You take down one of us, two more will pop up
And then four more will get taken down, and this exponential back-and-forth will continue until you either stay the fuck down where you belong or learn to be decent, compassionate human beings who don't belong back down every time they stand up. You are not involuntarily celibate; you choose to be bitter, sulk, isolate yourselves, and lash out at others. You know full well on some level that such behavior repulses others, and that level of your psyche also knows that you can change and be a likable and attractive individual from the inside out. You put placing blaming others and identifying as a victim before self-improvement. That is why you will never receive sympathy for your situation. And your treating women like dangerous subhuman objects to be preyed upon sure as hell ain't gonna help you earn a woman's affections or access to her genitals, either.
But what's truly ironic and sad is how you disparage feminists, especially male feminists like me, when we're the very ones trying to eradicate the phallocentric* thinking and toxic masculinity that you're wallowing in instead of trying to liberate yourself from it.
* This is different from the more literal sense of "phallocentric" I used on that alliterative award I gave David J Stewart. Mostly. I can explain what it means in this context if you want, but it requires a lot of background context. I can give you a better general gist of it using the Socratic method: In the conventional notion of a patriarchal society, what qualities or characteristics are used to define a notion of essentially male? Which of these characteristics is the most privileged, i.e. primarily used to decide who is male and who is not? Now, with that that in mind, who in a conventional notion of a patriarchal society are the ones that call the shots, steer social discourse, and set the norms of what is considered logical and correct (both in a moral and factual sense)? Why do they have this privilege? Back to what we discussed earlier, is there anything central to it (note the italics) ...and with that, I hope you just had an "a ha!" moment and this term seems a less like some psuedo-philosophical term some lunatic came up to sound intelligent while "logically" justifying abhorring of half the human race.
This has been shy's daily aside. I hope you learned something and tune in for next week's aside:
EILI5: Third-level Simulacra and Schrodinger's Disneyland Imagery.