alpha asshole cock carousel alpha males bad boys creepy cuckolding dark enlightenment empathy deficit entitled babies evil sexy ladies imaginary oppression men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny precious bodily fluids PUA rape culture reactionary bullshit red pill rhymes with roosh

Why pickup guru Roosh Valizadeh is dangerous to women

Roosh Valizadeh explains his philosophy of life to a cracker
Roosh Valizadeh explains his philosophy of life to a cracker

The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive continues! If you haven’t already, please consider sending some bucks my way. (And don’t worry that the PayPal page says Man Boobz.) Thanks!

It’s not exactly news that the slimeball pickup artists I write about on this blog have a bit of a double standard when it comes to sexuality. What is still surprising to me, even after years of reading these guys, is just how much they hate women for sleeping with guys like them.

For proof, look no further than the latest blog post by Roosh Valizadeh, an utterly appalling slice of misogyny that’s terrible even by Roosh’s low standards.

After a weirdly obtuse “critique” of a video by Swedish pop star Tove Lo – Roosh has a little trouble telling the difference between the singer and the depressed, self-destructive hedonist she portrays in her video – he launches into a vicious tirade against “the current generation of women” that seems driven as much by his own sexual insecurities and self-hatred as it is by hatred of women.

Roosh – a man who moved to Eastern Europe in pursuit of casual sex, a man who makes his living teaching men his dubious pickup techniques – starts off by denouncing women for indulging their own sexual desires with multiple men.

This sluttification of women, which Tove Lo’s catchy song conveys as normal and even fun, is part of a culture where every man who seeks serious relationships with women is a soft cuckold, because he’s the last man in a 30-man gangbang trying to give tender kisses on the lips and labia of a woman who has been rode hard and defiled for years.

That’s right: Roosh evidently thinks every woman who has sex with a man other than him is thereby “cuckolding” him.

How can any man who approaches a girl today see her as more than a cum bucket? Because let’s be real: she has been serving as a cum bucket thanks to a perverse culture that methodically trains and encourages her to take buckets of cum from men who make her vagina tingle, all as a way to help her “grow” as a person, find herself, and become strong and independent, which means not sobbing for more than a day when the latest bad boy she fell for turned out to be a selfish person who didn’t value her beyond the sexual.

What makes this especially creepy isn’t just the double standard; it’s that this is Roosh’s opinion of the women he spends his entire life trying to get into bed.

This is the girl who’s going to be your lifelong faithful partner? The girl who’s going to be the mother of your children?

Wait. So Roosh is telling us that after a few years of riding the vagina carousel, as it were, Roosh wants to settle down and get married? The irony, it burns.

I cringe at that notion, as should all men. I rather be an evolutionary dead-end that let a whore be the mother of my child, but men today are being trained to accept the whore mother and to be the soft cuckold, the sucker that gets to buy the goods at full price even though it has declined 80% of value from its peak.

Seriously, Roosh, please be an evolutionary dead-end.

Not that he’s likely to be able find a willing bride, unless he somehow prevents the woman in question from Googling his name and finding out what he actually believes.

It’s amazing that in just three generations, women have gone from being potential wives and mothers to nothing more than fuck toys. Men used to meet traditionally minded virgins, but are now stuck with a seemingly unlimited pool of mediocre sluts who have been fucked in the ass by multiple men.

So Roosh is shocked that the women he has casual sex with are women who … have casual sex?

Why would he think that his brilliant pickup strategy of pursuing drunk women in bars would result in him meeting a lot of “traditionally minded virgins?”

This is complete and utter decimation of the female human.

Apparently penises are so destructive to women that any woman who encounters more than one in her lifetime is “utterly decimated” by contact with them.

Men can no longer gain any meaning or value from a woman beyond sex, even if he is truly capable of being the world’s number one dad, and rest assured that the degeneracy that has so swallowed America whole will spread throughout the world from the trojan horse technology out of Silicon Valley.

Yep. He’s angry and jealous that iPhones give women more options in dating than just him.

And he also somehow seems to think he’s capable of being “the world’s number one dad.”

How did this happen? How did we get to this point? A book can be written on the answer, but understand that trillions of dollars are to be made by destroying the feminine mother and putting a mindless and shallow consumer fuck robot in her stead.

Oh dear. Here come the conspiracy theories.

The finger can be pointed at the elite and their useful idiots for creating this environment, but the fact still remains that this is not a good time to be a normal man with the normal need to reproduce with a good woman who will stay loyal to him, raise his kids right, retain a thin figure, and take care of his home.

Wow. What a great deal for a woman! I can’t understand why women aren’t lining up in droves for the chance to marry this prize of a man.

A man who puts in triple overtime and travels abroad can find the exceptions, but for the lot of men in the Western world, there is no longer any meaning beyond casual sex that can be gained from women. These are end times for traditional pair bonding.

And yet somehow most people end up in relationships, and the world isn’t exactly running out of babies.

So on that note, I urge you to learn game, seduce these inadequate women, and try out those moves you’ve seen in porn, because that sex drive of yours is not going anywhere and must be sated for your own mental health.

I’ve rarely seen a man so eager to announce to the world that he has absolutely no idea how to satisfy a woman in bed. Or even an understanding as to why satisfying a woman might be a good thing not only for her but for him as well.

Beyond that, however, don’t expect much more, because women can no longer provide you with what women of the past so easily could.

Roosh Valizadeh, everyone – a man who thinks he could be the greatest dad ever.

So how does a man end up loathing the women who sleep with him … because they sleep with him?

I’m not sure that’s the right question. I think Roosh’s real anger is directed at the women who won’t sleep with him – but will sleep with other men.

After all, as Roosh has often acknowledged, the life of a would-be “pickup artist” isn’t one of endless triumphs. In fact, it’s one of constant rejection, as the overwhelming majority of the women that these guys approach have no interest in them.

Instead of being able to roll with this – rejection is an inevitable part of romantic life for everyone – Roosh sees this rejection as a personal affront. In his mind, these women are denying him something that he is entitled to, something that he has worked hard for – hell, he even moved to Eastern Europe in an attempt to find more pliable women to pursue.

That’s why he feels he’s been “cuckolded” by any woman who sleeps with men other than him.

This isn’t just fucked up. Roosh’s philosophy is dangerous to women, as is he.

300 replies on “Why pickup guru Roosh Valizadeh is dangerous to women”

And that, class, is why you don’t close blockquote tags with exclamation points.

One of the big problems is that basically everyone lies about sex (or at least conceals) due to social compulsions, so you end up playing Sexuality many cards short of a full deck. For example, if you have some pain or discomfort or whatever in your equipment, there is so much misinformation around that it is difficult to know whether you have to accept that that’s the way male or female bodies work or you just need to do something differently or something’s wrong that needs medical attention. As far as behavior is concerned, there is so much wrong in society that it’s hard for anyone to make rational decisions about their own conduct. What, for example, makes a woman a slut, and why is a promiscuous man called a stud rather than a slut. And, most of all, why should any one deem themselves qualified to impose judgmental labels on other people’s sex lives.
It’s a lot better than it was when I was young. If in 1963 (which I choose because it’s the year I turned 16) you used the term “transvaginal ultrasound” on TV, tens of millions of pearls would have been clutched and fainting couches resorted to.
My view has always been that sexuality is far too important a part of life to permit, let alone encourage, people (and especially the young) to be so poorly informed as has been the norm. For dog’s sake, it’s how we all get here in the first place.
(Part of MY problem is that I’m a natural preacher in a world where the demand for agnostic preachers is severely limited.)

I’ve never lied to a current or potential partner about my sexual history. If someone can’t deal with that, well (shrugs). Either they’re applying a double standard, which is unacceptable, or they’re just not a good match, which is fine, and better to know that sooner rather than later. In either case, what would lying accomplish?

I never lied, but there was a time when I was young that I believed there were sex acts that didn’t count. So, mistakes were made in the tally. 😛

That’s what a lack of sex ed and a load of sexual shaming will get ya.

It’s funny because it was such a prevalent idea among young Baptists I knew. If it wasn’t piv, it wasn’t reeeeally sex

Unless your bf/gf did it with someone else. THEN it was sex.

It’s funny because it was such a prevalent idea among young Baptists I knew. If it wasn’t piv, it wasn’t reeeeally sex

Ah, the “what counts as sex” legalism! How well do I remember. And it never struck us as odd, either; we just assumed that rules-lawyering was a normal part of a relationship.

When I first heard that some people thought anal didn’t count as sex I nearly peed myself laughing. Where is the logic there?

I’m so glad I never got sucked into the whole PUA thing seeing as how I — a young, socially inept, somewhat romantically frustrated male — seem to be their main target. After reading a load of PUA articles I’ve always had the feeling that all the stuff they preach just isn’t right and even downright wrong; and now my suspicions have been confirmed.

I am so enjoying this thread! 🙂

Bina – Roosh would probably think Louis was kinging rong back in the day. He’d even help his valets make his bed! (Bearing in mind how big those beds were, it took more than one person to make ’em.)

Bina – Roosh would probably think Louis was kinging rong back in the day. He’d even help his valets make his bed! (Bearing in mind how big those beds were, it took more than one person to make ‘em.)

“Kinging rong” — LOL! That makes my night.

And yup…those beds were ginormungous. My mom once saw Napoleon’s bed on Elba, and said it was more wide than long, so therefore he MUST be short. Weren’t they all?

Thank you, thank you, I’ll be here all week. 🙂

I’ve heard that the short beds thing is more because people slept slanted up on pillows, though I’m not sure that explanation’s right either. Napoleon wasn’t that short, actually, around 5’7″ I think; French and English inches weren’t the same. Anyways the whole “people were all short” thing is wrong; look at the Plantagenets, most of them were six-footers! So were the Stuarts, for that matter (Charles I was short because of childhood ill health). So short beds definitely don’t equal short people.

” In either case, what would lying accomplish?”
It might get you a significant other who in the long run you don’t really want. Which I believe is your point. But I wasn’t thinking specifically of lying to a partner.

“When I first heard that some people thought anal didn’t count as sex I nearly peed myself laughing. Where is the logic there?”
That would seem to be basically lying to yourself about sex. In my experience, lying to yourself is REALLY bad policy.

When I encountered that idea it was coming from religious kids who’d committed themselves to the idea of no sex before marriage but conveniently decided that anything other than PIV didn’t count. Thus, oral is fine, anal is fine, just don’t break the freshness seal on your vagina and it’s all good.

The mind, it really did boggle.

Random, but those stiff neck ruffles that were a thing for a while always looked so incredibly uncomfortable to me. A nice basic military uniform would definitely have been preferable.

Also they made people look like the frilled dinosaur that spits goo in people’s eyes in Jurassic Park.

RE – “everyone used to be short” – I think they got that from the fact that doors were built short, and people have to duck their heads.

My theory is that it was just easier and cheaper to build them that way, and only the palatial buildings had tall doors. Peasants could just duck, and save money in construction costs.

RE – anything other than PIV didn’t count – That boggled me, too. Then again, I went to a church run school, where it seemed to run the gamut from “kissing before you’re engaged” counts, French kissing DEFINITELY counted, touching breasts counted and you had to get married, and yet, strangely, “dry humping” with all your clothes on didn’t count.

Me, I thought it was all hinky. I saw nothing wrong with kissing, even French kissing, before engagement, because that way you could tell if there was a real spark. I did believe you ought to date a few times, first, and not kiss indiscriminately. Touching breasts was as bad as touching butts, and it was off limits, but if you did it, you didn’t just say, “Whoopsie, break out the shotgun, Pops! Time to get married.” You said, “Whoopsie! Let’s back off and keep our hands otherwise occupied. Time for a cold shower.” And dry-humping was definitely, in my mind, a form of sex that would require formal repentance if done outside of marriage, because seriously, you don’t think you can fool the Lord, now, do you? If married people wanted to dry-hump, though, more power to them. That’s birth control, right?

Fortunately, I never actually witnessed anyone dry-humping. I just heard about it, from roommates who came home, saying, “You’ll never BELIEVE what I just saw!”

I don’t think I actually knew what anal sex was, at the time, but I’m sure I would have counted it as something to be reserved for marriage.

Basically, in my mind, before marriage, kissing was OK, as was holding hands, and putting arms around each other. Beyond that was pushing it.

Wow, I was so naive when I was a college student.

Michelle, yup!

Mind you his father did that bit of kinging even ronger. He went around in torn clothes when he felt like it.

cassandra, yup, they were damned uncomfortable. Starched, held up on a high collar and underpropper. Even the falling bands (think your cavalier-style lace collar) were held up high under the chin, and the collars of those doublets were very stiff. Louis still won’t wear high collars round his neck, not even knitted ones.

@cassandra and kitteh – I always thought those collars resembled slide projectors. Did people actually try to eat while wearing them?

Napoleon wasn’t that short, actually, around 5’7″ I think

That’s what I told my mom, too. She wasn’t convinced.

My pet theory is that he had his bed built that way so that he could protect himself against any enemy intruder who might fire off a round at the head of the bed. If he were sleeping sideways, they’d have a much harder time shooting in the dark.

Or maybe he was just eccentric. Who knows?

You owe me a new keyboard, Michelle! XD

That’s exactly what Henri was like, too. He had some real back-away-slowly habits back then.

Buttercup – oh yes! I’d hate to have been the one having to wash them.

Bina – well, beds in general were shortish; I’ve seen one Charles II used, and it was much the same, and he was over 6′ tall. So I really don’t know what the answer is. But a lot of the “Napoleon was short” stuff comes from English propaganda, which is hardly surprising given how long they were at war, and that they won.

Then again, I went to a church run school, where it seemed to run the gamut from “kissing before you’re engaged” counts, French kissing DEFINITELY counted, touching breasts counted and you had to get married, and yet, strangely, “dry humping” with all your clothes on didn’t count.

I remember conversations about what, exactly, you could and couldn’t do with your tongue before it counted as French kissing. And what sort of grinding was and wasn’t allowed.

Also earnest discussions about whether, having done such-and-such, you were still “technically” a virgin.

@kittehserf – euw! I bet it would make a handy filing system, though. “Gum? Hold on, let me check accordion fold #23.”

ROFL I was thinking that too, Buttercup. You could say “you owe me a new keyboard” is just the modern equivalent of “you owe me a new ruff”.


So short beds definitely don’t equal short people.

Thomas Jefferson was 6′ 2″ (1.89m), says Google, and his bed at Monticello is built into a wall and definitely not that long, and the tour guides said it was because of the propped-up sleeping. Seriously, it’s like a hole in the wall between his library and his bedroom. No dangling his toes off the end and cheating!


When I encountered that idea it was coming from religious kids who’d committed themselves to the idea of no sex before marriage but conveniently decided that anything other than PIV didn’t count.

There’s a Garfunkel & Oates song that reflects that belief, so it seems to be widespread. I wasn’t really a talker in high school so I never heard a lot of the local sex myths.

RE sex myths:

The religious school I went to wasn’t really all that extreme, and people didn’t seem to take the religion parts very seriously, so I heard about the whole “folks think only PiV counts” as sort of a Catholic Student trope.

I grew up more around the “there is a strict progression of sexual acts, with anal being the holy grail” or some nonsense. Although now that I think about it, even that attitude was sort of second-hand. Most of the guys around me were just interested in “hot or not,” and sex was just this thing that couples did, sometimes on the tables in the classrooms.

When I was in school the “it doesn’t count if it’s anal” thing was a running joke about the poor quality of sex ed. at the local Catholic school. Sex-ed at my school started in 4th grade and by high school it was comprehensive enough that nobody I knew actually bought into that. “Oral doesn’t count” was an excuse used by the more religious types though.

No dangling his toes off the end and cheating!

Falconer, I love that image! (And the info.) 🙂

Well, people sleeping with heads propped up makes sense, given that bolsters were frequently mentioned in literature; I’m guessing that that’s how they propped themselves up. Sleeping relatively flat is a modern thing, apparently!

I sleep propped up because I just can’t stand to use a CPAP. Sleeping on my back, I keep snoring and waking myself up. But if I’m propped up, I can breathe.

It started when I had a bad case of bronchitis, and I just kept it up.

As a teen, I went to a christian summer camp (no one in my family is actually religious, but it was a very cool camp off the BC coast, so I got to go), and of course, we had to listen to their silly lectures about how the boys could never ever go into the girls’ cabins. Because… mumble mumble mumble. We knew they thought we’d all have sex (even though very few of us were interested in each other AT ALL and we preferred group hangouts), so the boys would stand in the door way and jump in and out, singing “One baby, two babies, three babies,” etc.

I think the sleeping propped up might be a thing that comes and goes. Medieval illustrations look like the beds are flat.

Bolsters were definitely around by the 17th century at least: Mr K used one back then.

I have to sleep propped up a bit now, because of acid reflux.

I can sleep sitting, but when my head drops, I invariably wake up. So I guess propping myself up is out, at least for now. I’m a definite on-my-side-in-the-fetal-position sleeper, but I do like more than one pillow.

Sex ed in Christian schools can get real bizarre, we needed a permission note to learn about puberty, when we were sixteen mind you, but not for an impromptu lecture on the horrors of anal sex with gestures.

Pretty much spot on with your commentary David. Isn’t he just the sweetest with his idealised version of parenthood. Nobody knows what kind of parent they will be until they have a bunch screaming rug rats running around demanding constant attention. I don’t have kids but I try to stay aware of this for fear of making a stupid decision. You are the company you keep at the end of the day and if Roosh continues to spend his life pursuing people who’s behaviour is not conducive (for whatever reason, good or bad) to raising a healthy brood then his behaviour is not going to be conducive to being the worlds no.1 Dad. Man or Woman, sleeping around is not good for raising a family. A huge amount of people go through a phase of sewing the old oats before settling down and raising a family. So Roosh has made himself nothing more than an outlet for people who are either going through a phase or are just crap at relationships. And as a result of himself he has created nothing more than the proverbial cum bucket he so loathes. Roosh places no value on himself, he is nothing more than a walking dildo. I for one am glad that my father placed a higher value on himself because although he wasn’t a perfect man, it did make him a better father.

I almost feel sorry for Roosh because he has to wake up every morning and be himself. But then I remember his story about the drunk woman in Iceland.

I woke up the other day, propped up on the back of my couch with one leg tucked under and the other leg dangling off the front, and my baby boy face down in my lap trying and failing to go to sleep. He kept kicking the back of the couch and pushing the top of his head into my dangling leg.

I was propped up on the back, not the arm, although one of the little pillows was stuffed behind the small of my back.

Did I mention it was 6:30 in the morning? I don’t remember getting out of bed.

And that was the last time I slept sort-of upright. Apparently I was doing a good job of it.

This guy is a joke and couldn’t cut it in the US so he went abroad where the women don’t speak his language. I suspect if Any of us women actually had the unfortunate displeasure of meeting this guy we wouldn’t give him a second glance as his lackluster looks and intelligence coupled with his mysogynistic views and subtle stench of his own desperation would render us repelled if not completely indifferent.
This guy is a worthless piece of garbage and should be ignored . hopefully there wont be any more articles about this vomit bag because it only feeds his fragile ego.

Roosh is easy to dislike–he has done some pretty detestable stuff and is unrepentant about it. He also highlights through his own experiences and experiments what women respond to and what they don’t. The truth is, women are drawn to men who have been with a lot of women. It takes work and a certain amount of charisma (and/or money) to do that. To women, it’s social proof. The opposite does not apply. It’s incredibly easy for women to sleep with a lot of men. Of course women are welcome to if they like, but that doesn’t increase their mate value to men when it comes to long-term relationships. Why would it? For men, that just means more competition for him and the risk of ending up a provider to someone else’s kid. It happens.

> So how does a man end up loathing the women who sleep with him … because they sleep with him?

Romantic strategies are funny things. Why do women play the friends card with nice guys who would do anything for them and yet respond well to cavemen? While men might agree to marry, it’s the dominant and preferred strategy for women everywhere, and yet plenty of women (nearly as many as men, by some reckoning) cheat on good, faithful men who have sworn a lifetime of commitment and resources to them. Why do those women defect or end up deeply unhappy when this was ostensibly their lifetime goal?

I don’t understand the indignation about Roosh. If he’s despicable, and I see why someone would feel that way, why be bothered that he chooses to live in Eastern Europe rather than the U.S.? This should be a victory for American women. Is it resentment over his success? If feminist values hold true, he should be shunned for his strategy and moral repugnance. And yet women, hundreds and hundreds of them, including American women, can’t get enough. Finding out about his blog and PUA status actually gets women more interested.

So yes, some men do disgusting things. But why do women crave and reward that? Gentlemen who conform to social convention are nominally praised in mainstream messaging, but it’s the Rooshes of the world that women can’t get enough of in the bedroom. Criticize him if you like, but save some of it for the mysterious feminine wiring that makes his behavior not just possible but wildly successful.


Roosh is easy to dislike–he has done some pretty detestable stuff and is unrepentant about it.

Right. You got it right in the first sentence.

From there, your comment devolved into crapola.

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.