antifeminism creepy douchebaggery men who should not ever be with women ever misandry misogyny narcissism penises rape rapey rhymes with roosh

Roosh V has a little trouble with the concept of “no.” [TW: Rape Apologia]

Recently, a nameless commenter here asked “What exactly is “rapey” about Pick Up Artistry?” The post below should help to answer that question.

Hey, fellas! Say you’ve applied some state of the art Pickup Artistry on some HB 10 (“hot babe 10”) and you’re about to add another notch to your “girls I’ve totally had sex with” belt – and she has the gall to tell you “no.” Should you be worried?

Pickup artist Roosh Valizedah (whom we were talking about just yesterday) says, er, no. Apparently “no” (when the word is uttered by a girl you are groping) is actually a variant of “yes.” Who knew?

While every feminist likes to repeat the phrase “No means no,” it depends on context. Here’s a guide:

“No” when you try to take off her jeans or shirt means… “You need to turn me on a lot more.”

“No” when you try to take off her bra means… “Try again in five minutes.”

“No” when you try to take off her panties means… “Don’t give up now!”

I find the only word that means no is “stop.” If you hear that word then she’ll be asking you to leave soon after.

So just filter out everything she says other than the word “stop” and you’ll be fine. Oh, and if she actually starts punching you, that’s also a clue that she doesn’t want to have sex with you.

For every rape accusation I’d want to know at what stage of undress the girl was at before the supposed rape happened. If she was completely naked until saying no, and got there voluntarily, then I’d be reluctant to charge the man with rape unless there were signs of violence.

Gals need to remember, Roosh explains, that once a man gets a boner he’s pretty much helpless.  His innate biological drives require that he either have sex with you (if you’re willing) or rape you (if you are unwilling and remember to say “stop” as well as “no”).

Women need to understand that men aren’t robots who can suddenly stop at the drop of a dime with all that testosterone pumping through their system. Therefore it would be prudent for them not to enter situations where the average man can’t stop due to his innate weaknesses as an animal whose entire existence depends on him successfully mating.

If it gets to that point, Roosh advises the ladies,  you should just try to enjoy the rape as best you can – like it’s some sort of carnival ride.

Every roller coaster has a point while chugging up that first hill where’s there’s no turning back and you just need to hang on for the ride. In other words, don’t let a man on your bed unless you’re trying to get it.

So, In Roosh’s world, woman who merely say “no” shouldn’t complain about being raped, and men are basically slavering beasts controlled by their penises. What a lovely view of the world!

494 replies on “Roosh V has a little trouble with the concept of “no.” [TW: Rape Apologia]”


Also, I feel I don’t have to point out how much more worthy a pursuit it is to disprove bullshit spread by hate sites, which is what I’m doing, than to spread that bullshit as a talking point, which is what you were doing.

Noms, you really need drop the supercilious “Aren’t I so clever!” routine. It doesn’t become you.

Steele, I’m no writer and English isn’t my mother tongue, but even for someone like me your basic issues are obvious.
-‘irregardless’ is not a word. ‘Regardless’ is. ‘i-‘ and ‘-less’ means the same thing, so the i is redundant.
– stop using the same words over and over. That’s not a style, that’s how people with a very small vocabulary write.Since you obviously have Internet access, you also have access to synonym dictionaries. Use them.
– don’t use big* words just for the sake of using them. It makes you sound pedant and when you use them wrong, it makes you sound really dumb. Use the simpler word you can find to convey your thoughts.

*well, big compared to your currents capacities.

@Monsieur Sans Nom

A will to *survive*. We also have a survival instinct which is distinct from our emotions. Emotions are a part of us, but they do not define us completely.

But where does this will to survive come from? Humans have a will to survive because they feel pain, because they have loved ones they don’t want to part from, because they have goals they haven’t met in their lives, because there is so much beauty in the world, because they value themselves, because of a million and one reasons.

Where does a robot without feelings get that from? And why is it enough to simply survive? Why spend so much time and effort on building robots if you just want something to survive humans? You could just go with fungi, they’re very resilient.

“No, it does not mean “feeling”. Sentience does not require emotion, even though some of us cannot imagine what it’s like to be able to think but not “feel.””

Duuuuuude. Check your dictionary. Sentience means feeling, precisely. Sapience means wisdom and thinking. This isn’t my invention, but a pretty core thing in philosophy.

Duuuude go back to school.

Human-Robot Personal Relationship Act

This doesn’t exist outside of MRA sites because this was part of a class assignment that some professor put online; MRAs convinced themselves it was a real thing and made various alarmed posts about how the evil feminists were out to shut down their robot lady lovin before it even started. MRAs: the most gullible people in the world?

misandry was what ceased my progress.

Actually, Steele, what’s ceasing your progress is that you write things like “misandry was what ceased my progress.”

Which might make a good slogan or t-shirt. Hmm.

You can’t really be for real.

And to continue from Myoo’s thoughts again…

Precisely. Humans are sentient, self-aware, because we feel. Sentience is the first step towards higher mental functions, and sentience is required for sapience because intellect and wisdom are not just abstracts but are inseparably tied to the (human) experience. Or another sentient and sapient species’s experience. That experience could be different from ours and unexplainable to us, but it would not be without feeling. Because to experience is to feel, and self-aware existence without experience is a bit of an oxymoron.


Steele, you’re 27, you have a computer and obviously a lot of free time. What’s stopping to write now, misandry again?

He already explained that, his teacher told him there’s no such thing as a male writer. You have to admit, it’s difficult to be a pioneer.

Finally, the misandry of my teacher did indeed discourage me from pursuing a writing career. Would I have made it? I cannot be sure, but in point of fact, misandry was what ceased my progress.


Your teacher’s comments may have slowed or even derailed your progress, but only you can “cease” it, and you can “un-cease” it at any time by getting to work. Her comments may have sucked, but the decision whether or not to keep believing them is yours and yours alone.

You are only out of time if you are dead. And if you are dead, (a) congratulations for learning how to access the Internet from beyond the grave – that’s pretty cool, and (b) my condolences.

If you’re not dead, however, the only thing standing in your way is you. Now get to work.

He already explained that, his teacher told him there’s no such thing as a male writer. You have to admit, it’s difficult to be a pioneer.

Even more difficult to pick up ANY PUBLICATION EVER and discover that there are, in fact, male writers.

Hershele: and that’s half believable for when he was a gullible teenager, but seen then I figure he actually saw, if not read, two or three books and realized that man can write and be published.

And I would in fact not count “will to survive” as part of sentience. Will to survive is a much lower level function. I keep various invertebrates as pets. I am not sure if they are actually sentient as in self-aware, but I am pretty sure they have some low level feelings judging by their social interactions, although entirely guided by their biological functions. That is different from chimps and bonobos, or whales and dolphins. My invertebrate friends cannot recognise themselves in the mirror unlike an ape can. The ape is sentient, perhaps even sapient (Koko the gorilla and others that speak sign language are good examples). The dolphin is likely sentient.

Anyway, despite not being sentient my invertebrate friends have an amazing will to live. If damaged and given a chance to heal they will take that chance and fight for their life. They eat to keep living, escape and hide from perceived dangers. Will to survive is the most basic function that overdrives even hunger and mating desires, to a point. Will to survive is not sentience.

The Jester’s Foole

The wicked Favid Dutrelle is a fatman who runs a blog on the internet about how much men sucks. Our hero is oppressed by Favid, who uses triple-reverse crypto-psychology to endlessly post angry shit on his blog and sometimes also to lie about it on another blog except when he throws a tantrum and gives up.

But the joke is on Favid when our hero goes on a bunch of dates, only some of which he causes a scene during, and successfully navigates the corporate world in pursuit of his career as a generic white dude in middle-management.

Then a bunch of eagles high five each other on top of an American flag while Warren Farrell does a solo version of Freebird and Favid shits his pants and then his pants fall down in front of a bunch of girls and they all laugh at his poopy ass.

This shit writes itself mikey. you could be on the bestseller list by next year!

Our hero is oppressed by Favid, who uses triple-reverse crypto-psychology to endlessly post angry shit on his blog and sometimes also to lie about it on another blog except when he throws a tantrum and gives up.

to make him post angry shit

Ugh, I’m totally spamming now. I’m a bit flabbergasted about this “sentience equals no feelings” inanity.

There does exist a concept of complete awareness, complete consciousness in which state one no longer feels but yet exists. It’s called Nirvana and it’s a Buddhist concept. But even Nirvana is not reached without first experiencing how to feel, by going through all the levels of sentience from the lowest animals (sentient according to the Buddha) to Enlightenment. Consciousness (and thinking) just doesn’t exist without being tied to the ability to feel, even in the religion that’s end game is to give up fucking feelings.

(Also Hindu and Jainist etc. Indian region influenced concept…. I’m hitting send before doing final nitpicky edits, stupid me)

I for one have a very hard time believing that an artificial species whose sole motivation is to survive wouldn’t be horrifically violent if it suited their purposes.

The entire concept is already about one half of what it means to be a Dalek.

Yeah, I considered saying something about the instinctual nature of survival but I thought it would be irrelevant.
Since the survival instinct is biological, and the result of evolution, robots wouldn’t have that instinct to begin with, unless they were programmed to have it. Now, they could probably develop it, but that would require them having an attachment to existence, which I don’t think could be achieved without feelings of some sort.

Well the way I see it, if we made robots that can learn, where’s the first place they’re going to pick up a bunch of stuff from? I’d say it’s pretty inevitable that they’d learn a lot of human-like qualities.

The entire concept is already about one half of what it means to be a Dalek.

Pfft. Don’t bring your crappy science fiction into this discussion about fact.

Science fiction isn’t a good source of ideas for fact because the writers make the robots fail, and scare people away from the idea of laying down and dying so the robots can take over, because the writers are big meanie poopyheads.

Yep. No science-fiction writer has ever had an excellent idea that people are attempting to create.


Yeah, I think in the case of robots it would be different. But we got a guy here who actually said (paraphrasing) “to be sentient does not mean to feel” and that gives me the impression he has done his research on the subjects he speaks about in science fiction stories instead of, for example, in philosophy of consciousness and real-life artificial intelligence and cognition studies.* He certainly abuses the word like people who know what they’re talking about don’t.

(*The two latter, coincidentally, being the subjects where I began my studies and was going to major in. I changed into biosciences early on but I still remain interested!)

I honestly am not particularly well-versed in philosophy of consciousness or real life artificial intelligence. I’m mostly just going from what seems to make sense to me and part of that has been influenced by science fiction. I’d be glad if MSN had done his research in good science fiction stories.

There are many stories in sci-fi that examine the emergence of sentient/sapient robots, what influence that could have in society, the ethics involved in dealing with these robots, the nature of self-awareness, and other such topics.

And this isn’t exactly new either, Asimov wrote these kinds of stories over 50 years ago. Osamu Tezuka made Astro Boy around that time as well. Not that much later it was explored in 2001: A Space Odissey, although in that one it was a computer and not a robot per se. These are just three examples of the top of my head, and i’m only talking about sci-fi, there have been myths and legends about artificial people for centuries, if not millennia.

So that’s why his “unfeeling robots will be totally better than human but I don’t care to elaborate” shtick to be so annoying. Not only is this not a new idea, but his particular version is a lazy formulation as well.

If we’re eating Ramen I’m going to vote for Sapporo Ichiban, or Indo-Mie, or even the Maggi flavors that are made in Malaysia. In the unlikely (if you don’t live in an area with a big SE Asian population) event that you can get your hands on any of the Viet brands, those are good too.

Also, nobody who thinks that “irregardless” is a word and uses the phrase “in point of actual fact” has any writing talent. Again, Buttpole, your teacher did you a favor.

(I’m still hoping that Mikey is a Poe, because it’s depressing to think that anyone could be as stupid as he seems to be.)

varpole: I’m sorry? I am a rising corporate executive and entrepreneur-on-the-side; I would ask that you at least show me the courtesy of acknowledging my station.

I have accomplished more in my young life than you ever will.

Oh please.

I’ve helped build rockets which are on their way to Jupiter. I worked on the prototype nosewheel for the F-22.

In my Army career I trained more than 300 interrogators, and helped shaped doctrine in the design of two sets of interrogation instruction.

I’ve been interviewed by Ukranaian television about the inception of joint training betweeen the US and Ukraine when Ukraine decided it wanted to establish ties with NATO in the 1990s. I’ve helped in the translations for designing some of the subsequent exercises in that program.

I was a translator in the first exercise to design working protocols between the US and Russia in the event of a joint missile defense mission.

I’ve had generals praise me. I’ve had privates praise me. I’ve seen the fruits of my labor make nations policies change.

I’ve been an opinion editor, and a managing editor on a weekly paper. I’ve got a published book on photography (which means I have an entry in the Library of Congress, actually, I ought to have three, because I have two books I did the illos for as well). I have done shows in the US and Canada, I’ve sold art to people in Europe, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.

I’ve been to Korea, Canada, Ecuador (to include the Galapagos), Germany, Kuwait, Ukraine and France.

I’ve broken horses to saddle, dug a well, hatched chickens and quail, framed buildings, repaired cars and moved across the US twice.

I’ve been homeless, and gotten back to being sheltered.

I’m a combat veteran, and I’ve got an 80 percent disability rating because of it. After that happened I did a two and a half month motorcycle trip, crossing international borders four times, and covering 8,000 miles in 19 riding days.

I’ve been an actor, holding crowds in one man shows, and in long stretches of interactive improv theater.

I teach people to cook.

I have ex lovers who still love me.

Good luck at matching those, much less besting them, because you think that your pushing paper (and maybe selling things) grants you some “station” in need of respect.

Pull the other one, it’s got bells on it.

And yes, I know that list seems a bit incredible. Some of it (the rockets, the nosewheel, the missle-defense exercise) were being in the right place at the right time. Some of it (the editing, the interrogation instruction) was the combination of hard work, talent, and being in the right place at the right time.

Some of it (the book illustrations) was talent combined with knowing people.

And I left a lot out. Sort of like William Goldman and the story of Butch and Sundance.

It’s been a good ride. I got a lot of interesting breaks,and a lot of good luck.

I’ve got no real regrets.

Wetherby: Julian Barnes was wrong. Crepuscular is a wonderful word, and twice a year is not too much (though I confess, I mostly use it in terms of snakes; we used to breed cornsnakes, which are crepuscular).

If a woman doesn’t want sex with you, she will stop you and there won’t be any ambiguity about it. All the rest is just tease and play. Stop being so goddamn pussified.

The scaredy-cat is of course the guy who asks if a girl wants to have sex, not the guy who sneaks a word into a conversation six months later.

Not to mention that he sneaks it in on a thread that’s about rapists ignoring every word, every signal that means “no”. Way to say he’s going to rape a woman who doesn’t use whatever precise code he’s decided is the only thing that means she really doesn’t want to have sex.

I always wonder if guys like Andrew realize that their little bon mots are read by pretty much any woman as “I will try to rape you if given the chance”. I mean hey, thanks for the heads up and all, but zero points for stealth.

So wait, if this “who you can have sex with” thing is so clear, wtf’s with the whole “having ‘sex’ with asleep or passed out people” sort of rape?

(And why am I watching New Girl?!)

So Roosh is arguing that all men should be castrated to protect them from being overwhelmed by those unstoppable biological drives?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.