Post: #1

As my profile rises, I will get increasingly noticed by mainstream commentators and establishment types who don't agree with our world view. They will do everything to label our legal discussions as hate speech or misogyny. They will fail because...

1. There are currently no laws on the books that makes this forum or the discussions contained wherein illegal. It is not illegal to say you "banged a slut" and it's not illegal to make fun of masculine women or fatties (otherwise I'd be serving a life sentence with no possibility of parole... actually I'd probably get the chair).

2. There is no law against "misogyny." Even though we actively meet women with the end result of giving them orgasms and sexual pleasure, we will all be labeled woman haters. It's up to you to either be fearful of that label or debate and push back against their nonsense attacks that aren't based on fact or reality.

I know that many of you have professional lives and do not want your legal name to be outed. I understand this concern. I will never divulge your email address or IP address information. I also don't see any legal grounds for a subpoena from a law enforcement agency. Keep it legal and they will have absolutely no basis to harass us.

The best advice I can give everyone is to think of the Jumbotron test, to know that what you write here is available to anyone, even our enemies. Don't share your personal information (name, address, detailed job title information) and don't share details on illegal acts, no matter how minor. It's still okay to say you banged a slut raw dog, though.

If I'm not scared, and I'm the guy they are gunning for, you shouldn't be either.

Post: #2

And speaking of legal issues and sexual "morality", the guy leading the charge against you doesn't to seem to have much of a leg to stand on:

Quote:This Morris Dees guy from the SPLC just goes way overboard. Here are two pages from his divorce proceedings. This man is not just a sex addict and a womanizer, that’s not a problem. Worse, he is an out and out pathological narcissist.

For instance, it appears that Dees enjoyed peeping on his 16 year old daughter when she was naked. Also, at age 16, he appears to have either attempted to have sex with her or at the very least acted very inappropriately with her.
In 1978, Dees conducted an affair with a woman, Vicki Booker McGaha. He told the wife over and over he was going to knock it off, but then kept going back to her. Finally he dragged both women over to the house and played sick emotional power games with them, almost making them fight over him, toying with them like a cat toys with a mouse before it kills it.

Finally he told Maureene, the wife, that she could see other guys, since she was threatening divorce, but she had to be discreet about it....

...The wife went to Washington DC and met a lover there. Dees tailed her there and followed her to her hotel room where he hid. When she was in bed with her lover, he burst out and took pictures with a camera, causing a huge scene.

...The Dees threw a party at their home in 1977. D. Rodgers, a physician, showed up, along with his wife, Judith Rodgers, a criminal psychologist. Incredibly, Dees took the doctor’s wife upstairs to his bedroom and had sex with her while the party was still going on!

...Dees’ son Scooter was dating Karen Sherman. She later married Scooter and became Karen Sherman Dees. At the time, they were 18 or 19 years old and were frequently over at Dees’ house. Unbelievably, Dees seduced his own son’s girlfriend right in front of his son’s eyes!

After dinner one night, Maureene and Scooter were washing the dishes, and Dees and Karen took off for the pool. Maureene and Scooter later headed towards the pool too, but before they got there, Maureene saw Dees with his arms around Karen. Both were naked, and Dees had a hardon. Maureen turned around, decided she did not want to go swimming, and steered Scooter away from the pool.

This guy is just like Hugo Schwyzer. He puts on the sensitive "male feminist" act for women in order to make himself look good, going after and shaming guys like Roosh with labels that they do not deserve.

In reality, however, he is far from moral (Hugo Schwyzer endorsed cuckolding other dudes-this Dees fellow peeps on his 16 year old step-daughter and swoops his son's wife) and, in many ways, is the embodiment of the dysfunction he falsely tries to assign to those he shames as "misogynists".

Post: #3

I had female friend say this to a group of declared "feminist" girls with me present--after I'd slammed down feminist talking point after feminist talking point in an extended discussion. I was outnumbered, but I had them all thinking and changing their opinions on the spot.

It is very pertinent to this discussion. Paraphrased:

My Female Friend Wrote:When I first met Tuthmosis, I thought he was sexist, even a mysogist. I liked him anyway, but that's what I thought--and told him. But when I stopped to listen to him, not only did I realize that a lot of what he's saying is intelligent and makes sense, but also that he fundamentally loves women. He just differentiates between quality and low-quality girls. Just like men aren't all created equal, neither are women. He laments the things we have lost and is speaking for a world with better women and men.

We aren't, in fact, misogynists--even though we have the legal right to be. We don't hate women. We hate idiots: male and female. Unfortunately, there's an increasing number of them--especially in United States cities. Unmanly men ("betas") receive as much (or more) "abuse" from us that do masculine, delusional, or fat women. We're calling for a world in which men and women re-embrace the beauty of being masculine and feminine, respectively.

Our pursuit of sex with many quality women is merely us doing what we're biologically programmed to do--and what men have been doing for millennia. It's no different--and, we'd argue, more natural--than Sex-and-the-City style feminine hyper-sexuality that feminists are so quick to defend. This forum is merely a group of men adjusting to the realities of today's world. Things have changed, and we're changing with them. The fact that there are forces trying to shame male sexuality doesn't mean that being a man is illegal (yet). Proceed without fear.

Not only is our work not illegal, it's noble. People holding onto over-simplified--and increasingly discredited--second-wave feminist points-of-views have made their mind up about us before they even read a word of what we have to say. Roosh being listed on this SPLC thing is just a product of that "trial without a jury."

While I join Roosh in encouraging you to adhere to common-sense posting, and urge you to think of this as a public forum (which it always has been), I'd also add that this should serve as a reminder that you are part of a movement--whether you continue to post here or not.

Just like those "occupiers" thought everything was all fun and games until they got pepper-sprayed in the face with little or not provocation, this little incident should remind you that the simple fact that: you aren't subscribed to the get-an-office-job-get-married-have-kids-retire ethos; don't conceal or suppress your male sexuality; and approach women on the street; makes you a foot soldier in a lifestyle that, while rapidly increasing in numbers, is threatening to influential forces that want you to stay in your place, do what you're told, and shut up.

We're warriors. Let's remember that.

Post: #4

(03-11-2012 04:11 PM)Roosh Wrote:  It's still okay to say you banged a slut raw dog, though.

Is it?

Quote:According to published reports, the charges Sweden has lodged against Assange involve two different women, neither of whom contacted the police until after they discovered they were both involved with him. Their initial intention was reportedly to force Assange to take an HIV test. There are four charges: that on August 14, 2010 he committed "unlawful coercion" when he held complainant 1 down with his body weight in a sexual manner; that he "sexually molested" complainant 1 when he had condom-less sex with her after she insisted that he use one; that he had condom-less sex with complainant 2 on the morning of August 17 while she was asleep; and that he "deliberately molested" complainant 1 on August 18, 2010 by pressing his erect penis against her body.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange#All...olestation

Wrap it up every time, and don't press your boners against a girl's body.

Post: #5

I'm assuming since this forum is based in the US that speech on here is protected, although I'd be curious about what the deal is if you're in Europe, given the track record in those countries of criminalizing "hate speech".

As much as we all like to complain about the United States, this is one of the places where we shine in terms of civil liberty. (At least for now...) Hell, back in high school I got away with dressing like Hitler for a class project where we had to research a historical figure and give a monologue as that person. Pro tip: don't use a sharpie to do the mustache, it's hard to get it off.

Post: #6

[quote='Roosh' pid='176888' dateline='1331500295']

2. There is no law against "misogyny." Even though we actively meet women with the end result of giving them orgasms and sexual pleasure, we will all be labeled woman haters. It's up to you to either be fearful of that label or debate and push back against their nonsense attacks that aren't based on fact or reality.


In the same way that guys tend to focus of the reproductive aspects of women in attraction (tits, ass, looks in general), and women focus more on the survival qualities http://www.pualingo.com/pua-definitions/...alue-sr/l, there might also be a corollary when it comes to what women want from men with regards to the issue of "just sex vs. relationship."

Yes, having an orgasm is an intense pleasure for women, but they might not be as orgasm and sex-focused as us guys. In other words, women might actually derive more joy out of the other parts of being in a relationship than the reproductive parts.

If this is true, then I can see why women would take offense to us just giving them the sex part without the survival part. To them, it might seem like an unfair trade, or even some kind of theft.

That said, there are apparently so many girls out there who are just looking to get laid these days that maybe this only holds true for places you've talked about like Poland, where women really do seem to be more feminine. I wonder if we can conjecture that the rise of feminism (and game) is directly related to an increase in the general testosterone levels of women in the modernized world. Or maybe, there is no rise in testosterone in general, and it's only a few women who are actually dyed-in-the-wool, high-T feminists (we see how manly they all look). Through that perspective, we can surmise that because women in general are naturally followers, they have in a sense, been gamed by the feminists into promoting an agenda that is against there natural instincts.

In this way, we can also look at this SPLC thing as being an escaped cry from deep down inside the bowels of this complex of intellectual feminism, a yelp from actual femininity, offended by both the feminist agenda and our ensuing game, hinting at the need to return to a more "natural" balance in the sexual market where there is an even trade between men and women. The more hate that game gets, the more obvious it is that feminism is wrong about how men and women should be relating to each other.

Post: #7

I've been documenting more and more of my bangs, but after this shit I'll refrain from posting pics. Too bad.

Post: #8

(03-11-2012 09:08 PM)Samseau Wrote:  I've been documenting more and more of my bangs, but after this shit I'll refrain from posting pics. Too bad.

I'm pretty sure it's not illegal to post pics of girls you've banged (although I would black out the faces just in case). I doubt any of them could sue you for defamation because if you really slept with them, then truth is the ultimate defense to libel.

Post: #9

The only person who's been identified and needs to worry is Master Roosh. The rest of us mooks could get pulled in, but I doubt it if we play straight up.
What I take away from this is that no one is really safe. The SPLC has a long history of pushing lawsuits against anyone they think to be a viable target. They need an enemies list to keep that green flowing.

Post: #10

Crap- posted the wrong link before. Supposed to be this: http://www.pualingo.com/pua-definitions/...-value-sr/

Post: #11

To get a conviction, they need testimony. And I don't think any woman I've banged would admit to sleeping with me in public.

Post: #12

Could you limit thread page views to the lurkers? Give them a five page per day limit?

Post: #13

Man, what the hell is going on with all these pressure groups and regulatory agencies trying to crash everyone's party these days? Online gambling is dead. Internet marketing is looking like it's going to get fucked. and now this shit with Roosh and SPLC? I honestly don't know who isn't a menace to society these days.

Post: #14

(03-12-2012 02:17 AM)Andy_B Wrote:  Man, what the hell is going on with all these pressure groups and regulatory agencies trying to crash everyone's party these days? Online gambling is dead. Internet marketing is looking like it's going to get fucked. and now this shit with Roosh and SPLC? I honestly don't know who isn't a menace to society these days.

That is the whole point.

I have said it before, and I will say it again, the smoking ban was the pivotal moment.

Post: #15

I just saw this article in the HuffPost. They even mentioned the thread I started on "How to Choke a Women." Ha.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/10...35174.html

Seems like campaign season against Roosh V is in full swing. Lets keep the fortress strong.

Post: #16

(03-12-2012 04:29 AM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  I just saw this article in the HuffPost. They even mentioned the thread I started on "How to Choke a Women." Ha.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/10...35174.html

Seems like campaign season against Roosh V is in full swing. Lets keep the fortress strong.

They're going to quit poking around soon. In a couple weeks this will all blow over, just like it did after the release of Bang Denmark.

Post: #17

(03-12-2012 04:34 AM)P Dog Wrote:  

(03-12-2012 04:29 AM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  I just saw this article in the HuffPost. They even mentioned the thread I started on "How to Choke a Women." Ha.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/10...35174.html

Seems like campaign season against Roosh V is in full swing. Lets keep the fortress strong.

They're going to quit poking around soon. In a couple weeks this will all blow over, just like it did after the release of Bang Denmark.

Hope so. I've already gone as far to make my profile more anonymous by removing the list of countries I've traveled to and changing my race to "other." I tried to remove everything, but it seems that I can't revert some choices back to "blank." By the way, is that something we can feasibly implement? It would nice to have the choice to make all of our profile information completely anonymous.

Post: #18

Damn, these people really have nothing to do...

I'm with P-Dog, this whole thing will subside in a few weeks, as the hysterical media will need new material to keep people's attention away from REAL issues.

SPLC: Get a life.

I predict the US turning into a lesbo/feminazi Dystopia in the near future, where all fully testicled men that still have some sense of humor will have fled away from this "dictatorship of the mind" they call a country.

Post: #19

Why does an organization called the "Southern POVERTY Law Center" have anything to do with civil rights? Even so, why are they even remotely concerned with ladies' men? Seems like they're far overreaching here. That's like trying to lump the "1%" in with the KKK because they aren't widely accepted by the public majority. Ridiculous. If the people they were targeting were child molesters/rapists I would understand, but this just looks more like feminist pandering to me because someone out there doesn't like to see men making the current corrupt and twisted system work for them.

Post: #20

My sex life will be underground (like the railroad).

*sigh* I can't believe how anti-man things have become in America. I wonder if women in the USA truly want every guy to be like Homer Simpson or Peter Griffith. Male assertiveness is now equated with racism, Nazism, etc.

I tell an American woman that I am banging lots of girls she looks at me as if I participated in a pogrom.

Post: #21

(03-12-2012 09:53 AM)Commander Shepard Wrote:  My sex life will be underground (like the railroad).

*sigh* I can't believe how anti-man things have become in America. I wonder if women in the USA truly want every guy to be like Homer Simpson or Peter Griffith.

They don't. This is the inherent paradox of their modern feminism.

They seek to create more tame, "equitable" men and (judging from the emasculation of the average American guy in many parts of this country) they have succeeded.

The problem is that they cannot ignore their biology, which tells them that such men are not really attractive. Now that they have succeeded in creating the more neutered and equalist male they wanted to make, they complain that they cannot find "good men" (attractive, masculine men, that is) who are willing to "man up", and often find themselves dissatisfied with or cheating on the more tame betas they created and married (hence skyrocketing divorce rate and female initiation of divorce 70% of the time).

Conclusion: Women are not happy, never have been happy, and probably never will be happy. Every solution comes with a new complaint-they can't live without them.

Post: #22

Just a heads up to any Canadians in here: Look into the Canadian Human Rights Commission as well as your provincial human rights commission.

There have been incidences (ie. Warman v. Lemire) where Canadians have been prosecuted for posting "hate" messages on the internet. These organisations are typically staffed by the same type of people who work at the SPLC.

It's unlikely to happen and probably not a problem for the general game/lifestyle/everything discussion, but you might want to be careful about broad and negative generalisations of women if you're in Canada.

Post: #23

It means nothing to me. I have no respect at all for the SPLC. They are such an obvious scam I don't know how anyone could take them seriously. If it really is true that they solicit donations from poor people who can't afford it and don't know any better they are truely vile. Worse than tele-evangelist types even. Worse than Madoff. At least he only stole from the super-rich. Paraphrasing a great ex US President: "I would welcome their hatred!"

I agree that this thing will likely blow over pretty quickly. The worst that may happen is that this site is listed on some internet lists and blocked from work networks. But that may have been happening already.

Post: #24

(03-11-2012 09:19 PM)gringochileno Wrote:  

(03-11-2012 09:08 PM)Samseau Wrote:  I've been documenting more and more of my bangs, but after this shit I'll refrain from posting pics. Too bad.

I'm pretty sure it's not illegal to post pics of girls you've banged (although I would black out the faces just in case). I doubt any of them could sue you for defamation because if you really slept with them, then truth is the ultimate defense to libel.

Legality? The least of my concerns.


Try:

- Being publicly outed
- Put on sex offenders list
- Losing my job



This is America, where being accused is just as bad as being guilty.

Post: #25

(03-12-2012 02:22 PM)Puck Wrote:  Just a heads up to any Canadians in here: Look into the Canadian Human Rights Commission as well as your provincial human rights commission.

There have been incidences (ie. Warman v. Lemire) where Canadians have been prosecuted for posting "hate" messages on the internet. These organisations are typically staffed by the same type of people who work at the SPLC.

It's unlikely to happen and probably not a problem for the general game/lifestyle/everything discussion, but you might want to be careful about broad and negative generalisations of women if you're in Canada.

Yes, Warman is the Morris Dees of Canada.

Mark Steyn of Macleans magazine set out so clearly and brilliantly what is wrong with the CHRC's and Warman I don't think it's possible to improve on.

He should turn his pen to the SPLC if he hasn't already.