Roosh V, Pro-Rape Pick Up Artist, Announces Worldwide 'Tribal Meetings'

[Idris2002]

What are you hoping to demonstrate by quoting some random weirdos off twitter?

"Know thy enemy"

 

[andysays]

What are you hoping to demonstrate by quoting some random weirdos off twitter?

I don't know what FLB is hoping to demonstrate, but to me it suggests that that the twittersphere is a place where these reactionary but essentially meaningless phrases like #Regressive Left can be spread and parrotted by more than just "some random weirdos".

Whatever we think of Dawkins, for instance, he has greater cultural clout or authority than <stereotype alert> some sad MRA wanker posting from his mum's basement while eating cold ravioli from the tin clad only in his underpants.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

We were speculating a bit on the differences between the social/economic profile of some of these guys and the traditional opponents of 'cultural marxism' (white supremacists etc)

One thing that strikes me though, there seems to be a big cross-over between this demographic and the gamergate demographic.

Is it possible that some sort of rancid cultural hegemony has actually been achieved already for these ideas in certain big chunks of gamer (and closely related) culture?

Has such hegemony been achieved in milieus that are in effect a significant element of what passes for socialisation for many young men?

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

The link between atheists, PUAs, bigots, racists.

They all come together against what they see as the "regressive left"

Basically I think that they see themselves as the progressives, and that the left are really conservatives trying to take them back to dictatorial serfdom.

Whoever ends up as as the serfs and/or dictators in their distopa thoroughly depends on which form of bigotry they partake in.

But it's all "the left" at fault anyway. Who are regressive. We should be afraid of it. Apparently.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

Plus:

The point is it isn't just sad act basement dwellers. There are some people with real gravitas driving this nonsense.

People like Roosh are at the end of part the rabbit hole. But that particular rabbit hole ends up in different places

 

[laptop]

The link between atheists, PUAs, bigots, racists.
....

ONE angry white atheist, anyway.

One Atheist Pope

 

[toggle]

No see mentalchik PD is telling us what "most" women want. Therefore he can use your preferences as the exception that proves the rule. Meanwhile Dwyer can happily offer his insight into the minds of your sisters who all secretly lust after Donald Trump and Rupert Murdoch.

It's amazing how one track Dywer thinks women are, as if their sexuality isn't as complex as men, that women can't fancy several different types of men at the time and can't perhaps have a purely physical attraction to someone while at the same time prefer a different type of person as a long term partner.

Ps best not tell Phil about Bisexuals too.

well, considering women's sexuality tends to be more fluid, that would suggest it[s more complez

 

[bimble]

Is that fella typically good looking then?

No idea, you'd best ask phildwyer, resident expert on what women in general find attractive.

 

[two sheds]

What's his job title?

 

[mentalchik]

What's his job title?

sex on legs




I would like to point out that i am by no means encouraging 'PHWOOAR' type threads just being contrary for the crack iykwim

 

[toggle]

Another key word or theme in all this is reactionary.

They (MRAs, white-rights, etc) are reacting against social, economic and cultural changes in the direction of equality which undermine their previously privileged position. But because they can't really say they're opposed to equality, they have claim that women now have more rights than men, non-whites more than whites, etc, and that so-called "cultural marxists" who are challenging structures of privilege are actually attacking those individuals who previously benefited from that privilege (and still do to a significant extent).

hence if you delve down the mra rabbit hole, you can find all the stuff about how traditional gender roles privilage women.

 

[mentalchik]

It's amazing how one track Dywer thinks women are, as if their sexuality isn't as complex as men, that women can't fancy several different types of men at the time and can't perhaps have a purely physical attraction to someone while at the same time prefer a different type of person as a long term partner.

well quite....i find all sorts of different men attractive.........status never being a factor..........but obviously i'm not a 'real' woman like

 

[andysays]

well, considering women's sexuality tends to be more fluid, that would suggest it[s more complez

Do you mean by this that there is a wide range or fluidity of how women as a whole group (as compared to men) feel/express their sexuality, or that the sexuality of individual specific women (as compared to specific men) has a wide range or fluidity, or maybe a bit of both?

Because without wanting to get into a who's more fluid, women or men, I suspect that men's sexuality is also actually more fluid/wide ranging than it's popularly stereotyped and portrayed.

The whole thing is far more complex than various simplistic reductions would have us believe.

 

[andysays]

hence if you delve down the mra rabbit hole, you can find all the stuff about how traditional gender roles privilage women.

TBH, I'm glad that you and others are willing to delve down that rabbit hole on our behalf so we don't have to...

 

[toggle]

Do you mean by this that there is a wide range or fluidity of how women as a whole group (as compared to men) feel/express their sexuality, or that the sexuality of individual specific women (as compared to specific men) has a wide range or fluidity, or maybe a bit of both?

Because without wanting to get into a who's more fluid, women or men, I suspect that men's sexuality is also actually more fluid/wide ranging than it's popularly stereotyped and portrayed.

The whole thing is far more complex than various simplistic reductions would have us believe.

there will be a lot of social acceptance/ conditioning in there as well. being sexually fluid is generally more acceptable among women. but it's also in the way people consider their sexuality.

 

[pengaleng]

re: whoever is the whining MRA I don't care enough to namecheck or know who you are

he obviously has never been with a woman, allow it, anyone going mnerrrr only these women are attractive is a total fucking loser and from experience I can probably guess man don't know what to do with a vagina. sucks to be you m8 cus you ain't gonna learn with that attitude.


then again... entitled whining is so hot

SAID NO ONE EVER.

fucking outcast.

 

[ViolentPanda]

If you were to stop using that word in the sense that only the far outer fringes of MRA use it, you might find that people laugh at you a bit less loudly. x

Any suggestion that dwyer draws existential comfort from the concept of hypergamy is, of course, offensive and untrue.

 

[pengaleng]

god I wasted my time unignoring that ^^ christ

 

[bimble]

Roosh's website now has a thing on it called "why international meetup day was cancelled."
It's reassuring in that it displays how totally out there he really is.

eg) on the enemies who forced this 'tactical retreat & strategic victory' .. "They are vicious, they are legion, and they’re organized as only animals who have known sin could possibly be.We see you."

 

[Idris2002]

"only animals who have known sin".

Jesus fucking christ almighty.

 

[phildwyer]

Googling hypergamy, Dwyer's favourite word, helps a lot to explain where he's coming from:
You get all the best woman-hating websites lined up all in a row (MGTOW, Return of Kings, Rational Male etc).
None of them seem to agree on what the word means but they're very cross about something, basically that whatever it is that women want it's definitely .. not them, not men who write about 'hypergamy'.

The Rooshes of this world (and they are legion) are mad. They are being driven mad by the following circumstance: for the first time ever in the history of the human race, women are free to choose their sexual partners on the basis of their own sexual desires, without patriarchal interference.

I think everyone can agree that this is true.

So the question becomes, how does society deal with this unprecedented development? Because it will undoubtedly have profound effects--indeed it already is.

 

[Gromit]

The Rooshes of this world (and they are legion) are mad. They are being driven mad by the following circumstance: for the first time ever in the history of the human race, women are free to choose their sexual partners on the basis of their own sexual desires, without patriarchal interference.

I think everyone can agree that this is true.

So the question becomes, how does society deal with this unprecedented development? Because it will undoubtedly have profound effects--indeed it already is.

First time ever?!

 

[phildwyer]

It's quite interesting to search MRA / PUA sources for the use of the term 'cultural marxism'

I know Anders Breivik's manifesto is full of MRA sort of stuff.

How much cross-over is there between this lot and the racist right I wonder?

A lot. Evolutionary psychology innit. And also, the same guys who are threatened by unimpeded female sexuality are threatened by immigration of non-white people into "their" nations. We see it on these boards all the time: men who consider themselves "leftists" absolutely freaking out over middle-eastern refugees threatening "their women. Madness it is, real madness.

 

[killer b]

for the first time ever in the history of the human race, women are free to choose their sexual partners on the basis of their own sexual desires, without patriarchal interference.

this isn't actually true though.

 

[toggle]

society can either shore up (and continue to expect specifically women to fulfil this role) fragile and/or toxic expression of masculinity, or expect this lot to learn what most men are already aware of - that their masculinity is not contingent on dominating women

 

[phildwyer]

First time ever?!

Sure. For the majority of women anyway--I guess aristocrats and lumpenproles have sometimes been free to choose. But the majority of women have not--their freedom to choose sexual partners was always constrained by patriarchy. The ghost of such constraints still walks under the guise of slut-shaming and so forth, but women increasingly scorn its laments.

 

[phildwyer]

this isn't actually true though.

Yes it is. When else was it true that women could pursue their sexual desires without patriarchal restraint? Never and nowhere, that's when. We are in uncharted waters.

 

[phildwyer]

society can either shore up (and continue to expect specifically women to fulfil this role) fragile and/or toxic expression of masculinity, or expect this lot to learn what most men are already aware of - that their masculinity is not contingent on dominating women

Well-adjusted and reasonably successful men will indeed respond as you say.

But an awful lot of men are neither well-adjusted nor successful. An awful lot of men are barking mad (see Roosh et al). They are the ones that need watching, and I'm glad that people are now watching them.

 

[killer b]

They are not currently able to pursue their sexual desires without patriarchal restraint either. Unless you think patriarchy only exerts itself in crude & overt ways, and even then...

 

[mentalchik]

for the first time ever in the history of the human race, women are free to choose their sexual partners on the basis of their own sexual desires, without patriarchal interference.

Without patriarchal interference.......really...really do you seriously think there is still no interference ?????? Funny that as i still hear the old attitudes quite frequently..."slut, whore......what does she expect dressed like that" etc etc etc.......i think for a lot of people these attitudes STILL have an influence