The blackpill claims that society is too shallow and hypergamous, and that without enforcing monogamy and reinstating traditional gender roles, there is no hope for men that women deem unattractive.
Blackpillers are somewhat in opposition to the redpill philosophy. Redpillers believe in a collection of social manipulation and 'self-improvement' tricks. Blackpillers reject especially the long-term effectiveness of these tricks.
Not all incels are blackpillers and not all blackpillers are incels. The media have often falsely conflated blackpiller incels with all incels. More generally, a blackpill is any uncomfortable truth associated with extreme negativity/pessimism/fatalism, etc.
- 1 Overview
- 2 Themes
- 3 Solutions
- 4 Criticism
- 5 Origin of the term
- 6 Meme gallery
- 7 References
- 8 See Also
The blackpill holds that modernity and technology have unleashed female sexuality and created a shallow, lookist and hypergamous dating sphere which is destroying the social fabric of civilization and that only reverting women's emancipation can help. Hence blackpillers push for a return to traditions, sexual sublimation, monogamy and the natural subordination of women, in accordance with the greatest happiness principle. The social conservatism and focus on sexual sublimation reminds of the philosophy of 20th century English ethnologist J. D. Unwin.
Most blackpillers are atheist, but some promote cultural Christianity or other religions. Most believe in evolutionary psychology and biological determinism/essentialism (see Scientific Blackpill and /r/BlackPillScience). The central aspects of the blackpill are not new to academia at all, in fact, they often draw from scientific literature that predates the prevalent gynocentric monoculture in the social sciences (e.g. Briffault's law, Bateman's principle and sexy sons hypothesis). Many blackpillers are convinced blackpill knowledge will spark a sexual revolution.
The popularity of the blackpill is a result of the failure of the mainstream media and society of bluepilled pontification, to account for otherwise inexplicable phenomena such as the halo effect, hybristophilia, cacophobia and how female choosiness is leads to female hypergamy.
Blackpillers believe there are certain traits that are mostly pre-determined and unchangeable, but that play a vastly underappreciated role in female mate choice, especially looks, money, and status. This triad was popularized as the LMS theory in non-pill-ideological PSL forums in response to the self-improvement enthusiasm of redpillers and pickup artists. Other important, and also largely immutable traits are physical stature, race, IQ, personality, and neurotypicality.
The blackpill can be seen as a counterweight to the prevalent and bluepilled assumption that having a poor social and romantic life is mostly one's own fault and/or a matter of cultivating a positive personality. It provides an basis whereby one can reject the barrage of "self-improvement" advice that is ubiquitous in media, advertising and in day-to-day platitude and virtue signaling.
Humans universally prefer good looking people and agree fairly consistently about who is attractive. They agree more about the looks of very unattractive individuals, hence for them looks are more objective. People agree less about people of average attractiveness, so here individual preferences play a greater role. Even babies prefer attractive faces over non-attractive ones long before culture could have affected their preferences, and even blind men have the same preferences about women's hourglass shape as sighted men. Also, among widely different cultures, universal standards for beauty exist and women almost universally prefer tall men to short men. Physical appearance plays a significant role in occupational prestige and its impact is constant over the employment history. What is more, people automatically associate physical attractiveness with various positive traits to an unreasonable degree, e.g. a good personality, humor, morality, intelligence and health (halo effect), especially initially. This may even affect parents treating their good looking offspring better. In contrast to intuitive judgements, looks are only weakly related to health and even less with morality or cognitive ability which suggests beauty and symmetry evolved only because they look good, not because they indicate any other benefits to meaningful degree. Taken together, these research findings suggest that human preferences for physical appearance is largely innate and possibly resulted from aesthetic sexual selection and perhaps runaway selection, rather than from cultural evolution or even social construction.
Women are just as 'visual' as menEdit
Ratings of physical attractiveness predict romantic interest to the same extent in women and men as a large meta study (N = 29,414) concluded. What is more, women place a minimum threshold of physical attractiveness on potential mates before they are willing to consider anything else about them. Moreover, women lie about the importance of physical attractiveness. Women also rate looks more harshly than men. They rate 80% of men as below 5/10 with a skewed distribution both in online dating and non-online settings, whereas men rate women normally. The common objection to women being shallow about looks in online dating is that in real life women would care about personality and that one could easily make up for bad looks with a good personality. Sadly, various studies showed looks are the only factor to predict initial romantic interest, and they are only slightly less important in long-term dating. Looks are highly heritable as well, so even though lifestyle choices like bodybuilding can improve looks, much of it is predetermined, with more than half of an individual's lean mass being hereditary, and an individual's response to resistance training is significantly determined by genetics. The effects of plastic surgery on physical attractiveness are also small. Furthermore, men's attractiveness and masculinity predict a woman's chance of orgasm. While not as drastic as women's harsh ratings of men's looks suggest, there is indeed evidence of women dating up in looks, e.g. unattractive men were less likely married in a Spanish study (15% less likely married than attractive men). Conversely, very unattractive women were more likely being married than other women, providing some evidence for Juggernaut law. The more attractive the male partner, the sooner women allow for sex to occur and the less likely they would prefer a condom, providing evidence for the sexy son hypothesis.
The misconception that women would not care about looks may stem from political correctness as the Norwegian sexologist Kristin Spitznogle suggested, from the women-are-wonderful effect, or from the fact that men prefer young and fertile women and youth is associated with beauty. It also requires a much higher level of looks for women to copulate with a complete stranger only because of his looks than vice-versa, so this simply happens rarely. It may also be a remnant of monogamy norms, forcing women to marry men regardless of their looks.
That being said about the importance of looks, there exist anecdotal evidence, that many incels are not particularly ugly, sometimes even physically attractive, but these claims are possibly biased in the sense that only good looking incels expose themselves to the public. Looks do not seem to matter as much as many incels claim (e.g. unattractiveness only lowers the chances of marriage by 15%), but they do matter to some extent and good looks make life easier and open doors. In a study of Reddit users answering why they are single (not necessarily incels) on AskReddit, most answered they were physically unattractive, with about half as many mentioning obesity (see causes of inceldom). Looks were also after shyness (i.e. low status), mentioned as the second common barrier in the Donnelly study with 47% of virgins and 56% of singles mentioning this factor, compared to only 9% of partnered people.
Women do not seem to care more about looks as men (but roughly equally), so women's harsher ratings possibly result from an intuition to avoid initiating romance and giving men complements, having a more coy and passive sexuality all around. Initiation would make it more difficult to reject a male as the initiator bears more responsibility.
Women are coy and hypergamousEdit
Female choosiness — male horniness
By virtue of a having a womb, women have more parental investment, so they evolved to be more choosy maters. A result of this is that men's demand for sex is insatiable and men are doomed to be horny. Even in stable relationships men masturbate four times as often as women. Men much more readily agree to unsolicited invitations to sex, they less likely regret casual sex and more often regret missing out on sex. Additionally, there are large sex differences in sexual disgust. Women are more coy (reluctant to have sex) across the globe and flirting universally consists of the man impressing the woman. Women overwhelmingly prefer being asked out on dates vs doing the asking, possibly to avoid responsibility as mentioned above. Women's coyness and reluctance to initiate anything can also be seen on Tinder where women have on average 20 times as many matches as men. The top 10% of men get 58% of women's likes in online dating, and even in online dating platforms with an even sex ratio, like OkCupid one finds women receive around 8 times as many messages.
Having greater parental investment, women also evolved to be heavily dependent on men's resources. This makes women extra choosy as the man not only needs to be attractive, but also a good provider.
Principle of least interest
As a result of being more choosy, women having much more options to choose from as there are overall more men desiring women than vice-versa. Men and women aim up to the same extent and few aim unrealistically high, but since men have fewer alternative mating options available to them, they more readily make compromises and eventually date down, particularly if they experience frequent rejection. In economics, this is called the principle of least interest as the party that has the least interest (women in this case) get to decide on the conditions of the contract as the other party more readily compromises having fewer alternative options of as high value to them. Making compromises means dating down, so women get to date up (hypergamy).
Bodyguard hypothesis and polygamy
Being physically weaker, women are believed to choose the most dominant male available to be protected from contenders (bodyguard hypothesis) and to get access to high quality foods. Much of what distinguishes the male phenotype points to an evolutionary history of contest competition between men for mating opportunities. Especially when many women accumulate at the most dominant males (polygyny), it implies women tend to date up overall and there is a surplus of men at the bottom of the socioeconomic hierarchy without any sex. In fact, female hypergamy agrees with evidence that humans are a moderately polygamous species. In the Ethnographic Atlas, of 1,231 societies noted, 588 had frequent polygyny, 453 had occasional polygyny, and only 186 were fully monogamous. Women may have reproduced twice as often as men throughout history as a result. Women prefer partnered men over single men which may be related to women's preference for high status, but may also be an adaption of women living in harems. Men do not show such preferences.
Women love high status men
Women's preference for high status men ties into the hierarchical organization in humans. Cross-culturally, men do not care about women's socioeconomic status and achievements, but women care a lot about men's. Women with higher income tend to have a preference for men with even higher income, while men have no such preferences. Women are 1,000 times choosier about a potential partner's wealth, and they like online dating profiles with a higher education status than their own twice as often, and men with lower status half as often as men with equal status. Women are twice as likely to marry up in income when they marry down in education and women are prone to instability when they are more attractive than their male partner. In the Swedish top 1% income bracket, 70% of men, but only 30% of women, are partnered with someone in the bottom 90% bracket. What is more, there is evidence of women refusing to date down in educational status or marry men with lower income than their own, and preferring to remain single when they cannot date up or across the social hierarchy. These findings suggest, as women are surpassing men in socioeconomic status, more men are becoming sexually unattractive. They also suggest, welfare and affirmative action for women, as well as decreasing economic growth and increasing economic inequality, tend to reduce the sexual market value of lots of men because provision of resources are men's main goods to sell in the sex market. Women's sexual market value is, on the other hand, rather determined by their looks and their reputation of faithfulness (things that men desire).
A rise of female hypergamy
There is evidence that hypergamy has intensified in the recent years. The top 5-20% of men (i.e. "Chads") are now having more sex than before the sexual revolution. In addition, women's infidelity rate has increased, and for people aged 20 to 30, it is now close to men's infidelity rate, and overall also only a bit lower than men's, which is curious in light that women are much more likely to tolerate it (presumably because men can't have babies and maybe also an adaptation of harem wives). The more men date down, and the more partners are available e.g. through online dating and social networks, the choosier women become as they can choose from more options leading them to wait for the perceived opportunity for a partner of very high mate value. This results in men dating down even more out of frustration, possibly aggravating the situation and forming a positive feedback loop in male sexual frustration and female choosiness.
Women get bored with relationships and sex much sooner than men which may be a result of women being more choosy and more readily finding flaws in their partners and of a greater anxiety not having made the best partner choice possible. As a result, women are more likely to initiate divorce across a wide variety of cultures (e.g. 2/3 of divorces are initiated by women in the U.S.) and have been in the U.S. at least since year 1862.
Women's love style
In summary, women's hypergamous love style is more opportunistic and transactional than men's, driven by a hardwired expectation to be provided for. Women are loved nearly unconditionally, men are not. Men display a lot more grief when widowed, whereas women more likely simply move on. Social expectations for men are overall higher, hence femcels are rarer than male incels and more likely volcels. Since women have more dating options available to them, they tend to have much more power over relationships than they like to admit (Briffault's law). There exists a strong women-are-wonderful bias in that women are perceived more favorably than men in all kinds of regards which additionally suggests men are overall held to higher standards.
Contrary to mainstream dating advice that women would like nice men, many women, if not most women, are actually attracted to dominant and strong men, both physically dominant (a bulky appearance) and in character (confidence, stoicism). In one study, not a single woman out of 160 significantly preferred the physically weaker man when given the choice between a strong and a weak one. Women tend to prefer callous and psychopathic men, possibly because these act as costly signals of high status. Women's desire to be overpowered may also be related to the female testing the the man. Further, most women have rape fantasies and much of women's erotic literature, which accounts for 40% of mass paperback sales in the United States, revolves around taming a dominant, ruthless male. Aggressive men with low inhibition levels (e.g. ADHD, criminals, bullies) have substantially more sex partners and offspring. In naturalistic settings (i.e. rating a video interaction between a male and a female), it has been shown that women generally rate the men with higher levels of psychopathy as more attractive, controlling for physical attractiveness. A meta-analysis consisting of 53 studies found consistent evidence for a link between deliquency, drug use and greater sexual success in males. Social status predicts 62% of the variance in men's mating opportunities. These preferences are highly related to hypergamy and are also thought to be explained by the bodyguard hypothesis.
Women are much more passive maters than men, e.g. the vast majority of them prefers being asked out on a date vs doing the asking, i.e. they prefer men taking on the dominant/active role. For men, a relationship is a project, for women it is a choice. Women tend to dislike exclusively nice men and they dislike vegetarians, finding them less masculine. Health is a stronger predictor of marriage satisfaction for males than for females, suggesting that it is more important for males to be confident and dependable (stoic). Men might have been selected to hide/deny their illnesses and limitations (stoicism), possibly contributing to their earlier mortality. For example, men with a mental condition frequently have less romantic success than women with the same condition. Mental conditions that are especially detrimental are schizophrenia and autism. There is evidence that these mental disorders can also be accurately detected even in photographic first impressions, somewhat independent of the effect of physical attractiveness on positive judgement, suggesting it is difficult to conceal these disorders from observers.
Among blackpillers there is disagreement about whether dominance and aggression are actually conductive to dating success (science does suggest so, though likely only past some minimal standard of looks), some claiming that only looks truly matter. Better looks may allow one to act in a dominant manner to some extent, e.g. looks are correlated with extroversion (r = .2) and attractive men are more readily forgiven for deviant behavior, in particular women much more readily call an unattractive man's behavior creepy.
Women are teenagersEdit
Women have been described as childish and "incomplete" throughout human history. Women do not only look a lot more childlike than men (neoteny), but they also behave in a more childlike manner. For example, women's average emotional and crying behavior does not mature beyond the behavior of mid teen girls. Adult women cry 4 times as often as men on average, and when they cry they also cry more intensely. Notably, this has not changed with the sexual revolution. Conversely, men have evolved for combat, hunting and dominance competition, e.g. nearly all men are stronger than nearly all women. Women were historically predominantly involved in cooking and they never dominated men. Women's gossiping has been a concern throughout history and women gossip much more about close friends and acquaintances than men, particularly about looks, are very mean to one another, are significantly less cooperative towards each other than men are towards other men, and they are are more often described as difficult or demanding (even though one would expect the reverse due to the overall prevalent women-are-wonderful stereotype, implying women must be even worse than people like to admit). Women also take significantly longer to resolve same-sex conflicts. Female gossip is thought to be based in women's intrasexual competition in attracting high status males by their looks and reputation of faithfulness (since men and their mothers want certainty the offspring they invest in is their's which is thought to have motivated restrictions on women's sexual behavior throughout history). Men are also believed to be less gossipy and more cooperative because they can achieve more effective resource extraction by cooperating, something women do not need to worry much about.
Like children, women lie a lot, often presumably to avoid conflict (likely related women's higher agreeableness which is a childish/submissive trait in itself), but also to avoid negative gossip from other women, and because they are rarely held accountable (see female solipsism). For example, women underreport their number of past sex partners and lie more about the extent they care about looks. Like children women stick to themselves, e.g. women place 4.5 times greater importance on themselves as a group than men do (related to women-are-wonderful effect). Women make up the majority of victims of workplace mass hysteria which indicates they are more prone to hysterical group think and conformance. Just like children, women want to be treated special, e.g. even feminist women prefer men who take care for them. And adding to the childish and solipsistic contradictions, even feminist women have as much rape fantasies as other women. 23–33% of women have admitted to having gone on dates merely to get free food. Women interrupt each other more than men interrupt women. Women more often initiate intimate partner violence than men. Women's self-sexualization, high beauty standards (sometimes leading to eating disorders) and historically restricted female sexuality seem stem from female intrasexual competition more than from the patriarchy. The fact that seemingly the majority of women fails to recognize, let alone oppose the immense gynocentric contradictions and falsehoods in media narratives (e.g. about harassment, rape, the gender pay gap, the patriarchy and suppression of female sexuality), is indicative of a childish solipsism and lack of self-awareness, qualities that have been observed in women cross-culturally throughout history (see timeless quotes on women). The entire idea of "sexism" appears to be fueled by a childish sense of retaliation, an urge to be taken care of and seemingly to provoke a reaction.
Women may have been selected to be childish and submissive as men and also their parents prefer women who's reproductive behavior is easy to control in order to minimize the risk of cuckoldry and ruining the family's and man's reputation. This may explain men's highly common sexual attraction to fertile underage girls.
Sexlessness and loneliness are harmfulEdit
Sexlessness, singledom and loneliness are on the rise and likely have a number of adverse effects, though for now most results are only correlational. Sex is regarded as the most pleasurable activity of all (see the figure on the right). The literature clearly documents that marriage has a protective effect, especially for men's health. In one report, loneliness was estimated to be as lethal as smoking 15 cigarettes per day. Both excessive smokers and lonely people are 50% more likely to die prematurely than those with healthy social relationships and non-smokers respectively. Sexlessness negatively affects both men and women. What is more, the overall happiness of a country may positively affect productivity and the economy. In fact, a Chinese company employed women to cheer up their male workers to great effect. Populations with more unmarried men due to polygamy have greater violent conflict potential. Being in a relationship may increase men's social status, in particular among women who prefer partnered men over singles. Sexual activity was related to greater well-being the next day, and warm partner contact lowers cardiovascular stress.
The dual mating strategyEdit
Dual-mating refers to a hypothesis that women have an innate mating strategy that involves two mates: A primary partner as long-term support (a beta cuckold), and secondary sex partner of higher mate quality in order to get "good genes" for the offspring (an alpha male) by cheating on or cuckolding their primary partner. In recent times, this hypothesis was used to explain the rise of female infidelity, as well as seemingly higher rates of cuckoldry and also seemingly increasing rates of beta men providing for single mothers in their 30s or 40s after they had obtained a child from a more desirable male, which was dubbed alpha fucks, beta bucks (AF/BB), in the manosphere. More recently, however, the dual-mating strategy fell in disfavor in the scientific community for a number of reasons. One reason is that non-paternity rates are globally very low, even though contraceptives and relaxed marital norms should make AF/BB occur much more often if it was natural. E.g. only 3% of all children in the U.S. live with a step father. Also in recent European history, non-paternity rates were not high. Non-paternity rates are sometimes high in hunter-gatherers though and the men in such societies also often do not invest much in their offspring beyond childhood. One can also regard beta tax payers as "virtual provider mates", paying for single mothers who, presumably, often copulated with men way above their league and thus ended up being pumped and dumped, so there is some truth to dual mating.
Causes of inceldomEdit
Sexlessness and loneliness are thought to have many different causes, e.g. of economic, cultural or environmentalist/pessimist nature, as well as rapid technological changes. There are no causal scientific results explaining sexlessness, so all points below are (educated) guesswork.
- Hypergamy & affirmative action: With women's increased status, more incels (both male and female) are to be expected because women prefer to date up. For example, aversion to having the wife earn more than the husband explains 29% of the decline in marriage rates over the last thirty years.
- Lookism: Many blackpillers primarily blame the raise of lookism enabled by women's emancipation and financial independence allowing women to ruthlessly choose based on looks, a point that was also raised by the Norwegian sexologist and feminist Kristin Spitznogle. Physical ugliness decreases SMV and hence increases chances of inceldom, but according to some anecdotal evidence, incels often do not look particularly ugly, but these claims remain somewhat dubious as it could have been selection bias of the sort that only good looking people seek help from female sex therapists and are inclined to participate in a TV show.
- Economic stagnation & competitiveness: As systems hit limits of growth, economies stagnate and social networks allow for social comparison with more people, people also may become more competitive, narcissistic and choosy in fear of missing out (FOMO). The result is a low birth rate, few coddled children who are prepared for late marriage and higher education, and women save themselves up for the ideal mate. Similar points about centralization, economic stagnation and resulting competitiveness as causes of inceldom, late or no marriage and low birth rates have been raised by journalist Walter M. Gallichan in his 1915 book The Great Unmarried. Gallichan also lamented a negativity about marriage as well as declining relationship between the sexes expressing as misandry and misogyny. Significantly later marriages have been observed in economic crises in mid 17th century England where women saved up their virginity to attract high-earning men. Lower income makes men unattractive to women, especially when it is lower than women's (see hypergamy), and the increasing rate of millennials living with their parents makes signaling of status and independence and hence dating possibly harder for men.
- Pessimism: A poor economic outlook and ecological crises like pollution, global warming and overpopulation make people less willing to have offspring, hence reluctant to date.
- Decline of tradition & religion: The decline of tradition and gender roles (driven by a push towards higher female workforce participation) and hypergamy may also decrease marriage rates and thereby increase sexlessness. This is accompanied by a decline in communities, with loneliness rates skyrocketing among millennials (see demographics), changing the dating landscape to one that does not cater to shy men interested in long-term relationships, i.e. with slow life history.
- Corruption of the natural role of women: The evolutionary unusual role of women often occupying higher status than men may be confusing to men who are naturally sensitive about these roles and thus become reclusive. In fact, women have always depended on men's resources and they did most of the cooking, also men's and women's lives used to be much more segregated.
- SMV overestimation and status uncertainty: Economic uncertainty, "coddled" millennials and the lack of strict hierarchies, as well as the narcissistic notion that every child needs to be highly successful, caused by a low birth rate, liberalism, greater competitiveness and more social comparisons through social networks and globalization as discussed above, may result in both men and women to have too high standards. Women's standards might be especially high due to the immense sexual attention they receive in social media and online dating, forming a positive-feedback loop with men becoming even more frustrated and promiscuous.
- Fear of intimacy & social judgement: The feeling of being observed by social media has been suggested to explain some of the reluctance to date and a rising fear of intimacy.
- Neuroatypicality: Neurotypicality may be very critical, as e.g. high functioning autists seem to be often incels. Autism rates may have increased.
- Nice guys and weak men: Male feminists and men who have excessively been shamed to be nice are thought to have a poor chance of seducing a woman provided that most women appear to prefer dominant men. Blackpillers respond to the redpill-y advice to simply be more dominant that this is impossible without real status or reinstating subordination of women because dominance and confidence are hard to fake and one risks ridicule. Sneaky and nice guys may also contribute to spoiling the women, inflating their self-worth and thus adopting higher standards, e.g. with regards to how expensive the courtship display should be.
- Evolutionary mismatch: A mismatch has been suggested between the modern environment and human's natural environment, leading to deteriorating social functioning. In particular, people may have an expectation to be married rather than making their own choices as arranged marriage was a very common occurrence in human's past, affecting around 70% of marriages in a large sample of contemporary foraging societies and arranged marriage were also prevalent in Medieval Europe. As people less likely own land and are more replaceable and have less responsibility, there is a decreased need for arranging marriages the as concepts like lineage and inheritance lose their meaning (in addition to liberalism, an overemphasis on personal freedom, destroying such institutions). See also mismatchcel.
- Developmental insults, mutants & social epistasis amplification: Increased mutational load mainly due to milder living conditions and modern medicine drastically reducing infant mortality, as well as pollution (e.g. xenoestrogens), and/or changes in diet may have lead to a decline of masculine features, such as robust mandible, compact midface, and also reduced testosterone levels and hence reduced muscle mass, but also to a higher incident rate of all kinds of diseases (obesity, underweight) and mental conditions, e.g. autism. Likewise, sperm count has reduced as much as 50% in the past decades. Such changes should predict that more men now fall below what is objectively deemed as lowest bar for physical attractiveness by most women, and also more men fail to intimidate any other men in dominance contests, leading to increased incel rates. Others have proposed a feedback loop of mutants disrupting society and the thereby degraded society disrupting mutant's and other peoples' social lives, including sex lives (social epistasis amplification).
- Lack of dating opportunities: Some incels appear to lack opportunities to even meet individuals of the opposite sex which may a wide variety of reasons from unmaintained communities to aging populations.
- Social atrophy: Blackpillers believe that due to gynocentrism, many incels have missed formative social and sexual experiences during adolescence, and won't be able to catch up on them later (it's over). Women are believed to have more of opportunities to do so. In an informal poll, 94.9% of incels.co users said they've missed developmental milestones. The Donnelly Study and other studies on inceldom raised the same point. Men who do manage to attract a partner that late, for example by a good income, are believed to only get access to used up leftover women too old and sexually experienced to be sexually attractive (betabux). It is often noted that social skills are a muscle, and like a muscle that is not used it atrophies. Excluded individuals get no feedback how to behave, so they end up behaving in weird/autistic manner.
- Equal pay: Blackpillers believe admitting women a substantial income was a huge mistake, especially in combination with current economic stagnation. In the past, women's choosiness was naturally counterbalanced by their material dependence on men. Removing this dependence, renders men useless and reduces them to their looks and "social skills" such as superficial posturing, brashness and obnoxiousness (clown world), departing from traditional masculine traits like being taciturn, quietly confident.
- Matching hypothesis is mostly false: The matching hypothesis states that people naturally prefer potential partners who are about as attractive as themselves. However, the Walster's famous computer dating study suggested otherwise, namely that only the looks of the potential partner predicts romantic interest, not how similar they are in looks. Data from online dating suggests that men and women alike aim a bit higher than their own desirability, with few aiming excessively high. This may imply that without enforced monogamy, both men and women will lack pressure to settle for the "art of the possible," thus people remain single. This may be evidence of exaggerated preferences for ornament adversely affecting fitness.
- Greedy parents: Affirmative action incentivizes parents to push their female offspring into careers and to be pro-feminist. This forms a self-reinforcing vicious cycle as strengthened feminist policies only increase this incentive.
- Women in power: Blackpillers believe allowing women in politics was a huge mistake. For one thing, this is believed to fuel gendered politics which will ultimately drive the sexes apart. It is also believed that old, childless and bitter token women are occupying influential positions, causing hysteria about social issues and pushing anti-male policies. It is also dreaded that by now the majority of social scientist, educators and social policy makes are female and hence have a genetic disregard to empathize with men's issues executing their feminine imperative. Feminization of the workplace and politics is seen to cause overemphasis on useless socializing and posturing (clown world), draconian anti-harassment laws and limitations of freedom of expression (e.g. gossiping about or slut-shaming women). In fact, men's intrasexual competition is known to be much more ruthless in presence of women, so women's increased workplace participation has likely an effect to this extent.
- Religions had it right: Another theme is how it is implausible that the vast majority of prior cultures happened to be wrong about female sexuality as feminism claims. Blackpillers often jokingly invoke the trope that religious scripture has warned us of admitting women any power, but we did not listen.
- Lookist & harsh dating opportunities: Contact to women is seen to be reduced to situations in which looks are the main thing that matters (e.g. bars and online dating) especially for the many socially isolated millennials, aggravated by the fact that women more often have their own high incomes, so men cannot improve their SMV by income as much as in the past, and are hence more reduced to their physical appearance. The more unattractive the man, the longer longer courtship is required to convince a woman, so the trend towards brief dating opportunities where only looks matter, such as speed, online dating and bars most likely disproportionally disadvantage physically unattractive males. This is further aggravated by increasingly harsh social rules concerning flirting and harassment. As such, men perceive to lack opportunities to even get to know women, e.g. they reported this as a main reason for their singlehood on Reddit.
- Corrupt psychotherapy and psychiatry: Another frequent theme is that psychotherapy, counseling and psychiatry are useless and give poor advice. It is claimed they merely parrot bluepilled notions about being nice and taking a shower, and are ultimately a waste of time and money. There is indeed evidence that psychotherapist do not improve by training and that the effectiveness of psychotherapy is mostly not better than placebo (which consists in self-administered self-help, or in taking any action, other than psychotherapy). There is also some evidence (drawing on large samples from the U.S and Germany) that suggests psychotherapy can actively be harmful to the patient, being associated with negative personality changes (increases in neuroticism, stress and depression) and declines in positive traits (such as self esteem and conscientiousness).
Normies: Blackpills about normies usually involve either of two opposing themes:
- Incels try hard improving their personalities, while normies often have completely unsophisticated personalities and easily get sex and social life merely because they look acceptable and are neurotypical.
- That 1. is a cope and that neurotypical, acceptable looking normies often also develop fairly interesting personalities because they get to live an interesting and fulfilled life.
Each one of the central themes plays a part in deriving incel vocabulary. Looks and status being necessary for men, but unevenly distributed, gives rise to beta and alpha males, Virgin vs Chad. Chad represents women's tendency to date up (hypergamy) and to prefer dominant men. The higher sex drive and more active love style in men gives rise to beta orbiting. For women, Becky vs Stacy represent women's intra-sexual competition in looks.
Blackpills often mean that "it's over" for incels with poor looks and low social status or other flaws—that is, that they have next to no chance of 'ascending' or attaining sexual and social fulfillment. The blackpill gave rise to various spin-offs with varying degrees of seriousness, for instance, the 'dogpill' or 'birdpill'.
Believers in the blackpill have a wide range of opinions about what needs or can be done about the systemic issues outlined above. Most proposed solutions are about changing the price or availability of sex rather than calling for changing sexual desire. Below is a list of various other proposed solutions:
- Traditionalism: Traditionalist believe one should return to the nuclear family Some regard religion as necessary, while others simply propose atheistic monogamy. Some fear that a return to religion, hierarchies and chivalry (man proves himself to and protects the woman) will only lead to an exploitation of low status males, e.g. by duty to die in war or economic exploitation.
- Technology: In opposition to traditionalists, some blackpillers claim that technological progress, such as highly immersive simulated relationship experiences and realistic sex dolls or sex bots present a possible solution to increasing male social alienation and inceldom. Futurologist Ian Pearson has predicted that the prevalence or at least the availability of sexbots will be substantial by the year 2050. Sexlessness is a major component of inceldom. Taken altogether, the components and input of sexbots means that the resulting price of the product will be geared towards a middle-class market segment. Polls also show that men are more interested in sexbots than women, as such we're more likely to see the mass production of fembots rather than manbots or malebots. In conclusion, it is a fair bet that inceldom levels will drop dramatically among middle-class men by the middle of the 21st century. Some even suggest soon all women will be obsolete once science invents artificial wombs, or that genetic engineering could be used to make women less hypergamous. Critics of these solutions maintain that due to phenomena such as the "uncanny valley" effect, such experiences will prove to be, essentially, an elaborate form of masturbation, and will likely not serve as suitable substitutes for actual sex and companionship. Artificial wombs are also touted as a technological solution for incels who wish to reproduce without a willing female partner. Some blackpillers also view advances in the medical field of plastic surgery as a source of optimism, and claim widespread societal awareness of lookism—potentially leading to government subsidized plastic surgery for incels—would also present a possible solution to the problem.
- Sex communism: Some propose sex communism and state-issued girlfriends as a solution to inceldom, however others have objected that such projects seems unlikely to succeed socially/politically, as they are well outside of the Overton Window in all liberal democracies, at least, and as such would likely require an authoritarian state that was invested in solving the problem to sucessfully implement, and it is also seen as doubtful whether healthy relationships can form when a relationship is not "earned", but assigned by fiat. Both men and women often want to be proud of their partner choice. For that, both men and women need to know where they stand.
- Enforced monogamy & hierarchy: Traditionalists like Jordan Peterson say the solution to the incel problem lies primarily in socially enforcing monogamy, but he opposes the complete abolition of women's emancipation. In his words, "the question is not if, but how". Peterson believes social hierarchies are necessary for people to have certainty where they stand which he regards to be important for relationships to form because women date up and across the social hierarchy. Peterson says enforcing monogamy mainly works by cultural norms against promiscuity and divorce. Peterson emphasizes responsibility, "growing up", as well as keeping an upright posture, which many incels perceive as Chadsplaining.
- Limiting hypergamy & online dating: Substantial damage appears to be caused by women refusing to date men who are available. This may in part be due to being told to "grab opportunities, travel and keep your standards high" and that "the world is your oyster". Women appear to incite hypergamy in this manner, also by slutshaming (i.e. giving sex away too easily and hence loosing power over men by strategically withholding sex). One would need to establish social norms to discourage such behavior. Such efforts are strawmanned/slippery-sloped by anti-tradcons as going full sexual Marxism/Fascism, but arguably there is a middle ground where simply very high standards are discouraged, but standards still exist.
- Lowering women's status: Women's hypergamy means that for each man there needs to be a woman of lower status. This implies, in order to reduce inceldom, women's status relative to men needs to be lowered in general. Not necessarily as far that all women are below men, but many in the manosphere do advocate for this. Women definitely should not outeducate men as much as they do today.
- Incentives and disincentives: One can also systematically consider various ways of punishing (making less likely to occur) singlehood and promiscuity, and reinforcing (making more likely to occur) pairing up monogamously, whether by removing existing conditions (negative) or introducing new ones (positive). Blackpillers have proposed state subvention could pay male and female incels for pairing up (positive reinforcement). Similarly, it has been proposed to disincentivize promiscuity and singlehood instead, e.g. by taxing promiscuous behavior and singles (positive punishment). Further, one could remove burdens that are associated with pairing up, e.g. abolishing harassment laws and no-fault divorce laws (negative reinforcement). Lastly, one could e.g. deprive female singles and promiscuous individuals of certain benefits they may have (negative punishment). Of course there may be ethical concerns.
- Stoicism: Others believe a positive effect of taking the blackpill is that it liberates from false hope and from expending time and effort for what is, in essence, a futile goal. Taking the blackpill means acknowledgement unethical, shallow and unhealthy mannerisms in the dating scene or even wider cultural practices, such as narcissism and lookism (the halo effect and beauty-is-good stereotyping). Many blackpilled incels eventually complement or supplant the blackpill with the whitepill. Acceptance of the blackpill could literally mean adopting monk status and potentially joining a religious community that provides a sense of beloningness and status, or embracing ones singledom, freedom and independence (MGTOW, monk mode).
- Nihilism, fatalism and incelicide: Some blackpillers say the damage done is irreparable at this point and advocate fatalism. Such blackpillers are often driven by essentialist views that female sexuality is so strongly biologically hardwired that it would require a civil war to undo the sexual revolution, or that it is simply not feasible and has also historically never been substantially better (which is false since the number of incels is likely at a historical peak). Some social darwinist blackpillers promote fatalism and advocate incelicide. If nobody is left to be an incel, then the problem is solved. These kinds of solutions are of course not ethically tenable. Also if the core problem of the unequal distribution of female's sexual affections is left unresolved, then this would require a continuous purge of incels every generation.
- Too much focus on looks: Correlations between looks, height, income and partner count are only weak, so looks are unlikely to explain most inceldom except for extremely physically unattractive individuals perhaps.
- Too little focus on economics: Economic causes of inceldom like wealth inequality and economic stagnation come up short. Costs of living increasing discourage family formation. Millennials have only a fraction of the worth babyboomers had at the same age. Many blackpillers only focus on hypergamy as an economic issue.
Traditionalism does not necessarily eliminate inceldom: In the 19th century U.S., even though divorces were rare and traditional gender roles were strict, around 70% of men below age 25 were unmarried. In Medieval patriarchy about 20% of the population was poor or destitute, preventing them from entering marriage contracts set by the male Lords. There also seems to be no correlation between how relatively rigid gender roles are and how sexually dissatisfied a modern country is. For example, Japan is the least sexually dissatisfied nation, but it has relatively rigid gender roles for a developed country. Japanese women are encouraged to work more female-centric jobs than in most countries and earn less than men more than in most developed countries including Sweden and the USA.
Counter arguments to this include that conservatives do have more sex, even though even many conservatives are gender progressive nowadays. Japan is also one of the least religious countries and has a peculiar history regarding their sexual modesty. Historically, there have also been more incels due to harsher ecologies, so Medieval Europe and 19th century U.S. may not be a good comparison.
- Furthering the welfare state rather reducing it: Some blackpillers hold that poverty is a better solution to inceldom than mass abundance. To the contrary, child-rearing could instead be more subsidized to reduce female selection based on income. Blackpillers respond that women would then turn to looks and status. State welfare advocates also tend to promote broad societal egalitarianism (Jante Law eg), a sort of status leveler that is rumored to reduce intrasexual competition. However, they do not usually put forth a plan on how to reduce sexual dimorphism in the face of globalization. And in 2019 they tend to favor open-borders and liberal internet policy, which can increase sexual dimorphism in the dating sphere.
- Cult & unhealthy pessimism: Blackpill-spaces are criticised as cultish, quasi-religious and for encouraging unhealthy, pessimistic behaviors among members of the spaces, sometimes inciting violence.
- Bluepill: The bluepill is pretty much the complete opposite of the blackpill. Bluepillers tend to deny even biology determinism, and propose self-help, personality-altering, individualism, neoliberalism, and other self-actualization type philosophies. They also promote an overall positivity as a solution to inceldom.
- Danger of stricter hierarchies: A general danger of returning to stricter enforcement of norms and hierarchies is that it will be abused by those in power. For example the notion of chivalry, nationalism, obedience can quickly result in an apparatus that provokes wars between nations, or also possibly authoritarian outrages such as mass killings. It is a balancing act between maintaining order on the one hand and preventing highly coordinated conflict on the other.
- Nurture vs nature: In particular socialist, social constructionist, bluepilled and purplepilled spaces criticize that the blackpill relies too heavily on biological essentialism, i.e. sees human nature as more inflexible than it is.
Origin of the termEdit
The term blackpill was first used by a blog commenter named Paragon on the Dalrock anti-feminist blog in 2011 and later adopted by OmegaVirginRevolt's blog. In his comment, Paragon defined the blackpill to mean (paraphrased) 'there's no personal solution to systemic dating problems for men and only societal hardship (such as mass poverty) can solve men's systemic dating issues'. In other words, some blackpillers don't believe that a sexual marxist, wealthy welfare state is possible. Paragon, having dating difficulties in Canada, moved from Canada to the Philippines, a less prosperous country than Canada, and married there. It should be noted, though that not all incels or incel boards, or blackpillers promote or believe in the original blackpill definition. In Paragon's words, the blackpill was:
[..] to reconcile that there are no personal solutions to systemic problems – which can only resolve over evolutionary time.
And any solution will very much entail steep trade-offs, in that males can’t have their cake and eat it too – a prosperous population of deferred ecological pressures (like we currently enjoy), without an expectation that this prosperity will increase the mating latitude of females (dramatically perturbing the breeding population, to the point of near evolutionary instability).
One will always follow the other, as male consensus on these matters is practically impossible in terms of inter-sexual competition(as opposed to the broad accord females enjoy through an abundant wealth of sexual opportunities, courtesy of their reproductively limiting function).
- Di Dio C, Macaluso E, Rizzolatti G (2007) The Golden Beauty: Brain Response to Classical and Renaissance Sculptures. PLoS ONE2(11): e1201. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001201
- Psychological Bulletin 2000, Vol. 126, No. 3, 390-423 DOI: 10.1037//0033-2909.126.3.390
- Eibl-Eibesfeldt I. 2017. Pair Formation, Courtship, Sexual Love. In: Human Ethology. Rougtledge. [Excerpt]
- Gareth Tyson, Vasile C. Perta, Hamed Haddadi, Michael C. Seto, Queen Mary University of London, Sapienza University of Rome, Royal Ottawa Health Care Group A First Look at User Activity on Tinder
- Baumeister, R.F. and Tice, D.M., 2001. The social dimension of sex. Allyn & Bacon.
- Harper CR, Dittus PJ, Leichliter JS, Aral, SO. Changes in the Distribution of Sex Partners in the United States: 2002 to 2011–2013. Sexually Transmitted Diseases: February 2017 - Volume 44 - Issue 2 - p 96–100. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000554
- https://labs.la.utexas.edu/buss/files/2013/02/The-Mate-Switching-Hypothesis-FINAL-PUBLISHED-2017.pdf (see Section 6)
- http://dieoff.com/_Biology/BeautyAndTheBeast.pdf 3.3.3. Does female choice drive male dominance competition?
- https://just paste.it/3e767
- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228641949_A_Global_Survey_of_Sexual_Behaviours table 4
- Roger Devlin said this somewhere too
Biological essentialism • Eugenics • Traditional conservatism • Fatalism • Blackpill • Scientific Blackpill • Scientific Blackpill (Supplemental) • Behavioral sink • Hypergamy • Matthew effect • Beauty • Fisherian runaway • Dominance hierarchy • Intrasexual competition • J. D. Unwin • Sexual sublimation • Female subordination • Online dating • Physiognomy
Cope or rope • Cope • Lay down and rot • Inbreeding depression • Outbreeding depression • Mutation • Atavism • Reproductive success • Demographics of inceldom • Causes of inceldom • Adverse effects of inceldom • Evolutionary mismatch • Behavioral sink