💊 Manosphere Norwood Cemetery - Virgin with an acid attack fetish.

[ChuckSlaughter]

What's the one thing you'd change about yourself if you could, in order to be seen as attractive to women? What do you think your biggest downfall or obstacle is in that regard?

Spoiler: duh

10 inch chocolate penis that ejaculates money

 

[Norwood Crematorium]

What's the one thing you'd change about yourself if you could, in order to be seen as attractive to women? What do you think your biggest downfall or obstacle is in that regard?

I no longer think in those terms. I'm 30 now, and the days of yearning to be attractive to the opposite sex are long gone. Besides, despite 'fessing up on the regular that I'm no oil painting, neither looks nor bemoaning sexual experiences are the primary reason why I persisted with PUAhate, then SlutHate.

You must understand that I am not the stereotypical SlutHater; as in my interests in 'looksmaxing', 'slaying' or the utterly embarrassing male-model obsessing are absolutely nil. Neither, despite @Ass Manager 3000 's ill-researched thread title, am I a desperate virgin.

I have zero self-entitlement and couldn't possibly have a lower opinion of myself. So I guess the answer to your question is that I would change nothing, because I am neither seeking sexual gratification/companionship and nor am I striving to please some self-entitled female.

Biggest downfall? Simply 'existing' would probably be your starter for ten.

 

[Rin]

Off-topic no doubt, but I simply struggle to understand why 'loveshys' are such an apparent source of mockery, simply for being unable to secure romantic/sexual relationships.

And I'm not talking about the 'Lolcow' caricatures selected for special threads (including myself); I'm referring to the general notion of a person - usually male of course - who struggles for whatever reason to experience intimacy.

Why is that instantly so LOLworthy in the eyes of KF?

Nobody actually cares whether or not they can have sex. The only reason we pick on them for it is because they're sensitive about it and they've clearly let it define their entire personalities. The reason Loveshys are lolcows is because they do pathetic and disgusting things like spew hate at women, call them "shitcunts," and encourage people to throw acid at them. Also, they like to call themselves retarded, made-up words and act like they're being persecuted just because women don't throw themselves at them.

 

[Norwood Crematorium]

Nobody actually cares whether or not they can have sex. The only reason we pick on them for it is because they're sensitive about it and they've clearly let it define their entire personalities. The reason Loveshys are lolcows is because they do pathetic and disgusting things like spew hate at women, call them "shitcunts," and encourage people to throw acid at them. Also, they like to call themselves retarded, made-up words and act like they're being persecuted just because women don't throw themselves at them.

But like I clearly said in the post you quoted, I'm not referring to the people you create threads on specifically on this sub-forum. I'm talking about the general notion expressed on this place that if a person cannot secure sex, they are ripe for further abasement.

Not every person who cannot engage in intimacy does the things which you describe. So again, why does the inherent negative attitude to 'loveshys' prevail here?

 

[Rin]

But like I clearly said in the post you quoted, I'm not referring to the people you create threads on specifically on this sub-forum. I'm talking about the general notion expressed on this place that if a person cannot secure sex, they are ripe for further abasement.

Not every person who cannot engage in intimacy does the things you describe. So again, why does the inherent attitude to 'loveshys' prevail here?

Nobody is mocking general people who don't have sex. Several users have mentioned their own lack of sexual activity, and oddly enough it's only the Sluthate users who expect us to reject them for it. We only mock the ones that have ridiculous beliefs about why they don't have sex. Have you looked at the general threads? Most of the time, when someone isn't here to try and argue with us, we just point out particularly funny threads on the forums and laugh at those. The only reason we have a separate forum for you guys is that so many of you like to come here and argue with us, so the mods didn't want that to overwhelm the rest of the threads.

 

[wheat pasta]

Not every person who cannot engage in intimacy does the things you describe. So again, why does the inherent attitude to 'loveshys' prevail here?

It's really sort of a complicated issue, if I may I would conjecture that the opinion is largely based on how a person handles it.

Group A, we'll call them the Loveshies, they blame everyone else for their own issues and instead of attempting to gain greater insight, improve themselves or find a way of getting the sex monkey off their back they retreat further into their half-baked beliefs regarding human interaction.

Group B, they're just guys who don't get girlfriends or sex... they're the same as the loveshies in this one regard, the difference is they just try to find other meaning in life, even if the hand they were dealt kinda sucks. And what's important to note is that a lot of them don't stop trying, either.

This whole subject is pretty sensitive, honestly. I openly acknowledge that some people will probably never find a partner, and that is an awful reality but sadly it's the way our world works. However, I (and others undoubtedly) feel that the Sluthate/Loveshy crowd often makes mountains out of molehills and that they happen to be their own biggest obstacle toward happiness, long-term relationships etc.
The people who try (just for example, this is a broad brush that I do not mean to paint over all 'loveshies') to distill attraction down to some weird looks-based science are sick in the head, but nothing's actually wrong with them besides.

I'm sorry, this post kind of got away from me a little.

 

[Norwood Crematorium]

Nobody is mocking general people who don't have sex. Several users have mentioned their own lack of sexual activity, and oddly enough it's only the Sluthate users who expect us to reject them for it. We only mock the ones that have ridiculous beliefs about why they don't have sex. Have you looked at the general threads? Most of the time, when someone isn't here to try and argue with us, we just point out particularly funny threads on the forums and laugh at those. The only reason we have a separate forum for you guys is that so many of you like to come here and argue with us, so the mods didn't want that to overwhelm the rest of the threads.

Cursory glance through several threads yields fairly basic denigration towards loveshys in a general context for either their shortcomings, or suppositions that they behave a certain way purely because they cannot get sex - granted, many named here deserve responses that are just insults but such comments also appear in threads like Kent's, on issues which are unwarranted.

So for clarity, mockery of the 'loveshys' is simply restricted to those named 'n' shamed?

@wheat pasta - interesting post above. Yes, SHers do make mountains out of molehills and I've been known to indulge in that also on occasion. But perhaps - just perhaps - the 'awful realisation' as you put it yourself has hit some of them that whether through looks, autism or general circumstance, some of them will never experience the basics of intimacy or sexual gratification.

Is it any wonder then that some of them exhibit frustration? My perspective is that some of these guys (NOT talking about myself here, btw) should be cut a bit of slack. They are lonely, desperate and frustrated - and usually at an age when they have to watch their well-adjusted peers enjoying the first rites of sexual experimentation.

 

[Rin]

Cursory glance through several threads yields fairly basic denigration towards loveshys in a general context for either their shortcomings, or suppositions that they behave a certain way purely because they cannot get sex - granted, many named here deserve responses that are just insults but such comments also appear in threads like Kent's, on issues which are unwarranted.

So for clarity, mockery of the 'loveshys' is simply restricted to those named 'n' shamed?

@wheat pasta - interesting post above. Yes, SHers do make mountains out of molehills and I've been known to indulge in that also on occasion. But perhaps - just perhaps - the 'awful realisation' as you put it yourself has hit some of them that whether through looks, autism or general circumstance, some of them will never experience the basics of intimacy or sexual gratification.

Is it any wonder then that some of them exhibit frustration? My perspective is that some of these guys (NOT talking about myself here, btw) should be cut a bit of slack. They are lonely, desperate and frustrated - and usually at an age when they have to watch their well-adjusted peers enjoying the first rites of sexual experimentation.

Just because someone can't get sex doesn't make them a Loveshy. They're only a Loveshy if they act like an idiot because they can't get sex. It's the acting like an idiot that makes them a lolcow, not the lack of sex. And most people's pity ran out when other Loveshies took advantage of it. Look at what happened with Thonis. He got called out for making ridiculously racist remarks and having an ER avatar, but when he came here and begged for pity, a lot of people tried to give him legitimate advice. And then he flipped out and started going on about how charismatic a spree shooter was. When we regularly get people like that, why should we keep on hoping that the next person is going to be different?

 

[Aaron]

Cursory glance through several threads yields fairly basic denigration towards loveshys in a general context for either their shortcomings, or suppositions that they behave a certain way purely because they cannot get sex - granted, many named here deserve responses that are just insults but such comments also appear in threads like Kent's, on issues which are unwarranted.

So for clarity, mockery of the 'loveshys' is simply restricted to those named 'n' shamed?

@wheat pasta - interesting post above. Yes, SHers do make mountains out of molehills and I've been known to indulge in that also on occasion. But perhaps - just perhaps - the 'awful realisation' as you put it yourself has hit some of them that whether through looks, autism or general circumstance, some of them will never experience the basics of intimacy or sexual gratification.

Is it any wonder then that some of them exhibit frustration? My perspective is that some of these guys (NOT talking about myself here, btw) should be cut a bit of slack. They are lonely, desperate and frustrated - and usually at an age when they have to watch their well-adjusted peers enjoying the first rites of sexual experimentation.

There isn't really much I can disagree with here. All I can say is that I personally do not find any pleasure in deriding a loveshy unless they also exhibit some of the other eccentric characteristics I mentioned in the other thread. (As an aside, I do believe Kent warrants negative attention.) If I feel that someone is a genuinely good person, I will not take any pleasure in making fun of them. We all have our own internal arithmetic for determining who "earns" our ire, and who we'd be better off leaving alone. I understand many of these dudes have wound up the way they did for reasons partially (or fully) beyond their control. The world just isn't fair. We all recognize that.

What it comes down to is that most people on this site are not here to play the good guy to SlutHate's villain. We are here to laugh at the expense of others. We don't need a benevolent or defensible reason for doing so, and we don't need consistent, defined rules on what constitutes someone being worthy of our mockery; I think most of us acknowledge that the existence of this website as a whole is not a net good for the people we discuss here. Again, I can only speak for myself, but I don't intend to ever behave as if I hold any sort of moral high ground so long as I am a contributor to a website such as this.

 

[wheat pasta]

@wheat pasta - interesting post above. Yes, SHers do make mountains out of molehills and I've been known to indulge in that also on occasion. But perhaps - just perhaps - the 'awful realisation' as you put it yourself has hit some of them that whether through looks, autism or general circumstance, some of them will never experience the basics of intimacy or sexual gratification.

Is it any wonder then that some of them exhibit frustration? My perspective is that some of these guys (NOT talking about myself here, btw) should be cut a bit of slack. They are lonely, desperate and frustrated - and usually at an age when they have to watch their well-adjusted peers enjoying the first rites of sexual experimentation.

Frustration is definitely understandable, I can't imagine having to be in their shoes. It must really suck sometimes. We're nice to people who are civil to us, the thing is that most of them make a point of being adversarial when they pay us a visit. Not even that, but the people whom we observe and mock generally like to express such opinions as "[race] is inferior because [stereotypes]!" or "I hate all women/men because [reason]!" (or worse examples I'd rather not type) and they throw themselves their little pity parties and everyone takes turns trash-talking their fellow humans for reasons that don't really hold water most of the time. Surely you can agree such behaviors are something of a spectacle. I wouldn't be surprised to find it's some of the draw for you, even, in spite of your own reasons for frequenting such forums.

 

[Norwood Crematorium]

Just because someone can't get sex doesn't make them a Loveshy. They're only a Loveshy if they act like an idiot because they can't get sex. It's the acting like an idiot that makes them a lolcow, not the lack of sex. And most people's pity ran out when other Loveshies took advantage of it. Look at what happened with Thonis. He got called out for making ridiculously racist remarks and having an ER avatar, but when he came here and begged for pity, a lot of people tried to give him legitimate advice. And then he flipped out and started going on about how charismatic a spree shooter was. When we regularly get people like that, why should we keep on hoping that the next person is going to be different?

No, if someone is 'loveshy', then they struggle to express themselves in an intimate or romantic situation - that could be related to a general social anxiety, result of abuse, rejection (beyond simply being turned down for a date), all sorts of reasons. Your definition above of what a loveshy is is simply based on the caricatures that this forum seeks out and discusses. Or was the KF assessment what you meant with that definition?

And make no mistake, I'm not saying that loveshys should be pitied; just perhaps that not everyone under that moniker is a Thonis, or a Hood Rych, or indeed a NorCem. Besides, a completely deranged shitheel like Thonis is not a great example to generalise any demographic/contingent by. There are, believe it or not, plenty of rational people on sites like SH. You even allowed two of them acceptance, for starters.

.What it comes down to is that most people on this site are not here to play the good guy to SlutHate's villain. We are here to laugh at the expense of others. We don't need a benevolent or defensible reason for doing so, and we don't need consistent, defined rules on what constitutes someone being worthy of our mockery; I think most of us acknowledge that the existence of this website as a whole is not a net good for the people we discuss here.

I saw what the purpose of these forums were very quickly; it's a shame my SH brethren couldn't similarly understand.

An honest appraisal from you, Aaron.

 

[melty]

I deleted my response to you in my thread because it was off topic and the same discussion is occurring here

Hm. I don't have a resource for it, but it just seems to be an unfortunate aspect of society. Sorry to sound feminist but having sex and relationships is entangled with society's idea of masculinity, probably for a few reasons, and personally I think it's a really harmful stereotype.
But online, it's also an easy target. People who are loveshies tend to be very insecure about it so of course "trolls" are going to harp on it just like they do for racism, sexism, anything that really triggers people. Trolls and shitposters aim to upset people so if people are upset by being virgins then that's what they go after. When really they might not even care that much. Someone might mock a cow for being racist, then that same person will turn around and hurl racial slurs at a different cow. It's mostly based on what upsets people.
And it's not instantly LOLworthy at KF. Coming from a loveshy related site is instantly lolworthy til you prove otherwise but there are other people here on the farms who have trouble with relationships and are virgins and no one gives them a bunch of shit unless they make a big deal about it or are lolworthy in some other way.

 

[Rin]

Or was the KF assessment what you meant with that definition?

Yes. I don't consider people to be loveshies unless they identify themselves as such, meaning that they're declaring their support for groups with a large number of objectionable tenants.

And make no mistake, I'm not saying loveshys should be pitied; just perhaps that not everyone under that moniker is a Thonis, or a Hood Rych, or indeed a NorCem. Besides, a completely deranged shitheel like Thonis is not a great example to generalise any demographic/contingent by. There are, believe it or not, plenty of rational people on sites like SH. You even allowed two of them acceptance, for starters.

Then it's up to them to prove it. You can generally assume that the ones we're laughing at aren't the rational ones, and if they're so rational, they should associate themselves with a more stable group. I'm not going to take issue with those who have actually done that and don't espouse disgusting beliefs.

A lot of people on those sites make sweeping generalizations about an entire gender. Why is that more sensible than us making sweeping generalizations about a relatively small group of people that tend to have a distinct set of traits?

 

[sugoi-chan]

And make no mistake, I'm not saying that loveshys should be pitied; just perhaps that not everyone under that moniker is a Thonis, or a Hood Rych, or indeed a NorCem. Besides, a completely deranged shitheel like Thonis is not a great example to generalise any demographic/contingent by.

Yes, but that's what all of those people have in common. I mean, when a big website in the topic (Sluthate) lets people like Mrz post about how much they want to masturbate to child pornography and write long spergy screeds about how he wants to design a distribution system for child pornography and then another website (Lookism) specifically invites Mrz over...it's kinda hard not to paint the whole group is whackjobs.

 

[Norwood Crematorium]

A lot of people on those sites make sweeping generalizations about an entire gender. Why is that more sensible than us making sweeping generalizations about a relatively small group of people that tend to have a distinct set of traits?

It isn't more sensible, agreed. But since you and other KF users are often making individuals targets on this sub-forum specifically for making those 'sweeping generalisations', then isn't it a tad hypocritical to make sweeping generalisations yourselves?

As I pointed out during my first foray here, there are many otherwise normal users on SH (even more on PUAhate but we lost many in the site changeover). More people actually than you credit - but rational, even decent users aren't going to appear on the KF radar. By definition, you chaps go for the lolcow; meaning that your own perceptions about people aligning themselves to a certain definition - whether 'incel' or 'loveshy' - will always be inherently coloured.

Interesting parallels!

@sugoi-chan - again, taking that excremental smear known as MRZ to be representative/symbolic of anything is a disservice even to unhinged people like me and Thonis. MRZ is a cunt of monolithic proportions and you presumably have never seen the countless threads where I, and others, challenge him for his beliefs; as well as the forum admin for allowing him a platform.

@melty - "...having sex and relationships is entangled with society's idea of masculinity". That encapsulates one of the things that does annoy me greatly in the Western world: the concept that females are permitted leeway in being what they want to be, and not being 'judged'; yet men are still expected to play up to the masculine stereotype.

And God forbid that a man expresses his emotions - "grow a pair and get laid"...

 

[sugoi-chan]

@sugoi-chan - again, taking that excremental smear known as MRZ to be representative/symbolic of anything is a disservice even to unhinged people like me and Thonis. MRZ is a cunt of monolithic proportions and you presumably have never seen the countless threads where I, and others, challenge him for his beliefs; as well as the forum admin for allowing him a platform.

He's a user there. You're a user there. You all bitch about your ugliness and your inability to get your dicks wet in your preferred way:

Don't want to associate with those turds? Don't post on a site with those turds.

Besides - the notable users have their own threads where we distinguish all your insanity from those of your fellow shit diamonds. There's plenty of opportunity for you to stand out from Mrz or Thonis or whoever else.

 

[Rin]

@melty - "...having sex and relationships is entangled with society's idea of masculinity". That encapsulates one of the things that does annoy me greatly in the Western world: the concept that females are permitted leeway in being what they want to be, and not being 'judged'; yet men are still expected to play up to the masculine stereotype.

Not really related, but why "females" and "men"? Wouldn't it make more sense to say either "women" and "men" or "females" and "males"?

Yes, there are problems in Western civilization, but the people at Sluthate and similar sites aren't behaving in a way that will make things better. Heck, I think if someone poured their heart out here, they're more likely to get a positive response than if they did on Sluthate. How many times have you seen people remark on those sites that you should kill yourself ( or "flush yourself" or "go ER" or whatever their latest nonsensical euphemism is) if you aren't some specimen of physical perfection?

 

[sugoi-chan]

Heck, I think if someone poured their heart out here, they're more likely to get a positive response than if they did on Sluthate.

A couple of the threads in the Supporters board are almost entirely for that purpose.

 

[HickoryDickory]

Some users ended up with threads of their own because they were driving the main threads off-topic, so there was more need for containment. I never felt you needed a thread, but others felt differently. (Due to the acid comments)

The more erratic behavior the more mockery can be had, but I feel some of it has gone overboard with trying to get something out of loveshies or incels that aren't on that level.

 

[Frank Rizzo]

Some users ended up with threads of their own because they were driving the main threads off-topic, so there was more need for containment. I never felt you needed a thread, but others felt differently. (Due to the acid comments)

The more erratic behavior the more mockery can be had, but I feel some of it has gone overboard with trying to get something out of loveshies or incels that aren't on that level.

As long as the SH'ers keep coming here to "Troll us", it's just more ammunition for us.

I think they'll find that ignoring us and not coming back will greatly assure that we'll forget about them.