Ok so am I a robot or not welcome? When I was younger like 17-22

There is no fixed self, so yes, despite what lots of angry autists will tell you, you can be a robot. But it basically requires that you are currently in very poor mental health combined with no social skills and significant levels of social anxiety which prevent you from interacting with people without spilling tonnes of spaghetti.

Kinda sounds like your situation now but idk.

I'm definitely a robot. If you observed me irl around people (especially girls) you'd think i was a khv who was certainly destined for wizardhood. However i had one gf who i managed to get cos we shared accomodation and spent time in living room together. she is now desperately lusted after by every hopeless idiot she knows (she got hot af).

Then the relationship destroyed my mental health, made my anxiety 100x worse, got dumped, and i haven't recovered since.

some autists would say that means i'm not a 'true' robot, just a 'failed normie'. but i've always been extremely socially undesirable and the loser of any social situation. that relationship was just a fluke and doesn't define my current situation.

so in short.... welcome to the club OP. one of us, one of us, one of us.... etc etc etc

Yeah, you are what's called a failed normie. Don't worry though, you're not alone. I am as well and I just see it as a semantical thing rather than an insult

You are a failed normie, like all robots. You will fit right in.

>>38910839
>failed normie, like all robots
lol. No some of us never had a chance to try to begin with, so how could you say we failed?

File: 1500109642839.png (500KB, 481x720px)

500KB, 481x720px

>>38910714
Listen to
>>38910791
Anon, especially on this point:
>despite what lots of angry autists would tell you.
No matter how long you are here, people will tell you to "lurk more, newfag". No matter how much of a robot you are, people will call you a "normalfag". That's because a bunch of people are super retarded. Like not even normal retarded. SUPER retarded. Like stuck shit posting as 16 year olds their whole life retarded. Don't let it bother you.
Welcome back to the recovery ward.

>>38910830
>>38910839

as i pointed out in my above post, what these people don't understand is that there is no fixed self and there is no meaningful difference between a robot and a 'failed normie'

it's just a term autists use because they don't like the fact that other autists might have had more fun than them at certain points in their lives

File: 1501847188557.jpg (9KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 225x225px

>>38910791
>>38910714
Nope, nope, nope.

If you are not a kissless virgin, you are a normalfag. Plain and simple. It's literally that easy.

You don't understand the pain of it. You don't understand how HORRIBLE it is to get up and live your life every day knowing there is not a single woman on the planet who would want to kiss you, go on a date with you or have sex with you.

Yes, I admit that I'm a "failed normie". I have failed at being a normalfag. Despite years of socialisation, years of going to parties and bars, years of improving my personality and developing new hobbies to make me more interesting to women, NONE of this has mattered AT ALL. I am still a kissless virgin.

Meanwhile, normalcunts like you people can apparently just walk into life and acquire girlfriends simply be existing. I just don't get it. Why do I put so much effort into my life, and yet receive nothing? While people like you can do nothing, and yet receive everything. To me, this is 100% confirmation that you are normalfags. You have what I can only describe as "the normalfag gene". You were born with something, whatever it is, that makes romancing women natural to you. I was born WITHOUT that gene/ability/thing, and as a result there is no amount of physical or emotional effort that will ever be able to free me from the hell of kissless virginity.

I'm not even going to tell you to leave. I just want to ask you to fucking comprehend the pain in my life for even one second. One second.

>>38911062
Well I'm not an angry miserable prick whos an ass hole to everyone so

>>38911159
Oh, yes, because you're a 100% happy and cheerful bundle of joy literally all of the time, right?

If you had lived my life you'd be depressed too.

>>38911062

maybe you're a kv because on top of your lack of social skills, physical ugliness and shit personality, you're also quite dumb?

that fact that someone might have been kissed years ago once doesn't radically change their experience of reality. especially when they have serious mental health problems

>>38911190
No but the only people I've met like you is an unsuffersble ass hole who's always an ass hole if you don't agree with everything you say and crazy narcissists that no one can even talk to for 5 minutes without everyone hating them

>>38911214
>that fact that someone might have been kissed years ago once doesn't radically change their experience of reality. especially when they have serious mental health problems

I'm not saying that they can't be sad, or depressed, or mentally damaged. Of course they can. I'm just saying that on top of all those things they are also normalfags. Normalfag isn't an insult literally anywhere other than /r9k/. It's actually a compliment. It means you're NORMAL. You can go and live your lives like normal people. You're not cursed, like I am.

Look, to me, you people are like another species. I don't even comprehend the lives that you live. You might as well be Martians or some shit. I don't have any idea of the steps that one would take in order to kiss a girl.

>>38911218
>All this anecdotal evidence

Yeah I'm a cunt, but so are a lot of people. I have plenty of friends in real life. My problem is that I'm a kissless virgin, and women don't like me. I use /r9k/ to vent my frustration in the angriest way possible.

>>38911214
>that fact that someone might have been kissed years ago once doesn't radically change their experience of reality
Bullshit.

I'm not the anon you're replying to, but at best that statement is entirely case by case, if not outright wrong. Different people will place varying value on the same experiences, telling others that a kiss wouldn't affect them perception of reality is a pretty arrogant thing to say.

>>38911283

Let me refer back to what I said before, you are evidently quite dumb and unable to analyse the situation with a modicum of intelligence, objectivity or critical thinking.

Literally everything you said in response to my post was about you, your own retarded psyche, and bizarre delusions and attitudes towards the world. Nothing you said addressed any objective criteria that could be used to distinguish people from one another.But you are too self absorbed and genuinely stupid to discern this for yourself.

File: Buddha.jpg (67KB, 271x406px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 271x406px

>>38911300

I have yet to hear of a single case of somebody with the usual depression/anxiety/isolation issues whose day-to-day experience of life is significantly improved by the fact that they were kissed or even had sexual experiences long in the past.

All I ever hear is whiny autists who *think* their lives would be much better if only they had had such an experience at least once. Which is very telling, don't you think?

The fact that faggots want to labeled "robots" shows right off the bat that they're fucking normalfags. You want to be part of the group even if the term is colloquial with loser. Fuck you faggots.

>>38911353
>Nothing you said addressed any objective criteria that could be used to distinguish people from one another.

There is objective criteria. The objective criteria is the ability to attract women. OP and the other guy are people who have proven that they can attract women. Whereas I and my others have literally no evidence that any woman has ever been attracted to us.

How difficult is this to understand? In this world, there are those men who can attract the female gender, and there are the tiny minority who cannot under any circumstance do so. I fall into the latter camp.

>>38911392
>le enlightened normalfag

Quit being so pretentious.

And it's not that having a kiss or having sex in one instance suddenly makes us happy. It's that it breaks the fucking spell. Look, I have had so little attention from women in my life that for all I know it might be LITERALLY BIOLOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for girls to be attracted to me. I would literally entertain the idea that there might be a real, living God or gods out there who have placed a curse on me at birth so that I will never attract a woman.

If I were to suddenly succeed at kissing a girl, going on a date, or perhaps even having sex with a girl, then it would prove that my theory is false. It would prove to me that I am not some kind of non-sexual leper.

I don't think a woman has ever thought of me as a sexual being. I don't think there is a single girl on this planet who has thought about me and thought "I would love to kiss/fuck him". YOU cannot say that. YOU KNOW that isn't true for you. You know that there is at least one woman, and probably several more, who at one point in time have looked at you and thought "I want him sexually".

>>38911392
I have no idea if my life would be better were I not a khv, it could be same, or it could be entirely different if not necessarily better. But what I do know is that it absolutely altered my perception of the world in some way, which was my initial point, no need to create a strawman with something I wasn't even suggesting.

But on the topic, I'd like to know how it is you're so certain that these individuals lives weren't improved by having past romantic experiences. Are you saying that you know everything that caused the outcome of another person's life, and whether or not altering their past experiences could change said outcome?

>>38911510
>How difficult is this to understand? In this world, there are those men who can attract the female gender, and there are the tiny minority who cannot under any circumstance do so. I fall into the latter camp.

Has it ever occurred to your tiny mind that at some point in somebody's life they may be able to attract 'the female gender', then due to changes in their physical stature and mental health, they find themselves unable to?

And vice versa, somebody in poor physical shape and mental health improves their condition, and suddenly finds they have this ability?

There is no fixed binary condition that determines absolutely whether you CAN or CANNOT attract women. It's a psychological defence mechanism you have invented to make yourself feel more comfortable in your failure to do so. To reinforce it, you've then firmly integrated it into your conception of self, which itself is a great fucking mental trick your brain made up. It doesn't exist, byebye ;)

File: 1373504737346.jpg (227KB, 717x880px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 717x880px

>all that redit spacing itt
fuck off incels

>>38911546
>But on the topic, I'd like to know how it is you're so certain that these individuals lives weren't improved by having past romantic experiences. Are you saying that you know everything that caused the outcome of another person's life, and whether or not altering their past experiences could change said outcome?

I am saying that there a countless millions of people with serious problems with social interaction, depression, isolation and anxiety, who have had past sexual and romantic experiences, for whom those experiences have little significance in their outlook of lfie. If you understand depression and low self esteem, you would understand that having other people value you has little effect on your self-worth, because depression is a mental illness which seeks to rationalise the most negative outlook possible.

You can give a seriously depressed person one hundred reasons to value themselves, and for each one, they will come back to you with a perceived counter-argument that in their mind invalidates every single one.

>>38911611
>Has it ever occurred to your tiny mind that at some point in somebody's life they may be able to attract 'the female gender', then due to changes in their physical stature and mental health, they find themselves unable to?

Of course. But you've proven my point. These people are TEMPORARILY unable to attract women because of a change in their personal circumstances. This is not a permanent situation.

>And vice versa, somebody in poor physical shape and mental health improves their condition, and suddenly finds they have this ability?

And what about those of us who improve our physical shape and our mental health and STILL cannot attract women? This is the case for myself. There is only one explanation in my mind. That being that there is something very deep and wrong with my very existence. There is something genetically wrong with me, which I can never change, which means that women are actually incapable of viewing me in a sexual manner. This is the only explanation. I have done literally everything else and nothing has made women like me.

>There is no fixed binary condition that determines absolutely whether you CAN or CANNOT attract women

You only say this because you haven't experienced it. You haven't been through the effort of meticulously crafting your appearance, buying expensive and fashionable clothes, grooming yourself intricately, going out and socialising for years, forcing yourself into new and uncomfortable situations, only to STILL be a kissless virgin. Can you even comprehend that? I've spent thousands of hours of my life either trying to attract women or plotting things that I could do to try and attract them, and I haven't even got so much as a kiss, or a single date.

In my mind, it is genuinely the most difficult thing in the world. There is nothing more difficult for me than trying to attract a woman. I would have an easier time trying to get to Mars than I would trying to ask a woman on a date.

>>38911734

It still stands that any absolute binary state of being ABLE or UNABLE to attract women is a purely mental construct and not something that exists in the material world. There are billions of women on the planet, even if you're really really ugly inside and out, it seems unlikely based on law of large numbers that not one of them would fuck you if you put in the effort. The problem is, your chances of finding them are slim, but probably not zero. Therefore any absolute statement of "i am objectively unfuckable period." is just wrong

Even if you really are unable to get laid for the rest of your life, that doesn't mean it is something innate that's written into your DNA. The hypothetical example of somebody who once had it in them losing that ability, to say, poor mental health caused by life trauma, illustrates that this is not a condition we are born with that persists through life, but something that is gradually created and determined by our environment. Obviously genetics have a role, but they are not the sole determinant. Think of serious chemical burn victims for example, obviously they are in a similar situation to you, but it is a result of the conditions the world has placed upon them, not the result of some mystical elusive nature of "self" that exists out there in the ether.

So yeah, again, your desire to make an absolute concrete distinction between yourself and people who once had sexual experiences *IS* just a psychological defense mechanism. You made it up and once you start to analyse the foundations of it, it begins to break down. If it provides you comfort, then fair enough, live in it, but at least recognise it as a mental construct rather than an objective description of reality.

>>38912031
You still haven't provided me with even one alternate explanation for why it is the case that:
>I put immense effort into my appearance, my social life, my hobbies and dealing with my mental health and am still a kissless virgin
>There are men on this board and in this thread who probably don't even give their appearance/fashion/socialising a second thought and yet still have kissed/been on a date/had sex

I just don't see any other explanation except either genetic predisposition or divine intervention.

>>38912071

>>38912071

Well yes, there is a strong element of genetic predisposition. But there is a strong element of that with the robots who are rejected by 99.999% of women but also got lucky with that one anomalous girl who liked them back. It's a spectrum, and you're probably worse off than most.

But if you're claiming there's some specific genetic mutuation that makes you specifically unfuckable compared to all these other autists who maybe got lucky once or twice in their lives, then provide some actual evidence for it. If you can't, then you're just spouting unscientific nonsensical hearsay with no real basis for it.

Just because you can't think of an alternative explanation, doesn't mean your single hypothesis with no hard evidence is correct