Why is blackpill science not recognised?

[incelposting]

Incels have conducted many hours of experiments studying the blackpill and female behaviour. Their findings are repeatable, accurate and reliable yet incel scientists are not recognised.
Why is this?

[Anonymous]

Go back to watching Star Trek in your mommy's basement.

[goaded]

Hey! Star Trek is cool!

[bimmy5000]

Ya don't bring star trek into thos!

[IIGrifterSixII]

well done sir

[MzAsh]

What a miserable existence you must have. JfC.

[englisc]

It's not recognised because a lot of the things incels say are way exaggerated.

First you guys seem to obsess over sites like Tinder. The thing with Tinder is that most people on there are absolute trash. Tinder isn't the same as the real life dating world for many reasons.

You guys also post a lot of things that should be obvious anyway. Put a tall, extremely good looking guy's photo on a site based almost entirely on choosing people based on photos, filled with dumb sluts and see how many slutty messages he gets. That's supposed to be some kind of revelation? People are supposed to be shocked by this?

It's also not taken seriously because many of the things mentioned are completely false. For example recently with the 80/20 and 99/1 rules you mentioned. The idea that women are only attracted to 20-1% of men. That just doesn't make sense. Are they more heavily attracted to a small number of very attractive men? Are those men gonna have more options than the average man? Of course. Does that mean that the rest of the men are completely unattractive to women? No, not at all.

It's also not taken seriously because normal people know from their own experiences that the things incels have to say about this stuff isn't true. If I remember correctly you mentioned before that you're unable to get laid because you're 5'7". Plenty of 5'7" guys get laid, and shorter guys too. I'm 5'4" and I've done fine too. According to most incels I should be doomed to be an incel, but I'm not.

It's not because you're 5'7". It seems like incels cling to these ideas because it's easier to blame height, money, looks etc. Things that in their minds they can't control, when the real issue usually has to do with the way they behave and think. Usually incels are socially awkward, shy, insecure. Rather than work on becoming more confident, bettering their social skills and succeeding, they look for reasons why they can't succeed. Excuses to not bother trying in the first place. That's all this really is, and it's mostly false.

[Optymistyk]

Many of the things incels say are true. I read up on this and the basic themes are correct if you ask me. I just don't agree they have no way of getting women, they simply gave up and try to argue they had no chance.

Yes, women have a basic threshold of Attractiveness a man must pass to be considered for sex. It can be hard to Reach that threshold but I believe it's possibile for a majority of men, especially since most guys don't take too much care of themselves

Yes, women will settle down for a less attractive less manly guy when they get older. Because they can't get anything better. If instead of making a victim out of yourself you took a hold of yourself and became a man she wouldn't have to settle for you, she would be glad she could be with you. But that's harder than checking Tinder statistics

Being a man is hard, period. You can either Play the victim or race to the top, your choice

[incelposting]

All you said is alpha fucks, beta b8cks.

Also it is impossible to reach the minimum attractiveness wanted by females, given the consider 80% of men below average (and they want far better than average), and that attractiveness is based on height, frame and face. All of which are based on bone structure.

[Optymistyk]

@incelposting 80% of men are "below average" because 80% of men don't take good care of themselves. I used to be like that.

Attractiveness is based on height, namely you should be taller than the girl. Is all, you don't have to be 1.9m tall. If a girl is 1.6 she doesn't care much if you're 1.7 or 1.8. but it becomes a problem if she has to look down on you

I have a slim frame. But I used to make it so much worse by having a bad posture. Again, noone requires you to have a frame of Dwayne Johnson, just have your upper torso somewhat wider than hips. If you don't that probably means you have posture problems. Try pulling your shoulders back and down and walking straight, also work out! I go working out at least 4 times weekly no matter what and I ve been doing that since I was 16

Do you have a morphed face? No? Then congratulations, your bone structure is fine. You can have all kinds of faces, doesn't matter, there is a male model with a face like that who gets laid. But he spends big money on keeping that face clean of imperfections and young-looking. I just dropped 80USD on a skincare kit and I'm using it 3 times daily, how about you? Do you have acne or blemishes on your face? That Has nothing to do with your bone structure

[Optymistyk]

@incelposting I have a wingman who is 21, 1.9m tall, Has long Black curly hair, Black dense stubble, square jaw etc, very good looking, but he's a virgin because he is fat, doesn't workout, could dress better, slouches and is a pussy in general. So no, it's not all about the bone structure

[incelposting]

Females demand at least 6' tall.
Also, nearly all of them want the top 1% of men. The rule used to be the top 20% of men but that has been revised recently

[bimmy5000]

Because it's not science, its garbage fueled by hate.

[incelposting]

That does nothing to disprove the litany of evidence I have presented.

[bimmy5000]

Its research based on hate. Simple as that.

[incelposting]

Doesn't make it less true

[tartaarsaus]

Just going on Tinder with fake profiles is not a reliable way to conduct research lmao

[incelposting]

It s an absolute demonstration that females care about looks only.
The fact this can be repeated easily with identical results, blackpill scientists have struck a breakthrough in analysing female behaviour.

[tartaarsaus]

No, it is not.

Without proper measures to ensure consistency and transparency and proper representation of the women, the results are inconsequential

[incelposting]

The results clearly show females love paedophiles and abusers

[tartaarsaus]

Someone can also ask some incels whether they would fuck a tortoise. If some of them say yes, then use that.

That does not mean that incels in general want to fuck tortoises nor that the results are in any way usable

[incelposting]

Results are replicable, consistent and accurate

[name_is_eric]

Because it's a psuedo-science, you pathetic vermin.

[incelposting]

Says the tradcuck nazi

[name_is_eric]

At least I'm not a degenerate incel, who cannot get laid even if he paid for it.
Being a NatSoc is good, being a vermin is not.

[Anonymous]

This is kinda sad and pathetic... I feel sorry for you

[bangyourhead]

Because incels are twats, not scientists

[incelposting]

Incels are some of the most brilliant, astute and capable minds of our generation.

[bangyourhead]

Really? How many are research scientists or CEOs? What's your job?

[incelposting]

As you can see many of them are blackpill research scientists

[bangyourhead]

That's not real science, silly.

[incelposting]

It clearly is

[bangyourhead]

It's theories. It's not peer reviewed, it's not published in academic papers. Its confirmation bias for losers.

[incelposting]

No, incel scientists are clearly not recognised due to their radical (and true) theories

[bangyourhead]

You're just full of shit. Go clean your room, get a better diet, and lift some weights.