Roosh and his beard have many opinions
The last time Roosh Valizadeh, hirsute pickup artist and wannabe reactionary philosopher, had a Big Idea it was a doozy. In a blog post he originally presented seriously but later insisted was Swiftian satire, he argued that the best way to end rape would be to legalize it on private property, thus forcing women to think twice before going home with potential rapists. Ta da! Problem solved!
Now Roosh has a new idea which he thinks could save civilization itself from degenerate cultural marxists and evil sex-having ladies. And by “new idea” I mean “a really really old idea” — the notion that women should be prohibited from voting.
As Roosh sees it, women’s suffrage is at the root of all social ills, creating “a techno-matriarchy with an agenda of male disempowerment and persecution,” and ending it will basically fix everything. The big problem? Ladies love leftism!
Allowing women to vote has made it effortless to elect leftist politicians who hate the family unit, men, and healthy market competition, while simultaneously weakening society by pushing women into work and giving them generous welfare in the form of handouts to single moms and the able-bodied along with make-work jobs for females in bloated government bureaucracies.
Also, 50 Shades of Grey.
To appease female voters and their destructive nature of promiscuity and drama, a symptom of which is collectively propelling a book about a woman being brutally dominated by a man (50 Shades Of Grey) to one of the best selling books of all time, society has veered so far to the left that it is crumbling at its base through declining birth rates and collapse of the family unit.
As Roosh sees it, we in the west need to boost our baby production STAT.
Because we have given women suffrage, it has become necessary to gain their votes by promising whatever they want in the moment, including the removal of all gates to the sexual market so they can engage in the great game of “alpha male hunting,” which has led to such unbridled chaos and sterility that we have to import third-world people as these empowered female voters abort nearly 60 million American babies.
UNREMOVE THE GATES TO THE SEXUAL MARKET!
BAN ALPHA MALE HUNTING AND STERILITY!
I don’t actually know what any of that means; I’m just trying to get into the spirit of things here.
These pesky details aside, it’s clear that the real problem is women with the temerity to live their lives according to their own desires rather than those of men.
The demographic crisis the West faces today is primarily due to allowing women to do as they please instead of imposing healthy standards on their behavior and choices. The direct cause of this horror movie is giving women the vote.
Roosh offers up a long laundry list of bad, bad things “that stem from having to appeal to the female vote.” This includes everything from the “lowering of academic standards in universities to allow [women] to ‘excel,’” to
promotion of degeneracy in media, invention of apps and technology to allow frictionless casual sex with bad boys, promotion of sex change operations among children, re-defining fat women as “beautiful at any size” …
NO FAT CHICKS
… legalization of gay marriage, use of murder (abortion) as birth control, maligning normal masculinity as “toxic masculinity,” and elevation of damaging myths such as “rape culture” and the “wage gap” to foment gender fear and confusion.
And it’s all the fault of the ladies and their evil lady nature.
The culture has degraded because women have been at the forefront of degrading it. Their true nature, once unimpaired by societal limits, embarks on an tragic mission of destruction to recreate reality in a way to make them appear more attractive to high status men, no matter the consequence.
Happily, all terrible terrible things could be undone with one quick change in the laws: the repeal of that dastardly 19th Amendment.
Take away the power of women to vote, and the degradation stops. The paltry population of male feminists, who are likely suffering from low testosterone due to environmental plastics, would offer no barrier in stopping the return to patriarchal normalcy. Women, helpless at enacting political change, would just whine and nag endlessly, and when they tire themselves out, they’d complete their protest by buying dildos or cats.
Dildos or cats? Why not dildos AND cats? Check out the latest specials on DildosAndCats.com!
Women being helpless at enacting political change
Roosh devotes a number of paragraphs to all of the wondrous things that he thinks will happen if women are deprived of the vote. Politicians will appeal to the male-only electorate by promoting “patriarchy, economic success, stable families, and an equitable distribution of females among society.” Women will be forced to share their “political opinions [with their] feline friends” as no one else will listen.
And Roosh will finally be able to buy himself the farm he’s apparently always wanted to live on. No, really. In his utopian future, Roosh happily imagines,
My game guides would no longer be needed, allowing me to buy land and operate a real farm instead of a content farm where most of my life has been spent pushing back the harmful effects that were unleashed after allowing women to vote.
I fully support Roosh getting off the internet to go live on a farm. Who’s with me on this?
![Antifeminist DV guru Erin Pizzey: "If you are not in fear of your life, you are not suffering [from Domestic Violence]."](https://i2.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/epizzpn.jpg?resize=50%2C50)
@Latte Cat
Regarding this quote:
I’m not sure who it was on YouTube that highlighted this (I think it was ContraPoints), but whoever it was did the unenviable job of actually parsing one of Roosh’s “Bang” books and one of the striking things is that for a book ostensibly about sex, the actual act of intercourse constitutes less than a page. The bulk of the books describe the resources required, both in money and time, to go to a country and just troll and manipulate random women at clubs and bars until the one with the lowest self-esteem goes to bed with you. According to the reviewed book, it can take weeks or even a couple months to find said woman, and after all that effort getting her into bed, the actual act is described with all the grace of two slabs of meat clacking together.
It sounds like an absolutely miserable existence, but it’s such a telling fact: Roosh doesn’t do what he does to get off. He doesn’t seem to enjoy sex given the fleeting and coarse treatment it gets in his books. What his books do paint is the portrait of a man whose self-worth is measured in bedpost notches, and he’s made it his life’s goal to destroy the one thing preventing him and guys like him (at least in their minds) from obtaining bedpost notches: women’s own sense of self-worth. It would explain his opposition to the most basic of women’s human rights.
If it was just sex he was interested in, he wouldn’t have to work this hard for it. Seems clear to me that he wants conquests more than an encounter with mutual pleasure in mind. He wants to control and dominate, adding to the number that he can boast about later. It’s just pathetic.
Whenever these asshats whine about Western civilization being ruined by women getting the vote, I always wonder how exactly it’s been ruined. If you compare life now to life 200 years, I’d think most anyone would pick life now. There’s been huge advances in technology and medicine. Quality of life is so much better. Back in the time Roosh is romanticizing, cities would have been full of crime and poverty and the streets would have raw sewage running through them. For rich people living in huge country estates, life in the country might have been pretty nice. For the poor in rural areas, it would have been a tough existence of constant work.
The world is far from perfect, but I like that I have TV and internet and don’t have to worry about getting cholera from a glass of water. I like not being forced to work 80 hours a week for just about no pay. I like having plentiful food available year round that I just quickly pick up at the grocery store. I’m sure the whiners in the manosphere like these things too. So again I ask, how exactly has the world been ruined? Would they really give up all the comforts and protections of 21st century life for the chance to legally beat and rape their wives? It’s that important to them?
Spaniard in the Works
The ass-wiping reference starts here…
http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2014/10/02/why-pickup-guru-roosh-v-resents-women-for-forcing-him-to-clip-his-fingernails-and-wipe-his-own-ass/
I found a relevant gif for today on my tumblr dashboard, and thought y’all would appreciate it:
1) Re. frictionless sex – there’s no such thing as too much lube, but if we’re talking perfectly frictionless like in a physics problem, that might result in decreased sensation.
2) Declining birth rate – the birth rate is declining because the cost of feeding, medicating and educating a child is skyrocketing, and in a post-agrarian era, that cost is pure expense. You’re not breeding your only little team of farmhands anymore. Of course, what this talking point is really about is the low birthrate among white people. Immigrant groups tend to cling to their Old Country lifestyle for a generation or two before their birthrate slows down to synch up with the rest of America. The Irish and Italians did it in our turn, the Hispanics and Middle Easterners are doing it now. Of course, by the end of the process, the demographics of America have changed irrevocably, which is of course what they’re afraid of.
@Chiomara
Smell. Cats have got a distinct odour that rodents know and avoid.
So, alpha anti-feminist men all avoid plastics and live in Nunavut, or how does this work? The environment doesn’t selectively interact with certain people and not others.
Or is this some kind of midichlorian thing?
Plus, I believe they’re talking about pthlates and I’m pretty sure those are banned from baby bottles and toys in the EU nations and probably many other places outside of the US. How are they explaining European male feminists?
The line about “equitable distribution of women” is revealing. Apparently his “techniques” for landing a woman aren’t actually getting him any.
basically he doesn’t like it if women become PUAs
@James
No, women are already PUAs. What with their cleavage and scarves. See, he hates lady PUAs, cos he doesn’t have a vagina with which to produce hypnotic goo. And that’s just plain unfair
Roosh and his audience are ignorant and irrational in addition to callous and cruel. The goals of feminism result in more sex in society. When everyone can have respected personal autonomy and when we stop policing what male and female do consentually I would predict it will result in safe, casual, and satisfying sex.
But that means sharing social power at an individual and instutional level and they are doing precisely the opposite. What was the definition of evil again? I don’t tend to use it much but this one feels like it to me.
Roosh is looking more and more Taliban-esque every day. Sounding like it, too. All that’s missing is the turban…
@ bina
Ironically the Taliban started out as an anti-rape organisation; at least in their original incarnation. So they’d probably have Roosh hanging from a tank barrel.
(The origin story, which is generally accepted, is that Mullah Omar lead a group of 30 students (taliban) to rescue two girls who had been captured and raped by a local warlord/governor. They executed the perpetrators (the tank barrel thing). Locals asked the group to intercede in a number of similar cases thereafter and that was how they established a power base)
I doubt Roosh would last more than 6 months on a farm before he got bored and went back to annoying people across the planet. And I bet in his farm scenario he’d be sitting around bossing hired workers around, not doing any of the actual work himself.
(This post brought to you by “Sailors Tale” by King Crimson.)
Which would only be of benefit to those interested in casual sex, and of course those considered sexually desirable enough to begin with. Roosh and his supporters probably realize on some level that this quite likely won’t include them, even without the nasty attitudes. Consensual and safe doesn’t mean indiscriminate, some will obviously have difficulty finding consenting partners.
I think it could be preferable for society to get to the stage where sexual relationships in whatever form are no longer considered an expected norm for almost everyone.
@Alan:
How things have changed. I kind of wish we could send present-day Roosh over there at that time, and see what happens.
@Bryce
Both can coexist, though there is a tension between social emphasis and deemphases. There should be no universal expectation, and urge still seeks outlet among us and that urge is suppressed in women out of fear. Your point worth thinking about and working in.
Did I appear to imply indiscriminate? What I typed seems consistent with a society that supports expression without requiring it.
@Brony
It did kind of give the impression that sexual relationships might be more easily available to wider variety of people in the absence of sexual violence and rigid gender roles. For example socially awkward men, or women who don’t conform to current beauty standards. Maybe I just read it that way.
I don’t think is necessarily so, but you addressed that.
@Brony
Bryce is an old WATM troll with serious sad-boner issues. He’s not discussing in good faith.
So if the only reason he writes his game guides is because of the supposed negative affects of the female vote does that mean Ovid’s Ars Amatoria is a post female sufferage fake?
@Brony
I’ve observed this, at least, in microcosm. I recently joined a group that semi-regularly throws house parties where it’s acceptable (and encouraged) for attendees to engage in sexual activity more-or-less however they’d like. I won’t drill down into the groups rules and philosophy, but I’ll just say there’s a heavy emphasis on consent, personal autonomy, safety, and non-judgement. And yes, these parties feature a lot of safe(r), consensual, and (as far as I can tell) satisfying sex.
@Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
I can believe it. Hell, my own motivations are in part related to sad boner issues. But I work to find the place where my needs and the needs of women intersect and are met, and overtly support women in ways that covertly achieve my own goals so we are both happy. I’m in a cluster of people that get called “hypersexual” and I effectively don’t have a sex life because of my wife’s therapy needs. She is in a place where she needs to figure herself out and I can’t intrude, or work on places where I am broken until she figures out what she needs to. I would argue that I feel the desire more intensely than these whiners and I do everything I can to make sure my pain motivates me to attack the right social targets so others don’t experience what my wife and I have. I wish I could express more but that risks shifting things too far in my direction. Maybe in the next appropriate open thread, I think it’s something I do need to express.
I can see that regardless of intent Bryce’s challenge directly opposes the social support necessary for women to be able to express themselves and have authority over their own bodies and desires, and expect to have their needs and wants respected and met. That requires placing a social value on sex in a specific way. But while emphasizing the needs of people trying to find partners creates a problematic tension here, there is something that I realized creates a useful tension. What about pressure to have sex and asexual people? That’s worth considering. Society should simultaneously take away pressure for everyone to have sex, and encourage people who have not been allowed to express their sexuality.
I like to try to take a social challenger’s point seriously so that I can turn it towards my benefit, but there is more than one way to do that. We can’t escape self-interest in politics but we can control it and use it with awareness. I want all of our needs and wants met, but I won’t pretend that we all have the same amount of social power.
@dlouwe
That is good to hear. It makes me feel better about this approach. I don’t articulate it often because most of the time it can’t be without undermining what I want to support.
One of the weirder things about 50 Shades that I’ve long wondered about is why Stephanie Meyer hasn’t sued E. L. James for plagerism yet. According to people who’ve actually compared the two series, 50 Shades shares about 80% (give/take) of its content with Twilight. And while that was acceptable when it was a hatefic called Master of the Universe, it isn’t for an actual paid work. Or at least it shouldn’t be. Maybe things have changed since I last looked into these things (back when dinosaurs first roamed the earth).
I think what publishing house put out 50 Shades made sure just enough things were changed to avoid plagiarism suits. The names are different and Christian isn’t a vampire. That was probably enough. IANAL though.
There’s no copyright in an idea, only in the expression of an idea. The subtlety of that distinction is what pays for lawyers holidays. But it’s the reason you see so many ‘follow the leader’ rip-off films for example or why we got a sudden upsurge in post Hunger Games derivative dystopian YA fiction.
If the only way to “save” Western Civilization is to enslave half of it to the other half, I’m sorry but I’d rather let it go the way of the dodo.