Quote# 141159

Maybe you want to side with women, because you think it gives you brownie points with them. Unfortunately, a woman is NEVER on a man's side. Simply put, they think totally different from men. Women have different brains. For a woman, a man is simply a means to an end. Maybe you are young, maybe you think you are special, and maybe you want to believe in them. Unfortunately, if a man's relationship ever conflicts with her self-interest, she will betray you too.


Now you say 'Not all women are like that', and maybe there is a bit of variation, but their nature is basically all the same. I honestly think it has to do with the XX chromosome. It's like none of them differentiate or expand into adulthood, like men do. It's almost like they contract instead. I'm not complaining about it. It's just evolutionary forces at work, and being childlike is actually advantageous if you are raising them. However, given the current framework, where relationships are based on love and equality, getting involved with them is a bad idea, because a man can sacrifice his whole life for her, only to find out that she didn't really love him, despite repeatedly saying so otherwise. You find out the whole thing was just an act.


You'd be surprised at how easy it is for a woman to move on from a relationship, completely cutting all contact off and never looking back, even if a man has invested his emotions or financial resources in her for years. Don't say I didn't warn you. You can feel like she took a part of you that you will never get back. This is the point at which men become bitter and indifferent to them.

bgates276, Future Timeline Forums 6 Comments [11/4/2018 1:35:42 PM]
Fundie Index: 8
Submitted By: Smilodon

Quote# 141128

I absolutely lost all sense of morality. The black pill makes morality ridiculous. Once you know that people get the utmost admiration, love and respect for their aesthetic appearance only, being a moral person just seems like enslaving yourself for society. You're moral and attempt to contribute, society benefits from it only to use all your contribution to chase the evolutionary motive of stronger, faster, bigger. You also learn of the insane discrepancy between what people do, want and like in their deepest fibres and what is best for society. It's a nihilism I haven't come close to encountering in any of the depressing existentialist books. Being blackpilled just makes you realize how even people like Dostoyevsky are deep down optimists who believe in a good humanity.

You start to realize everyone is deep down an asshole, that nothing has any sense whatsoever, that nothing is worth any effort because what you're giving effort for - society - is sick and disgusting.

You learn that 50% of the population lives insanely easy lives but their inherent subhumanity keeps them from coping even with their easy lives. That the entire society brainwashes you into thinking calculating and instinct driven people are the angels on earth bringing flowers and goodness, while they spent 80% of their free time on what's in the end not much more than attempting to be better natural selectors, trying to look as pretty as possible to convince Chad to fuck (impregnate them). Getting insecure over their body issues because Chad (good genes) might not want to reproduce with them. Getting jealous of other girls, fighting with them etc. Having hobbies that just amount to make up and exercise meant to improve attractiveness for Chad. (yoga, make-up, workout, animals). Living in a society where you're forced to worship the proxy of the devil is, indeed, hell on earth.

Being blackpilled is the end. There is no way back, you see too much, you realize too much and you start to understand there's nothing you can do. There is nothing to work for, nothing to live for etc. other than your own entertainment.

Personally I cope pretty well. I take society like an insanely difficult game I cannot win in, but I take pleasure in me becoming better and better at understanding how it works and changing my life to reflect my understanding. I have something to do for myself, at least.

yuyuyuyuu, r/Braincels 6 Comments [11/4/2018 1:13:13 PM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 141080

Anyone who tells you they hate incels because of "misogyny" is lying.

As a low-value male, people are disgusted by your very existence. Everything they do is an attempt to get you out of their mind.

Just look at ForeverAlone during its early days. Certainly a bluepilled sub by today's standards, but they were the punching bags of Reddit. No accusations of promoting violence, no quarantine, no shitty news articles blaming them all for a terrorist attack, but they were still insulted and considered an embarassment to Reddit anyway. People want you to shut up about your problems so they don't have to hear it, even if you aren't directly speaking to them.

And guess what happened when incels posted "rope threads"? You guessed it, a bunch of disingenuous normies who don't really give a shit about them, and would tell an incel to fuck off if he had ever approached them in real life. It lets the normie feel like he helped, thus allowing him to clear his conscience, but incels can see right through it after a lifetime of outright hostility.

People don't hate incels because of "misogyny". They hate incels because they remind people of the more uncomfortable truths of life- some people will just get screwed over because of factors they can't control, you can't guarantee getting anything you want just by trying over and over again. When confronted with a threat to the just world fallacy, they will do anything to try and get you to shut up and stop complaining.

And now that they have the long-sought-after opportunity to dismiss us all as evil rapist murderers, you can bet they're gonna take it.


21cell, r/Braincels 6 Comments [11/4/2018 11:43:02 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 141061

A Christian wife is commanded by God to submit to her husband as unto the Lord Jesus Christ, not only if he returns the gesture. Ephesians 5:22, “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.” Marriage is not a 50/50 proposition; but rather, a 100/100 commitment. You're supposed to give 100% diligence and effort, even if your spouse only returns 20% (or nothing). This is God's way! This is the holy way! This is second-mile Christianity, which is almost unheard of nowadays.

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Precious 9 Comments [11/4/2018 11:41:11 AM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 141141

I just made a fake dating profile with my actual face on a gay website, Holyshit

I got like 6 "Hey" in the first hour there. I had so many conversations at some point I had to ghost some dudes , I felt so bad for it but I imagine they also had tons of convos so it's cool. Some of those dudes were legit chadlites and still had an interest to meet up. Eventually I closed the whole thing because I am not gay even tho I wish I was.

Tbh it felt so good at first, to know that I was an object of desire, but then it slowly started becoming bitterness and jealousy. I am jealous of females and what they experience in their dating lives, I am bitter that they can't empathize with heterosexual males and how horrible it feels to never be seen in a sexual way.

Females are the devil in the flesh, their sexual selection pushes societies towards more and more competition, everything ancient misogynist cultures say about women is true. God I hate them. Sure I am ugly but if gays don't mind going for me, why wouldn't women? It's women's fault, they are the one who are absurdly sexually selective, they are to blame for all the tension between genders today. They are guilty

bcat124, r/Braincels 12 Comments [11/3/2018 1:17:33 PM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 141132

Women have an inherent and built-in creep detector. They call it the "creepy vibes" and we have no reason to doubt the existence of something so many women are reporting of having. But it's directed at ugly and feminine men because her entire body fears being impregnated by low quality genes. Hence she only fears and suspects ugly, disgusting men of being rapists or assaulters - it's with them that it matters, it's with them that her body gets the instinctual reaction to avoid them. Those give her the creepy vibes. It's a primal, instinctual thing.

A dominant, rapey, macho man is not a problem whatsoever if he is good looking. On the contrary, her body's instinctual reaction is to let him impregnate her (i.e. have sex). The more pushy the attractive man is, the better. Because then her body is excitedly getting ready for sex, anticipating the impregnation and looking forward to it.

I unironically believe this is the explanation to the baffling behaviour of women.

yuyuyuyuu, r/Braincels 6 Comments [11/2/2018 12:28:57 PM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 141129

This post has one of the highest proportions of "legitimately serious possible triggers" to words I've seen: Count(triggers) / Count(words) hardly ever hits closer to 1 than this, so I'm not even going to try to list them; the "award" alone should give enough caution of what lies below. There are at least a couple things that cross over into other hotbeds of psychological traumatization, ones barely tangentially related to any form of child abuse or rape. I put what I thought were the worst parts in light grey, and I decreased the font size (partially for length and partially as a subtle, mild deterrent). If you decide to start reading this, and it starts fucking with you mentally, or even if you start wondering if what might come next will, then just stop. I should have. –shy

Court says ‘pedophilia does not apply’ — because perpetrator is a woman

Female pedophiles. She-monsters.

No such thing. Probably not. A woman can’t be a pedophile. Probably not. The clinical research is thin. Maybe the experts will change their mind, by and by. That happens a lot in the imprecise science of psychiatry.Although one expert’s mind was not changed by this:

A toddler sits at the woman’s feet, his small hands holding on to either leg. In this position, the woman — naked below the waist — masturbates using a baby bottle. The toddler, giggling, then grabs the bottle and drinks from it. The woman looks directly into the camera and smiles. That was one video seized by police from the Toronto home where the woman lived with her husband. On another video, the same woman is lying in bed with the same toddler. Both are naked. She begins to lick the child’s anus. Looking at the camera, she smacks her lips. A third video: The little boy is seated naked on a change table. The woman puts the child’s penis into her mouth. The child giggles.

In all, investigators discovered 25,066 child pornography images on more than 50 electronic devices when they executed a search warrant on April 25, 2016, including 111 child porn movies.

The couple is also shown engaging in BDSM (bondage/domination/sadism/masochism) activities with other couples. Police also found a contract signed by the “Slave” and her “Master,” an agreement containing rules and tasks to be completed by the woman as the submissive member in the relationship. They’d met through a website called “Bondage.com.” That’s who Jason Dickens and Dylan McEwen were, a man and woman joined in holy BDSM during a 2007 “collaring” ceremony — literally collaring — followed a year later by an ordinary wedding in front of family and friends.

Last week, Dickens, a former actor on Degrassi High, pleaded guilty to several child pornography offences, including two counts of making child porn, with an agreed statement of facts read into the record. Earlier this year, McEwen also pleaded guilty to sexual assault and two child pornography offences. She was sentenced to six years. But what the presiding judge would not do was declare McEwen a dangerous offender, which the Crown had sought and with impassioned urgency. In rejecting the long-term offender order, Justice Kathleen Caldwell weighed the various criteria that must be met, primarily a “substantial risk of reoffence.” Caldwell determined that McEwen wasn’t such a risk, relying heavily on the evidence and psychiatric report prepared by a forensic psychiatrist with expertise in paraphilia and sexual deviancy.

Dr. Mark Pearce was agreed upon as an expert witness by both the Crown and the defence when he testified in February. He diagnosed McEwen as a masochist and low-risk to reoffend [sic]. Caldwell accepted Pearce’s conclusion that McEwen derived sexual arousal not from acts committed against children but from the “extreme humiliation” of her involvement in those acts, which fed her masochism, described as on the moderately severe end.

The judge wrote (and read aloud in court): “Dr. Pearce testified that the current research suggests that women do not suffer from paraphilic disorders apart from masochism. This fact lends further weight to the conclusion that pedophilia does not apply to you.”

Crown Attorney Lisa Henderson, the judge noted, had “rigorously challenged” Pearce on this assertion.

“(I) agree that at first blush it appears illogical that women do not suffer from other paraphilic disorders,” Caldwell continued. “Sometimes, however, that which appears reasonable is anything but and vice versa. I accept the doctor’s evidence on this point. He did agree that this conclusion might change in the future as psychiatry continues to develop, but I cannot base my conclusions on speculative potential that have yet to develop.”

In this particular case, McEwen was her husband’s slave, committed to do his bidding. Court also heard, however, that McEwen had initiated at least one of the toddler videos without her “Master” present. And in at least two earlier instances, McEwen had obtained child pornography from two men she’d met online before she’d even met Dickens.

As for the risk-assessment testing, Caldwell acknowledged that such testing hasn’t been validated as being accurate in predicting risk with female, as opposed to male, sex offenders. They don’t really know what they’re talking about, the experts, because they haven’t looked at the phenomenon closely enough.

As an aside, at the Dickens trial, court heard that in 2003 a London-area woman offered him her 14-year-old daughter for sex after they’d connected online. Dickens took the teenager on a movie and date night, then had sex at the girl’s home while her mother sat beside them. Sex with teens and children had clearly been a feature of the couple’s role-playing, in their video commentary to one another, the child porn retrieved from their home and posters also discovered depicting female children, labelled with such descriptors as “15-year-old f--- slut” and “whore.”

In an interview this week with the Star, Pearce emphasized the scarcity of research literature on female sex offenders: “I’m not saying there’s no such thing as a female pedophile , but it is almost an exclusively male disorder. That’s not to say no woman has it. There may be some outliers. But women (sex offenders) usually offend for other reasons, not because of an innate sexual attraction to children. [...] These are damaged, needy, lonely women, not necessarily pedophiles.”

There was immense frustration at 720 Bay — in the attorney general’s office — over McEwen dodging the dangerous offender designation. But there will be no appeal.

Justice Kathleen Caldwell & Dr. Mark Pearce, The Star 9 Comments [11/2/2018 12:03:50 PM]
Fundie Index: 11