I think your manifesto rotates around a flaw.

[Sustacel250]

The main flaw, which can be linked to all 5 of the points is that looks can be assessed and there is a parameter.

There is a branch of incel community who excessively focuses on looks and they have forums like "lookism". Their main perspective is accurate, they say looks is very important. Yeah they are correct. However, theyre 1 part of inceldom, the biggest probably, the youngest also.

Some incels are in the sciences fields, one of them was in the past participating in blackpill community. I know personally also a second who works at university who shares our perspectives on looks (works at AI recognition) and a third. The one im referring to is "paragon" and he has a blog: https://sirtyrionlannister.wordpress.com/

This guy is probably one of the most lookist-aware incels who also are adjacent to blackpill community, I would say he is the most extreme of all. I want you people to read message sent during December 9, 2019 at 2:50 pm here https://sirtyrionlannister.wordpress.co ... nd-absurd/

He details an algorithm he devised to pair people. I would post it cropped as image but its huge and the text would be illegible its better if you read his comment. This incel named "paragon" is one of the first blackpillers, the very first ones who were posting at omegavirgin revolt blog and he coined literally the term "blackpill" that later was used by the admincel of the platform. I wanted to show his message as proof of how much extreme he got over the years due to incelism.

In any case, not even this guy will tell you that looks is something you can determine with an interview and give a rating. Now, i know there are scammers online who will rate you and lookist incels pretend they know the science so well they can rate you. But its wrong, the science is utterly incomplete, "censored" (is not really censored, just disincentivized a bit), or there is not enough incentives to pursue evolutionary perspectives in this field so it just is not produced enough to the point we could in theory create an almost-objective system of measurement. The notion that "looks is everything" is also blatantly incorrect.

What your manifesto implies, is we establish a technocracy and we have a class of bureaucrats, which I assume will be selected among the loyal people and guys you deem as "expert". They will do subjective reviews of applicants who want 30k bucks or a state mandated girlfriend... its a mess. And "normies" would fund it, and its not based on income... Now I dont know if its a joke or a manifesto in a primitive stage about to be reviewed, in any case its a fair criticism what Im doing. Right now manifesto is what it is.

I think you need a meter, an establishment of a system of measurement. You need support of science, and science does not says that "looks is all what matters". To compare disability with lack of looks is a stretch, because one can be objective in determining disability. One cannot be objective in determining looks level. Plus, in most EU systems this is already covered. You dont have money for nosejob? State pays for it (if you need it for respiratory reasons). Healthcare exists outside of america, and people do get surgeries for incel-related reasons, but some times also for lookist reasons if you have a benevolent surgeon friend.

The closest approximation to a lookist incel approach like the one I see in the manifesto, would be the surgeon approach. The surgeon does and can assess this stuff "scientifically". The issue, again, is that some surgeons have ethics. I know in the lookist incel sphere they think all surgeons will "surgerymax" you and everyone of them has a price. This isnt true. Most surgeons will reject you. I know you can find with "word of mouth" some surgeon who is paying lookists to promote his services on incel forums. But that is illegal in many countries. Surgeons cannot promote themselves so they pay lookists to go online and foment discussion and glamorize surgery. And again, saying surgery can fix all your life problems is a big stretch. It may help you, it may even fix all life problems for some people. Its not what people who glamorize it online (sometimes payed to do so) make it seems.

So i dont think surgeons will want to rate people clinically to establish their "incel level" and see if they are eligible for whatever benefit you would like to achieve for incels. Since all 5 points realate to this central problem of measurement. I think therefore this is the biggest flaw. To summarize, the flaw is that this system of measurement simply does not exists. Depite best efforts of incels to understand human attractiveness, the system is not here. And it would be necessary for the ideology to function, just like gulag is necessary for the ideology of communism to function.

[Darth_aurelius]

The main flaw, which can be linked to all 5 of the points is that looks can be assessed and there is a parameter.

There is a branch of incel community who excessively focuses on looks and they have forums like "lookism". Their main perspective is accurate, they say looks is very important. Yeah they are correct. However, theyre 1 part of inceldom, the biggest probably, the youngest also.

Some incels are in the sciences fields, one of them was in the past participating in blackpill community. I know personally also a second who works at university who shares our perspectives on looks (works at AI recognition) and a third. The one im referring to is "paragon" and he has a blog: https://sirtyrionlannister.wordpress.com/

This guy is probably one of the most lookist-aware incels who also are adjacent to blackpill community, I would say he is the most extreme of all. I want you people to read message sent during December 9, 2019 at 2:50 pm here https://sirtyrionlannister.wordpress.co ... nd-absurd/

He details an algorithm he devised to pair people. I would post it cropped as image but its huge and the text would be illegible its better if you read his comment. This incel named "paragon" is one of the first blackpillers, the very first ones who were posting at omegavirgin revolt blog and he coined literally the term "blackpill" that later was used by the admincel of the platform. I wanted to show his message as proof of how much extreme he got over the years due to incelism.

In any case, not even this guy will tell you that looks is something you can determine with an interview and give a rating. Now, i know there are scammers online who will rate you and lookist incels pretend they know the science so well they can rate you. But its wrong, the science is utterly incomplete, "censored" (is not really censored, just disincentivized a bit), or there is not enough incentives to pursue evolutionary perspectives in this field so it just is not produced enough to the point we could in theory create an almost-objective system of measurement. The notion that "looks is everything" is also blatantly incorrect.

What your manifesto implies, is we establish a technocracy and we have a class of bureaucrats, which I assume will be selected among the loyal people and guys you deem as "expert". They will do subjective reviews of applicants who want 30k bucks or a state mandated girlfriend... its a mess. And "normies" would fund it, and its not based on income... Now I dont know if its a joke or a manifesto in a primitive stage about to be reviewed, in any case its a fair criticism what Im doing. Right now manifesto is what it is.

I think you need a meter, an establishment of a system of measurement. You need support of science, and science does not says that "looks is all what matters". To compare disability with lack of looks is a stretch, because one can be objective in determining disability. One cannot be objective in determining looks level. Plus, in most EU systems this is already covered. You dont have money for nosejob? State pays for it (if you need it for respiratory reasons). Healthcare exists outside of america, and people do get surgeries for incel-related reasons, but some times also for lookist reasons if you have a benevolent surgeon friend.

The closest approximation to a lookist incel approach like the one I see in the manifesto, would be the surgeon approach. The surgeon does and can assess this stuff "scientifically". The issue, again, is that some surgeons have ethics. I know in the lookist incel sphere they think all surgeons will "surgerymax" you and everyone of them has a price. This isnt true. Most surgeons will reject you. I know you can find with "word of mouth" some surgeon who is paying lookists to promote his services on incel forums. But that is illegal in many countries. Surgeons cannot promote themselves so they pay lookists to go online and foment discussion and glamorize surgery. And again, saying surgery can fix all your life problems is a big stretch. It may help you, it may even fix all life problems for some people. Its not what people who glamorize it online (sometimes payed to do so) make it seems.

So i dont think surgeons will want to rate people clinically to establish their "incel level" and see if they are eligible for whatever benefit you would like to achieve for incels. Since all 5 points realate to this central problem of measurement. I think therefore this is the biggest flaw. To summarize, the flaw is that this system of measurement simply does not exists. Depite best efforts of incels to understand human attractiveness, the system is not here. And it would be necessary for the ideology to function, just like gulag is necessary for the ideology of communism to function.

My response to all of this:

[Sustacel250]

My response to all of this:

hey my englando skills giga shits you will see how shit they are. I never speak english in my life.

In any case I told in the record that I have heard you saying, in a context where you explained a point about DEI diversity inclusivity. YOu said you see the problem of adjudication. Well, I think youre correct, as a lawyercel you know for sure its the problem. That is a part of my reply I think is less clear so I had to write it, or else I dont think my crappy broken englando is even comprehensible. It was fun to try to speak englando but it is really really hard for me.

Having said that, I get it. idealistic people set a goal, like "i want to go there". I heard a priest in a podcast saying that he dislikes usury, someone asked him "ok but how do we consider 1% interest rate is that usury". the priest replied that its not up to him to get into details, the principle mattered more: usury sucks. If that is your perspective, you think we have to focus on the core, the whole idea that incels have it shit in life, and care less of details, then is something I can understand.

But I dont think I was nitpicking or misrepresenting. I mean, you got this stuff I referenced in the manifesto, its not my imagination or dishonesty, its there.

[Sustacel250]

sustanon 250 is a steroid by the way

[Darth_aurelius]

My response to all of this:

hey my englando skills giga shits you will see how shit they are. I never speak english in my life.

In any case I told in the record that I have heard you saying, in a context where you explained a point about DEI diversity inclusivity. YOu said you see the problem of adjudication. Well, I think youre correct, as a lawyercel you know for sure its the problem. That is a part of my reply I think is less clear so I had to write it, or else I dont think my crappy broken englando is even comprehensible. It was fun to try to speak englando but it is really really hard for me.

Having said that, I get it. idealistic people set a goal, like "i want to go there". I heard a priest in a podcast saying that he dislikes usury, someone asked him "ok but how do we consider 1% interest rate is that usury". the priest replied that its not up to him to get into details, the principle mattered more: usury sucks. If that is your perspective, you think we have to focus on the core, the whole idea that incels have it shit in life, and care less of details, then is something I can understand.

But I dont think I was nitpicking or misrepresenting. I mean, you got this stuff I referenced in the manifesto, its not my imagination or dishonesty, its there.

My response is below:

[Sustacel250]

Hi sorry if I dont reply again with voice. Before I did it mostly to reciprocate same behavior. Its best for me to stick to text. In any case, I dont think we will agree. You explained yourself. I dont want to reiterate points I already said. You will probably build another argument and I dont want to go on. I think we can disagree and is fine.

I always presented same criticism to lookism incels. I think they focus on looks excessively. And many people reply to me, saying I deny their perspective. It isnt true. I embraced their perspective. I embraced lookism and it helped me and I dare say I consider it revolutionary. I never seen such a thing in my life and its the most truthful description of human mating I ever found. So it changed my life and for the better I think.

I was about to reply with some clever things to say, I will not do. Its pointless. I will say its great youre about to statusmax and workcel, have good luck. I think you look good. I mean, you got glasses but is evident youre tall and gymmaxed. Good job. I think you may be a bit hindered by your "looksmatch" ideal, just a bit. However, i think is positive, I think men should always have standards. And you pretend a woman that matches your effort, your looks, your preference. I approve it, I think men should always set a standard. You do it at your detriment as is evident. A concept you picked from lookism people is "looksmatch" but I interpret it positively, it means "having standards" which is cool, every man should do it.

You can avoid to reply, I already expressed myself more than abundantly