Blackpill has made the concept of being a 'loser' irrelevant to modern society

[disillusioned]

Jeremy Meeks was literally a criminal lowlife with no life accomplishments but he's hardly a 'loser' by most standards, thanks to his appearance.

What the the fuck does it even mean to be a loser in 2024?

Looks? Then what about ugly people with 160 IQ and tons of money? Lack of money? But then what about Chads who slay despite being broke and unemployed? Lack of ambition? But then what about rich attractive kids who were born with swimming pools and super-model hookers that they fuck all day? Are they 'losers'?

Fuck it, you don't even need to be rich. A NEET living in a western country is still living better than 80% of humanity and so is by definition 'not a loser'.

The fact of the matter is that the blackpill and modern female degeneracy have broken nature and society. The whole entire concept of 'being a loser' doesn't even make sense anymore.

The very concept of social shame/image is literally irrelevant in this day and age.

 

[Latinus]

The problem is not being a NEET, but being a poor NEET. A rich NEET will never need to work, but a poor NEET, when his source of food (their parents, or anyone that brings food to the roof he lives) dies, will have to, sooner or later, get a job and be a slave to the capitalist and non-meritocratic society.

 

[ElTruecel]

Attractive people cant be losers unless their niche revolves around it

 

[Latinus]

Jeremy Meeks was literally a criminal lowlife with no life accomplishments but he's hardly a 'loser' by most standards, thanks to his appearance.

When you're good looking women will jump at you, regardless of your character. Sad but true.

What the the fuck does it even mean to be a loser in 2024?

Being an Incel and having an account on looksmax.org.

Looks?

Yeah, losers are usually ugly, and ugly people are also overrepresented in the lower classes, who are seen as losers by this society that praises pseudo meritocracy.

Then what about ugly people with 160 IQ and tons of money?

They mainly inherited from mommy and daddy.

Lack of money?

Being born in poor family. Poverty runs though generations and generations...

But then what about Chads who slay despite being broke and unemployed?

Because they are good looking. Women get wet by your appearance, not your dollars, even if they value both: a chad to fuck, and a rich guy to pay the silicone to her boobs and her fancy/expensive shoppings in Beverly Hills, Malibu, Dubai...

Lack of ambition?

A poor chad can succed in life easier than a poor subhuman, since he can do modeling.

But then what about rich attractive kids who were born with swimming pools and super-model hookers that they fuck all day?

Don't understand? Who are they?

Are they 'losers'?

Same question as above: who are they?

 

[ThatGuythattype]

Being a loser just means being a loser, nothing too complicated.
If you live like an animal in a cage, or lost every game you ever tried you are a loser.
You can be a rich loser, a poor loser, doesn't matter.
Also an ugly loser or good looking loser
I know many good looking losers

 

[Allornothing]

A loser is someone who doesn’t win. Meeks wasn’t a loser he had it all and took what he wanted by force. A loser is an ugly guy with nothing.

 

[yeeyeeslayer]

Jeremy Meeks was literally a criminal lowlife with no life accomplishments but he's hardly a 'loser' by most standards, thanks to his appearance.

What the the fuck does it even mean to be a loser in 2024?

Looks? Then what about ugly people with 160 IQ and tons of money? Lack of money? But then what about Chads who slay despite being broke and unemployed? Lack of ambition? But then what about rich attractive kids who were born with swimming pools and super-model hookers that they fuck all day? Are they 'losers'?

Fuck it, you don't even need to be rich. A NEET living in a western country is still living better than 80% of humanity and so is by definition 'not a loser'.

The fact of the matter is that the blackpill and modern female degeneracy have broken nature and society. The whole entire concept of 'being a loser' doesn't even make sense anymore.

The very concept of social shame/image is literally irrelevant in this day and age.

I think looks and NTness make the difference when it comes to being a loser or not

 

[Aladin]

Being a loser is being a bitter incel who doesn’t worship kweens.

 

[disillusioned]

Being an Incel and having an account on looksmax.org.

Does it?

I'd argue that having a looksmax.org account just makes you more self-aware than normies. The vast, vast majority of incels irl will never visit a looksmaxing or blackpill forum.

If anything we have the advantage in that we're not going to get fucked over by some bullshit the say way a more bluepilled normie or incel might.

 

[lunin7]

I feel like no one really cares about anyone unless they are goodlooking or classy, because these are people associated with success, and they too want to be apart of that success. This is likely the mindset of the average individual and they probably see someone like the average 9-5 worker as "low lives" regardless of how hard they work.

 

[Outlier]

Jeremy Meeks was literally a criminal lowlife with no life accomplishments but he's hardly a 'loser' by most standards, thanks to his appearance.

What the the fuck does it even mean to be a loser in 2024?

Looks? Then what about ugly people with 160 IQ and tons of money? Lack of money? But then what about Chads who slay despite being broke and unemployed? Lack of ambition? But then what about rich attractive kids who were born with swimming pools and super-model hookers that they fuck all day? Are they 'losers'?

Fuck it, you don't even need to be rich. A NEET living in a western country is still living better than 80% of humanity and so is by definition 'not a loser'.

The fact of the matter is that the blackpill and modern female degeneracy have broken nature and society. The whole entire concept of 'being a loser' doesn't even make sense anymore.

The very concept of social shame/image is literally irrelevant in this day and age.

This is because the concept of being a "loser" was created to shame men by other men. Men created the concept of being a "loser". Now, since women hold so much power in society and the dating market the idea of being a loser has shifted toward a more superficial end. Where you were judged in the past by other men, now you are judged mostly by women who aren't rational and will judge you off how you look rather then what you do. Men in power are meritocratic, whereas women in power are emotionally unstable eugenicists. Whats worse is there is now no checks and balances to control these power that women hold. Affirming these ridiculous, and useless standards for an actual flourishing society.

 

[dreamcake1mo]

This is because the concept of being a "loser" was created to shame men by other men. Men created the concept of being a "loser". Now, since women hold so much power in society and the dating market the idea of being a loser has shifted toward a more superficial end. Where you were judged in the past by other men, now you are judged mostly by women who aren't rational and will judge you off how you look rather then what you do. Men in power are meritocratic, whereas women in power are emotionally unstable eugenicists. Whats worse is there is now no checks and balances to control these power that women hold. Affirming these ridiculous, and useless standards for an actual flourishing society.

Gold comment.

 

[Sprinkles]

a loser by normie standards has always been a socially isolated individual with no friends, family, sexual/romantic relationships, a non
existent social life, and does not drink alcohol or do drugs.

they tend to be unattractive, socially inept, and have extremely niche interests and hobbies, and are often socially introverted

 

[copemaxxeer]

a loser by normie standards has always been a socially isolated individual with no friends, family, sexual/romantic relationships, a non
existent social life, and does not drink alcohol or do drugs.

they tend to be unattractive, socially inept, and have extremely niche interests and hobbies, and are often socially introverted

Sub 6 males don't have relationships anymore

 

[hirochan]

Jeremy Meeks was literally a criminal lowlife with no life accomplishments but he's hardly a 'loser' by most standards, thanks to his appearance.

What the the fuck does it even mean to be a loser in 2024?

Looks? Then what about ugly people with 160 IQ and tons of money? Lack of money? But then what about Chads who slay despite being broke and unemployed? Lack of ambition? But then what about rich attractive kids who were born with swimming pools and super-model hookers that they fuck all day? Are they 'losers'?

Fuck it, you don't even need to be rich. A NEET living in a western country is still living better than 80% of humanity and so is by definition 'not a loser'.

The fact of the matter is that the blackpill and modern female degeneracy have broken nature and society. The whole entire concept of 'being a loser' doesn't even make sense anymore.

The very concept of social shame/image is literally irrelevant in this day and age.

Blackpill is the relief from this burden we self-impose and we can become low inhib, not be politically correct and not have other shame you to drain your of your serotonins, these bitches should be utter complete property solely used for breeding and as a coom receptacle.

 

[Psychophilly]

Jeremy Meeks was literally a criminal lowlife with no life accomplishments but he's hardly a 'loser' by most standards, thanks to his appearance.

What the the fuck does it even mean to be a loser in 2024?

Looks? Then what about ugly people with 160 IQ and tons of money? Lack of money? But then what about Chads who slay despite being broke and unemployed? Lack of ambition? But then what about rich attractive kids who were born with swimming pools and super-model hookers that they fuck all day? Are they 'losers'?

Fuck it, you don't even need to be rich. A NEET living in a western country is still living better than 80% of humanity and so is by definition 'not a loser'.

The fact of the matter is that the blackpill and modern female degeneracy have broken nature and society. The whole entire concept of 'being a loser' doesn't even make sense anymore.

The very concept of social shame/image is literally irrelevant in this day and age.

being born in Iran and being ltn and poor and then failing uni and not finding job and being khhv at 28 living with your father is definition of loser.

 

[Hess]

I assume the word loser just means bottom of the social hierarchy in the society and culture you live in

 

[IAMNOTANINCEL]

There's no such thing as a loser

 

[disillusioned]

Where you were judged in the past by other men, now you are judged mostly by women who aren't rational and will judge you off how you look rather then what you do.

So fucking tired of this cope.

In what sense are women 'not rational' by fucking Chad? No offense but this is just a bullshit normie bluepiller cope. Women aren't irrational because they're not dating a 4/10 betabucks with a high-paying programmer job. They get their own decent jobs instead + welfare and then go fuck Chad on the side. That is plenty rational from their perspective.

 

[disillusioned]

Men in power are meritocratic, whereas women in power are emotionally unstable eugenicists.

 

[Outlier]

In what sense are women 'not rational' by fucking Chad?

The irrationality is that they believe by "fucking Chad" they'll be able to date chad. The irrationality comes from the belief that they'll be able to obtain a man of that caliber long-term.

Women aren't irrational because they're not dating a 4/10 betabucks with a high-paying programmer job.

Yes, they are. Only in the case if that is there looksmatch though. Most women are average, and most men are average. Is it rational to believe you deserve something great, when you yourself are average?

They get their own decent jobs instead

Not a rational choice, but a life path they are told by feminism and society writ large. Most women aren't actively thinking this out, but are told it is the action they should take.

That is plenty rational from their perspective.

No, it's not. All you have to point to is the female happiness paradox. Wouldn't you think the rational choice women would want to make would be their own well-being and happiness? No, wanting chad is an emotional, not a rational response.

 

[Outlier]

Hitler was meritocratic. He had the best men in the most important positions. His end-goal might not seem "rational", but there was a rationality behind how he was going to accomplish it.

 

[New Poster]

c
o
p
e

 

[Lookologist003]

I disagree. Being a loser is very much relevant. But there is no such thing as a universal loser, perhaps unless that loser never existed, will never exist, can never exist.

One way to think about life is that it is a bunch of games. The game of survival is so easy in the West, it's impossible to natural-select yourself to be a loser there. Winning the game of popularity and desire is very difficult as I'm coming to find out, maybe impossible with what cards whoever the dealer, the cosmos, God dealt you. I'm loosing really fucking hard here, comically even.

This game, however, is what everybody enters the rat race for, to hopefully upgrade LMS. When a normie is gonna call you a loser, it's because you are unattractive, very rarely for anything else as actions, I'm sure, don't matter. The inference comes from that failo and a presumption that unattractive people at best can be background characters, and at worse, a laughingstock.

Another thing to think about is the ever increasing importance on physical attractiveness only ever can become more important with the growth of the population. Starting only in the 20th century did the population grow to today's approximately eight-billion from the modest one-billion it was. Nobody has time to know you, besides your face and height. Women act like it is a huge waste of their time getting to know some ugly man, because what's he realistically got to offer? A young ugly guy can't even be a beta provider, nor would today's liberated and sexually-free woman give a fuck. She's thinking how wet her pussy is with Chad, and not how expensive your ER BMW is.

So unless you can work for a better face or height, being a loser is having an undesirable body.

I've made blackpill and lookism sort of my dogma. It's like peering in to the head's of anybody and understanding that only high social value (good looking) individuals are winning that game that everybody so much wants to win.
A strange game. The only winning move for ugly males is not to play.

I didn't word that so well, but I hope you get it @disillusioned

 

[disillusioned]

I disagree. Being a loser is very much relevant. But there is no such thing as a universal loser, perhaps unless that loser never existed, will never exist, can never exist.

One way to think about life is that it is a bunch of games. The game of survival is so easy in the West, it's impossible to natural-select yourself to be a loser there. Winning the game of popularity and desire is very difficult as I'm coming to find out, maybe impossible with what cards whoever the dealer, the cosmos, God dealt you. I'm loosing really fucking hard here, comically even.

This game, however, is what everybody enters the rat race for, to hopefully upgrade LMS. When a normie is gonna call you a loser, it's because you are unattractive, very rarely for anything else as actions, I'm sure, don't matter. The inference comes from that failo and a presumption that unattractive people at best can be background characters, and at worse, a laughingstock.

Another thing to think about is the ever increasing importance on physical attractiveness only ever can become more important with the growth of the population. Starting only in the 20th century did the population grow to today's approximately eight-billion from the modest one-billion it was. Nobody has time to know you, besides your face and height. Women act like it is a huge waste of their time getting to know some ugly man, because what's he realistically got to offer? A young ugly guy can't even be a beta provider, nor would today's liberated and sexually-free woman give a fuck. She's thinking how wet her pussy is with Chad, and not how expensive your ER BMW is.

So unless you can work for a better face or height, being a loser is having an undesirable body.

I've made blackpill and lookism sort of my dogma. It's like peering in to the head's of anybody and understanding that only high social value (good looking) individuals are winning that game that everybody so much wants to win.
A strange game. The only winning move for ugly males is not to play.

I didn't word that so well, but I hope you get it @disillusioned

So basically loser = Ugly

You just proved my point. If being a loser doesn't have anything to do with stuff you do, but rather by what you are, then there is no reason to care.

 

[Gus17]

Jeremy Meeks was literally a criminal lowlife with no life accomplishments but he's hardly a 'loser' by most standards, thanks to his appearance.

What the the fuck does it even mean to be a loser in 2024?

Looks? Then what about ugly people with 160 IQ and tons of money? Lack of money? But then what about Chads who slay despite being broke and unemployed? Lack of ambition? But then what about rich attractive kids who were born with swimming pools and super-model hookers that they fuck all day? Are they 'losers'?

Fuck it, you don't even need to be rich. A NEET living in a western country is still living better than 80% of humanity and so is by definition 'not a loser'.

The fact of the matter is that the blackpill and modern female degeneracy have broken nature and society. The whole entire concept of 'being a loser' doesn't even make sense anymore.

The very concept of social shame/image is literally irrelevant in this day and age.

Low iq, if you’re in highschool you know who the losers are. Losers are the fat ugly people who are seen as strange and weird by others. Usally they have few freinds and if they do have freinds they’re other losers. Basically your a loser if you don’t do sports, are ugly, and you’re a social outcast.

 

[disillusioned]

Low iq, if you’re in highschool you know who the losers are. Losers are the fat ugly people who are seen as strange and weird by others. Usally they have few freinds and if they do have freinds they’re other losers. Basically your a loser if you don’t do sports, are ugly, and you’re a social outcast.

So basically loser = Ugly

You just proved my point. If being a loser doesn't have anything to do with stuff you do, but rather by what you are, then there is no reason to care.

 

[Lookologist003]

then there is no reason to care.

There is no reason to care, if you don't live in society. But we live in a society. Sadly being dejected by society makes you feel sad and stuff, and that's hardwired. So you need to care about other's perceptions of you!

If being a loser doesn't have anything to do with stuff you do

Well, yeah, it doesn't. Damn, I really can't explain this yet. When I mean looks are everything, it's because of the halo effects. Like you could be a world-class artist, donate to charities, be as selfless as you can, but to a stranger who sees you for the first time, has no idea about you, everything is from your looks. You would get treated and thought to or not to be a loser accordingly to your face and height, not by whatever virtuous things you did or do. This cognitive bias is so prevalent in society; you see faces everyday like how you see language. You almost don't get a choice in the matter. Normies who have no fucking idea at all about lookism or what the skeletal difference between a good looking face and a bad looking face is stand no chance at defeating their instincts; they succumb to whatever impressions a face makes. And normies are going to be the judge of whoever is a loser or not. (Do you care about normie's flawed and instinctual judgements so much? You might care if that normie is female and has a pussy, something to offer those judged as winners, attractive men.) So I hope you can understand why I think being a loser is completely whether or not your body is high grade and face symmetric and well-formed and dimorphic.

Even a little critical thinking would help stop how prevalent the halo effects are, but critical thinking is hard work for the brain, and so rarely seen and develops spontaneously in some, that's what I think.

I truly do believe looks are everything, so not being good looking limits you greatly, and being ugly restricts even from the normal experience you'd get as a man. The finality of this has ruined me. This life is gay and stupid.

 

[copemaxxeer]

Yes, they are. Only in the case if that is there looksmatch though. Most women are average, and most men are average.

Following your evolutionary programming is plenty rational, women are designed to be unhappy with a average men, even if they themselves are also average or below average

 

[mvp2v1]

Jeremy Meeks was literally a criminal lowlife with no life accomplishments but he's hardly a 'loser' by most standards, thanks to his appearance.

What the the fuck does it even mean to be a loser in 2024?

Looks? Then what about ugly people with 160 IQ and tons of money? Lack of money? But then what about Chads who slay despite being broke and unemployed? Lack of ambition? But then what about rich attractive kids who were born with swimming pools and super-model hookers that they fuck all day? Are they 'losers'?

Fuck it, you don't even need to be rich. A NEET living in a western country is still living better than 80% of humanity and so is by definition 'not a loser'.

The fact of the matter is that the blackpill and modern female degeneracy have broken nature and society. The whole entire concept of 'being a loser' doesn't even make sense anymore.

The very concept of social shame/image is literally irrelevant in this day and age.

Loser = struggle to make connections with other people (romantic and non-romantic)

That’s the mainstream meaning imo. Niche meanings are many like someone who tries being good at something but fails etc

 

[Reckless Turtle]

The problem is not being a NEET, but being a poor NEET. A rich NEET will never need to work, but a poor NEET, when his source of food (their parents, or anyone that brings food to the roof he lives) dies, will have to, sooner or later, get a job and be a slave to the capitalist and non-meritocratic society.

Ironically, Elliot Rodger has become martyred as a prototypical loser despite coming from a wealthier background and having nepotistic advantages.

 

[kranerman23123]

Jeremy Meeks was literally a criminal lowlife with no life accomplishments but he's hardly a 'loser' by most standards, thanks to his appearance.

What the the fuck does it even mean to be a loser in 2024?

Looks? Then what about ugly people with 160 IQ and tons of money? Lack of money? But then what about Chads who slay despite being broke and unemployed? Lack of ambition? But then what about rich attractive kids who were born with swimming pools and super-model hookers that they fuck all day? Are they 'losers'?

Fuck it, you don't even need to be rich. A NEET living in a western country is still living better than 80% of humanity and so is by definition 'not a loser'.

The fact of the matter is that the blackpill and modern female degeneracy have broken nature and society. The whole entire concept of 'being a loser' doesn't even make sense anymore.

The very concept of social shame/image is literally irrelevant in this day and age.

Yeah same with streamers. Literally all it means is you have no looks + no money + no skills (this doesnt even really matter anymore tbh without the money you can be world class drummer still a loser at parents house) and its pretty indicitive of how vain the world is. You got lucky throwing all the money you made when you were an 18yr old neet working as a dishwasher into some random stupid crypto elon musk is shilling on twitter and became a millionaire because of it? Successful! no longer a loser. You stream world of warcraft 12 hours a day living in your moms house with no skills no job no income? Loser. People start watching the stream and you make money because of it? Not a loser. Success is some stupid shit. Goyim word

 

[kranerman23123]

Yeah same with streamers. Literally all it means is you have no looks + no money + no skills (this doesnt even really matter anymore tbh without the money you can be world class drummer still a loser at parents house) and its pretty indicitive of how vain the world is. You got lucky throwing all the money you made when you were an 18yr old neet working as a dishwasher into some random stupid crypto elon musk is shilling on twitter and became a millionaire because of it? Successful! no longer a loser. You stream world of warcraft 12 hours a day living in your moms house with no skills no job no income? Loser. People start watching the stream and you make money because of it? Not a loser. Success is some stupid shit. Goyim word

Do you work 4 hours a day barely supporting yourself at a cell phone store only to go home the rest of the day and fuck off as a 23 yr old? Loser. Are you chad? Player.