Rapecels are romantic idealists

04fcb6f509d2ee151790e47bc0d3cda068cf77-wmRape is based on many ideas that romantics have cherished throughout the ages. E.g., the idea that “Love will find a way,” “Love overcomes obstacles,” etc. It doesn’t matter if she says “No” or tries to fight back; love will not be deterred! Romeo and Juliet violated social convention so that they could be together, and the rapist also does not let some arbitrary manmade law get in the way of physically expressing his desire for a female.

Some will object, “That’s not love!” But according to the Greeks, eros — lust — was a form of a love. It’s a love strong enough that even among those animal species that don’t have actual relationships, are able to rely on it for the procreative needs. It’s the cornerstone of every other kind of love, because without lust, there would be no people with whom to populate the earth and enjoy the other kinds of love that exist.

The marital rapecel refuses to allow his relationship to degenerate into a dead bedroom situation. When his wife won’t put out, he ravishes her, so that she knows that he at least is willing to uphold the integrity of the institution of marriage, which is a “more than friends” relationship. He makes known through his penetration of her that he desires her so strongly that even when she tries to push him away and scream “rape,” he’s not going to let something as trivial as a lack of consent get in the way of his passion. (Later, when the neighbors ask what was all that racket, he’ll explain that it was just some kinky BDSM. Can she disprove it?)

The female brain is not actually wired to have any concept of rape anyway. There’s only “sex she regrets” and “sex she doesn’t regret”. The word our modern society uses for sex she regrets is “rape”. If the law defines rape differently that “regretted sex,” she will just change the facts of what happened so that it meets the legal definition.

See the hypocrisy — femoids will say, “Rape is a crime” yet they violate the law all the time by making false rape accusations. Of course, they can’t help it; it’s in their nature, so society lets them get away with. Well, I can’t help being a masculine man who wants to dominate femoids either! Just like it’s in female nature to want to blame men for everything, it’s in my nature to want to force femoids into sexual submission. Am I supposed to be untrue to my nature? My romantic idealism won’t allow that, since the very definition of romance is that the two sexes are fulfilling their masculine and feminine tendencies, respectively, so that they can be in harmony together, to fulfill the romantic ideal of what a relationship is supposed to be about.

Why should we accept feminine lack of responsibility, while not accepting male dominance? That would be misandrist, by which I mean, it would seem to suggest something negative about men (much as misogyny means expressing anything negative about women). If we’re going to let femoids get away with blaming men for everything, then men should be allowed to have control. Rape is one way of exercising control. I’m just trying to restore some balance between the sexes. The feminists are always saying relationships are unhealthy when there’s a power imbalance, so therefore I want to eliminate the power imbalance by getting rid of femoids’ power to say, “I don’t want to have sex,” which puts men in a submissive position as the ones who tend to want more sex and to be less picky about sex partners.

Femoids have become so entitled and arrogant. Nothing is asked of them other than that they open their legs and moan when they’re getting fucked as though they’re enjoying it, which comes easily to them because they’re natural actresses, having evolved through millennia of needing to please powerful men by pretending to like them. If a femoid refuses to put out, I think her man has a right to say, “Relationships are supposed to be better than this. There are supposed to be expressions of physical love” and then enforce his standards by holding her down and violating her, rather than accept some kind of pseudo-relationship, masquerading as the real thing, that doesn’t involve the amount and kind of intimacy that he wants. This is what I mean by idealism — upholding an ideal, by force if necessary, rather than settling for less.

Some will say, “If she doesn’t put out, you can always divorce her.” That’s not the idealistic way of looking at it! Marriage is supposed to be permanent. To say, “I’ll just let her go if she doesn’t fulfill my wishes” is to act like she isn’t special, and can just be replaced by some other broad. But love is all about viewing a particular person as special rather than fungible. Pragmatic love says, “I’ll settle for what I can get.” E.g., for whichever girl will consent to sex. Idealistic love says, “I’ll have the girl I want, even if it has to be by rape. I won’t let go of this relationship; I will make it happen, and preserve its integrity (by keeping it sexual, lest it degenerate into a platonic relationship) by force if need be.”

All day long, we hear on the radio these songs where femoids talk about their love and devotion for Chads who mistreat them. They long to be violated by Chad. Well, I may not be able to become like Chad in EVERY way, but I can at least be as rapey as Chad. Yeah, I may not have Chad’s jawline or hairline, but I can least twist her arm and overpower her to fuck her like Chad does. I’m just trying to Chadmaxx in whatever ways are possible for me; what’s wrong with that?

In the Bible, the Christian God says, “You better accept my love, or I’ll send you to hell.” How is that any different than if I tell some chick, “You better open your legs, or I’ll beat the shit out of you”? True love doesn’t take no for an answer, because true love accepts no substitutes for the object of affection. In a world where love is not a crime, to have a “oneitis” is not a disorder at all; the obsession is just supposed to drive you to rape, rather than to despair. And when you forcibly penetrate her, that’s not “abusive, controlling behavior”; that’s just proof of your love.

Maybe someday she’ll have some rape-babies that will be further evidence of your love, and you can tell them about how their mommy was so desirable to you that you couldn’t help but violate her so you could bring those kids into existence. Kids just want to feel wanted; and what could make them feel more wanted, than knowing their dad didn’t take no for an answer, but insisted on impregnating their mom? Life is all about the fight for existence, and when your kids know that they were the product of rape, they’ll realize that you were fighting for their existence from the very get-go, even before they were conceived; and that will give them the confidence that they are loved and that you will always be there for them.

There’s a saying that if God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him. It’s the same way with rape! Femoids’ attitude is, “If rape does not exist, it’s necessary to invent it.” There’s not enough rape going on in our society, which is why femoids feel the need to make so many false rape allegations. If they had more rape in their lives, they wouldn’t need to invent all these stories of rape; they could just tell the stories of how they actually were raped.

Poor Christine Blasey Ford. She really wishes that some high status man like Brett Kavanaugh would have wanted to grope her. If only I’d been around back then, I could have raped her, and then she could have focused on that incident rather than making up some fake story about how this other guy forced himself upon her. I think these false allegations leave femoids feeling empty inside; what they really need is a TRUE rape story they can tell. That will leave them feeling complete, to have had that peak experience of being so strongly desired, and tell the whole world about it.

Some will say, “Femoids only want to be raped by high-quality men.” This assumes that it would be low-quality men doing the raping. Yet as we know, it’s actually the frustrated high-quality man who is often a rapist, because he knows that his genetics deserve to be passed on, and it seems like a crime to not cause that to happen.

People will say, “Rape shows disrespect for women” — but on the contrary, rape shows respect for her by saying, “I want to participate in passing on your genetics by making some babies with you.” What could be a greater compliment than that?

Women realize their inferiority, and they hate to take responsibility for anything. So what they want is a man who will violate them (and thereby take responsibility for the decision to have sex), and who will then mercilessly dominate them (and thereby take responsibility for all future decisions as well). That way, no matter what happens, the femoid will not be to blame for anything.

However, society lets femoids make bad decisions and then blame those decisions on men anyway, and make false accusations of having been dominated. The problem with that is, letting femoids make decisions means that more bad decisions will be made, which means that more blaming will go on than would have gone on if men had just been allowed to rape femoids (thereby making her sexual decisions for her) and make all the other decisions in the relationship as well.

So therefore, both on pragmatic AND idealistic grounds, femoids have a need to be raped. Now, some might say, “How are you going to set up a society where femoids can be legally raped, if femoids are 50% of the electorate?” The answer is, we just need to rape them into submission. Just put a dog leash on her, and then go to the polls and have her vote for the candidate you want to see get elected, who will be a radical patriarchist; and then take her home and fuck her up the ass as a reward for her obedience and further assertion of dominance.

There’s a saying, “It’s not the people who vote that count, it’s the people who count the votes.” Similarly, it’s not the femoids’ views on rape that count; it’s the views of those who rape the femoids. If you’re her rapist, then you can get her to do whatever else you want, in addition to putting out. You can have her get one of those absentee ballots and then grab her by the neck and say, “Either vote for the reactionary party, or I’ll sodomize you so hard your rectum will prolapse.” That’s how you handle femoids, and get out the vote for good conservative candidates, in this era of female suffrage.

People might say, “She’ll call the cops, though.” Nah, if you make her afraid enough, she won’t do that. Remember Colleen Stan? Her kidnapper kept her in a box for years, and told her that if she ever escaped, members of his organization would come and get her. It was the same way with Elizabeth Smart, who appeared in public with her captor many times and didn’t go to the cops, because she was afraid of him. You just gotta know how to control your bitches.

Some people would say, “CuckTears is gonna screenshot this shit.” Nah, they won’t do that, because they know what the consequences are. These roasties know that if they do that, I’m going to find them and rape them (thus, if they screenshot it, that means they must want to get raped, which means it’s consensual, which means I can’t be charged for it). The cucks, on the other hand, know that if they screenshot me, I’ll rape their bitches.

Someone might argue, “Your threat is meaningless, because you’re not actually gonna rape any bitches; you’re just talking shit.” Well if that’s the case, then how can anyone give me a hard time about anything I’ve said above, if it’s just idle talk? If this is just hypothetical rape, then who cares? It has no connection to the real world, and is just mental masturbation.

People want to argue that rape is wrong, while disregarding the fact that life itself is one big rape. I didn’t CHOOSE to be born; that was forced upon me, and now society says I’m not allowed to kill myself. And there are many other forms of domination we have to submit to. So how can femoids single out one particular form that they supposedly don’t like, and say, “That’s bad”?

Society says, “You can’t kill yourself, because you don’t know what’s good for you. Life is actually great and you’ll discover that if we force you to stay alive.” Well, why can’t I tell a femoid then, “You can’t say no to sex with me; you need to just submit so that you can find out what a great experience it is to have my penis inside of you, and have my babies”? Don’t we have a culture of life, where every life is sacred, including the life I’m going to create with the bitch I rape? Every sperm is precious, lest you forget.

Yet we have these supposedly pro-life conservatives saying we need an FBI investigation of Kavanaugh to see if he groped some bitch. His only crime, if there was a crime, was in only feeling her up rather than actually impregnating her. If she’d devoted herself to being a teenage mother rather than her fancy career, maybe she’d be happier and less neurotic today. But the problem is, he didn’t love her enough to forcibly knock her up, and that’s why she’s so mad at him and trying to get revenge now.

Men being forced to be incel is the true rape. “How is that rape,” you might ask. Well, rape is unwanted sexual penetration, is it not? Yet we didn’t want girls to fuck Chads (and leave all sub-8 men without sex). So, guess what.

9 thoughts on “Rapecels are romantic idealists

  1. Lately I’ve been thinking about quitting Male Sexualism, but “for real.” I mean, with Jim leading NRx, Anglin leading Nazism, and you leading Rapecelism, what use is there for this freaky ol’ kike? I think I should pursue a different ideology.

    P. S., why call them femoids rather than gynoids?

    Like

    1. Finding a niche is hard sometimes. It can take years.

      Just forget about male sexualism and become king of the pedocels instead. Since I’m hanging out at Incels.me a lot lately, I don’t get a chance to talk about pedocel stuff very often, so that leaves an opening for you.

      The rapecel stuff too I can’t talk about too much at Incels.me (that’s why I had to make this post here). But a pedocel is just an edgier kind of rapecel anyway.

      There’s also a niche for someone to be king of the zoocels. I think FeminismIsCancer already has that covered somewhat, but mostly he has to keep to his own little corner of Truecels.org.

      Like

  2. Btw, you know what’s really upsetting? That Ford Blazer bitch probably had a drunken orgy at that party with two Chads, yet now Virgin Kavanaugh is getting screwed over by it. I mean, he was an incel at the time while Blazzy was pulling trains with Chads, yet the Chads go unscathed while the uninvolved incel is blamed! That’s a whole new level of getting cucked by a foid.

    Like

  3. You live off of your mother’s money and you have a sister who made it possible for you to see your daughter in person. What do your parents and sister have to say about your beliefs?

    Like

      1. Well, your mother must care at least a little. You state that she made you quit the Congressional race. Have you sent a link to your blog?

        Like

    1. You never mentioned whether his mother or sister even have good political beliefs or a correct view on this issue, which is surely more relevant to whether or not he should adopt their views. People’s views shouldn’t be considered more important unless it has something to do with the viewpoints themselves.

      Like

  4. When it comes to the ‘romantic’ element, I think that orthodox ‘romance’ is mostly something that occurs in the minds of males. Obviously, in a typical public context, if the female consents to it then it typically isn’t romantic. If a person wants to have sex, out of love or lust or otherwise, then they essentially want to rape. It’s a question of their own desire, which compels them to have a sexual encounter regardless of other circumstances. It seems perverse to glorify sex while stigmatising people for their sexual desires. Nobody asks people to get consent before having a sexual fantasy, for instance – so that is hence essentially a fantasy about sex without consent from the other, as their conduct is up to you. Nonetheless, this kind of thing is treated as if a taboo. It somewhat like playing cricket if match-fixing were obligated by law.

    It seems likely that society’s sexual conduct is slightly peculiar, especially when they like to keep up romantic and ‘bluepill’ pretenses while effortlessly giving approval to and sanctifying extraneous factors in relationships.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s