[ Home ] [ wiz / dep / hob / lounge / jp / meta / games / music ] [ all ] [  Rules ] [  FAQ ] [  Search /  History ] [  Textboard ] [  Wiki ]

/wiz/ - Wizardry

Disregard Females, Acquire Magic
Email
Comment
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

  [Go to bottom]   [Catalog]   [Return]   [Archive]

File: 1668293697600.jpg (145.76 KB, 1080x1080, 1:1, 1644383955756.jpg) ImgOps iqdb

 No.198043[View All]

Sometimes I feel like there's no adult virgins out there. No matter where I go, be it discord, various chans, forums and social media, I have yet to find someone around my age(28) that's a virgin.
I could go to a small discord server of some obscure weeb game only a degenerate would like and everyone in there would have had friends and a girlfriend or three growing up.
Not to sound like an insufferable snowflake faggot but it sometimes makes me think that there's no people out there that grew up with no friends or a girlfriend like me. At least not online.
What do you think wizards? Would you say virgins are that rare?
215 posts and 11 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.198767

https://imgur.com/2FGbp89

this was uploaded in 2018. More male celibates than female. Only way this makes sense is if succubi are riding the cock carousel

 No.198768

>>198766
No, it is not "better than noting" because it's totally irrelevant. It's like you're looking at how many people die because lightning crashed their plane when they flew through storm, and using that data to determine how likely you are to die from lightning when walking on the ground. Tinder is niche, an odd format for odd people looking for odd relationships. Its stats will only benefit someone looking for the kind no-commitment, sex-focused, suck-n-fuck with other people who believe they are attractive enough to use their looks alone to attract people who feel the same. Most men who get swiped the bad direction on Tinder will find someone to form a relationship with an a platform that uses a personality-based approach, and with someone they mutually find attractive.

Tinder succubi get all the Tinder men and the Tinder men get all the Tinder succubi. Those who aren't Tinder people will be rejected and later find fellow non-Tinder people to enjoy the company of.

>>198765
>more sexless men than succubi.
Men are more likely to chose to be celibate. Do those stats and surveys ask if the man who are virgins are OK with being virgins? If they were asked, most of them would say they are fine with it and hold themselves and their efforts responsible. They are virgins because they haven't made the effort to have sex. Just like you, just like me.

>>198764
>When it comes to extremely personalized things like dating, the only thing that matters is your personal experience
I agree, but it's important to inform the crabs who want sex, love, or friends, that those things are very obtainable.. But if the crab has a dusty shell or small claws, he shouldn't count on stats from "The shiny shell and big claws" exclusive wading pool as a measure of his own capacity to attract someone.

I don't mind crabs. There will always be men, even here, who really want a relationship but can't get one. Just because we as wizards aren't interested in that lifestyle, doesn't mean we can or must convince crabs that Wizardry is the way for them. I post reassurance of what I believe to be the easy realities of finding love to give crabs peace of mind. To teach patience.

 No.198769

>>198768
this post was written by a female

 No.198770

>>198768
>Most men who get swiped the bad direction on Tinder will find someone to form a relationship with an a platform that uses a personality-based approach, and with someone they mutually find attractive.
A platform such as? All are the same today, and owned by MindGeek.

I agree with other anon, you are a succubi.

 No.198771

>>198770
>I agree with other anon, you are a succubi.
i'm betting it's more likely a troll from leftypol

 No.198772

>>198768
see >>198767 the genders diverge in rates of sex meaning multiple succubi have to be fucking the same man for it to add up. I did not expect to be a wizard, this was not a conscious lifestyle choice at any point in my life

 No.198774

File: 1669780640145.gif (631.33 KB, 300x224, 75:56, carl exhausted.gif) ImgOps iqdb

>>198773
His post doesn't break any rules. Not explicitly at least.

>>198765
I kinda have to agree with faglord supreme over here >>198768 on this one. For men relationships and succubi are just one thing on a long list of stuff we can do or feel are important. For a succubus that is near the top of the list. A succubus has to be genuinely insane or enlightened to choose not to have sex. Having a family and having a career are basically the only two things I can imagine a succubus caring about.

 No.198786

>>198768
> Men are more likely to chose to be celibate. Do those stats and surveys ask if the man who are virgins are OK with being virgins? If they were asked, most of them would say they are fine with it and hold themselves and their efforts responsible. They are virgins because they haven't made the effort to have sex. Just like you, just like me.

You’re just a retarded moron who believe in lies. You deny the obvious facts like tinder statistics like no source bullshit claim of yours that men who are not succesful on tinder find succubi elsewhere. What is your source on that? Just out your ass , tinder and other dating app statistics disprove you that significant portion of men could never get succubi even if they try their hardest and small minority of men gets most of the pussy.


>>198769
Yes there is really something fishy with this poster.

>>198771
Obviously this retard is a leftist there is no doubt on that as an ordinary leftist he denies statistical facts and claims no source lies as truth.

 No.198808

>>198786
out of curiosity I looked up the tinder use stats for the united states. 13% of the total population but 15% in the 18-29 range. I also don't know how to compare this stat to the population actively trying to date

 No.198813

>>198810
>peaks around 6'5
There's hopeful and then there's delusional jesus.

 No.198814

File: 1669833383699.jpg (44.95 KB, 1000x743, 1000:743, height-filter.jpg) ImgOps iqdb

bumble is a "succubi first" app in that only succubi can send the first message and it bills itself as less of a hookup app (which is bullshit in reality because succubi have sex on the 1st or 2nd "date" if they find the man physically attractive). and even here they automatically start filtering out at least 85% of males as 15% of male americans are 6+ ft.

 No.198815

>>198813
had to delete post because of leftist trolls are so persnickety about little errors like accidentally typing "6 ft" instead of "6+ ft" or "15% of americans" instead of "15% of male americans" even though the errors should be obvious. i hate posting stats on imageboards/forums for this reason, too much effort

 No.198833

>>198814
>United States
I'd be interested to see stats from other countries but i can't find them. A lot of noise on the net leaves me with the impression that American succubi are they're own breed of entitled brat. Curious to see how foids from other countries compare.

 No.198839

>>198833
I'm inclined to believe succubi are the same everywhere.

 No.198840

>>198814
what am i looking at? these bitches are all expecting to meet n fuck goliath or something?

 No.198841

>>198840
Not that it's an exclusion filter. So a succubus can set the filter to include all or set a range of heights she wants to be shown. No succubus is gonna turn down 6'5'' dudes, so they are always included in the filter. Poor guys under six feet are excluded from 70% of the search results though.

 No.198846

>>198841
ok, that is less insane. i thought it was the height threshold. i remember seeing someone say that females would get butthurt if men could be as open about their distaste for fatties as females are with shorter (sub 6, which obviously doesnt mean men below 6 are immediately short) men.

 No.198855

>>198760
>>198761
It doesn't add up that way either. Especially considering what the other guy said too, that males who have access to lots of succubi prefer the better looking females naturally. I never heard of an alpha male having sex with ugly or fat females.

>>198763
Excellent post though you shouldn't waste your time that much on these fanatics. They already have the "ultimate truth", which is that they are the victims and martyrs of a cruel world where it is impossible to have sex unless [insert stupid shit like needing to be a giant etc].

>>198786
>What is your source on that? Just out your ass
Not him by my source is my own experience and what I witness day after day. I've never met with or seen a man above 25 who is unmarried or don't have a gf or didn't have gfs already in the past.
Sorry but instead of your autismo blackpill stats I would rather trust real life and real life shows me that low value, poor, ugly, autistic men can get sex just fine if they want to. Every time I go outside I see ugly low class men with their children and wife or gf. I don't care how you calculate and make up these graphs, the truth is that unless you deliberately avoid the opposite sex you can get into relationships of any kind rather easily.

Hell, I'm not good looking or socially well-adjusted or high status in any way but I could have gotten together with at least 3 succubi if I wanted to. And there were many more that were just interested in me and gave signals that they liked me but I never bothered with them.

 No.198856

>>198855
>Not him by my source is my own experience and what I witness day after day
So, your ass.

 No.198882

>>198855
You’re a lying piece of shit everything you said is a lie and your source is your ass obviously while we present you stats you brazenly deny the truth. There is an obivous fact that celibacy is rising on men but not on succubi and significant portion of those men are not volcel and this fact is even acknowledged even by mainstream media .

>>198856
Yep his ass. This retarded leftist is gonna continue rejecting facts no matter what.

 No.198884

>>198882
Most male humans in history have no living descendants, but go off on how there is a rise in celibacy.

 No.198893

Guys, why can't you just go outside? Vast majority of men (except us wizards) are (were at least once) married and have children. And most of them are not super chads, but average men, some not beautiful, some not intelligent, some not adequate. Did you ever see a succubus being constantly beaten by her husband but still staying with him for the sake of their child? I suppose no, you're not capable of seeing such things. Did you ever see a succubus staying with a man because she desperately wants somebody but can't find? Again, you're not capable. But just because you're blind doesn't mean things don't happen.

Why do you act like it's not true? Why do you act like statistics from dating apps is objective, while it covers only those layers of society, where people use dating apps. Look at this simple chart: https://www.businessofapps.com/data/dating-app-market/
Only 300 millions of people use dating apps. Where do you put the rest? Extrapolate on them? That's a bad idea, considering you're dumb neets who have no idea about psychology and society. So please find better sources of information and go outside sometimes, because you're really delusional.

Btw, https://ifstudies.org/blog/male-sexlessness-is-rising-but-not-for-the-reasons-crabs-claim
I mean, you're exaggerating the problem of being unable to have sex. Yes, some are unable, yes, the number is growing, but the group of chads taking all succubi you're talking about just doesn't exist. What's worse, you act like you're pissed off, which *impies* you hate to be among those "unfortunate", and that in turn *implies* or *suggests* you want to indulge in sexual relationships, which in turn breaks rule 1. and theoretically you should get banned at all.

But I'm just a passerby and didn't follow your conversation, only the last 3-6 posts.

 No.198894

>>198893
Yeah, s/crabs/i-n-c-e-l-s/ without dashes to make the second link valid.

 No.198895

>>198893

That is survivorship bias. Of course everyone you interact with are normies with wives and girlfriends. The ones who have been outcast from society are hiding away because, you know they were fucking outcast.

Please get the hell out of here with your normie advice. Anyone here is way too far gone for any of it to work.

 No.198896

>>198893
Can you normalfags just fuck off with you “go outside and touch le grass” rhetoric

 No.198897

>>198895
If the mods are teenage sex havers, I doubt even a core contingent of this wizard group is truly unsaveable

 No.198899

>>198893
I hope you get beaten by your husband.

 No.198900

>>198893
You posted that faggot article before. You are no passerby.

 No.198901

>>198897
I don't most people here are unsaveable, but the normie "just go outside" advice sure as shit won't work.

 No.198902

>>198900
I am. But you may claim whatever, of course.

You guys cope really hard, and the only reason why I'm against you is because you're delusional and butthurted, which means you're not proud of being wizards and latently want to have a succubus. Which is just sad.

Now, look at this: https://flowingdata.com/2017/03/17/when-americans-lost-their-virginity/
It's about America. Around 3% of men don't get sex at all. I think that numbers in Europe are roughly similar. But, as I suspected, much different in Japan.
https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-019-6677-5
Around 10% don't get sex. It's totally understandable, considering how they live.

Now, guys, derive conclusions from your beloved statistics. The groups of chads is just your delusions. There is only a group of outcasts, who don't get succubi at all.

I can understand if you're very upset that you don't get sex, I can even believe that it's not your fault. But I hate that you butthurt. I hate that you cope. I hate that you're not proud of wizardy.

 No.198906

File: 1669921755576.jpg (451.35 KB, 1170x1243, 1170:1243, 1669851385646479.jpg) ImgOps iqdb

>>198902
>Between 1992 and 2015, the age-standardized prevalence of heterosexual inexperience in adults aged 18–39 years increased from 21.7 to 24.6% for succubi (p-values for linear and quadratic trend < 0.05) and from 20.0 to 25.8% for men (p-values for trend < 0.05).

Your own statistics say the rate is increasing. Morover this includes a cohort prior to the widespread use of cell phones and social media.

The broader point is that there seems to be fewer long term relationships forming. Usage of online dating is also increasing (seems to be 30% of the population broadly) and the results all mirror tinder statistics. Hypergamy is common to gorillas and chimpanzees. The tinder data clearly shows some proportion of succubi are doing the exact same thing.

 No.198907

>>198906
Humans are gorillas and chimps when they don't have rules (e.g. laws, religion) to suppress their innate ape instincts.

 No.198908

>>198907
If humans are apes, where did those laws come from friend?

 No.198909

>>198906
>Your own statistics say the rate is increasing.
In Japan. And I can understand. I don't know if there are any documentary films/shows about Japan in English, but there's a one in my native language and they have really tough lives. You should consider they also have the highest suicide rate. So it's not something unexpected. And it's sad.
>there seems to be fewer long term relationships forming
I think it's because with globalization there's more choice. Like imagine breaking relationships 200 years ago. You'd probably just never find anyone else.
>Usage of online dating is also increasing
The strangest thing I know. Really. I just can't comprehend it. Looks like they are just retarded, but I'm sure there's more deep reason behind this shit.
>The tinder data clearly shows some proportion of succubi are doing the exact same thing.
I never denied it, so yes.

 No.198910

>>198909
> Like imagine breaking relationships 200 years ago. You'd probably just never find anyone else.
People would remarry days after their spouse died, what are you on about?

 No.198911

>>198908
There are several books on anthropology and ancient history you can read if you really care, just have to be careful to avoid politically correct / feminist ones and/or ones that dumb down and euphemize/pussyfoot around the past (e.g. texts used in highschools coddling the sheletred students from the reality of rapes, harems, genocides, etc.).

 No.198912

>>198911
You didn't really get what I was insinuating there.

 No.198914

>>198912
If you're trying to convince me to believe in the make-believe and creationism and just disregard DNA, fossil records, radiation-induced gene mutations you can forget it, my brain doesn't work that way.

 No.198915

>>198914
I was trying to point out that if humans are still apes, and humans made the laws that prevent us from being "apes", then apes made the laws. I'm not a creationist.

 No.198937

>>198915
yes, smarter apes made rules for the dumber apes to follow and what does that imply exactly?

 No.198944

>>198910
>what are you on about?
Yes.

 No.198973

I think it is becoming more common due to technological and cultural changes. Male virginity is rising. crabs are a growing demographic.

However, true volcel wizards are rare. Society has always had pious monks and hermits. They will always be a small minority.

 No.198978

>>198895
See, this is the failed normal paradox. If someone desires sex or relationships then why isn't he out there trying to achieve his desires? If you are hiding away behind your computer and are whining about fems all day then you don't come off as someone who wants a fem.

People here could get laid or get a wife easily. Some things to consider
>lose some weight
>work out a little
>keep basic hygiene stuff like shower daily and shave every two or three days, have your hair cut or at least take care of it in some way
>wear clean clothes
>get a job or a source of income, anything will do
>get a place to live alone, can be a dump even but it should be your own
That's it. It's not impossible to pull off, actually it is pretty basic stuff. That is another question however whether you want to bother with all of this shit (I personally would rather remain a dirty fat NEET wiz than try to please some succ at any cost). There are no crabs above 25. Only confused men who don't know what they want and volcels. People who want to have sex actually manage to get some one way or another by the age of 25.

>>198907
That's only true for your average normal. Rules, laws and religions are completely meaningless for intellectually superior people like us.

 No.198989

>>198978
I've done all you said and I was still rejected every single time i tried.

 No.198990

>>198989
Why are you trying to get laid though? Are you not happy with being a celibate male?

 No.198991

File: 1670099932553.webm (2.96 MB, 800x387, 800:387, isaac don't care.webm) ImgOps iqdb

>>198990
Not him but I for one would like to at least know if I'm missing out on something, or if it's not worth my time.

Yeah go ahead ban me.

 No.198992

>>198991
Beyond pathetic.

 No.198994

>>198990
I'm now I ok with my life as of now but younger when I was naive and thought I had chance I did the usual gym, job, etc. with zero resutls.

 No.198995

>>198994
I'm now. I'm ok with my life as of now but when I was younger and naive*

sorry I'm a little drunk

 No.198996

>>198978
If you have standards this really isn't true. But this kind of conversation isn't suited for the nature of the site and I suggest we drop it.


[View All]
[Go to top] [Catalog] [Return][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ Home ] [ wiz / dep / hob / lounge / jp / meta / games / music ] [ all ] [  Rules ] [  FAQ ] [  Search /  History ] [  Textboard ] [  Wiki ]