Open main menu

ExpansionEdit

Any ideas on how to expand the blackpill article? I'd like to expand on each of the five thesises with data. You're free to propose ideas to me here or on Discord. Mahlo#2892

I would love to contribute. I've made my first edit (removing the poetry intro from this article). We get one chance to blackpill normies, so we have to 'cut our darlings' and get to the point. Also, I dislike that each edit has to be mod-approved before it goes live. It's very unsatisfying to contribute that way, and makes it impossible to run my regular wiki workflow. Limerencel (talk) 04:48, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Considered addingEdit

I was considering adding the following sentence: "One of the most alluring aspects of the black pill is that it gives vulnerable people an ideological basis whereby they could reject the barrage of "self-improvement" advice that is ubiquitous in media, advertising and day-today platitudes. As such, it serves as a shield for people who may otherwise have faced financial or emotional exploitation." Thebreeze (talk) 15:07, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

If you can make the statement more neutral, that'd be fine. Not all incel forums promote the blackpill conceptWilliam (talk) 16:35, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

NevermindEdit

Ignore todays drama. There is now consensus on the lede btw various political factions settled via PM. William (talk) This lede in particular was agreed upon by various political factions https://incels.wiki/w/index.php?title=Blackpill&oldid=27289

Proposal for new lede with focus on tribalism with the redpillEdit

A blackpill is pill jargon for an uncomfortable truth (a redpill) that nothing can be done about barring profound changes.

In the manosphere, the blackpill refers to a movement that emerged in opposition to the self-improvement enthusiasm of the redpill movement. Redpillers believe in a collection of "dating tricks" such as pickup artististry, game and bodybuilding. Blackpillers reject the long-term effectiveness of these tricks, regard them chadsplaining, and claim that for many men it is futile to fake confidence and get fit without plastic surgery, or even systemic changes or changes to human nature itself. It's over for such men and it's not their own fault, but a result of their looks, genes or other deterministic circumstances, as well as women's financial independence and freedom of sexual choice allowing them to ruthlessly choose based on looks. This resulted in considerable tribalism about the importance of looks between the redpill and blackpill communities driving many blackpillers to claim looks is all that matters. Other than that, blackpill and redpill knowledge is nearly identical.

Other blackpillers take a broader look at systemic impediments that aggravate men's dating success, for example the effect of affirmative action for women causing women to outearn men and making it harder for men to impress women due to women's preference to date up (hypergamy). Most blackpillers see women's emancipation, as well as a corruption of the gender roles as the main cause of the incel epidemic and increasingly unsteady sexual relationships. Many blackpillers hence propose returning to traditions, enforcing monogamy and restoring the natural subordination of women.[1] Many blackpillers regard the abolition of sexual sublimation as an existential threat and see modern society as a behavioral sink. Some blackpillers believe that a social collapse is inevitable and therefore advocate that ugly men should adopt a fatalistic and defeatist outlook.[2] Most blackpillers believe in the greatest happiness principle and are opposed to degeneracy. Most are atheist, but some promote cultural Christianity or other religions. Most blackpillers believe in evolutionary psychology and biological determinism, in which they scientifically ground their ideas. The science behind the blackpill is being collected in the Scientific Blackpill article and on the subreddit /r/BlackPillScience.

Not all blackpillers are incels (noncel blackpillers) and not all incels are blackpillers. Some public intellectuals have raised issues closely related to the blackpill. For example, the Norwegian sexologist Kristin Spitznogle largely agrees with the lookism aspect of the blackpill. The Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson agrees with the systemic issue of hypergamy and lack of enforced monogamy causing inceldom.

There's nothing wrong about what you wrote, and you can use that verbatim, just good to source it if you can.William (talk) 12:23, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Kept the vast majority of what you wrote in the ledeEdit

However, it was too long so slimmed it down. If you want to go into further detail about redpill vs. blackpill, a separate section may be good.William (talk) 22:49, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

That new 2 sentence lede paragraphEdit

Is damn goodWilliam (talk) 03:14, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Do any meaningful amount of blackpillers propose changing female nature vis-a-vis desire?Edit

I don't see it and it wasn't cited so I got rid of that sentence that implied it was part of the blackpill. The common theme of the blackpill since the first definition by Paragon is very strong in biological essentialism. I mean Paragon basically meant the blackpill to mean 'women's sexuality can't be changed in any timeframe shorter than millions of years'. This continues into today, if you went into a modern blackpill space and told blackpillers to join in a movement to make incels more appealing to women (decrease cost of childbirth, reduce gender dimorphism, socially engineer eglitarian values etc), they'd just look at you funny.William (talk) 03:25, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

I couldn't cite a source, but genetic engineering was considered on various forums. But it's a minor futuristic point so it's good thinking to drop it in favor of a shorter lede. Bibipi (talk) 14:16, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

FatalismEdit

Should be in any paragraph that discusses proposed solutions by blackpillers imoWilliam (talk) 16:02, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Moved big chunk of politics into OverviewEdit

Now that the lede has a pretty good summary of political bent.William (talk) 16:09, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

CriticismEdit

Moving this point here before it is fully examined.

An alleged incorrect thesis: While the sexual revolution may have exacerbated inceldom, it does not logically follow that we can simply dial back the clock to previous gender roles and have greater sexual satisfaction. Thus, some argue the blackpill has an incorrect thesis that more rigid gender roles would be something anyone would even want to follow along with, with the advent of technology. In fact, there seems to be no correlation between how rigid gender roles are and how sexually dissatisfied a modern country is.[1] Japan is always rated the highest in sexual dissatisfaction, and yet has relatively rigid gender roles[2] for a developed country.

Overall, I'm finding a .4 correlation p = .05 regarding sexual satisfaction and gender inequality, which may also have to do with economic growth and population growth. Bibipi (talk) 05:45, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
Firstly, it's more about monogamy enforcement, which the Japanese evidently do not do. Their economic exploitation of women has made their birth rate plummet which they are not actively fighting. Conversely, less gender progressivism in certain regards may have prevented their incels going berserk (though part of that is maybe also greater conformism/collectivism of the NE asian type). So Japan is worse but also better at the same time. Bibipi (talk) 03:17, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
Another issue is that not all countries with high gender inequality have strict monogamy. Bibipi (talk) 09:42, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
"Overall, I'm finding a .4 correlation p = .05 regarding sexual satisfaction and gender inequality, which may also have to do with economic growth and population growth" Can you dumb that down for me and reference your data/calculation, including which countries you find gender equal? Mexico is fairly matriarchal yet rated the second highest in sexual satisfaction in that study. Their legislature is half women, more than the USA and other European countries. They have also always been fast with gender liberalizing laws. Poland is aso among the highest and while more conservative than other european countries on some issues anectodally, have been very feminist and liberal with regards to gender. Greece and the Netherlands also rank high in sexual satisfaction relative to the USA and the rest of the countries and are very gender liberal.William (talk) 17:04, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
With regards to monogamy 'enforcement' polygamy in Japan is very low (and outlawed) and nuclear families are encouraged. Guaranteed maternity leave for voluntary female work in Japan covers a period of 6 weeks prior to the expected birth date to 8 weeks after giving birth, that is not 'exploitation of gender roles in industrial society' given Japan has been against paternity leave for longer than most countries that adopt maternity leave.[1] It's an enforcement of gender roles in a society where women really want to work. Divorce rates are slightly lower than Sweden[2] yet is more sexually dissatisfied than the Sweden. What one would advocate from a monogamous perspective to reduce inceldom would be universal arranged monogamous marriages with legal rape, which is an opinion..., not JP 'vague cultural monogamy enforcement', which women have been able to subvert or opt-out-of if they want by just not dating or having sex at all, which they are increasingly.William (talk)
"Not enforcing monogamy" is not the same as "enforcing or allowing polygamy". It could also mean nobody pairs up at all, which seems to be the case in Japan. Arranged marriages were pretty much the norm nearly everywhere. When nobody does the arranging due to lack of culture and and overworked, aging populace, combined with non-optimistic governance and actual overpopulation issues then that is going to drop the birth rates of course. As mentioned in the main article, gender inequality is pretty low in Japan. Bibipi (talk) 17:56, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
You cited an index that measures labor outcomes rather than cultural expectations and uses female life expectancy as a measurement of 'gender equality', so you are using higher female life expectancy as a measurement of less feminine gender roles, which is dubious at best. Women live longer than men in Japan than women live longer than men in the US years.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancyWilliam (talk) 18:15, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

GIIEdit

Is not as good as the OECD gender pay gap in measuring roles rather than outcome). Japan has higher division of labor and women work less hours in Japan for lower pay than most developed countries, including the USA. And it doesn't have to do with any 'gender equality paradox' as Swedish women and women in other 'model gender-equal countries' earn more than in less gender-equal countries such as the US and Japan. https://www.oecd.org/japan/Gender2017-JPN-en.pdf William (talk) 18:08, 18 January 2020 (UTC)