Opinion on the "virgin loser" type of character archetype (an by extention, real people)?

[TAMAnnoying]

Pretty sure you don’t need to have kids in order to contribute to society. There are plenty of people who choose not to have children and can contribute in medicine, science, and social structures is contributing to society’s future. Hell, being a good person and actively participating in lifestyles that are better for the future of the world is really all you need to do. Having children isn’t really a default anymore especially when most people cannot afforded to take care of one. “Bare minimum” isn’t what I would say is “having kids”

[LT1986]

I"ve been kind of busy. Thanks for the responses. I'll try to read them one by one. When I say thank you, I really mean it even if we don't agree. Maybe I can learn something. I'm reading them right now. I'll try to respond soon.

[LT1986]

Thank you for responding to my post @AceRagz. I only have a few points to make in my response. Not all of the rules have to be broken. If you at least do one or two that is enough to increase a person's chances of having better success with women. You have admitted that you have broken some of the rules. I want to add two more things about rules that I didn't add earlier. These rules were given by parents, sisters, teachers, coaches, classmates, and celebrities. They do one thing in public and another thing in secret. I'm not saying that what they do in secret is bad. What is bad is that they led others to believe something that is not true. I don't have any issues with drinking, smoking, getting tattoos, etc. Again my only issue is making others believe one thing when other things are being done in secret.

It is easier to be outgoing, crack jokes, and be social if a person has a few things in common with the majority of society. Here's one example of what I mean by that. Let's take the Bible for instance. I'm not going to say if it is true or just another form of mythology, I'm using it as an example. Most Christians believe either a traditional doctrine, Israelite doctrine, or Jewish doctrine. I grew up following a Christian doctrine. I was able to bond with people. Then I temporarily followed the racist Israelite doctrine. I was wrong, but wasn't afraid to research it. Now I have beliefs that are different from anything that I have ever seen. I have two YouTube channels with what I believe is new understanding that no scholars, pastors, and theologians are presenting in churches and online. Now here's the main point. I've talked to well known people in the past about the Bible. Now that I don't follow the rules that other people follow, no one listens to me anymore. I'm not complaining. I just used this example to show that I could go back to being more social in this area if I would just give in to thinking like the majority of people.

If a guy is viewed as a successful man, he can start being someone of a revolutionary person. The key is getting to the point that people will respect you enough to be yourself, if you are different.

I agree with you on the fact that rushing someone to have sex is negative and that sex is important. My only issue is a statement like that being made to a struggling young man without letting him know how their life might turn out if they don't try to be the best at their strengths to compensate for the issue. I don't think lowly of the person, but others obviously do, as we both admit.

I'm responding to each post separately. I'm moving on to the next post. Thank you.

[AceRagz]

The point I was getting at is these "rules" are meaningless. Women smoke, cuss, get tattoos (in some cases even more than most guys), have wild hairstyles. Women are not some separate species that rejects men on the basis of a set of arbitrary rules. If someone seriously believes in that they have no real understanding of women at all.

I don't even want to get into religion. Oh boy that is a huge can of worms there. All I will say is that I don't talk about this often but I think religion can be damaging as much as it can help some people. To each their own, for me I'm an atheist.

As for struggling men they should reach out to someone they trust and talk to them.

[LT1986]

Thank you for replying @Maps. I think that we have differing definitions of the word good guy. I view good as following rules that are presented. I don't go off of what I feel, only what I see. Here's an example of what I mean. Here's the difference between a good driver and bad driver. One person ran a stop sign and another person didn't. Going by the rules, I would say that the person that ran the stop sign is a bad driver and the person that didn't run the stop sign is a good driver. Now if the person that ran the stop sign for no other reason than to break the rules gets rewarded for doing what publicly by rules is considered wrong, a problem has just occurred in my opinion.

Here's my thoughts on interacting with women without breaking the rules. Before I begin I do want to note what I stated in my previous post about rules. I have no issues with drinking, smoking, getting tattoos, etc. My only issue is one thing being done in public and another thing being done in secret. Let me address what I mean by secretly quickly. This is an example of secretly. A guy sees other guys being successful by doing certain things that are so-called breaking the rules, but a mother, sister, father, or someone else gaslights them by saying don't be like those guys. A lot of guys that are considered incels can have relationships with women. Before I begin the next example I want to say one thing, I'm not referring to the information that you shared with me. Here it goes. Incels can get women that are settling, unattractive, constantly cheating, using them for money, etc. They also can get the women that they desire if they work their hardest to compensate for their lack of social skills, etc and stop complaining. I believe that we all agree on that.

I agree that women can't just magically know how incels feel without the guys talking to them. I also agree that incels hold anger towards women that the women might not deserve. Now here's part of what I mentioned. You mentioned that women don't want guys to pander to them and be overly nice. That is what I mentioned in my post about rules. Incels were taught this. Incels need to stop complaining and fix the problems that society taught them. I agree.

Incels are jealous of alpha males and sexually active women that don't choose them. Incels do need to work on themselves. I agreed in my original post and I agree now.

To save time, I'm going to say one thing. I agree with you 100% on everything that you mentioned in your last paragraph.

Thank you. I going to read the next post now.

[LT1986]

Hey @Darth_Biomech. Thank you for responding. I don't really have much to say, but something that I said in a previous post earlier. I view good guys as guys that follow rules that are presented to them. They don't have to agree with the rules or like the rules, they just have to follow the rules. I gave a good driver and bad driver example earlier. Now here's something that I guess is a little different when it comes to what a nice guy is by my definition. If a guy does things that he was told to do to be a nice guy, I consider him a nice guy. It doesn't matter if he wants to do the things or not or agrees with them or not. His actions, not his feelings make him a nice guy.

Thank you. I'm moving on to the next comment.

[AceRagz]

They also can get the women that they desire if they work their hardest to compensate for their lack of social skills, etc and stop complaining. I believe that we all agree on that.

This right here I find to be far more damaging than anything else said prior. I'm sorry but just because someone desires a particular woman or even a type of woman doesn't mean its going to happen no matter how much work they put in. We all have to be realistic. If someone wants a super model does it mean if they put in a ton of work it will happen? No. There might be a slight chance it all works out I would say at the most optimistic.

Thinking that putting in hard work to get the woman of their desires is all it takes is a bad message. It comes down to being proactive yes but also there has to be chemistry too. Other words you have to both click with each other. That doesn't always happen.

[LT1986]

Hello @TAMAnnoying. I appreciate you for responding. You just admitting that the person needs to at least pleasure themselves and that the lack of sex can cause people to hurt themselves. I agree. Is this a true or false statement? In the medical field, psychology, etc., do the experts admit that there are somethings that they can't explain but agree to be true. There have been many cases of doctors, etc. not knowing about certain things. Correct me if I'm wrong. Do some expert/professional therapists not even know about certain forms of narcissism and some refuse to treat their patients a certain way because it hasn't been approved by their rules? I am not going to feel bad about a doctor that has researched a subject way more than me saying something that goes against what I believe by what I've seen in my life. This is not the first time that I've disagreed with experts. Sometimes I'm wrong and sometimes I'm right. I know that this is a different subject, but I need to use it as an analogy. I've proven pastors, theologians, scholars wrong about scriptures in the Bible before. Sometimes they have proven me wrong. Those things can be proven. I'm not saying if the scriptures are real or fake, I'm saying that the meaning can be proven.

I've said all that to say this. I'll take the l on this one, because I don't have the time, money, resources, and most importantly people that will tell the truth to prove it. Have a good day. I have to work on some other things, but I will try to return later.

P.S. I've briefly looked ahead at the post(s) about me not knowing about sex hormones, puberty, and similar stuff. I'll try to eventually get to it. I am not right about everything. I admit that. I also know that we all agree on some things. Our responses prove it. The sex hormones and puberty stuff is a little tricky. This is why I say this. I can't go into deep details about that here, because I might end up breaking some rule. Will anyone at least admit one thing about the topic? Here it is. Have you seen videos by incels and even alpha males that agree that there is a group of people that lie about their thoughts on sex?

[LordVincent]

Anytime i see words and terms like "alpha males", "the two sexes", "women are designed this way whereas men are designed that way" etc etc I'm just stuck here like

What about people who are gay, intersex, bi, trans, asexual, or simply have other fucking priorities in life?

I feel like "scientists" and "studies" that conclude procreation as the main purpose of life for all humans are intentionally ignoring heaps of information in order to arrive at a point that suits their view of what's important in life. Last time I checked, science was not supposed to be about picking whatever factual indications are convenient for you and just creating your own version of the truth.

Also incels are not nice guys, majority of people who claim to be nice guys aren't actually nice. And even if they are, that doesn't entitle them to sex. Nice is not a qualificiation for anything, and it's not a personality trait. "Nice" is the bare fucking minimum. The only thing "nice" tells me is "he won't beat the sit out of me". I don't know about you but I think people need to require more in a partner than that. 🤷‍♂️

[HGohwell]

It makes me mildly uncomfortable the way Alpha Male and Incel are being thrown around like they're the only two male personality types in the world, which to get back to the original topic, may well be something to do with fictional generally playing up the "you're either having sex or you're a loser" tropes.

The problem is Involuntary Celibate (let's not forget that's literally where the term Incel comes from) basically translates as "I can't have sex and it's everyone else's fault and definitely not mine" and who are often perfectly "nice guys" until a woman says she likes them as a friend (Friendzoned is a terrible idea that normalises men and women being unable to interact without there being a sexual element). Now, let's also make a distinction here: Alpha Male does not equal Bad Boy/Jerk. Alpha Male is a leader and protector type. Bad Boy/Jerk are the rules breakers/abusers/"I can change him"/Troubled But Cute. Please stop conflating the two. They are in no way the same and this is another thing that has come from the media idea that all athletes/handsome guys/popular with women guys are jerks because we should be routing for the "losers" who are seen as more normal because people are more likely to identify with that, especially as teens.

There are plenty of Alpha Males who follow the rules. Hell my young love was the nicest guy who was always polite, always smiles, always helped everyone, never drank, never smoked, never swore, got straight A, top athlete (wow this guy sounds like a totally unbelievable character or hiding a dark past) and was a natural leader aka Alpha Male. Girls loved him, I was not the only one.

Also the thing about illnesses, come on man, having sex has been linked to vaginal cancer. Literally everything is linked to cancer. You can't win.

The point is: it's important to teach people sex isn't the only thing and that it should be dealt with in a way that makes people comfortable. If we spent less time teaching people sex is super and more time teaching people to be confident in themselves and their own choices and others, maybe more people who wanted to have sex would be and maybe more people would respect people who don't want to have sex. And that there are not only two male personalities and please stop mixing them up and trying to give good guys a bad name and asshole who can't take responsibility for their own actions a good name.

[mrtoontastic]

I mean, if you want an opinion on a virgin, just ask the Spy. He knows (and kills) one!

[LordVincent]

Speaking of the friendzone and the niceguy 180 that typically occurs in correlation with it:

The friendzone is not a bad thing if you value deep emotional relationships with women.

If you don't value deep emotional relationships with women, that's probably why you don't have a girlfriend.

If you expect sex in return for something, what you're looking for isn't a girlfriend, it's a hooker.

[HGohwell]

The friendzone is not a bad thing if you value deep emotional relationships with women.

My problem is the term "friendzone" which comes from the idea that a man has a shot at having sex with/being the boyfriend of any girl but that you have to be careful or she'll put you "in the friendzone" the idea being that she now she's you as a friend and you no longer have a chance. Which is the total opposite to wanting a proper emotional relations. It's literally the idea that once you're seen as her friend you no longer have any shot with her. Which is a very odd idea because in my experience a lot of women date from their friendship circles.

[SleepingPoppy]

The "good guy rules" thing really throws me. Like, all people receive messaging from family, community, society, about what it is to be a good person, and we all have to unlearn some stuff as we grow. Some people will be more messed up than others for a variety of reasons, but it's something we all have to deal with to some degree.

[AceRagz]

P.S. I've briefly looked ahead at the post(s) about me not knowing about sex hormones, puberty, and similar stuff. I'll try to eventually get to it. I am not right about everything. I admit that. I also know that we all agree on some things. Our responses prove it. The sex hormones and puberty stuff is a little tricky. This is why I say this. I can't go into deep details about that here, because I might end up breaking some rule. Will anyone at least admit one thing about the topic? Here it is. Have you seen videos by incels and even alpha males that agree that there is a group of people that lie about their thoughts on sex?

I'm guessing this is aimed at me partially. waves Don't worry I'll be around to debate you some more.

LT I don't want to come off as mean but seriously the things you've put forward as your "evidence" and your beliefs has lead me to believe you've never had a serious relationship. And that you would be fine with a woman that was only there to pop babies out left and right for you. Everything you've said so far gives off this image. I apologize if I got the wrong impression of you but so far this is kind of the picture you are painting of yourself when you say stuff like women must get pregnant in order to avoid cancer. Also the whole thing about men and women are hardwired only for procreation.

[LT1986]

Hey @AceRagz. I think that I've read your second response about the irresponsible misinformation topic. I've read everything in the post. I don't have much to say. You gave more information about the topic. I just hit a few points. You explained how some of the points that I made add on to other things to get certain outcomes. Thank you. I agree and have no disputes with your post.

[LT1986]

Hey @Maps. I'm responding to the post about a doctor not saying that you have to have sex or you will get cancer. I'm sorry to hear about your grandma having breast cancer after giving birth.

Here's my thoughts on breast cancer coming from the opposite of what I posted. I agree that cancer does not only come from one thing. Many things can cause the issue. I still believe that trauma, whether it is good, bad, physical, or mental can cause the illness. I'm agreeing with you.

I've already thrown in the white flag about the you must have a pregnancy or sex statement or you MIGHT, not will automatically, get cancer. I don't have the time, resources, money, participants, and lie detectors to really research the topic. I haven't changed my opinion. I just admit that I can't prove it right now.

[LT1986]

Hey @Trevor. I'm responding to the post that has the Futurama picture. Thank you for sending the picture.

[LT1986]

Hello @DiegoPalacios.

I agree that incels are responsible for their actions.

I guess we might have to agree to disagree about the genuine niceness versus the self-proclaimed niceness topic, only because we have different nice guy definitions. I can't accuse someone of being fake or not. I only go by their actions. I compared it to following the law. The government would rather a person disagree with the law and follow it, than agree with the law and break it. As long as someone's actions are nice, I don't call them fake. Now if I was going by the usual definition that I believe you are referring to, I would agree with you 100%.

I agree with you completely on your points responding to my statements about the importance of sex, romance, etc.

I can sum up the rest of your response by saying this. I agree. Incels need to be smarter. This is what I meant when I said that when incels figure out that what they are doing is wrong, they need to stop excessively complaining about it and fix the problem(s). I do agree with your Disney fallacy statement, too.

I hope that I can explain this without having to look up the exact definitions. Here it goes. Some incels do have problems that are beyond being nice. I believe that it is Asperger's and/or autism that causes someone to not understand things that are not straight forward. That's why I say that just because some guys are smarter and can figure out what needs to be done publicly and what needs to be done in private, that doesn't mean that people are let off the hook for influencing them to not understand what needs to be done publicly and what needs to be done in secret. Other people get help for mental issues and I believe that these guys need help with their issues, too. Whenever I interact with someone that I believe has a mental issue, I don't gaslight them and then blame them for having a mental issue that prevents them from understanding what I've told them or have shown them. Thank you.

[LT1986]

Hi @therealbereth. Here's my response to your statement about there being more than two sexes. I don't disagree with you. I guess I didn't go in detail enough about it in my first post. I'll say it, now. Not everything that I or anyone else says is the case 100% of the time. There are exceptions, minorities, and over looked points to not only this topic, but other topics. Thank you for pointing that out.

Here's my response to your second point. I'm sorry for not making myself clear the first time. People can train themselves to do certain things and have abilities that other people don't. Cancer doesn't just come from the physical act. The point of going through the physical act of being a virgin is too much for some people and does cause some sickness. It doesn't have to be cancer. Hell, it could even be a mental illness. I agree with you. Yes, sex doesn't definitely stop cancer cells. Does stress help cause cancer? Does sex help relieve stress.

I actually believe that we agree on the oxygen information that you gave about how reproduction coincides with this. Thank you.

I agree with you on the issue about incels having a sociological problem. I agreed in my first post and posts that I've made, since then. Incels need to stop complaining and fixing their problems. Thank you.

Thank you for the information about the word incel. Incels need to stop complaining and start fixing their problems. I've said this before. This goes for excessively talking negatively about women. Other guys talk negatively about women too, but that is besides the point. I can't really dispute your claim about how I used the word incel. I've seen other people use it that way too, but oh well I'll take an L on that one. I think everyone knows how the word was being used. Anyway, incels with the correct definition doesn't mean that these guys aren't nice. Enough trauma can make anyone lash out, even the real nice guys, by the correct definition that you might use. Let's say that the incels with the correct definition are not nice guys, they do need to stop constantly bashing women. Thank you for point that out.