8den
No I'm pretty sure that was 8ball...
Much in the same way that just because some people have submissive style sexual fantasies that doesnt enjoy being treated like shit by everyone they meet.
Roosh V, Pro-Rape Pick Up Artist, Announces Worldwide 'Tribal Meetings'
- Thread starter Buddy Bradley
- Start date
Much in the same way that just because some people have submissive style sexual fantasies that doesnt enjoy being treated like shit by everyone they meet.
It's amazing how people who are clearly so deeply unhappy (nobody who is happy writes a "lament" or rages about their life on social media) can have the outright gall to declare that they have found the secret key to life. What they really need is to have a think about why all of this philosophy they espouse is psychologically failing them and failing them hard. Forget its fairness to others, it isn't even working for themselves.
Truth is that we only really find happiness when we make proper, authentic connection to others in the spirit of community. Using others as objects works directly against this psychological need. The further they go down this rabbit hole, the unhappier they will inevitably be.
Truth is that we only really find happiness when we make proper, authentic connection to others in the spirit of community. Using others as objects works directly against this psychological need. The further they go down this rabbit hole, the unhappier they will inevitably be.
FabricLiveBaby!
Live Baby Fabric!
Rebelda
Nearly as bad as Badgers
If what you're getting at is that male and female sexuality aren't binaries, but exist on a spectrum of sexualities, then I don't think many people here will disagree with you. I think we have to accept the popular semantics; i.e. that male sexuality doesn't mean exclusive to men and female isn't exclusive to women (unless you have better terms, which I'd genuinely be interested to hear), but that most people place themselves somewhere between the two. Honestly though, your best bet is to explain your point not just facepalm at people who don't get what you're alluding to. Unless you're alluding to something else entirely, in which case why not explain?Are you serious?
Do you think "male sexuality" and "female sexuality" are some sort of self evident nouns that exist in actual fact as defined by.. whom? You? Sigmund Freud? Mr.Roosh?
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
bimble
floofy
Now i'm even more confused!
you say "I think we have to accept the popular semantics; i.e. that male sexuality doesn't mean exclusive to men and female isn't exclusive to women (unless you have better terms, which I'd genuinely be interested to hear), but that most people place themselves somewhere between the two."
That's the same as saying there is no such thing as 'male sexuality' and 'female sexuality', isn't it ? Looks like it to me. In which case yep, that's all I meant.
The idea that there are these innate differences between us, men are from mars etc, is exactly the kind of bollocks that Voosh and co subscribe to, saying that women and men have these two opposing 'sexualities' is just next door to saying that women are innately good at embroidery and feelings whilst men are born with a superior talent for things like using power tools and doing science.
Rebelda
Nearly as bad as Badgers
They exist as sexualities in the sense that in the simplest language it's how one might explain sexuality as a scale not a parallel, and until someone comes up with alternative terms that enter common vernacular, how do you suggest we discuss it on a message board? I mean, I agree you were right to pull up the poster who presented them as - or so it read to me - the only two options, but sometimes the terms are required to explain oneself. It's not a case of 'it doesn't exist like that so we can't talk about it' - which I'm certain isn't your point but is how it's coming across to me. My only real point was that it's better to explain what you mean rather than facepalm when people don't get it
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
Or, perhaps given to the mods to work out.
It's so fucking dull
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
Rebelda
Nearly as bad as Badgers
Yeah, nine pages ago. Start a thread in feedback and tag in those who asked you if you must. I'm not having a go at you, but there's pages of discussion here and topics that will get lost if that^ kicks off.
Fuck offSorry you find Islamaphobia dull, kabbes
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
Ok, sorry - I wasn't around yesterday & didn't have access to the internet.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Of course he's daft. Every two-bob cunt who tries to use power or position, whether they be an MP, a peer, a professor, a foreman or a boss, to get away with this shit is daft.
That said, "getting away with it" is the name of the game, when you consider that his defence - and that of every grubby advantage-taker ever - will be constructed around what's worked for other abusers in the past.
Ain't patriarchy grand?
Chimpanzees and bonobos:
http://www.returnofkings.com/76219/...s-and-bonobos-show-the-decline-of-our-society
"Be clear about what we are faced with. The issue is no longer about gender equality or rights—it never has been. This is all about social control. And the best way to control men is by decimating their unity and eradicating masculinity as an identity to be reckoned with. You must choose whether you want to see this trend continue or not and decide if you will fight back against this force."
http://www.returnofkings.com/76219/...s-and-bonobos-show-the-decline-of-our-society
"Be clear about what we are faced with. The issue is no longer about gender equality or rights—it never has been. This is all about social control. And the best way to control men is by decimating their unity and eradicating masculinity as an identity to be reckoned with. You must choose whether you want to see this trend continue or not and decide if you will fight back against this force."
bimble
floofy
"Of course, warfare and violence are not the only factors that sustain a social environment favourable for patriarchy, but it is still the major factor. Just compare the war ridden regions of the world to our peaceful and prosperous urban centers, which is more patriarchal? Even exceptions like Saudi Arabia—which have been a relatively peaceful society—has only been able to prop up its patriarchal rule through strict religious dogma and brute force. And even they are finally succumbing to changes" 
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
"Of course, warfare and violence are not the only factors that sustain a social environment favourable for patriarchy, but it is still the major factor. Just compare the war ridden regions of the world to our peaceful and prosperous urban centers, which is more patriarchal? Even exceptions like Saudi Arabia—which have been a relatively peaceful society—has only been able to prop up its patriarchal rule through strict religious dogma and brute force. And even they are finally succumbing to changes"
Yes, I can't imagine that sort of thing is really helping sell his views to anyone.
Sure.
Hypergamy is the true sexual desire of heterosexual women (obviously there are exceptions etc.). Before feminism allowed women to express their sexuality openly, hypergamy was covert. Thus the myth that women are attracted to "nice guys" was sustainable among men (and therefore, pre-feminism, in society at large).
Post-feminist women see no need to equivocate about the sexual desire, and thus hypergamy is practiced and discussed openly today.
Roosh and his ilk are outraged at what they see as modern women's hypocrisy. "How dare women omit moral considerations from their sexuality" they chorus.
But they are hypocrites to do so. Because as they openly admit, their own sexuality also omits moral considerations, being concentrated entirely on physical characteristics.
One way of looking at this would be to say that men are just learning a truth that women have always known: ethical considerations have no place in sexuality.
Are you serious?
Do you think "male sexuality" and "female sexuality" are some sort of self evident nouns that exist in actual fact as defined by.. whom? You? Sigmund Freud? Mr.Roosh?
By me.
Similar threads
