Post: #51

I donated over $100. Just the small bits I saw in the trailer were enough to convert logical men and women to at least sympathizing with the men's movement. That is enough for me. MikeCF says that her feminist backers pulled funding when they realized it wasnt a hatchet job on the MRM, that may be why she needs kickstarter... I personally believe if it was a hatchet job on the MRM the whole thing would have been funded already and way more than $100k.

update: found in the comments on the danger and play : http://www.dangerandplay.com/2015/10/27/...ou-to-see/

"The truth. Watch the trailer. Read her tweets. Feminists have pulled out of supporting her. There is something to be found here and she isn't some two-bit documentary maker. She has grown and changed her views throughout the making of this documentary. Strongly consider supporting her because it could do a world of good"

Post: #52

Would love to see Gavin McInnes (or Roosh?) or some other well recognized and well spoken Red Pill figure-head make a documentary of this fashion.

It is intriguing and will certainly watch it when it comes out, but I won't contribute. She is still a self-proclaimed feminist so she is coming at this from the wrong camp if she is truly trying to make an "unbiased" documentary. She would need to be someone who has no real feelings one way or the other about it.

Post: #53

Why does our message always have to come from a chick in order to be taken seriously? Just doesn't jive with me. Usually if Milo and Mike vouch for something I'm all aboard but something doesn't sit right about this with me.

For some reason I can see this getting completely funded and then going unfinished like Sarkeesian's thing. Here's hoping I'm proved wrong across the board, but I remain skeptical.

Post: #54

She's now at just over $86,000 - and with 15 days to go it looks like she'll make it.

Post: #55

(10-27-2015 12:18 PM)iamdegaussed Wrote:  Why does our message always have to come from a chick in order to be taken seriously? Just doesn't jive with me. Usually if Milo and Mike vouch for something I'm all aboard but something doesn't sit right about this with me.

For some reason I can see this getting completely funded and then going unfinished like Sarkeesian's thing. Here's hoping I'm proved wrong across the board, but I remain skeptical.

My point exactly. We should not be expected to ride to the rescue and pull some reformed feminist's chestnuts out of the fire. From what I've read, her first source of backing was from feminists.

So now, when they have pulled the rug out from under her, she wants men to run in and save her?

What kind of nonsense is this?

Is this about ideas, or is this about self-promotion and shameless hucksterism?

Let her go back to her feminist buddies for a loan.

We are not targets for stealth marketing.

This is just unacceptable.

Post: #56

(10-27-2015 10:48 AM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  No, we do not need to experience some reformed feminist's "journey of self-actualization" as she realizes that most of her ideas are based on bullshit.

I do not wish to see some doe-eyed minx smile at the camera and tell us what we already know.

This documentary to me looks like nothing but female attention-whoring in stealth form. It's disguised as some sort of sympathy piece for men--as if men need her pity--but the reality is that this is just a rancid attempt to make a buck off the mood of the times.

We don't permit women to define our struggles for us. We tell them ourselves.

We don't prostitute ourselves for the pity or sympathy of attention-whores. And we absolutely should not be collaborating with them or hyping their projects.

Only by taking this uncompromising stance will anything of value ever be achieved. The revolt must come from within, from us. Not from them. The only way forward is through the sweat of our own brows, and the honest heart imbued with zeal.

There is no other way.

Achievement comes through struggle. Our own struggle. Women do not speak for us, and to help empower her megaphone is making the same mistake that men have been making for decades.

No compromise, no collaboration. Permitting the message to be filtered through a female lens guarantees its conformity to the existing doctrinal requirements.

.

Post: #57

(10-27-2015 12:18 PM)iamdegaussed Wrote:  For some reason I can see this getting completely funded and then going unfinished like Sarkeesian's thing. Here's hoping I'm proved wrong across the board, but I remain skeptical.

Are you talking about "The Sarkeesian Effect", the pro-GamerGate movie? Your statement made me curious if it was finished, and apparently it was, though only on September 14, 2015 - so quite a bit late, after the news about it was well over:

https://vimeo.com/ondemand/thesarkeesianeffect

This may ultimately be the fate of any so-called "Red Pill" movie - total media black-out. Given that and the multitude of other issues with this particular one, I can't blame guys for passing on it. At the least, it's a roll of the dice.

Post: #58

It's over 100k. Fully funded.

Post: #59

(10-27-2015 02:35 PM)262 Wrote:  Are you talking about "The Sarkeesian Effect", the pro-GamerGate movie? Your statement made me curious if it was finished, and apparently it was, though only on September 14, 2015 - so quite a bit late, after the news about it was well over:

'The Sarkeesian Effect' was sunk by forum member Aurini making the mistake to trust Jordan Owen - a Leftist Collaborator whom probably doesn't even recognise he is a Leftist. Aurini wanted to believe the best in someone, and that they could be elevated, but had yet to learn just how fundamentally-different a creature these people are. Unfortunately, this is why I didn't invest: Jordan's appearance was all the warning I needed - since I know appearance is ideology, and the few videos I watched I was struck by the fact that Jordan wasn't as clever as he obviously thought he was, and intellectual inferiority coupled with an inability to admit others might be more intelligent than them is a huge red flag for Progressive and Gamma male hijinks. A smart man recognises intelligence that is superior to his own, a mediocre man thinks it can't possibly exist.

I was going through my own harsh learning experience at the time from making the exact same mistake. Never again. There are attributes that Leftists just don't believe in: dedication, honour, trust, hard work, sincerity. The result is just an avalanche of passive-aggressive bullshit and frustration that could all be avoided by just knuckling down and doing the work.

Good video here:

Post: #60

(10-27-2015 02:35 PM)262 Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 12:18 PM)iamdegaussed Wrote:  For some reason I can see this getting completely funded and then going unfinished like Sarkeesian's thing. Here's hoping I'm proved wrong across the board, but I remain skeptical.

Are you talking about "The Sarkeesian Effect", the pro-GamerGate movie? Your statement made me curious if it was finished, and apparently it was, though only on September 14, 2015 - so quite a bit late, after the news about it was well over:

https://vimeo.com/ondemand/thesarkeesianeffect

This may ultimately be the fate of any so-called "Red Pill" movie - total media black-out. Given that and the multitude of other issues with this particular one, I can't blame guys for passing on it. At the least, it's a roll of the dice.

No, I was talking about Anita Sarkeesian's actual project where she got some ridiculous sum of money, then took way past her deadline to produce videos that were not worth the tens of thousands that were supposedly being spent on the production quality.

I'd just hate to see Mike and Milo putting themselves out there for the same type of thing. I really hope I'm wrong but after watching the trailer I don't think so.

QC's hit the nail on the head I think. Even the trailer reeks of her "having to be saved" from these awful ideas that maybe her feminist dogma might not be all it was cracked up to be. After talking to the Men's Rights guys she has to go back to the feminists so she can be told "Oh sweetie it's okay, they only think those things because of PATRIARCHY!"

Also perhaps I'm really naive about the costs of producing films like this, but why do they always seem to cost so much? If you've already got the camera and the editing software, what could possibly cost nearly $100,000?

Post: #61

(10-27-2015 01:09 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  My point exactly. We should not be expected to ride to the rescue and pull some reformed feminist's chestnuts out of the fire. From what I've read, her first source of backing was from feminists.

So now, when they have pulled the rug out from under her, she wants men to run in and save her?

What kind of nonsense is this?

Gotta agree here.

What honour or integrity should we expect from a woman, based on the fact that they're fundamentally-different creatures from Men?

Can you expect her to do a balanced documentary on MRA / the Red Pill - what I see as two different spheres of a thought and a concept that's been far superseded by Neomasculinity anyway - and present facts without filtering things through her feelings and just having to correct opinions she finds personally-offensive as a woman? You can call her open-minded, but there's a level of Real Talk this subject requires that I think women just aren't prepared to handle. (See Roosh's hired Hostess just having to speak her mind at one of his events).

Look at the blurb on the damn poster: A feminist's journey into the men's rights movement. It's all about her.

As such, I'd consider this Rule #2 of my Four Rules for Predicting Female Behaviour.

Quote:Rule #2: What's the least amount of effort I can expend to get what I believe I deserve as quickly as possible?

Two possibilities:

1. She delivers on her promise.

2. Rule 3 and Rule 4. Transgression then justification.

I just double-checked and now she's fully-funded: for fuck's sake. These Brooklyn Hipsters are now likely to clear around $10,000 on this deal between the 3% cut of each monetary transaction and the 5% fee off the final total. They look nice, so I'm sure you can trust them with your personal information.

https://www.kickstarter.com/team?ref=footer

Post: #62

^^^^

My guess is that the money's for one of two things, given she hasn't broken down for anyone exactly what the money's going to be used for:

(1) Her salary
(2) A PR company or film distributor has laughed in her face when she's approached them with this project and has said "Yeah, right. We're going to be inundated with Big Red clones if we release this. Maybe we'll consider doing it if, like a vanity publisher, you pay us a hundred grand to defray our inevitable losses on this film."

Post: #63

Quote:
As such, I'd consider this Rule #2 of my Four Rules for Predicting Female Behaviour.

Quote:Rule #2: What's the least amount of effort I can expend to get what I believe I deserve as quickly as possible?

AB: what is the full set of Four?

Post: #64

^

I believe the majority of women follow these four rules in choosing how to act to achieve their goals. It might sound vague, but the four rules are interrelated, and all four aren't always required to achieve her ends.

I have a shorter version of this, but I'll unpack the four rules into a longer form so you can see how one leads to the next.

Rule #1: Everything I want, I believe I deserve.

Rule #2: What's the least amount of effort I can expend to get what I believe I deserve as quickly as possible?

Rule #3: If the quickest and laziest route to achieving what I believe I deserve would require serious moral or social transgressions, then those rules don't apply to me, because of how righteously-deserving I am.

Rule #4: If I am stigmatised for any moral or social transgressions in the righteous pursuit of what I believe I deserve, then what is the least amount of effort I can expend to defuse criticism, deflect blame or escape punishment?

Rule #4 is how women consistently-lower the bar of any civilisation. If enough female listeners can empathise with the justification for transgression by imagining being in her position, the transgression becomes destigmatised. Women don't really feel guilt the way men do - from my experience, they can emotionally-justify anything as being anyone's fault but their own.

I could unpack these steps properly - it'd probably require a very long essay - but all non-resilient female behaviour seems to follow this pattern to me. Emotionally-resilient women are the ones I can't predict.

It might go:

Rule #1: My husband isn't giving me the mind-blowing sex I deserve.

Rule #2: I could talk to him about it, actively work to improve our sex lives through active engagement, stronger communication of sexual desires, and sex therapy, but all that would require a sizeable time commitment, much hard work, and possibly feeling uncomfortable, so I can't be bothered.

Rule #3: Therefore, I'm entirely-justified in cheating on him with another man who is better at sex and could give me the mind-blowing orgasms I deserve.

Rule #4:

(to the lover) "I'm cheated on him because he doesn't love me anymore and you make me feel alive."

(to her friends) "I had to cheat on him. It's so horrible being trapped in a loveless relationship with a miserable sex life. I felt like I was suffocating."

(to the husband) "It's your fault I cheated because you didn't care about my happiness."

See how it works?

How it might play out, in this case:

Rule #1: I want to make a film becomes I deserve to make a film.

Rule #2: I could take out personal loans; contact local businesses for financial investment; attend trade shows and glad hand producers for further investment; contact advertisers for possible sponsorship; accept realistic goals; budget careful and cut out unrealistic expenses; and engage guerrilla filmmaking where personal comfort is sacrificed for the art.

or

My Feminst friends didn't care enough to fully fund my film. Perhaps I could cry online about how my original backers are now attacking me and my movie mightn't be made. Won't someone please save me? Perhaps even people who hate the people who are (ostensibly) attacking me and are now assuming my film paints them in a positive light?

Rule #3: "Of course, the film hasn't been edited yet and I don't really know the narrative the material was suggesting until I start editing it into shape."

Rule #4: "I never promised the film would paint MRA and the red pill in a positive light."

or

"It was going to be positive, but MRA's turned on me towards the end of production, and I've had a realisation about how just dangerous they are and that message needs to get out"

or

"The project won't be finished because of reasons, and now I'm donating the remaining budget to Feminist Frequency / Planned Parenthood. Giving away the money as an act of charity proves I wasn't ever scamming anyone." <- I think something like this actually happened a while ago

Whilst I'm not saying it's going to play out that way - it's a coin toss, to be honest - I know if things go south how the betrayal or failure will be justified. Perhaps she found the experience stressful or maybe she had a hard upbringing. Maybe though the backers are hurt, she's hurting three times as much.

Post: #65

^^^

Brilliant, AB. I'm going to tweet that out right now. It needs to be seen.

Post: #66

The other thing that occurs is this: she thinks by putting this out there that she'll create a "Only Nixon Could Go To China" moment for feminism, that women will suddenly reconsider feminism's bullshit because she, a cute girl, interviews a few crusty old fuckers in the MRA movement and discovers that they actually have a point.

This is fundamentally misconceived because of her looks. Feminists, like all lefties, are perfectly prepared to throw a member of their own gender under the bus for the sake of The Cause. We've seen this from the very fact feminists have been backing away from the film at a rate of knots. And feminists are particularly willing to throw a member of their gender under the bus who is somewhat superior to them in the looks department.

What will happen is that Jaye will be accused by ugly old feminists and even uglier young feminists of being "young" (read: moderately fuckable), "privileged" (read: white and less than 100 kgs), "not understanding the subject" (read: a ditz), and being "a victim of the patriarchy" (read: can get alpha dick easier than an ugly chick can).

Post: #67

(10-27-2015 11:43 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  ^^^

Brilliant, AB. I'm going to tweet that out right now. It needs to be seen.

I'm not sure anything needs to be anything, QC. Things just are.

Obviously, NAWALT. There are two types of women in my eyes: Princesses and Queens. Queens are the ones who have emotionally-matured past a high school mindset, or have driven minds that work hard to achieve their goals, or whom have built emotional resilience through hardship. They've usually earned their stripes by being forced to accept hard realities. They're the ones whose behaviour frequently-surprises me – they’re far more genuine to be around and far less prone to High School Drama. I think of them as Queens because they possess genuine wisdom and their outlook tends to be community and family-orientated.

Princesses, though? Their outlook is entirely-self focused. Thoughts of community are simply ways to elevate themselves through Social / Moral Crusading. Thoughts of family, when they even exist, are that parents are a financial and emotional resource to be exploited to achieve their own goals, and that children are simply extensions of themselves, without their own desires and dreams.

Unfortunately, this is now the vast majority of modern women as cultivated by Feminism and Academia.

Here's another example:

Rule 1. I deserve attention.

Rule 2. I lack genuine talent or beauty to gain attention, so I'll tweet a picture of myself naked.

Rule 3. ...Despite the fact I'm ugly and obese and people are disgusted.

Rule 4. Obese bodies are beautiful, and your disgust is just fat-shaming.

or

Rule 1. I deserve to be taken seriously as an academic critic of video games from a Feminist Mental Environmentalist perspective.

Rule 2. I could create a series of honest criticisms of video games, and whilst I might have some valid points, others might be false, so I could potentially improve by listening to feedback. Still, I could slowly build an audience with an understanding that my perspective is just one of many... but I'm lazy. Look, I'm being harassed! I won't debate my points! Give me money and media attention!

Rule 3. As an agent of change, I need to encourage diversity to create the necessary conflict required to steer the culture to the outcome I've predetermined, so If I need to bend the truth, demonise opponents, lie by omission and exaggerate the danger I'm in, well, the ends justify the means.

Rule 4. All criticism is just harassment by misogynists! Women never lie! Listen and believe.

or

Rule 1. I deserve the boy I'm romantically interested in.

Rule 2. He seems disinterested, so I could either try to genuinely-connect with him, or face up to reality and move on to find another man, but I'm lazy, so I'm sure he'll want to protect me if I look like I need rescuing and then he'll deeply-love me.

Rule 3. "There's this guy called George Glass Haven Monahan. You wouldn't know him - he's Canadian, but he and his friends violently-raped me for hours in a UVA Frat House."

Rule 4. EVERYONE INVOLVED DID RULE 4 FOR HER! The police, the university representatives, Rolling Stone, her friends: no-one dared call an obvious liar an obvious liar.

Post: #68

AB your posts about this stuff are so on point it seems like you're watching reality happen through a TV screen where you're able to fast forward and rewind to analyze it better. Good stuff, as always.

Post: #69

The illustrated version for kids:

1. "I deserve my career as a Big City Typist!"



2. "Oops! Responsibility! Boy, it would be very demanding raising this kid and keeping my career, but my personal appearance suggests I'm not afraid of hard work effort so I'm sure I can handle it."



3. "Fuck that! Slurppppp!"



4. Triumphant Twitter hashtag!



Remember, Princesses can morally-justify anything.

Post: #70

(10-28-2015 12:31 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 11:43 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  ^^^

Brilliant, AB. I'm going to tweet that out right now. It needs to be seen.

I'm not sure anything needs to be anything, QC. Things just are.

Obviously, NAWALT. There are two types of women in my eyes: Princesses and Queens. Queens are the ones who have emotionally-matured past a high school mindset, or have driven minds that work hard to achieve their goals, or whom have built emotional resilience through hardship. ...

Princesses, though? Their outlook is entirely-self focused. ...

Unfortunately, this is now the vast majority of modern women as cultivated by Feminism and Academia.

Here's another example:

...

this and the following posts are the best posts I have read in a very long time on female behaviour! An rational, perfectly astute observation and detailed description.

Post: #71

There's an important point we aren't seeing: This movie isn't made for us - it's made for people who wouldn't touch this site or anything "manosphere" because it's associated with dreaded words like "mysoginist", "sexist", "racist", et cectra.

Good idealistic social justice progressives don't bother with anything from a hostile source that may challenge their view.

Cassie isn't considered hostile by them, at least not yet, though her faith has been shaken during the making of this.

That is what we want her audience - more liberal types who get everything they know about the manosphere from manboobz to MSNBC to watch this as they might have their faith shaken as well

This is why this opportunity is so unique and must be taken. This film is worthy of funding. It will be probably one of the only documentaries made by someone with Cassie Jays social standing and feminist credentials.

Essentially this film won't be preaching to the choir and will actually give the manosphere a fairer shake than any other piece would. I'm not saying we should accept or settle for that, but merely pointing it out.

She's in a unique position and I know people - including feminists - who will watch this because cassie put it out.

This may be one of the first times an opportunity like this has ever happened.

Post: #72

I don't get why everyone is jumping on a bandwagon supporting Men's Rights Movement (or is claiming to support them), just because they aren't 3rd Wave Feminists. Its similar to how many 'Red-Pill men' support 2nd Wave Feminists such as Christina Hoff Sommers, who support Careerism but condemn the Victim Narrative. Just because you support an entity's argument doesn't mean that you should support the entity. Didn't Paul Elam Tweet Roosh to 'suck a dick' after Roosh published his Gay Marriage Article?

These people aren't our friends or allies. Supporting them won't lead to a right-ward shift, it will lead to betrayal at the first turn. Its better to get our message out there than it is to support a group or individual just because its on the medium-far left instead of the extremely-far left.

Post: #73

(10-28-2015 08:46 AM)armenia4ever Wrote:  There's an important point we aren't seeing: This movie isn't made for us - it's made for people who wouldn't touch this site or anything "manosphere" because it's associated with dreaded words like "mysoginist", "sexist", "racist", et cectra.

Good idealistic social justice progressives don't bother with anything from a hostile source that may challenge their view.

Cassie isn't considered hostile by them, at least not yet, though her faith has been shaken during the making of this.

That is what we want her audience - more liberal types who get everything they know about the manosphere from manboobz to MSNBC to watch this as they might have their faith shaken as well

This is why this opportunity is so unique and must be taken. This film is worthy of funding. It will be probably one of the only documentaries made by someone with Cassie Jays social standing and feminist credentials.

Essentially this film won't be preaching to the choir and will actually give the manosphere a fairer shake than any other piece would. I'm not saying we should accept or settle for that, but merely pointing it out.

She's in a unique position and I know people - including feminists - who will watch this because cassie put it out.

This may be one of the first times an opportunity like this has ever happened.

As said: this will not be a "Only Nixon Could Go To China" moment. The fact that the feminist rats are pulling out, have pulled out, ahead of this piece even making it into editing says they are going to disavow Jaye as any sort of feminist and portray her as just another White Cisgender Girl Who Does Not Undertstand The Real Struggle. For every blue pill man or woman with a conscience who goes to see this film, there will be two, three, or four who will double down on the feminist narrative and try to bury her. They will start by disavowing her leftie credentials and saying "Like her other documentaries, this one is smugly superficial and does not represent the real struggle at hand." From there they will move to threaten distributors. From there the death threats and/or threats of financial ruin will start. And at that point the interest the film had will be over.

More to the point, and it's one QC and 'degaussed have already made: we don't need women, nor want them, in order to win this fight. We win by transforming ourselves, by refusing to play according to the rules, by refusing to supplicate and begging women to take pity on us. Slaves beg; free men choose.

Post: #74

This is still getting play in the media, and then I was reminded of something I'd completely forgotten about.

When Gamergate began, some Gamer Chick from Toronto went off on a mission to create a review aggregate site similar to Rotten Tomatoes 'By Gamers for Gamers', asking for $50,000 to do so.

When Roosh started Reaxxion, Kotaku In Action heavily-criticised him, and when we pointed out he wasn't asking for their money to do so, they still shouted us down. I said, well, you'll deserve what you get.

So, I vaguely remembered this today, and figured, it's been 15 months or so, I wonder what happened?

Turns out BasedGamer was fully-funded with $52,000+ pledged by January the 12th this year.

So what has that bought?

They started Alpha Testing nine months ago.

It's been in Beta Testing for the last six months just to test if the Review Contribution system works.

If I go to the site, there's a handful of links to blog and tv content, none of which are clickable for me.

If I manually type in the addresses the clicks would have linked to, the TV link comes back with a Certificate Error and the Blog link spits out something that looks like a Geocities Page circa 1997.

Roosh had a platform up and running in a matter of days. The Crowdfunded Woman hasn't delivered a useable, functioning site with even one single review, 11 months later with $50,000 of investment.

Post: #75

BP'd ?

Feminists Are Panicking and Lashing Out at Cassie Jaye’s ‘The Red Pill’ Movie

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2015/11/03...ill-movie/

by Milo Yiannopoulos 3 Nov 2015

Feminists are in meltdown following the successful funding of The Red Pill, a documentary about the Mens’ Rights Movement
by award winning filmmaker Cassie Jaye. How awful!

The documentary’s Kickstarter project was successfully funded last week. Following an article by yours truly, campaign donations
surged. The movie sailed through its original goal of $97,000, and now — as icing on the cake — it is likely to exceed the amount
raised by Anita Sarkeesian’s Tropes vs Women in Video Games, a series that had the entire weight of the progressive media
behind it. Not gonna lie, I am enjoying the spectacle enormously.