reads “Meanwhile… You’d go to prison for “attempted r**e”. The message of this video is that Chads have free access to women’s bodies, yet betas or incels do not enjoy the same entitlements. This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It implies that it is not the nature of the acts themselves that constitute sexual assault, but rather women’s reception, which is influenced by the attractiveness of the perpetrator. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"


My response to the above text: Chads aren't entitled to women, but they do get easy access to women. Entitlement is "I deserve it". Easy access is "I don't have to do anything, or much to get what I want". Unattractive men almost always have zero access to women, because they're unattractive. The acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Also, ugly and average looking incels aren't entitled to shit. They should looksmax like hell to deserve anything.


"This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"

My response to the above text: They think I'm encouraging rape culture and that sexual assault shouldn't be taken seriously. I didn't say explicitly or implicitly imply anything else besides the fact that the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Sexual assault and related crimes are serious but like the Amber Heard case proved, not always valid because some women may interpret something like a non-attractive man grabbing a woman's shoulder and accidentally touching her breasts in an attempt to save her from a speeding truck as sexual assault and get the man imprisoned.

Obviously, some dude just grabbing her and doing it while she's screaming stop is obviously and validly a violation and the perpetrator should be imprisoned.

"Rape culture and justification of sexual assault are further amplified within the comments. Here, women are portrayed as a homogenous group rather than as individuals and described as hypocritical, liars and promiscuous. It is suggested that women’s double standards and hypocrisy are most obvious when it comes to sexual advances—unattractive men are rejected and found ominous whereas the same type of behaviours are encouraged and desired by women from attractive men “The difference between creepy and sexy is how attractive you are
10610_2023_9559_Figc_HTML.png
”; “women dont get mad at advances, they are just selective on who is doing it”. Additionally, commenters debated the importance of consent. Whilst a small number of comments argued that sexual assault has serious repercussions, the consensus was that women’s claims of sexual assault or harassment are subjective. According to this, Chads can have their way with women and do not need consent from women to engage in sexual behaviours with them. Attractive men are therefore viewed as having ‘handsome privilege’ entitling them to women’s bodies and protecting them from repercussions “That’s called pretty privilege”; “Difference between flirting and assault is how attractive you are”. "


The notion of consent is used to support the trope of male victimhood, with commenters stating that unattractive men would be prosecuted for the same acts Chads/attractive men are entitled to “Wait what happened to the “Me Too” outrage? Oh that’s right… he’s HOT so never mind.”; “Just goes to show, it’s usually more about regret than consent….”; “If he was ugly it would be a felony”. The complicity of the criminal justice system is also implied by the commenters who claim that “Different rules depending on attractiveness” because “if she didn't think he was attractive he'd be in prison now”. Whilst women are the primary instigators, the law is also seen as skewed against men, suggesting we live in a gynocentric society, where rape charges, convictions and even life in prison are ascribed by women based on looks - “good looking pasts rape charges
10610_2023_9559_Figd_HTML.png
”. Thus, women are seen as taking advantage of a system biased against men, and therefore, women’s claims of sexual assault cannot or should not be taken seriously “This is why women can’t be taken seriously. It’s good for one but not the other. You want change? Try being consistent.”; ”If he was ugly it’s sex assault and he would be classified as creepy that’s why women are sick”.


My response to the above text: Men aren't victims, some of these guys are ugly and deserve their treatment. If a blackpiller has a victim mentality, I guarantee you, it's towards themselves (their genetics, their face, their height, phenotype, etc.) as blackpill is a self-critical ideology, unlike redpill which is a mostly environment-critical ideology. The rest of the sexual assaunt stuff is merely a continuation of her reasoning. I gave my input on that reasoning a while back.

Just letting you know guys, I'm only critiquing what I see as very necessary, of course, she's right about some of this stuff but she's wrong on others, since it's hard to understand someone's POV from an outsider's perspective.

The video content, along with the accompanying comments, contribute to the proliferation and normalisation of the fallacious belief that women derive pleasure from sexual assault. Furthermore, it portrays women as utilising allegations of sexual assault as a means to pursue legal action and discriminate against men deemed less desirable, taking advantage of the inherent biases within the criminal justice system. Consequently, these narratives not only reinforce the notion of male victimhood but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault.

No Way Wtf GIF by Harlem


My response to the above text: We don't hate women, want to sexually assault them, or rape them. We are very prone to hating ourselves for not being attractive enough for women. Women have the right to weed us out of the dating market if we're not good enough. Your line of reasoning starts from the axiom that blackpillers hate women and blame external factors and that we should harm women for what they have done to us. If this line of reasoning was valid, we wouldn't be seeming body dysmorphia and self hating all across blackpill communities and @Schery6 wouldn't have killed himself for "being too ugly to be alive"



"...but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault."

My response to the above text: She must think I'm an angry redpill roach lol.

"Many videos within our sample (especially the Account1 videos) relied on emotion-based arguments to further the idea that unattractive men are discriminated against based on their looks, whilst women are entitled and privileged."

My response to the above text: She is very solid on the first point, but the second point, the women are priviliged is false in the sense that she misinterpreted what the message of that video was. She's focusing on the women, I'm focusing on the belittlement of the retarded men who thought learning pickup skills and daygame, displaying their abhorrently funny daygame is ok for their ugly or short selves lol. That woman should reject him, it's obvious and the right thing to do.

"Commenters trivialised sexual violence by claiming that women incite and deserve to be subjected to such acts, demonstrating the pervasiveness of a ‘non-consent’ rhetoric and the embracement of rape culture (Powell & Sugiura, 2018), linking blackpilled beliefs with normalised sexual violence (Kelly, 1987). This is conducive of what Jane (2017) terms as ‘Rapeglish,’ discourse portraying women as promiscuous and deserving of non-consensual sexual acts, often issued via rape threats. However, the language employed on TikTok can be understood as borderline (GIFCT, 2022), in the sense that it was sufficiently implicit to escape content moderation, yet apparent enough to be harmful and perpetuate rape culture."

Steve Harvey Reaction GIF
Nick Young Wtf GIF


Jesus.

As I said, the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.


My overall response:

The purpose of my TikTok Account was to
use sensational, brutal, drastic, attention-grabbing, ego-destroying, and extremely emotional examples of lookism to convince those hard headed bluepillers, pickup artists, redpillers and the everyday male that looks determine your dating life as a man. Nothing more, nothing less.

The conclusions made are founded upon false axioms, such as the blackpill ideology is a female-hating ideology, blackpillers want retribution for their mistreatment or lack of dating options, and mixing blackpill and redpill rhetoric together.

Remember that it's redpillers solely that are converting to Islam, and we know how the West sees Muslim's treatment of women.

Now if this was an analysis on the redpill, it would actually be much more (although not completely) accurate.
Also, we love using hyperbolic language because blackpilled toxic humor is funny 🤣 We love "brutal" humor.

Also, the blackpilled videos we post here or on social media is not to show men that "you're oppressed, see!! you should probably hurt and do heinous things to women for oppressing you". You'd be so far off the mark thinking like this.

The message is "hahahahahaha you're less than (especially to women) if you're deficient in this area, and you should do something to escape it so women and people treat you the way you want to be treated." or even "hahah i am worshipped/treated nicely/treated like a person for having this trait and you don't, so you're subhuman" or even "hahah you're ugly, you're short, can't you see how important is it to be tall and handsome if you want women to love you hahaha" aka toxic humor




i aint reading all that
im happy for you tho
or sorry that happened
 
  • JFL
Reactions: redmaxx
They should just ban TikTok instead of blaming an Indian forum.
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Lookologist003
Yeah, but the authors of the paper won't see it like that. They have there own skin in the game to keep this ideology from spreading. Skimming the paper, It doesn't seem to really consider WHY this ideology is becoming popular, just how to stop if from doing so. Now, it is written in a journal of criminology so I can see the reasoning, but why is it even in a journal like that in the first place? You would think a sociological or cultural journal would be better. They only wish to understand the blackpill because it's becoming a threat to the social order, and to women. I would be more sympathetic to these authors (both of whom are women, which could lead to some subconcious bias) if they would try to consider the plight of these men that fall into this ideology, but all it appears to be is more damage control from a system that is inherently against men's interests and intends on fighting tooth and nail to keep it that way.
This.
 
You can't be serious lmao
You also got to consider that most of the users here don't interact with the forum a lot, with a few posts. A minority of the users post a majority of the content. There was a study on this forum that cited that exact fact, although I can't find it. It was on ResearchGate.
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: GunDevilHybrid
bro honestly i dont care and i dont wanna know about these retards
look the simple standard in western soy-cieties is INCITMENT TO VIOLENCE which me and any other SANE user here HASNT done it lol, thats it if youre a normal, sane person and not a weirdo
we just wanna looksmax thats it lol

these retard journalists seem to not understand how dating works, which is ok, but you can call us terrorists or inkwells 100 times leftie neckbeard journalism boyo, it will NEVER change the fact that you , YOURSELF, are UNATTRACTIVE to women, and will FOREVER be that way, and NO amount of CUCKING to women will change that

you are simply to retarded to understand human sexual dynamics, so go ahead boyos, call us inkwells or terrorists, as its the only position your retarded brain can understand lmao
 
  • +1
Reactions: Agendum
The link can be found here:

Solea, A.I., Sugiura, L. Mainstreaming the Blackpill: Understanding the Incel Community on TikTok. Eur J Crim Policy Res 29, 311–336 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-023-09559-5

The only author who left her email is Anda Iulia Solea from School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Portsmouth in the United Kingdom.
If you'd like to contact her, please email her at Anda.Solea@port.ac.uk.

If you're retarded enough to diss her or say anything rude to her, that's not necessary. She's doing what she believes is her job and you can help her understand us better by briefly correcting any false assumptions, as I plan on doing with her critique of my viral Tiktoks.

I find this article to be very interesting (because she critiqued it) and funny (in the sense that our stuff made it here lol).
Here are some snippets.

Here is her response

Abstract

"Incels (involuntary celibates), a subgroup of the so called ‘manosphere,’ have become an increasing security concern for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners following their association with several violent attacks. Once mostly contained on niche men’s forums, redpilled and blackpilled communities and theories are gaining prominence on mainstream social media platforms. However, whilst previous research considerably enhanced our understanding of the incel phenomenon and their presence on Reddit and secluded incel forums, incel’s presence on mainstream social media platforms is understudied and their presence on TikTok is yet to be addressed. The present paper examines the incel subculture on TikTok, through an analysis of incel accounts, videos and their respective comments, to understand the role mainstream social media platforms play in the ‘normiefication’ and normalisation of incel ideology and discourse. The findings suggest that on TikTok the expression of incel ideology takes a covert form, employing emotional appeals and pseudo-science to disseminate common incelosphere tropes. Further, we demonstrate how the process of mainstreaming incel beliefs is facilitated by their interconnectedness with wider sexism and structural misogyny. The harms generating from this association are conducive to the normalisation of blackpill beliefs and the reinforcement of misogyny, sexism and justification of rape culture."

As I read the article, I quickly came to see that the authors don't really know where to draw the line between blackpill and redpill, neither do they really understand them fully. This doesn't surprise me since it's hard to understand phenomena from an outsider's perspective.

The focus of the critiques below are solely on correcting perceptual mistakes about my content's message on TikTok and perceptual mistakes about the blackpill. Also, when I say "we" I mean (the vast majority of blackpillers).

It would have been better if she tried to understand the perspective of a blackpiller before saying anything to maximize accuracy.

She also doesn't realize that most blackpillers are self-hating, self-loathing people who are desperate to look better, moderate/indifferent on feminism, love toxic humor, insecure and see looksmaxing as salvation to their self-hate and lackluster social and dating life. If anything, we congratulate women for the sexual liberation movement so now they won't breed with mediocre men and create pathetic short and ugly incels that get bullied at school. Most users here also support gender equality and probably have suicidal thoughts because they're ugly, short, wrong phenotype, etc.

Most people on here aren't misogynistic, some are but most just hate themselves for not being good enough for women. Sounds familiar? Teenage women!

They also have to realize there is a minority of mentally ill (as in neurotic, angry, and psychologically disturbed) people here who say heinous things that even we disagree with, so discard their opinions, they're minority and foolish opinions.

Blackpillers may have different beliefs on things but some of the things we all agree on is.
  • Looks are primary in dating and in generating attraction and plays an important role in maintaining attraction. Other factors only matter after you've passed the looks test, and the importance of these factors are almost always inferior to the importance of looks (unless you're noticeably neurodivergent)
  • Women aren't entitled or evil, you're just ugly and they want nothing to do with you sexually and romantically.
  • Women want to date men they find attractive and they treat them very well, even to the degree of literal worship.
Blackpill is focused on the proposition that you (and your aesthetic inadequacies) are the problem, not women. That's why a fair amount of people here hate themselves.

As a former redpiller, redpillers believe that things like
  • Confidence
  • Money
  • Status
  • Being assertive, and "asserting yourself the right way"
  • Masculine behavior
  • Game, Charisma and Pickup Skills
...are of most importance and that looks are secondary or even irrelevant.

Redpill is very focused on the proposition that feminism and modern women have corrupted the dating market and have created degenerate women and creating very unequal dating markets - that proposition composites the majority of the problem and their inadequacies are a minority (they do acknowledge this).

These guys are the anti-feminists, believe that women are entitled and that feminism has ruined the dating market and through those things listed above, you'll survive the shit show. They have an elevated but not certain or high possibly (I wasn't) a male supremacist. They are the ones that want to go back to "muh traditional dating market". They are the ones who either misogynists or mistrustful of women (I didn't hate women but was mistrustful when I used to be a redpiller)

These guys think feminism & modern women are the problem, more than they are.

This is very important. This "modern women are the problem" thinking has the slim chance of leading to events like the shooting Elliot Rodger committed. Blackpill's "your lack of physical attractiveness are the problem" thinking on the other hand, wouldn't cause you to exterminating others, it would make you prone to exterminating yourself because you're too ugly to be alive, and the treatment you get isn't worth enduring if looksmaxing can't save you.

Watch Fresh & Fit, Donovan Sharpe, and Alpha Male Strategies on YouTube if you want to understand the redpill better.

"Alpha male strategies", "High value man"
Cracking Up Lol GIF by HULU

Go looksmax, you dumb redpill roach.

Any "blackpiller" that believes in any redpill-pickup artist or bluepill rhetoric are immediately mocked on this forum.

🔴 "Just be confident bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴"Just say this magically scientifically proven line and she'll get wet bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔵 "Just buy her gifts even though she's not attracted to you bro! She'll see how valuable you are then bro!" - That's called simping and it doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴 "Just be rich bro"- Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you, and you're now just a gold digging oppurtunity.
🔴 "Just have status bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you. Average woman doesn't craves Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk because they are famous.
🔵"Just be funny bro" - She'll love spending time with you because you're funny, not because she's attracted to you (she isn't attracted to you). Speaking from direct experience.
🔵 "Just have a great personality bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.

If you're curious about the strategy of the three dating philosophies strategies to get women, here they are.

Bluepill strategy - being nice, respectful, female-worshipping and being simpish generates attraction.

Of course, it's important to be nice and respectful, but if not paired with physical attractiveness, it's useless. It's like dividing a number by zero.

View attachment 2553323
View attachment 2553379

Redpill-PUA strategy - Use your elite game, and other insignificant factors and get women.



Blackpill strategy - Looksmax and become attractive, and the women will come.
View attachment 2553330

View attachment 2553332
View attachment 2553333
All of those gestures she asked him to do was to verify that he was a real person

View attachment 2553338
She'll wear anything this guy tells her, I wonder why?

View attachment 2553346
She's mad that Chad didn't kiss her. Unlike my most viral video, the recipient wasn't interested, therefore it's a form of sexual-romantic assault.

View attachment 2553380
notice who she's staring at

View attachment 2553382


Sadly, they are correct about the fact that few mentally ill people here think rape is ok, but that's (mostly) old and was a small minority of users who aren't really active anymore. That belief is held by so few people here. It's not a widespread belief.

There's so much to say because the whole scientific article is almost 100,000 characters (very large)
Anyways, I own a TikTok account called lookism.tiktok and they cited it in their article boyos holy shit!
Here it is if you want to see it: https://www.tiktok.com/@lookism.tiktok

Anyways, here's my critique of their critique of my TikToks.


" The Stylistic Framing of Incel Content on TikTok​

Whilst both TikTok accounts were chosen because they espoused blackpill and incel ideology, the two accounts differ in the stylistic presentation of this ideology. The name of the first TikTok account (Lookism.tiktok) demonstrates the focus on the issue of lookism, stating in the account’s description:

Looks determine your dating life as a man. Fuck the redpill 🔴& the bluepill 🔵

Account1 videos include repurposed and collated viral internet videos and pictures to demonstrate women’s lookist nature. The account creator provides little explanations in his videos, no narration, and relies on sensationalised titles and brief overlay text commentaries to make his point (see Fig. 1)."

Lookism and the Unjust Sexual Market​

Account1’s video content is unsurprisingly focused on lookism. Women are depicted as preferring men with traditional masculine characteristics, with handsome facial features and height above 6 ft. For example, in Video3 a typical pick-up artist meeting is depicted where a male dating guru presents an ‘unattractive’ man to an ‘attractive’ woman asking her if from a ‘feminine perspective’ she would be sexually attracted to this man. The woman instantly rejects the man. The overlay text argues “The real problem here is that he’s unattractive and she is repulsed by his presence....” The hyperbolic choice of language for (mis)interpreting the woman’s reaction as ‘repulsed’ at the man’s mere presence is aimed at inducing a negative emotional reaction from the viewers. Subsequently, the message of this video and several videos on this account is not just exposing women’s lookist nature but also their ‘cruel rejection’ methods and propensity to humiliate men that do not fit hegemonic masculinity standards. It is also noteworthy that the emphasis is on women's ‘cruel rejection,’ and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility.

My response to the above text: Yes, I did use hyperbolic language but I didn't misinterpret it, she literally said he isn't attractive.
Also, the purpose of that video is to mock the man for being ugly, hense "repulsive". She has the right to reject such a pathetic male. We not only laugh but encourage it since such a pickup retard should know that looks determine your dating life as a man. My account description perfectly describes the message of my account. The focus is absolutely on the humiliation of the pickup artist (autist). The goal was not in any way to absolve responsibility on the men, I need men to not only notice my account's message but inspire them through fostering insecurity to do something about it (responsibility). That fatass who fell for the PUA scam should looksmax or give up on dating.

When the blackpill was forming, there was a website called puahate.com, PUA stands for pickup artist. We PUA's are dumb, maybe dislike or even hate these guys for falsely making others believe that "just say the magic line and it won't matter what you look like bro" nonsense. I used to fall for that.

View attachment 2553299

"...and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility."

My response to the above text: In no way are we going to save a PUA or try to make a PUA free from responsibility :ROFLMAO:


"This was reflected within the comments sections, where debates around attractiveness and lookism represented the most frequently discussed theme. The commenters claimed women solely desire men that are traditionally good looking (i.e., attractive face/body) and tall. A recurrent argument was that men need to conform to women’s strict aesthetic standards to qualify for sex and relationships “it all basically comes down to how good you look”; “Step 1: be attractive Step 2: don’t be unattractive”. Height was also a deciding factor in men’s sexual or romantic success, with women portrayed as despising short men to the extent of regarding them as non-existent- “Short guys literally don’t exist to the average woman. it’s sad”; “How sad they shamed and laughed at a man that can’t control his height, this still goes on to this day and they say men are the toxic ones”.

My response to the above text: They nailed it. This is "looks theory" or that looks are the primary factor when it comes to dating. You don't even have to be Chad necessarily, all that matters is that you're considered good-looking to women around you or to the woman you want, and if not, it's over. Of course, the "strict" dating standards is an extreme point of view I had at the time. Of course, looks theory is very real, but the strictness depends. Some individuals believe in higher strictness, or lower strictness, some believe it depends on the woman, environment, context, or a combination of these, but they got this right.

I'd personally disagree with this comment a user left on the TikTok: "...and they say men are the toxic ones”. Everyone assesses people based on appearance and it's not just men, it sounds like the user who wrote that thinks men do it more than women.

Women’s lookist nature is further framed within the videos as being conducive to a constant ritual of men's humiliation. This is evident in several Account1 videos. For example, one video showcases a woman on an online meeting shouting “You are ugly as fuck” to the man on the other end of the call; another video presents a woman verbally abusing a police officer because he was short “Why did the police let this short man join? Who the fuck is he gonna hurt? Look at this munchkin, look at this baby ass bitch”; and a third video of a man recounting his experiences with online dating stating that he was told he should kill himself because he is short “Why is it ok for women to say—Oh you are 5 ft on a dating site? You should be dead!—that’s ok?”. According to these, the habitual rejection and humiliation leads men to feeling dehumanised as suggested by a video with an insect staring at a wall over which sad music is played—the caption reads “Non-chads after realizing only team tinder wants to date them…”. The insect represents unattractive men, or ‘non-chads’, who come to the realisation that women will never be interested in them and they will be forever dateless and celibate, demonstrating the hopeless perpetuity of the incel condition."

My response to the above text:
I love watching those videos, the brutality of the situation faced by those guys :lul: Love watching ugly men get savagely rejected by women, especially redpillers and pickup artists. Funniest stuff ever!

"Account1 further builds upon the notion of women’s privileged status, arguing that it is not just women’s entitlement that is problematic but also women’s nefarious and hypocritical nature. This is ‘evidenced’ by women’s supposed preference and idolisation of ‘bad’, abusive and even ‘criminal’ men, chosen at the detriment of ‘nice guys’ with less appealing physical characteristics. An example of this is Video2 titled “Watch what it takes to get girls as a short guy!” which presents a short man on a dating competition show getting repeatedly rejected by all the women candidates. When questioned as to what it would take to pick the short man, the women stated they would only pick him if the other four candidates were convicted murderers. An overlay text appears on the screen informing the viewers that “Even now they are lying. They would rather be with a tall murderer Chad than a manlet”. According to this video, women’s immorality and lookist nature are so pervasive that they would prefer a good-looking murderer to a decent short man, but women are hypocritical and would never admit to this ‘fact’. This is expanded by clips showcasing ‘hybristophilia’ (2023)—women’s sexual attraction to mass murderers, violent criminals, rapists and even paedophiles. For example, two videos depict the adoration women have for Ted Bundy and Jeremy Meeks, two infamous and attractive convicted criminals. The text overlay on the Ted Bundy video states “Chad can get hoards of women despite being a rapist and a murderer”.

My response to the above text: We don't believe women are entitled, nefarious, hypocritical and problematic. That's a redpill belief. Don't get it mixed up with the blackpill. I believe Stew's height is problematic and worthy of ridicule, very worthy 🤣🤣🤣

Also, I didn't say or imply that women like criminals, of course this is my fault for not being clear but what I was saying is women will usually rank looks as more important even if the attractive male has a criminal record. A criminal record can (not always) be excused if he's hot enough.

"Women’s preference for abusive attractive men at the detriment of unattractive betas or incels is further implied in the most viewed video on Account1 (video1). In this clip, a woman is approached and kissed without consent by a young man characterised as a Chad, which the woman says she is happy with. The video then switches to a second clip in which a group of armed police agents break down a door and enter an apartment. The text added above this video reads “Meanwhile… You’d go to prison for “attempted r**e”. The message of this video is that Chads have free access to women’s bodies, yet betas or incels do not enjoy the same entitlements. This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It implies that it is not the nature of the acts themselves that constitute sexual assault, but rather women’s reception, which is influenced by the attractiveness of the perpetrator. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"


My response to the above text: Chads aren't entitled to women, but they do get easy access to women. Entitlement is "I deserve it". Easy access is "I don't have to do anything, or much to get what I want". Unattractive men almost always have zero access to women, because they're unattractive. The acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Also, ugly and average looking incels aren't entitled to shit. They should looksmax like hell to deserve anything.


"This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"

My response to the above text: They think I'm encouraging rape culture and that sexual assault shouldn't be taken seriously. I didn't say explicitly or implicitly imply anything else besides the fact that the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Sexual assault and related crimes are serious but like the Amber Heard case proved, not always valid because some women may interpret something like a non-attractive man grabbing a woman's shoulder and accidentally touching her breasts in an attempt to save her from a speeding truck as sexual assault and get the man imprisoned.

Obviously, some dude just grabbing her and doing it while she's screaming stop is obviously and validly a violation and the perpetrator should be imprisoned.

"Rape culture and justification of sexual assault are further amplified within the comments. Here, women are portrayed as a homogenous group rather than as individuals and described as hypocritical, liars and promiscuous. It is suggested that women’s double standards and hypocrisy are most obvious when it comes to sexual advances—unattractive men are rejected and found ominous whereas the same type of behaviours are encouraged and desired by women from attractive men “The difference between creepy and sexy is how attractive you are
10610_2023_9559_Figc_HTML.png
”; “women dont get mad at advances, they are just selective on who is doing it”. Additionally, commenters debated the importance of consent. Whilst a small number of comments argued that sexual assault has serious repercussions, the consensus was that women’s claims of sexual assault or harassment are subjective. According to this, Chads can have their way with women and do not need consent from women to engage in sexual behaviours with them. Attractive men are therefore viewed as having ‘handsome privilege’ entitling them to women’s bodies and protecting them from repercussions “That’s called pretty privilege”; “Difference between flirting and assault is how attractive you are”. "


The notion of consent is used to support the trope of male victimhood, with commenters stating that unattractive men would be prosecuted for the same acts Chads/attractive men are entitled to “Wait what happened to the “Me Too” outrage? Oh that’s right… he’s HOT so never mind.”; “Just goes to show, it’s usually more about regret than consent….”; “If he was ugly it would be a felony”. The complicity of the criminal justice system is also implied by the commenters who claim that “Different rules depending on attractiveness” because “if she didn't think he was attractive he'd be in prison now”. Whilst women are the primary instigators, the law is also seen as skewed against men, suggesting we live in a gynocentric society, where rape charges, convictions and even life in prison are ascribed by women based on looks - “good looking pasts rape charges
10610_2023_9559_Figd_HTML.png
”. Thus, women are seen as taking advantage of a system biased against men, and therefore, women’s claims of sexual assault cannot or should not be taken seriously “This is why women can’t be taken seriously. It’s good for one but not the other. You want change? Try being consistent.”; ”If he was ugly it’s sex assault and he would be classified as creepy that’s why women are sick”.


My response to the above text: Men aren't victims, some of these guys are ugly and deserve their treatment. If a blackpiller has a victim mentality, I guarantee you, it's towards themselves (their genetics, their face, their height, phenotype, etc.) as blackpill is a self-critical ideology, unlike redpill which is a mostly environment-critical ideology. The rest of the sexual assaunt stuff is merely a continuation of her reasoning. I gave my input on that reasoning a while back.

Just letting you know guys, I'm only critiquing what I see as very necessary, of course, she's right about some of this stuff but she's wrong on others, since it's hard to understand someone's POV from an outsider's perspective.

The video content, along with the accompanying comments, contribute to the proliferation and normalisation of the fallacious belief that women derive pleasure from sexual assault. Furthermore, it portrays women as utilising allegations of sexual assault as a means to pursue legal action and discriminate against men deemed less desirable, taking advantage of the inherent biases within the criminal justice system. Consequently, these narratives not only reinforce the notion of male victimhood but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault.

No Way Wtf GIF by Harlem


My response to the above text: We don't hate women, want to sexually assault them, or rape them. We are very prone to hating ourselves for not being attractive enough for women. Women have the right to weed us out of the dating market if we're not good enough. Your line of reasoning starts from the axiom that blackpillers hate women and blame external factors and that we should harm women for what they have done to us. If this line of reasoning was valid, we wouldn't be seeming body dysmorphia and self hating all across blackpill communities and @Schery6 wouldn't have killed himself for "being too ugly to be alive"



"...but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault."

My response to the above text: She must think I'm an angry redpill roach lol.

"Many videos within our sample (especially the Account1 videos) relied on emotion-based arguments to further the idea that unattractive men are discriminated against based on their looks, whilst women are entitled and privileged."

My response to the above text: She is very solid on the first point, but the second point, the women are priviliged is false in the sense that she misinterpreted what the message of that video was. She's focusing on the women, I'm focusing on the belittlement of the retarded men who thought learning pickup skills and daygame, displaying their abhorrently funny daygame is ok for their ugly or short selves lol. That woman should reject him, it's obvious and the right thing to do.

"Commenters trivialised sexual violence by claiming that women incite and deserve to be subjected to such acts, demonstrating the pervasiveness of a ‘non-consent’ rhetoric and the embracement of rape culture (Powell & Sugiura, 2018), linking blackpilled beliefs with normalised sexual violence (Kelly, 1987). This is conducive of what Jane (2017) terms as ‘Rapeglish,’ discourse portraying women as promiscuous and deserving of non-consensual sexual acts, often issued via rape threats. However, the language employed on TikTok can be understood as borderline (GIFCT, 2022), in the sense that it was sufficiently implicit to escape content moderation, yet apparent enough to be harmful and perpetuate rape culture."

Steve Harvey Reaction GIF
Nick Young Wtf GIF


Jesus.

As I said, the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.


My overall response:

The purpose of my TikTok Account was to
use sensational, brutal, drastic, attention-grabbing, ego-destroying, and extremely emotional examples of lookism to convince those hard headed bluepillers, pickup artists, redpillers and the everyday male that looks determine your dating life as a man. Nothing more, nothing less.

The conclusions made are founded upon false axioms, such as the blackpill ideology is a female-hating ideology, blackpillers want retribution for their mistreatment or lack of dating options, and mixing blackpill and redpill rhetoric together.

Remember that it's redpillers solely that are converting to Islam, and we know how the West sees Muslim's treatment of women.

Now if this was an analysis on the redpill, it would actually be much more (although not completely) accurate.
Also, we love using hyperbolic language because blackpilled toxic humor is funny 🤣 We love "brutal" humor.

Also, the blackpilled videos we post here or on social media is not to show men that "you're oppressed, see!! you should probably hurt and do heinous things to women for oppressing you". You'd be so far off the mark thinking like this.

The message is "hahahahahaha you're less than (especially to women) if you're deficient in this area, and you should do something to escape it so women and people treat you the way you want to be treated." or even "hahah i am worshipped/treated nicely/treated like a person for having this trait and you don't, so you're subhuman" or even "hahah you're ugly, you're short, can't you see how important is it to be tall and handsome if you want women to love you hahaha" aka toxic humor




I think they are not interested in truth. They are pushing some agenda
 
  • +1
Reactions: Skywalker
The link can be found here:

Solea, A.I., Sugiura, L. Mainstreaming the Blackpill: Understanding the Incel Community on TikTok. Eur J Crim Policy Res 29, 311–336 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-023-09559-5

The only author who left her email is Anda Iulia Solea from School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Portsmouth in the United Kingdom.
If you'd like to contact her, please email her at Anda.Solea@port.ac.uk.

If you're retarded enough to diss her or say anything rude to her, that's not necessary. She's doing what she believes is her job and you can help her understand us better by briefly correcting any false assumptions, as I plan on doing with her critique of my viral Tiktoks.

I find this article to be very interesting (because she critiqued it) and funny (in the sense that our stuff made it here lol).
Here are some snippets.

Here is her response

Abstract

"Incels (involuntary celibates), a subgroup of the so called ‘manosphere,’ have become an increasing security concern for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners following their association with several violent attacks. Once mostly contained on niche men’s forums, redpilled and blackpilled communities and theories are gaining prominence on mainstream social media platforms. However, whilst previous research considerably enhanced our understanding of the incel phenomenon and their presence on Reddit and secluded incel forums, incel’s presence on mainstream social media platforms is understudied and their presence on TikTok is yet to be addressed. The present paper examines the incel subculture on TikTok, through an analysis of incel accounts, videos and their respective comments, to understand the role mainstream social media platforms play in the ‘normiefication’ and normalisation of incel ideology and discourse. The findings suggest that on TikTok the expression of incel ideology takes a covert form, employing emotional appeals and pseudo-science to disseminate common incelosphere tropes. Further, we demonstrate how the process of mainstreaming incel beliefs is facilitated by their interconnectedness with wider sexism and structural misogyny. The harms generating from this association are conducive to the normalisation of blackpill beliefs and the reinforcement of misogyny, sexism and justification of rape culture."

As I read the article, I quickly came to see that the authors don't really know where to draw the line between blackpill and redpill, neither do they really understand them fully. This doesn't surprise me since it's hard to understand phenomena from an outsider's perspective.

The focus of the critiques below are solely on correcting perceptual mistakes about my content's message on TikTok and perceptual mistakes about the blackpill. Also, when I say "we" I mean (the vast majority of blackpillers).

It would have been better if she tried to understand the perspective of a blackpiller before saying anything to maximize accuracy.

She also doesn't realize that most blackpillers are self-hating, self-loathing people who are desperate to look better, moderate/indifferent on feminism, love toxic humor, insecure and see looksmaxing as salvation to their self-hate and lackluster social and dating life. If anything, we congratulate women for the sexual liberation movement so now they won't breed with mediocre men and create pathetic short and ugly incels that get bullied at school. Most users here also support gender equality and probably have suicidal thoughts because they're ugly, short, wrong phenotype, etc.

Most people on here aren't misogynistic, some are but most just hate themselves for not being good enough for women. Sounds familiar? Teenage women!

They also have to realize there is a minority of mentally ill (as in neurotic, angry, and psychologically disturbed) people here who say heinous things that even we disagree with, so discard their opinions, they're minority and foolish opinions.

Blackpillers may have different beliefs on things but some of the things we all agree on is.
  • Looks are primary in dating and in generating attraction and plays an important role in maintaining attraction. Other factors only matter after you've passed the looks test, and the importance of these factors are almost always inferior to the importance of looks (unless you're noticeably neurodivergent)
  • Women aren't entitled or evil, you're just ugly and they want nothing to do with you sexually and romantically.
  • Women want to date men they find attractive and they treat them very well, even to the degree of literal worship.
Blackpill is focused on the proposition that you (and your aesthetic inadequacies) are the problem, not women. That's why a fair amount of people here hate themselves.

As a former redpiller, redpillers believe that things like
  • Confidence
  • Money
  • Status
  • Being assertive, and "asserting yourself the right way"
  • Masculine behavior
  • Game, Charisma and Pickup Skills
...are of most importance and that looks are secondary or even irrelevant.

Redpill is very focused on the proposition that feminism and modern women have corrupted the dating market and have created degenerate women and creating very unequal dating markets - that proposition composites the majority of the problem and their inadequacies are a minority (they do acknowledge this).

These guys are the anti-feminists, believe that women are entitled and that feminism has ruined the dating market and through those things listed above, you'll survive the shit show. They have an elevated but not certain or high possibly (I wasn't) a male supremacist. They are the ones that want to go back to "muh traditional dating market". They are the ones who either misogynists or mistrustful of women (I didn't hate women but was mistrustful when I used to be a redpiller)

These guys think feminism & modern women are the problem, more than they are.

This is very important. This "modern women are the problem" thinking has the slim chance of leading to events like the shooting Elliot Rodger committed. Blackpill's "your lack of physical attractiveness are the problem" thinking on the other hand, wouldn't cause you to exterminating others, it would make you prone to exterminating yourself because you're too ugly to be alive, and the treatment you get isn't worth enduring if looksmaxing can't save you.

Watch Fresh & Fit, Donovan Sharpe, and Alpha Male Strategies on YouTube if you want to understand the redpill better.

"Alpha male strategies", "High value man"
Cracking Up Lol GIF by HULU

Go looksmax, you dumb redpill roach.

Any "blackpiller" that believes in any redpill-pickup artist or bluepill rhetoric are immediately mocked on this forum.

🔴 "Just be confident bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴"Just say this magically scientifically proven line and she'll get wet bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔵 "Just buy her gifts even though she's not attracted to you bro! She'll see how valuable you are then bro!" - That's called simping and it doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴 "Just be rich bro"- Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you, and you're now just a gold digging oppurtunity.
🔴 "Just have status bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you. Average woman doesn't craves Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk because they are famous.
🔵"Just be funny bro" - She'll love spending time with you because you're funny, not because she's attracted to you (she isn't attracted to you). Speaking from direct experience.
🔵 "Just have a great personality bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.

If you're curious about the strategy of the three dating philosophies strategies to get women, here they are.

Bluepill strategy - being nice, respectful, female-worshipping and being simpish generates attraction.

Of course, it's important to be nice and respectful, but if not paired with physical attractiveness, it's useless. It's like dividing a number by zero.

View attachment 2553323
View attachment 2553379

Redpill-PUA strategy - Use your elite game, and other insignificant factors and get women.



Blackpill strategy - Looksmax and become attractive, and the women will come.
View attachment 2553330

View attachment 2553332
View attachment 2553333
All of those gestures she asked him to do was to verify that he was a real person

View attachment 2553338
She'll wear anything this guy tells her, I wonder why?

View attachment 2553346
She's mad that Chad didn't kiss her. Unlike my most viral video, the recipient wasn't interested, therefore it's a form of sexual-romantic assault.

View attachment 2553380
notice who she's staring at

View attachment 2553382


Sadly, they are correct about the fact that few mentally ill people here think rape is ok, but that's (mostly) old and was a small minority of users who aren't really active anymore. That belief is held by so few people here. It's not a widespread belief.

There's so much to say because the whole scientific article is almost 100,000 characters (very large)
Anyways, I own a TikTok account called lookism.tiktok and they cited it in their article boyos holy shit!
Here it is if you want to see it: https://www.tiktok.com/@lookism.tiktok

Anyways, here's my critique of their critique of my TikToks.


" The Stylistic Framing of Incel Content on TikTok​

Whilst both TikTok accounts were chosen because they espoused blackpill and incel ideology, the two accounts differ in the stylistic presentation of this ideology. The name of the first TikTok account (Lookism.tiktok) demonstrates the focus on the issue of lookism, stating in the account’s description:

Looks determine your dating life as a man. Fuck the redpill 🔴& the bluepill 🔵

Account1 videos include repurposed and collated viral internet videos and pictures to demonstrate women’s lookist nature. The account creator provides little explanations in his videos, no narration, and relies on sensationalised titles and brief overlay text commentaries to make his point (see Fig. 1)."

Lookism and the Unjust Sexual Market​

Account1’s video content is unsurprisingly focused on lookism. Women are depicted as preferring men with traditional masculine characteristics, with handsome facial features and height above 6 ft. For example, in Video3 a typical pick-up artist meeting is depicted where a male dating guru presents an ‘unattractive’ man to an ‘attractive’ woman asking her if from a ‘feminine perspective’ she would be sexually attracted to this man. The woman instantly rejects the man. The overlay text argues “The real problem here is that he’s unattractive and she is repulsed by his presence....” The hyperbolic choice of language for (mis)interpreting the woman’s reaction as ‘repulsed’ at the man’s mere presence is aimed at inducing a negative emotional reaction from the viewers. Subsequently, the message of this video and several videos on this account is not just exposing women’s lookist nature but also their ‘cruel rejection’ methods and propensity to humiliate men that do not fit hegemonic masculinity standards. It is also noteworthy that the emphasis is on women's ‘cruel rejection,’ and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility.

My response to the above text: Yes, I did use hyperbolic language but I didn't misinterpret it, she literally said he isn't attractive.
Also, the purpose of that video is to mock the man for being ugly, hense "repulsive". She has the right to reject such a pathetic male. We not only laugh but encourage it since such a pickup retard should know that looks determine your dating life as a man. My account description perfectly describes the message of my account. The focus is absolutely on the humiliation of the pickup artist (autist). The goal was not in any way to absolve responsibility on the men, I need men to not only notice my account's message but inspire them through fostering insecurity to do something about it (responsibility). That fatass who fell for the PUA scam should looksmax or give up on dating.

When the blackpill was forming, there was a website called puahate.com, PUA stands for pickup artist. We PUA's are dumb, maybe dislike or even hate these guys for falsely making others believe that "just say the magic line and it won't matter what you look like bro" nonsense. I used to fall for that.

View attachment 2553299

"...and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility."

My response to the above text: In no way are we going to save a PUA or try to make a PUA free from responsibility :ROFLMAO:


"This was reflected within the comments sections, where debates around attractiveness and lookism represented the most frequently discussed theme. The commenters claimed women solely desire men that are traditionally good looking (i.e., attractive face/body) and tall. A recurrent argument was that men need to conform to women’s strict aesthetic standards to qualify for sex and relationships “it all basically comes down to how good you look”; “Step 1: be attractive Step 2: don’t be unattractive”. Height was also a deciding factor in men’s sexual or romantic success, with women portrayed as despising short men to the extent of regarding them as non-existent- “Short guys literally don’t exist to the average woman. it’s sad”; “How sad they shamed and laughed at a man that can’t control his height, this still goes on to this day and they say men are the toxic ones”.

My response to the above text: They nailed it. This is "looks theory" or that looks are the primary factor when it comes to dating. You don't even have to be Chad necessarily, all that matters is that you're considered good-looking to women around you or to the woman you want, and if not, it's over. Of course, the "strict" dating standards is an extreme point of view I had at the time. Of course, looks theory is very real, but the strictness depends. Some individuals believe in higher strictness, or lower strictness, some believe it depends on the woman, environment, context, or a combination of these, but they got this right.

I'd personally disagree with this comment a user left on the TikTok: "...and they say men are the toxic ones”. Everyone assesses people based on appearance and it's not just men, it sounds like the user who wrote that thinks men do it more than women.

Women’s lookist nature is further framed within the videos as being conducive to a constant ritual of men's humiliation. This is evident in several Account1 videos. For example, one video showcases a woman on an online meeting shouting “You are ugly as fuck” to the man on the other end of the call; another video presents a woman verbally abusing a police officer because he was short “Why did the police let this short man join? Who the fuck is he gonna hurt? Look at this munchkin, look at this baby ass bitch”; and a third video of a man recounting his experiences with online dating stating that he was told he should kill himself because he is short “Why is it ok for women to say—Oh you are 5 ft on a dating site? You should be dead!—that’s ok?”. According to these, the habitual rejection and humiliation leads men to feeling dehumanised as suggested by a video with an insect staring at a wall over which sad music is played—the caption reads “Non-chads after realizing only team tinder wants to date them…”. The insect represents unattractive men, or ‘non-chads’, who come to the realisation that women will never be interested in them and they will be forever dateless and celibate, demonstrating the hopeless perpetuity of the incel condition."

My response to the above text:
I love watching those videos, the brutality of the situation faced by those guys :lul: Love watching ugly men get savagely rejected by women, especially redpillers and pickup artists. Funniest stuff ever!

"Account1 further builds upon the notion of women’s privileged status, arguing that it is not just women’s entitlement that is problematic but also women’s nefarious and hypocritical nature. This is ‘evidenced’ by women’s supposed preference and idolisation of ‘bad’, abusive and even ‘criminal’ men, chosen at the detriment of ‘nice guys’ with less appealing physical characteristics. An example of this is Video2 titled “Watch what it takes to get girls as a short guy!” which presents a short man on a dating competition show getting repeatedly rejected by all the women candidates. When questioned as to what it would take to pick the short man, the women stated they would only pick him if the other four candidates were convicted murderers. An overlay text appears on the screen informing the viewers that “Even now they are lying. They would rather be with a tall murderer Chad than a manlet”. According to this video, women’s immorality and lookist nature are so pervasive that they would prefer a good-looking murderer to a decent short man, but women are hypocritical and would never admit to this ‘fact’. This is expanded by clips showcasing ‘hybristophilia’ (2023)—women’s sexual attraction to mass murderers, violent criminals, rapists and even paedophiles. For example, two videos depict the adoration women have for Ted Bundy and Jeremy Meeks, two infamous and attractive convicted criminals. The text overlay on the Ted Bundy video states “Chad can get hoards of women despite being a rapist and a murderer”.

My response to the above text: We don't believe women are entitled, nefarious, hypocritical and problematic. That's a redpill belief. Don't get it mixed up with the blackpill. I believe Stew's height is problematic and worthy of ridicule, very worthy 🤣🤣🤣

Also, I didn't say or imply that women like criminals, of course this is my fault for not being clear but what I was saying is women will usually rank looks as more important even if the attractive male has a criminal record. A criminal record can (not always) be excused if he's hot enough.

"Women’s preference for abusive attractive men at the detriment of unattractive betas or incels is further implied in the most viewed video on Account1 (video1). In this clip, a woman is approached and kissed without consent by a young man characterised as a Chad, which the woman says she is happy with. The video then switches to a second clip in which a group of armed police agents break down a door and enter an apartment. The text added above this video reads “Meanwhile… You’d go to prison for “attempted r**e”. The message of this video is that Chads have free access to women’s bodies, yet betas or incels do not enjoy the same entitlements. This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It implies that it is not the nature of the acts themselves that constitute sexual assault, but rather women’s reception, which is influenced by the attractiveness of the perpetrator. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"


My response to the above text: Chads aren't entitled to women, but they do get easy access to women. Entitlement is "I deserve it". Easy access is "I don't have to do anything, or much to get what I want". Unattractive men almost always have zero access to women, because they're unattractive. The acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Also, ugly and average looking incels aren't entitled to shit. They should looksmax like hell to deserve anything.


"This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"

My response to the above text: They think I'm encouraging rape culture and that sexual assault shouldn't be taken seriously. I didn't say explicitly or implicitly imply anything else besides the fact that the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Sexual assault and related crimes are serious but like the Amber Heard case proved, not always valid because some women may interpret something like a non-attractive man grabbing a woman's shoulder and accidentally touching her breasts in an attempt to save her from a speeding truck as sexual assault and get the man imprisoned.

Obviously, some dude just grabbing her and doing it while she's screaming stop is obviously and validly a violation and the perpetrator should be imprisoned.

"Rape culture and justification of sexual assault are further amplified within the comments. Here, women are portrayed as a homogenous group rather than as individuals and described as hypocritical, liars and promiscuous. It is suggested that women’s double standards and hypocrisy are most obvious when it comes to sexual advances—unattractive men are rejected and found ominous whereas the same type of behaviours are encouraged and desired by women from attractive men “The difference between creepy and sexy is how attractive you are
10610_2023_9559_Figc_HTML.png
”; “women dont get mad at advances, they are just selective on who is doing it”. Additionally, commenters debated the importance of consent. Whilst a small number of comments argued that sexual assault has serious repercussions, the consensus was that women’s claims of sexual assault or harassment are subjective. According to this, Chads can have their way with women and do not need consent from women to engage in sexual behaviours with them. Attractive men are therefore viewed as having ‘handsome privilege’ entitling them to women’s bodies and protecting them from repercussions “That’s called pretty privilege”; “Difference between flirting and assault is how attractive you are”. "


The notion of consent is used to support the trope of male victimhood, with commenters stating that unattractive men would be prosecuted for the same acts Chads/attractive men are entitled to “Wait what happened to the “Me Too” outrage? Oh that’s right… he’s HOT so never mind.”; “Just goes to show, it’s usually more about regret than consent….”; “If he was ugly it would be a felony”. The complicity of the criminal justice system is also implied by the commenters who claim that “Different rules depending on attractiveness” because “if she didn't think he was attractive he'd be in prison now”. Whilst women are the primary instigators, the law is also seen as skewed against men, suggesting we live in a gynocentric society, where rape charges, convictions and even life in prison are ascribed by women based on looks - “good looking pasts rape charges
10610_2023_9559_Figd_HTML.png
”. Thus, women are seen as taking advantage of a system biased against men, and therefore, women’s claims of sexual assault cannot or should not be taken seriously “This is why women can’t be taken seriously. It’s good for one but not the other. You want change? Try being consistent.”; ”If he was ugly it’s sex assault and he would be classified as creepy that’s why women are sick”.


My response to the above text: Men aren't victims, some of these guys are ugly and deserve their treatment. If a blackpiller has a victim mentality, I guarantee you, it's towards themselves (their genetics, their face, their height, phenotype, etc.) as blackpill is a self-critical ideology, unlike redpill which is a mostly environment-critical ideology. The rest of the sexual assaunt stuff is merely a continuation of her reasoning. I gave my input on that reasoning a while back.

Just letting you know guys, I'm only critiquing what I see as very necessary, of course, she's right about some of this stuff but she's wrong on others, since it's hard to understand someone's POV from an outsider's perspective.

The video content, along with the accompanying comments, contribute to the proliferation and normalisation of the fallacious belief that women derive pleasure from sexual assault. Furthermore, it portrays women as utilising allegations of sexual assault as a means to pursue legal action and discriminate against men deemed less desirable, taking advantage of the inherent biases within the criminal justice system. Consequently, these narratives not only reinforce the notion of male victimhood but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault.

No Way Wtf GIF by Harlem


My response to the above text: We don't hate women, want to sexually assault them, or rape them. We are very prone to hating ourselves for not being attractive enough for women. Women have the right to weed us out of the dating market if we're not good enough. Your line of reasoning starts from the axiom that blackpillers hate women and blame external factors and that we should harm women for what they have done to us. If this line of reasoning was valid, we wouldn't be seeming body dysmorphia and self hating all across blackpill communities and @Schery6 wouldn't have killed himself for "being too ugly to be alive"



"...but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault."

My response to the above text: She must think I'm an angry redpill roach lol.

"Many videos within our sample (especially the Account1 videos) relied on emotion-based arguments to further the idea that unattractive men are discriminated against based on their looks, whilst women are entitled and privileged."

My response to the above text: She is very solid on the first point, but the second point, the women are priviliged is false in the sense that she misinterpreted what the message of that video was. She's focusing on the women, I'm focusing on the belittlement of the retarded men who thought learning pickup skills and daygame, displaying their abhorrently funny daygame is ok for their ugly or short selves lol. That woman should reject him, it's obvious and the right thing to do.

"Commenters trivialised sexual violence by claiming that women incite and deserve to be subjected to such acts, demonstrating the pervasiveness of a ‘non-consent’ rhetoric and the embracement of rape culture (Powell & Sugiura, 2018), linking blackpilled beliefs with normalised sexual violence (Kelly, 1987). This is conducive of what Jane (2017) terms as ‘Rapeglish,’ discourse portraying women as promiscuous and deserving of non-consensual sexual acts, often issued via rape threats. However, the language employed on TikTok can be understood as borderline (GIFCT, 2022), in the sense that it was sufficiently implicit to escape content moderation, yet apparent enough to be harmful and perpetuate rape culture."

Steve Harvey Reaction GIF
Nick Young Wtf GIF


Jesus.

As I said, the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.


My overall response:

The purpose of my TikTok Account was to
use sensational, brutal, drastic, attention-grabbing, ego-destroying, and extremely emotional examples of lookism to convince those hard headed bluepillers, pickup artists, redpillers and the everyday male that looks determine your dating life as a man. Nothing more, nothing less.

The conclusions made are founded upon false axioms, such as the blackpill ideology is a female-hating ideology, blackpillers want retribution for their mistreatment or lack of dating options, and mixing blackpill and redpill rhetoric together.

Remember that it's redpillers solely that are converting to Islam, and we know how the West sees Muslim's treatment of women.

Now if this was an analysis on the redpill, it would actually be much more (although not completely) accurate.
Also, we love using hyperbolic language because blackpilled toxic humor is funny 🤣 We love "brutal" humor.

Also, the blackpilled videos we post here or on social media is not to show men that "you're oppressed, see!! you should probably hurt and do heinous things to women for oppressing you". You'd be so far off the mark thinking like this.

The message is "hahahahahaha you're less than (especially to women) if you're deficient in this area, and you should do something to escape it so women and people treat you the way you want to be treated." or even "hahah i am worshipped/treated nicely/treated like a person for having this trait and you don't, so you're subhuman" or even "hahah you're ugly, you're short, can't you see how important is it to be tall and handsome if you want women to love you hahaha" aka toxic humor




Anda solea i know your reading this bitch! Fuck you! We looksmaxxers hate women! Fuck you bitch! 😡😡🤬🤬
 
Anda solea i am your biggest fan can u sit on my face
 
1701040969188

:p
 
  • JFL
Reactions: BrendioEEE
The link can be found here:

Solea, A.I., Sugiura, L. Mainstreaming the Blackpill: Understanding the Incel Community on TikTok. Eur J Crim Policy Res 29, 311–336 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-023-09559-5

The only author who left her email is Anda Iulia Solea from School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Portsmouth in the United Kingdom.
If you'd like to contact her, please email her at Anda.Solea@port.ac.uk.

If you're retarded enough to diss her or say anything rude to her, that's not necessary. She's doing what she believes is her job and you can help her understand us better by briefly correcting any false assumptions, as I plan on doing with her critique of my viral Tiktoks.

I find this article to be very interesting (because she critiqued it) and funny (in the sense that our stuff made it here lol).
Here are some snippets.

Here is her response

Abstract

"Incels (involuntary celibates), a subgroup of the so called ‘manosphere,’ have become an increasing security concern for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners following their association with several violent attacks. Once mostly contained on niche men’s forums, redpilled and blackpilled communities and theories are gaining prominence on mainstream social media platforms. However, whilst previous research considerably enhanced our understanding of the incel phenomenon and their presence on Reddit and secluded incel forums, incel’s presence on mainstream social media platforms is understudied and their presence on TikTok is yet to be addressed. The present paper examines the incel subculture on TikTok, through an analysis of incel accounts, videos and their respective comments, to understand the role mainstream social media platforms play in the ‘normiefication’ and normalisation of incel ideology and discourse. The findings suggest that on TikTok the expression of incel ideology takes a covert form, employing emotional appeals and pseudo-science to disseminate common incelosphere tropes. Further, we demonstrate how the process of mainstreaming incel beliefs is facilitated by their interconnectedness with wider sexism and structural misogyny. The harms generating from this association are conducive to the normalisation of blackpill beliefs and the reinforcement of misogyny, sexism and justification of rape culture."

As I read the article, I quickly came to see that the authors don't really know where to draw the line between blackpill and redpill, neither do they really understand them fully. This doesn't surprise me since it's hard to understand phenomena from an outsider's perspective.

The focus of the critiques below are solely on correcting perceptual mistakes about my content's message on TikTok and perceptual mistakes about the blackpill. Also, when I say "we" I mean (the vast majority of blackpillers).

It would have been better if she tried to understand the perspective of a blackpiller before saying anything to maximize accuracy.

She also doesn't realize that most blackpillers are self-hating, self-loathing people who are desperate to look better, moderate/indifferent on feminism, love toxic humor, insecure and see looksmaxing as salvation to their self-hate and lackluster social and dating life. If anything, we congratulate women for the sexual liberation movement so now they won't breed with mediocre men and create pathetic short and ugly incels that get bullied at school. Most users here also support gender equality and probably have suicidal thoughts because they're ugly, short, wrong phenotype, etc.

Most people on here aren't misogynistic, some are but most just hate themselves for not being good enough for women. Sounds familiar? Teenage women!

They also have to realize there is a minority of mentally ill (as in neurotic, angry, and psychologically disturbed) people here who say heinous things that even we disagree with, so discard their opinions, they're minority and foolish opinions.

Blackpillers may have different beliefs on things but some of the things we all agree on is.
  • Looks are primary in dating and in generating attraction and plays an important role in maintaining attraction. Other factors only matter after you've passed the looks test, and the importance of these factors are almost always inferior to the importance of looks (unless you're noticeably neurodivergent)
  • Women aren't entitled or evil, you're just ugly and they want nothing to do with you sexually and romantically.
  • Women want to date men they find attractive and they treat them very well, even to the degree of literal worship.
Blackpill is focused on the proposition that you (and your aesthetic inadequacies) are the problem, not women. That's why a fair amount of people here hate themselves.

As a former redpiller, redpillers believe that things like
  • Confidence
  • Money
  • Status
  • Being assertive, and "asserting yourself the right way"
  • Masculine behavior
  • Game, Charisma and Pickup Skills
...are of most importance and that looks are secondary or even irrelevant.

Redpill is very focused on the proposition that feminism and modern women have corrupted the dating market and have created degenerate women and creating very unequal dating markets - that proposition composites the majority of the problem and their inadequacies are a minority (they do acknowledge this).

These guys are the anti-feminists, believe that women are entitled and that feminism has ruined the dating market and through those things listed above, you'll survive the shit show. They have an elevated but not certain or high possibly (I wasn't) a male supremacist. They are the ones that want to go back to "muh traditional dating market". They are the ones who either misogynists or mistrustful of women (I didn't hate women but was mistrustful when I used to be a redpiller)

These guys think feminism & modern women are the problem, more than they are.

This is very important. This "modern women are the problem" thinking has the slim chance of leading to events like the shooting Elliot Rodger committed. Blackpill's "your lack of physical attractiveness are the problem" thinking on the other hand, wouldn't cause you to exterminating others, it would make you prone to exterminating yourself because you're too ugly to be alive, and the treatment you get isn't worth enduring if looksmaxing can't save you.

Watch Fresh & Fit, Donovan Sharpe, and Alpha Male Strategies on YouTube if you want to understand the redpill better.

"Alpha male strategies", "High value man"
Cracking Up Lol GIF by HULU

Go looksmax, you dumb redpill roach.

Any "blackpiller" that believes in any redpill-pickup artist or bluepill rhetoric are immediately mocked on this forum.

🔴 "Just be confident bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴"Just say this magically scientifically proven line and she'll get wet bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔵 "Just buy her gifts even though she's not attracted to you bro! She'll see how valuable you are then bro!" - That's called simping and it doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴 "Just be rich bro"- Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you, and you're now just a gold digging oppurtunity.
🔴 "Just have status bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you. Average woman doesn't craves Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk because they are famous.
🔵"Just be funny bro" - She'll love spending time with you because you're funny, not because she's attracted to you (she isn't attracted to you). Speaking from direct experience.
🔵 "Just have a great personality bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.

If you're curious about the strategy of the three dating philosophies strategies to get women, here they are.

Bluepill strategy - being nice, respectful, female-worshipping and being simpish generates attraction.

Of course, it's important to be nice and respectful, but if not paired with physical attractiveness, it's useless. It's like dividing a number by zero.

View attachment 2553323
View attachment 2553379

Redpill-PUA strategy - Use your elite game, and other insignificant factors and get women.



Blackpill strategy - Looksmax and become attractive, and the women will come.
View attachment 2553330

View attachment 2553332
View attachment 2553333
All of those gestures she asked him to do was to verify that he was a real person

View attachment 2553338
She'll wear anything this guy tells her, I wonder why?

View attachment 2553346
She's mad that Chad didn't kiss her. Unlike my most viral video, the recipient wasn't interested, therefore it's a form of sexual-romantic assault.

View attachment 2553380
notice who she's staring at

View attachment 2553382


Sadly, they are correct about the fact that few mentally ill people here think rape is ok, but that's (mostly) old and was a small minority of users who aren't really active anymore. That belief is held by so few people here. It's not a widespread belief.

There's so much to say because the whole scientific article is almost 100,000 characters (very large)
Anyways, I own a TikTok account called lookism.tiktok and they cited it in their article boyos holy shit!
Here it is if you want to see it: https://www.tiktok.com/@lookism.tiktok

Anyways, here's my critique of their critique of my TikToks.


" The Stylistic Framing of Incel Content on TikTok​

Whilst both TikTok accounts were chosen because they espoused blackpill and incel ideology, the two accounts differ in the stylistic presentation of this ideology. The name of the first TikTok account (Lookism.tiktok) demonstrates the focus on the issue of lookism, stating in the account’s description:

Looks determine your dating life as a man. Fuck the redpill 🔴& the bluepill 🔵

Account1 videos include repurposed and collated viral internet videos and pictures to demonstrate women’s lookist nature. The account creator provides little explanations in his videos, no narration, and relies on sensationalised titles and brief overlay text commentaries to make his point (see Fig. 1)."

Lookism and the Unjust Sexual Market​

Account1’s video content is unsurprisingly focused on lookism. Women are depicted as preferring men with traditional masculine characteristics, with handsome facial features and height above 6 ft. For example, in Video3 a typical pick-up artist meeting is depicted where a male dating guru presents an ‘unattractive’ man to an ‘attractive’ woman asking her if from a ‘feminine perspective’ she would be sexually attracted to this man. The woman instantly rejects the man. The overlay text argues “The real problem here is that he’s unattractive and she is repulsed by his presence....” The hyperbolic choice of language for (mis)interpreting the woman’s reaction as ‘repulsed’ at the man’s mere presence is aimed at inducing a negative emotional reaction from the viewers. Subsequently, the message of this video and several videos on this account is not just exposing women’s lookist nature but also their ‘cruel rejection’ methods and propensity to humiliate men that do not fit hegemonic masculinity standards. It is also noteworthy that the emphasis is on women's ‘cruel rejection,’ and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility.

My response to the above text: Yes, I did use hyperbolic language but I didn't misinterpret it, she literally said he isn't attractive.
Also, the purpose of that video is to mock the man for being ugly, hense "repulsive". She has the right to reject such a pathetic male. We not only laugh but encourage it since such a pickup retard should know that looks determine your dating life as a man. My account description perfectly describes the message of my account. The focus is absolutely on the humiliation of the pickup artist (autist). The goal was not in any way to absolve responsibility on the men, I need men to not only notice my account's message but inspire them through fostering insecurity to do something about it (responsibility). That fatass who fell for the PUA scam should looksmax or give up on dating.

When the blackpill was forming, there was a website called puahate.com, PUA stands for pickup artist. We PUA's are dumb, maybe dislike or even hate these guys for falsely making others believe that "just say the magic line and it won't matter what you look like bro" nonsense. I used to fall for that.

View attachment 2553299

"...and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility."

My response to the above text: In no way are we going to save a PUA or try to make a PUA free from responsibility :ROFLMAO:


"This was reflected within the comments sections, where debates around attractiveness and lookism represented the most frequently discussed theme. The commenters claimed women solely desire men that are traditionally good looking (i.e., attractive face/body) and tall. A recurrent argument was that men need to conform to women’s strict aesthetic standards to qualify for sex and relationships “it all basically comes down to how good you look”; “Step 1: be attractive Step 2: don’t be unattractive”. Height was also a deciding factor in men’s sexual or romantic success, with women portrayed as despising short men to the extent of regarding them as non-existent- “Short guys literally don’t exist to the average woman. it’s sad”; “How sad they shamed and laughed at a man that can’t control his height, this still goes on to this day and they say men are the toxic ones”.

My response to the above text: They nailed it. This is "looks theory" or that looks are the primary factor when it comes to dating. You don't even have to be Chad necessarily, all that matters is that you're considered good-looking to women around you or to the woman you want, and if not, it's over. Of course, the "strict" dating standards is an extreme point of view I had at the time. Of course, looks theory is very real, but the strictness depends. Some individuals believe in higher strictness, or lower strictness, some believe it depends on the woman, environment, context, or a combination of these, but they got this right.

I'd personally disagree with this comment a user left on the TikTok: "...and they say men are the toxic ones”. Everyone assesses people based on appearance and it's not just men, it sounds like the user who wrote that thinks men do it more than women.

Women’s lookist nature is further framed within the videos as being conducive to a constant ritual of men's humiliation. This is evident in several Account1 videos. For example, one video showcases a woman on an online meeting shouting “You are ugly as fuck” to the man on the other end of the call; another video presents a woman verbally abusing a police officer because he was short “Why did the police let this short man join? Who the fuck is he gonna hurt? Look at this munchkin, look at this baby ass bitch”; and a third video of a man recounting his experiences with online dating stating that he was told he should kill himself because he is short “Why is it ok for women to say—Oh you are 5 ft on a dating site? You should be dead!—that’s ok?”. According to these, the habitual rejection and humiliation leads men to feeling dehumanised as suggested by a video with an insect staring at a wall over which sad music is played—the caption reads “Non-chads after realizing only team tinder wants to date them…”. The insect represents unattractive men, or ‘non-chads’, who come to the realisation that women will never be interested in them and they will be forever dateless and celibate, demonstrating the hopeless perpetuity of the incel condition."

My response to the above text:
I love watching those videos, the brutality of the situation faced by those guys :lul: Love watching ugly men get savagely rejected by women, especially redpillers and pickup artists. Funniest stuff ever!

"Account1 further builds upon the notion of women’s privileged status, arguing that it is not just women’s entitlement that is problematic but also women’s nefarious and hypocritical nature. This is ‘evidenced’ by women’s supposed preference and idolisation of ‘bad’, abusive and even ‘criminal’ men, chosen at the detriment of ‘nice guys’ with less appealing physical characteristics. An example of this is Video2 titled “Watch what it takes to get girls as a short guy!” which presents a short man on a dating competition show getting repeatedly rejected by all the women candidates. When questioned as to what it would take to pick the short man, the women stated they would only pick him if the other four candidates were convicted murderers. An overlay text appears on the screen informing the viewers that “Even now they are lying. They would rather be with a tall murderer Chad than a manlet”. According to this video, women’s immorality and lookist nature are so pervasive that they would prefer a good-looking murderer to a decent short man, but women are hypocritical and would never admit to this ‘fact’. This is expanded by clips showcasing ‘hybristophilia’ (2023)—women’s sexual attraction to mass murderers, violent criminals, rapists and even paedophiles. For example, two videos depict the adoration women have for Ted Bundy and Jeremy Meeks, two infamous and attractive convicted criminals. The text overlay on the Ted Bundy video states “Chad can get hoards of women despite being a rapist and a murderer”.

My response to the above text: We don't believe women are entitled, nefarious, hypocritical and problematic. That's a redpill belief. Don't get it mixed up with the blackpill. I believe Stew's height is problematic and worthy of ridicule, very worthy 🤣🤣🤣

Also, I didn't say or imply that women like criminals, of course this is my fault for not being clear but what I was saying is women will usually rank looks as more important even if the attractive male has a criminal record. A criminal record can (not always) be excused if he's hot enough.

"Women’s preference for abusive attractive men at the detriment of unattractive betas or incels is further implied in the most viewed video on Account1 (video1). In this clip, a woman is approached and kissed without consent by a young man characterised as a Chad, which the woman says she is happy with. The video then switches to a second clip in which a group of armed police agents break down a door and enter an apartment. The text added above this video reads “Meanwhile… You’d go to prison for “attempted r**e”. The message of this video is that Chads have free access to women’s bodies, yet betas or incels do not enjoy the same entitlements. This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It implies that it is not the nature of the acts themselves that constitute sexual assault, but rather women’s reception, which is influenced by the attractiveness of the perpetrator. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"


My response to the above text: Chads aren't entitled to women, but they do get easy access to women. Entitlement is "I deserve it". Easy access is "I don't have to do anything, or much to get what I want". Unattractive men almost always have zero access to women, because they're unattractive. The acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Also, ugly and average looking incels aren't entitled to shit. They should looksmax like hell to deserve anything.


"This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"

My response to the above text: They think I'm encouraging rape culture and that sexual assault shouldn't be taken seriously. I didn't say explicitly or implicitly imply anything else besides the fact that the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Sexual assault and related crimes are serious but like the Amber Heard case proved, not always valid because some women may interpret something like a non-attractive man grabbing a woman's shoulder and accidentally touching her breasts in an attempt to save her from a speeding truck as sexual assault and get the man imprisoned.

Obviously, some dude just grabbing her and doing it while she's screaming stop is obviously and validly a violation and the perpetrator should be imprisoned.

"Rape culture and justification of sexual assault are further amplified within the comments. Here, women are portrayed as a homogenous group rather than as individuals and described as hypocritical, liars and promiscuous. It is suggested that women’s double standards and hypocrisy are most obvious when it comes to sexual advances—unattractive men are rejected and found ominous whereas the same type of behaviours are encouraged and desired by women from attractive men “The difference between creepy and sexy is how attractive you are
10610_2023_9559_Figc_HTML.png
”; “women dont get mad at advances, they are just selective on who is doing it”. Additionally, commenters debated the importance of consent. Whilst a small number of comments argued that sexual assault has serious repercussions, the consensus was that women’s claims of sexual assault or harassment are subjective. According to this, Chads can have their way with women and do not need consent from women to engage in sexual behaviours with them. Attractive men are therefore viewed as having ‘handsome privilege’ entitling them to women’s bodies and protecting them from repercussions “That’s called pretty privilege”; “Difference between flirting and assault is how attractive you are”. "


The notion of consent is used to support the trope of male victimhood, with commenters stating that unattractive men would be prosecuted for the same acts Chads/attractive men are entitled to “Wait what happened to the “Me Too” outrage? Oh that’s right… he’s HOT so never mind.”; “Just goes to show, it’s usually more about regret than consent….”; “If he was ugly it would be a felony”. The complicity of the criminal justice system is also implied by the commenters who claim that “Different rules depending on attractiveness” because “if she didn't think he was attractive he'd be in prison now”. Whilst women are the primary instigators, the law is also seen as skewed against men, suggesting we live in a gynocentric society, where rape charges, convictions and even life in prison are ascribed by women based on looks - “good looking pasts rape charges
10610_2023_9559_Figd_HTML.png
”. Thus, women are seen as taking advantage of a system biased against men, and therefore, women’s claims of sexual assault cannot or should not be taken seriously “This is why women can’t be taken seriously. It’s good for one but not the other. You want change? Try being consistent.”; ”If he was ugly it’s sex assault and he would be classified as creepy that’s why women are sick”.


My response to the above text: Men aren't victims, some of these guys are ugly and deserve their treatment. If a blackpiller has a victim mentality, I guarantee you, it's towards themselves (their genetics, their face, their height, phenotype, etc.) as blackpill is a self-critical ideology, unlike redpill which is a mostly environment-critical ideology. The rest of the sexual assaunt stuff is merely a continuation of her reasoning. I gave my input on that reasoning a while back.

Just letting you know guys, I'm only critiquing what I see as very necessary, of course, she's right about some of this stuff but she's wrong on others, since it's hard to understand someone's POV from an outsider's perspective.

The video content, along with the accompanying comments, contribute to the proliferation and normalisation of the fallacious belief that women derive pleasure from sexual assault. Furthermore, it portrays women as utilising allegations of sexual assault as a means to pursue legal action and discriminate against men deemed less desirable, taking advantage of the inherent biases within the criminal justice system. Consequently, these narratives not only reinforce the notion of male victimhood but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault.

No Way Wtf GIF by Harlem


My response to the above text: We don't hate women, want to sexually assault them, or rape them. We are very prone to hating ourselves for not being attractive enough for women. Women have the right to weed us out of the dating market if we're not good enough. Your line of reasoning starts from the axiom that blackpillers hate women and blame external factors and that we should harm women for what they have done to us. If this line of reasoning was valid, we wouldn't be seeming body dysmorphia and self hating all across blackpill communities and @Schery6 wouldn't have killed himself for "being too ugly to be alive"



"...but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault."

My response to the above text: She must think I'm an angry redpill roach lol.

"Many videos within our sample (especially the Account1 videos) relied on emotion-based arguments to further the idea that unattractive men are discriminated against based on their looks, whilst women are entitled and privileged."

My response to the above text: She is very solid on the first point, but the second point, the women are priviliged is false in the sense that she misinterpreted what the message of that video was. She's focusing on the women, I'm focusing on the belittlement of the retarded men who thought learning pickup skills and daygame, displaying their abhorrently funny daygame is ok for their ugly or short selves lol. That woman should reject him, it's obvious and the right thing to do.

"Commenters trivialised sexual violence by claiming that women incite and deserve to be subjected to such acts, demonstrating the pervasiveness of a ‘non-consent’ rhetoric and the embracement of rape culture (Powell & Sugiura, 2018), linking blackpilled beliefs with normalised sexual violence (Kelly, 1987). This is conducive of what Jane (2017) terms as ‘Rapeglish,’ discourse portraying women as promiscuous and deserving of non-consensual sexual acts, often issued via rape threats. However, the language employed on TikTok can be understood as borderline (GIFCT, 2022), in the sense that it was sufficiently implicit to escape content moderation, yet apparent enough to be harmful and perpetuate rape culture."

Steve Harvey Reaction GIF
Nick Young Wtf GIF


Jesus.

As I said, the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.


My overall response:

The purpose of my TikTok Account was to
use sensational, brutal, drastic, attention-grabbing, ego-destroying, and extremely emotional examples of lookism to convince those hard headed bluepillers, pickup artists, redpillers and the everyday male that looks determine your dating life as a man. Nothing more, nothing less.

The conclusions made are founded upon false axioms, such as the blackpill ideology is a female-hating ideology, blackpillers want retribution for their mistreatment or lack of dating options, and mixing blackpill and redpill rhetoric together.

Remember that it's redpillers solely that are converting to Islam, and we know how the West sees Muslim's treatment of women.

Now if this was an analysis on the redpill, it would actually be much more (although not completely) accurate.
Also, we love using hyperbolic language because blackpilled toxic humor is funny 🤣 We love "brutal" humor.

Also, the blackpilled videos we post here or on social media is not to show men that "you're oppressed, see!! you should probably hurt and do heinous things to women for oppressing you". You'd be so far off the mark thinking like this.

The message is "hahahahahaha you're less than (especially to women) if you're deficient in this area, and you should do something to escape it so women and people treat you the way you want to be treated." or even "hahah i am worshipped/treated nicely/treated like a person for having this trait and you don't, so you're subhuman" or even "hahah you're ugly, you're short, can't you see how important is it to be tall and handsome if you want women to love you hahaha" aka toxic humor




ill stick to being rapist (im not)
 
The link can be found here:

Solea, A.I., Sugiura, L. Mainstreaming the Blackpill: Understanding the Incel Community on TikTok. Eur J Crim Policy Res 29, 311–336 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-023-09559-5

The only author who left her email is Anda Iulia Solea from School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Portsmouth in the United Kingdom.
If you'd like to contact her, please email her at Anda.Solea@port.ac.uk.

If you're retarded enough to diss her or say anything rude to her, that's not necessary. She's doing what she believes is her job and you can help her understand us better by briefly correcting any false assumptions, as I plan on doing with her critique of my viral Tiktoks.

I find this article to be very interesting (because she critiqued it) and funny (in the sense that our stuff made it here lol).
Here are some snippets.

Here is her response

Abstract

"Incels (involuntary celibates), a subgroup of the so called ‘manosphere,’ have become an increasing security concern for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners following their association with several violent attacks. Once mostly contained on niche men’s forums, redpilled and blackpilled communities and theories are gaining prominence on mainstream social media platforms. However, whilst previous research considerably enhanced our understanding of the incel phenomenon and their presence on Reddit and secluded incel forums, incel’s presence on mainstream social media platforms is understudied and their presence on TikTok is yet to be addressed. The present paper examines the incel subculture on TikTok, through an analysis of incel accounts, videos and their respective comments, to understand the role mainstream social media platforms play in the ‘normiefication’ and normalisation of incel ideology and discourse. The findings suggest that on TikTok the expression of incel ideology takes a covert form, employing emotional appeals and pseudo-science to disseminate common incelosphere tropes. Further, we demonstrate how the process of mainstreaming incel beliefs is facilitated by their interconnectedness with wider sexism and structural misogyny. The harms generating from this association are conducive to the normalisation of blackpill beliefs and the reinforcement of misogyny, sexism and justification of rape culture."

As I read the article, I quickly came to see that the authors don't really know where to draw the line between blackpill and redpill, neither do they really understand them fully. This doesn't surprise me since it's hard to understand phenomena from an outsider's perspective.

The focus of the critiques below are solely on correcting perceptual mistakes about my content's message on TikTok and perceptual mistakes about the blackpill. Also, when I say "we" I mean (the vast majority of blackpillers).

It would have been better if she tried to understand the perspective of a blackpiller before saying anything to maximize accuracy.

She also doesn't realize that most blackpillers are self-hating, self-loathing people who are desperate to look better, moderate/indifferent on feminism, love toxic humor, insecure and see looksmaxing as salvation to their self-hate and lackluster social and dating life. If anything, we congratulate women for the sexual liberation movement so now they won't breed with mediocre men and create pathetic short and ugly incels that get bullied at school. Most users here also support gender equality and probably have suicidal thoughts because they're ugly, short, wrong phenotype, etc.

Most people on here aren't misogynistic, some are but most just hate themselves for not being good enough for women. Sounds familiar? Teenage women!

They also have to realize there is a minority of mentally ill (as in neurotic, angry, and psychologically disturbed) people here who say heinous things that even we disagree with, so discard their opinions, they're minority and foolish opinions.

Blackpillers may have different beliefs on things but some of the things we all agree on is.
  • Looks are primary in dating and in generating attraction and plays an important role in maintaining attraction. Other factors only matter after you've passed the looks test, and the importance of these factors are almost always inferior to the importance of looks (unless you're noticeably neurodivergent)
  • Women aren't entitled or evil, you're just ugly and they want nothing to do with you sexually and romantically.
  • Women want to date men they find attractive and they treat them very well, even to the degree of literal worship.
Blackpill is focused on the proposition that you (and your aesthetic inadequacies) are the problem, not women. That's why a fair amount of people here hate themselves.

As a former redpiller, redpillers believe that things like
  • Confidence
  • Money
  • Status
  • Being assertive, and "asserting yourself the right way"
  • Masculine behavior
  • Game, Charisma and Pickup Skills
...are of most importance and that looks are secondary or even irrelevant.

Redpill is very focused on the proposition that feminism and modern women have corrupted the dating market and have created degenerate women and creating very unequal dating markets - that proposition composites the majority of the problem and their inadequacies are a minority (they do acknowledge this).

These guys are the anti-feminists, believe that women are entitled and that feminism has ruined the dating market and through those things listed above, you'll survive the shit show. They have an elevated but not certain or high possibly (I wasn't) a male supremacist. They are the ones that want to go back to "muh traditional dating market". They are the ones who either misogynists or mistrustful of women (I didn't hate women but was mistrustful when I used to be a redpiller)

These guys think feminism & modern women are the problem, more than they are.

This is very important. This "modern women are the problem" thinking has the slim chance of leading to events like the shooting Elliot Rodger committed. Blackpill's "your lack of physical attractiveness are the problem" thinking on the other hand, wouldn't cause you to exterminating others, it would make you prone to exterminating yourself because you're too ugly to be alive, and the treatment you get isn't worth enduring if looksmaxing can't save you.

Watch Fresh & Fit, Donovan Sharpe, and Alpha Male Strategies on YouTube if you want to understand the redpill better.

"Alpha male strategies", "High value man"
Cracking Up Lol GIF by HULU

Go looksmax, you dumb redpill roach.

Any "blackpiller" that believes in any redpill-pickup artist or bluepill rhetoric are immediately mocked on this forum.

🔴 "Just be confident bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴"Just say this magically scientifically proven line and she'll get wet bro!" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔵 "Just buy her gifts even though she's not attracted to you bro! She'll see how valuable you are then bro!" - That's called simping and it doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.
🔴 "Just be rich bro"- Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you, and you're now just a gold digging oppurtunity.
🔴 "Just have status bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you. Average woman doesn't craves Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk because they are famous.
🔵"Just be funny bro" - She'll love spending time with you because you're funny, not because she's attracted to you (she isn't attracted to you). Speaking from direct experience.
🔵 "Just have a great personality bro" - Doesn't matter if she's not physically attracted to you.

If you're curious about the strategy of the three dating philosophies strategies to get women, here they are.

Bluepill strategy - being nice, respectful, female-worshipping and being simpish generates attraction.

Of course, it's important to be nice and respectful, but if not paired with physical attractiveness, it's useless. It's like dividing a number by zero.

View attachment 2553323
View attachment 2553379

Redpill-PUA strategy - Use your elite game, and other insignificant factors and get women.



Blackpill strategy - Looksmax and become attractive, and the women will come.
View attachment 2553330

View attachment 2553332
View attachment 2553333
All of those gestures she asked him to do was to verify that he was a real person

View attachment 2553338
She'll wear anything this guy tells her, I wonder why?

View attachment 2553346
She's mad that Chad didn't kiss her. Unlike my most viral video, the recipient wasn't interested, therefore it's a form of sexual-romantic assault.

View attachment 2553380
notice who she's staring at

View attachment 2553382


Sadly, they are correct about the fact that few mentally ill people here think rape is ok, but that's (mostly) old and was a small minority of users who aren't really active anymore. That belief is held by so few people here. It's not a widespread belief.

There's so much to say because the whole scientific article is almost 100,000 characters (very large)
Anyways, I own a TikTok account called lookism.tiktok and they cited it in their article boyos holy shit!
Here it is if you want to see it: https://www.tiktok.com/@lookism.tiktok

Anyways, here's my critique of their critique of my TikToks.


" The Stylistic Framing of Incel Content on TikTok​

Whilst both TikTok accounts were chosen because they espoused blackpill and incel ideology, the two accounts differ in the stylistic presentation of this ideology. The name of the first TikTok account (Lookism.tiktok) demonstrates the focus on the issue of lookism, stating in the account’s description:

Looks determine your dating life as a man. Fuck the redpill 🔴& the bluepill 🔵

Account1 videos include repurposed and collated viral internet videos and pictures to demonstrate women’s lookist nature. The account creator provides little explanations in his videos, no narration, and relies on sensationalised titles and brief overlay text commentaries to make his point (see Fig. 1)."

Lookism and the Unjust Sexual Market​

Account1’s video content is unsurprisingly focused on lookism. Women are depicted as preferring men with traditional masculine characteristics, with handsome facial features and height above 6 ft. For example, in Video3 a typical pick-up artist meeting is depicted where a male dating guru presents an ‘unattractive’ man to an ‘attractive’ woman asking her if from a ‘feminine perspective’ she would be sexually attracted to this man. The woman instantly rejects the man. The overlay text argues “The real problem here is that he’s unattractive and she is repulsed by his presence....” The hyperbolic choice of language for (mis)interpreting the woman’s reaction as ‘repulsed’ at the man’s mere presence is aimed at inducing a negative emotional reaction from the viewers. Subsequently, the message of this video and several videos on this account is not just exposing women’s lookist nature but also their ‘cruel rejection’ methods and propensity to humiliate men that do not fit hegemonic masculinity standards. It is also noteworthy that the emphasis is on women's ‘cruel rejection,’ and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility.

My response to the above text: Yes, I did use hyperbolic language but I didn't misinterpret it, she literally said he isn't attractive.
Also, the purpose of that video is to mock the man for being ugly, hense "repulsive". She has the right to reject such a pathetic male. We not only laugh but encourage it since such a pickup retard should know that looks determine your dating life as a man. My account description perfectly describes the message of my account. The focus is absolutely on the humiliation of the pickup artist (autist). The goal was not in any way to absolve responsibility on the men, I need men to not only notice my account's message but inspire them through fostering insecurity to do something about it (responsibility). That fatass who fell for the PUA scam should looksmax or give up on dating.

When the blackpill was forming, there was a website called puahate.com, PUA stands for pickup artist. We PUA's are dumb, maybe dislike or even hate these guys for falsely making others believe that "just say the magic line and it won't matter what you look like bro" nonsense. I used to fall for that.

View attachment 2553299

"...and not the actions of the PUA who has orchestrated this ritual of humiliation. Therefore, both the rejected man and the man instigating this event are absolved of responsibility."

My response to the above text: In no way are we going to save a PUA or try to make a PUA free from responsibility :ROFLMAO:


"This was reflected within the comments sections, where debates around attractiveness and lookism represented the most frequently discussed theme. The commenters claimed women solely desire men that are traditionally good looking (i.e., attractive face/body) and tall. A recurrent argument was that men need to conform to women’s strict aesthetic standards to qualify for sex and relationships “it all basically comes down to how good you look”; “Step 1: be attractive Step 2: don’t be unattractive”. Height was also a deciding factor in men’s sexual or romantic success, with women portrayed as despising short men to the extent of regarding them as non-existent- “Short guys literally don’t exist to the average woman. it’s sad”; “How sad they shamed and laughed at a man that can’t control his height, this still goes on to this day and they say men are the toxic ones”.

My response to the above text: They nailed it. This is "looks theory" or that looks are the primary factor when it comes to dating. You don't even have to be Chad necessarily, all that matters is that you're considered good-looking to women around you or to the woman you want, and if not, it's over. Of course, the "strict" dating standards is an extreme point of view I had at the time. Of course, looks theory is very real, but the strictness depends. Some individuals believe in higher strictness, or lower strictness, some believe it depends on the woman, environment, context, or a combination of these, but they got this right.

I'd personally disagree with this comment a user left on the TikTok: "...and they say men are the toxic ones”. Everyone assesses people based on appearance and it's not just men, it sounds like the user who wrote that thinks men do it more than women.

Women’s lookist nature is further framed within the videos as being conducive to a constant ritual of men's humiliation. This is evident in several Account1 videos. For example, one video showcases a woman on an online meeting shouting “You are ugly as fuck” to the man on the other end of the call; another video presents a woman verbally abusing a police officer because he was short “Why did the police let this short man join? Who the fuck is he gonna hurt? Look at this munchkin, look at this baby ass bitch”; and a third video of a man recounting his experiences with online dating stating that he was told he should kill himself because he is short “Why is it ok for women to say—Oh you are 5 ft on a dating site? You should be dead!—that’s ok?”. According to these, the habitual rejection and humiliation leads men to feeling dehumanised as suggested by a video with an insect staring at a wall over which sad music is played—the caption reads “Non-chads after realizing only team tinder wants to date them…”. The insect represents unattractive men, or ‘non-chads’, who come to the realisation that women will never be interested in them and they will be forever dateless and celibate, demonstrating the hopeless perpetuity of the incel condition."

My response to the above text:
I love watching those videos, the brutality of the situation faced by those guys :lul: Love watching ugly men get savagely rejected by women, especially redpillers and pickup artists. Funniest stuff ever!

"Account1 further builds upon the notion of women’s privileged status, arguing that it is not just women’s entitlement that is problematic but also women’s nefarious and hypocritical nature. This is ‘evidenced’ by women’s supposed preference and idolisation of ‘bad’, abusive and even ‘criminal’ men, chosen at the detriment of ‘nice guys’ with less appealing physical characteristics. An example of this is Video2 titled “Watch what it takes to get girls as a short guy!” which presents a short man on a dating competition show getting repeatedly rejected by all the women candidates. When questioned as to what it would take to pick the short man, the women stated they would only pick him if the other four candidates were convicted murderers. An overlay text appears on the screen informing the viewers that “Even now they are lying. They would rather be with a tall murderer Chad than a manlet”. According to this video, women’s immorality and lookist nature are so pervasive that they would prefer a good-looking murderer to a decent short man, but women are hypocritical and would never admit to this ‘fact’. This is expanded by clips showcasing ‘hybristophilia’ (2023)—women’s sexual attraction to mass murderers, violent criminals, rapists and even paedophiles. For example, two videos depict the adoration women have for Ted Bundy and Jeremy Meeks, two infamous and attractive convicted criminals. The text overlay on the Ted Bundy video states “Chad can get hoards of women despite being a rapist and a murderer”.

My response to the above text: We don't believe women are entitled, nefarious, hypocritical and problematic. That's a redpill belief. Don't get it mixed up with the blackpill. I believe Stew's height is problematic and worthy of ridicule, very worthy 🤣🤣🤣

Also, I didn't say or imply that women like criminals, of course this is my fault for not being clear but what I was saying is women will usually rank looks as more important even if the attractive male has a criminal record. A criminal record can (not always) be excused if he's hot enough.

"Women’s preference for abusive attractive men at the detriment of unattractive betas or incels is further implied in the most viewed video on Account1 (video1). In this clip, a woman is approached and kissed without consent by a young man characterised as a Chad, which the woman says she is happy with. The video then switches to a second clip in which a group of armed police agents break down a door and enter an apartment. The text added above this video reads “Meanwhile… You’d go to prison for “attempted r**e”. The message of this video is that Chads have free access to women’s bodies, yet betas or incels do not enjoy the same entitlements. This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It implies that it is not the nature of the acts themselves that constitute sexual assault, but rather women’s reception, which is influenced by the attractiveness of the perpetrator. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"


My response to the above text: Chads aren't entitled to women, but they do get easy access to women. Entitlement is "I deserve it". Easy access is "I don't have to do anything, or much to get what I want". Unattractive men almost always have zero access to women, because they're unattractive. The acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Also, ugly and average looking incels aren't entitled to shit. They should looksmax like hell to deserve anything.


"This, according to the video, showcases women’s hypocrisy and challenges the notion that consent is needed when engaging in sexual acts. Furthermore, the harmful subtext of this popular video suggests that women's claims of sexual assault should not be taken seriously. It is therefore implied that women enjoy and even seek sexual assault or harassment when performed by attractive, Chad-type men, but reject, demonise and criminalise the same acts when enacted by unattractive men. This converges the concept of rape culture (Herman, 1989) with incel-specific beliefs as to women deserving and/or causing their physical or sexual abuse by Chad/alpha males. Whilst incels claim to despise and envy Chads (and their dominant sexuality), they also celebrate and glorify the same men when they engage in acts of physical or sexual violence towards women because they feel vicariously avenged through these acts (Tranchese & Sugiura, 2021)"

My response to the above text: They think I'm encouraging rape culture and that sexual assault shouldn't be taken seriously. I didn't say explicitly or implicitly imply anything else besides the fact that the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.

Sexual assault and related crimes are serious but like the Amber Heard case proved, not always valid because some women may interpret something like a non-attractive man grabbing a woman's shoulder and accidentally touching her breasts in an attempt to save her from a speeding truck as sexual assault and get the man imprisoned.

Obviously, some dude just grabbing her and doing it while she's screaming stop is obviously and validly a violation and the perpetrator should be imprisoned.

"Rape culture and justification of sexual assault are further amplified within the comments. Here, women are portrayed as a homogenous group rather than as individuals and described as hypocritical, liars and promiscuous. It is suggested that women’s double standards and hypocrisy are most obvious when it comes to sexual advances—unattractive men are rejected and found ominous whereas the same type of behaviours are encouraged and desired by women from attractive men “The difference between creepy and sexy is how attractive you are
10610_2023_9559_Figc_HTML.png
”; “women dont get mad at advances, they are just selective on who is doing it”. Additionally, commenters debated the importance of consent. Whilst a small number of comments argued that sexual assault has serious repercussions, the consensus was that women’s claims of sexual assault or harassment are subjective. According to this, Chads can have their way with women and do not need consent from women to engage in sexual behaviours with them. Attractive men are therefore viewed as having ‘handsome privilege’ entitling them to women’s bodies and protecting them from repercussions “That’s called pretty privilege”; “Difference between flirting and assault is how attractive you are”. "


The notion of consent is used to support the trope of male victimhood, with commenters stating that unattractive men would be prosecuted for the same acts Chads/attractive men are entitled to “Wait what happened to the “Me Too” outrage? Oh that’s right… he’s HOT so never mind.”; “Just goes to show, it’s usually more about regret than consent….”; “If he was ugly it would be a felony”. The complicity of the criminal justice system is also implied by the commenters who claim that “Different rules depending on attractiveness” because “if she didn't think he was attractive he'd be in prison now”. Whilst women are the primary instigators, the law is also seen as skewed against men, suggesting we live in a gynocentric society, where rape charges, convictions and even life in prison are ascribed by women based on looks - “good looking pasts rape charges
10610_2023_9559_Figd_HTML.png
”. Thus, women are seen as taking advantage of a system biased against men, and therefore, women’s claims of sexual assault cannot or should not be taken seriously “This is why women can’t be taken seriously. It’s good for one but not the other. You want change? Try being consistent.”; ”If he was ugly it’s sex assault and he would be classified as creepy that’s why women are sick”.


My response to the above text: Men aren't victims, some of these guys are ugly and deserve their treatment. If a blackpiller has a victim mentality, I guarantee you, it's towards themselves (their genetics, their face, their height, phenotype, etc.) as blackpill is a self-critical ideology, unlike redpill which is a mostly environment-critical ideology. The rest of the sexual assaunt stuff is merely a continuation of her reasoning. I gave my input on that reasoning a while back.

Just letting you know guys, I'm only critiquing what I see as very necessary, of course, she's right about some of this stuff but she's wrong on others, since it's hard to understand someone's POV from an outsider's perspective.

The video content, along with the accompanying comments, contribute to the proliferation and normalisation of the fallacious belief that women derive pleasure from sexual assault. Furthermore, it portrays women as utilising allegations of sexual assault as a means to pursue legal action and discriminate against men deemed less desirable, taking advantage of the inherent biases within the criminal justice system. Consequently, these narratives not only reinforce the notion of male victimhood but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault.

No Way Wtf GIF by Harlem


My response to the above text: We don't hate women, want to sexually assault them, or rape them. We are very prone to hating ourselves for not being attractive enough for women. Women have the right to weed us out of the dating market if we're not good enough. Your line of reasoning starts from the axiom that blackpillers hate women and blame external factors and that we should harm women for what they have done to us. If this line of reasoning was valid, we wouldn't be seeming body dysmorphia and self hating all across blackpill communities and @Schery6 wouldn't have killed himself for "being too ugly to be alive"



"...but also undermine the credibility of women and invalidate their lived experiences of sexual assault."

My response to the above text: She must think I'm an angry redpill roach lol.

"Many videos within our sample (especially the Account1 videos) relied on emotion-based arguments to further the idea that unattractive men are discriminated against based on their looks, whilst women are entitled and privileged."

My response to the above text: She is very solid on the first point, but the second point, the women are priviliged is false in the sense that she misinterpreted what the message of that video was. She's focusing on the women, I'm focusing on the belittlement of the retarded men who thought learning pickup skills and daygame, displaying their abhorrently funny daygame is ok for their ugly or short selves lol. That woman should reject him, it's obvious and the right thing to do.

"Commenters trivialised sexual violence by claiming that women incite and deserve to be subjected to such acts, demonstrating the pervasiveness of a ‘non-consent’ rhetoric and the embracement of rape culture (Powell & Sugiura, 2018), linking blackpilled beliefs with normalised sexual violence (Kelly, 1987). This is conducive of what Jane (2017) terms as ‘Rapeglish,’ discourse portraying women as promiscuous and deserving of non-consensual sexual acts, often issued via rape threats. However, the language employed on TikTok can be understood as borderline (GIFCT, 2022), in the sense that it was sufficiently implicit to escape content moderation, yet apparent enough to be harmful and perpetuate rape culture."

Steve Harvey Reaction GIF
Nick Young Wtf GIF


Jesus.

As I said, the acts that Chad committed, is ethicality is contextual to the woman, based on attractiveness and receptivity. What he did wasn't sexual assault to her, but an unexpected kiss by a hot stranger. It would only be considered sexual assault to her and others if she didn't find him attractive and she didn't like what happened. That's the only message.


My overall response:

The purpose of my TikTok Account was to
use sensational, brutal, drastic, attention-grabbing, ego-destroying, and extremely emotional examples of lookism to convince those hard headed bluepillers, pickup artists, redpillers and the everyday male that looks determine your dating life as a man. Nothing more, nothing less.

The conclusions made are founded upon false axioms, such as the blackpill ideology is a female-hating ideology, blackpillers want retribution for their mistreatment or lack of dating options, and mixing blackpill and redpill rhetoric together.

Remember that it's redpillers solely that are converting to Islam, and we know how the West sees Muslim's treatment of women.

Now if this was an analysis on the redpill, it would actually be much more (although not completely) accurate.
Also, we love using hyperbolic language because blackpilled toxic humor is funny 🤣 We love "brutal" humor.

Also, the blackpilled videos we post here or on social media is not to show men that "you're oppressed, see!! you should probably hurt and do heinous things to women for oppressing you". You'd be so far off the mark thinking like this.

The message is "hahahahahaha you're less than (especially to women) if you're deficient in this area, and you should do something to escape it so women and people treat you the way you want to be treated." or even "hahah i am worshipped/treated nicely/treated like a person for having this trait and you don't, so you're subhuman" or even "hahah you're ugly, you're short, can't you see how important is it to be tall and handsome if you want women to love you hahaha" aka toxic humor




She should write a paper on how Jewish-owned businesses are driving the youth to be sexless, unhealthy, and mentally-ill.

Backed by stats.
 
  • Love it
  • JFL
Reactions: Agendum and enchanted_elixir
Any "blackpiller" that believes in any redpill-pickup artist or bluepill rhetoric are immediately mocked on this forum.
Legit this, I don’t know how people don’t realise this jfl
 
  • +1
Reactions: enchanted_elixir

Similar threads

edodalic29
Replies
7
Views
122
|Daddy_Zygos|
|Daddy_Zygos|
lunin7
Replies
5
Views
151
IAMNOTANINCEL
IAMNOTANINCEL
lonelycurry
Replies
10
Views
125
lonelycurry
lonelycurry
M
Replies
22
Views
721
hytt
H
reptiles
Replies
8
Views
128
_MVP_
_MVP_

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top