The Daily Mail completely ignores the Asian victims: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...in-22.html

Pictures of them can be found here: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national...-1.1805488

(05-26-2014 01:56 AM)Flint Wrote:  I like Freud as a cultural critic but psychoanalysis is pseudo-science at best a rock solid predictor of behaviour and most of his theories have been disproven attacked and ridiculed by feminists to thorougly discredit him because they are largely unfalsifiable hugely-applicable to the type of neurotic, low-resilent upper-class woman who attend universities, and they're incapable of the intelligence required to truly understand his work, and of accepting the uncomfortable truths he speaks of, so run the hamsters with their own idiotic theories to reduce cognitive-dissonance. Meanwhile, these same critics, firmly-entrenched in their mundane +1 SD thinking start theorising about unfalsifiable crap like 'innate privilege' and 'the social construction of gender' and the herd moos uncritical approval because of feels. In the meantime, the majority of girls I've fucked call me 'Daddy' during the act of their own accord, and my current girlfriend gets soaking wet whenever I growl that she's 'my baby girl' in her ear.

I fixed that for you.

What a pathetic picture! He looks like the typical beta if not outright IRT! As someone mentioned before, the kid doesn't even look like his!!!

Btw, would love to see a pic of a real man with a pic his son saying so etching along the lines of: "I'm committed to raising my son to resist feminism ad embrace masculinity. MEN AGAINST FEMINISM & Misandry".

Wonder what kind of reaction that pic would receive....

Thinking about it, we should create something along fat shaming week about raising kids the normal, healthy and traditional and NATURAL way. That is a boy as a manly boy and a girl as a girly girl. We can put 2 pics of a happy couple with a boy, a girl and both a boy and a girl with captions that say:

"We are committed to raise our son as a normal, traditional, heterosexual manly man. Parents against leftists corrupting our children!".

"We are committed to raising our daughter as a normal, traditional, loyal, sweet feminine woman. Our daughter will NOT be yet another vistim of feminism!"

With these we would be promoting the natural, healthy and traditional gender roles as well as a happy, heterosexual parents, comprised of a manly father and a sweet, tender, caring and feminine mother.

I invite the ROK guys to start a normal kids-family week. It will go viral in no time as it will be totally against all the current progressive yuppies. It will make them go batshit crazy! Which will be a grandiose spectacle to witness as these fragile and weak people will feel extremely threatened by it!

To Normal Kids & Family/Parents Week!!!

(05-25-2014 08:49 PM)TheFinalEpic Wrote:  

(05-25-2014 08:47 PM)draguer Wrote:  It's provoking an outpouring of White Knights on Twitter.

The poor kid has no chance

Is there any happy medium with people anymore? Absolutely pathetic that this guy can hold his SON while supporting that. Good luck having grandchildren.

(05-25-2014 08:40 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  Mexico doesn't let people have guns. Seems to be working out just great down there.

Yes, Mexico has been ruled by criminal gangs throughout its entire history.

(05-25-2014 08:47 PM)draguer Wrote:  It's provoking an outpouring of White Knights on Twitter.

The poor kid has no chance

The man will wake up when his wife divorces him, and he only sees the kids one day a week. His son will never be a feminist.

(05-26-2014 01:56 AM)Flint Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 01:36 AM)2Wycked Wrote:  This is why I fucking hate sociology. Sociologists start with the whole of society and then draw conclusions from there. As such, they draw up ludicrous theories of why society is the way it is (misogyny).

Psychology is a much better way to explain society, as you start with individuals and see patterns of behavior recurrent in society. The Freudian analysis would be that common psychological issues in a given society would tell you about the psychological posture of the society.

If men think that masculinity is nothing but a performance every day and anxiety undergirds this, then the issue is narcissism, not "problematic masculinity."

I think you misunderstand a lot of what modern sociology actually does. It is actually necessary to look at the big picture with a quantitative analysis and long-term studies in order to understand social trends and changing attitudes.Also, it is becoming more and more common in sociology to include findings from evolutionary psychology, neurobiology and other sciences into the studies.

That you cite Freudian analysis to explain is society must be a bad joke. I like Freud as a cultural critic but psychoanalysis is pseudo-science at best and most of his theories have been disproven because they are largely unfalsifiable.

Read Lacan.

(05-26-2014 01:16 AM)placer Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 12:56 AM)Wadsworth Wrote:  prospect . org/article/how-pick-artist-philosophy-and-its-more-misogynist-backlash-shaped-mind-alleged-killer

I refuse to hot link to these kinds of ultra-left-wing sites. From that article:

Idiotic article at Prospect Wrote:pick-up artistry argues that men who can’t get laid are fine the way they are, and it’s women—the entire lot of them—who are broken

No, that's what the now-down website PUAhate, which devoted countless posts attacking all of the regulars here, said. We've been telling men that want to get laid that they have to change and improve themselves to get there.

It was around there that I stopped reading Amanda Marcotte's nonsense. Speaking of Amanda Marcotte:


4/10. Old hag, ugly tattoo. Psycho look to her face. Would not bang.

(Image source: Wikipedia)

The issue here is that the left keeps propping up straw men about the pick up community because they don't want to accept our fundamental message about self-improvement. There's a lot of people on the Internet who post a lot of rationalization bullshit about why they can not or will not improve.

That's the best pic I've seen of her. You should see the other horror shows. Amynda is unhinged. Check out what she said about a boy asking out Miss America. Insane.

so let me get this straight, a kid that was raised in a way that filled him with some warped sense of entitlement, found out the hard way that life didnt owe him shit and that just because he drove bmw didnt mean he could and would get laid....

after he realized that life was tough and a man had to work on himself to get the things in life that he wanted, rather than actually work on himself he went postal instead in fit of rage ...?

am i missing something here?

I am real sorry for the victims, they should still be with us but I suspect his parents shoulder some of the blame for raising him the way he turned out. Further to this, if they really cared they would have had him committed years ago to get his head straight before he hurt anyone. American society also shares some of that blame as far i can see.

Hopefully the victims of this piece of shit , will rest in peace or better still, get a second chance at the lives that were just stolen from them.

(05-26-2014 02:11 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  This white knight is actually right, though not in the way that he thinks he is. Let me explain:

Quote:

I have suffered a great deal because of not being able to achieve any contact with women for years. No sex, no relationship, no kiss, not even a single touch. All of this, naturally, made me extremely anxious. I was anxious because of my loneliness, and I was anxious because of feeling inadequate as a man, yet not having a clue what I was doing wrong.

Here is where he is wrong, though. The source of that anxiety wasn't patriarchy, misogyny or some other fictional construct. It was women and feminism. With natural constraints removed from them, women suddenly wanted far more dominance from me as a man than what I was capable of providing at that moment, let alone than what I had ever been taught to provide. I was taught to be a gentleman who brings flowers and chocolates to first dates and his main concern is if he is boring someone. Women wanted a bad boy on a motorbike who could throw them around and give them drama and tingles.

Yes, that made me anxious. Even though I am now able to provide vastly higher levels of dominance then before, it still manages to bother me from time to time. But it wasn't the the patriarchy or misogyny that forced me to be that way - it was women and feminism.

If I was in an actual patriarchal society (and some misogyny that allegedly goes with it), I wouldn't be anxious. I'd just be a gentleman, work hard and I'd end up with a woman. Problem solved. Anxiety = 0.

The greatest irony of Michael Kimmel's delusional argument is this: the more that he harps about it, blaming men for everything and providing a free pussy pass to women, the more dominance will be needed not to feel anxious in the future. So much that future guys similar to me will be unable to adjust to it, because the gap they will be facing will be even more larger and even darker than the one that I had faced.

Their anxiety will be through the roof exactly because of what this white knight is saying. And while that won't be an excuse to reach for a gun and start shooting, don't color me surprised if they do. He will have only himself to blame for that.

"With natural constraints removed from them, women suddenly wanted far more dominance from me as a man than what I was capable of providing at that moment, let alone than what I had ever been taught to provide. I was taught to be a gentleman who brings flowers..."

I agree with you 100 percent. But as a guy in his forties, let me tell you it was this was 25 years ago. We just didn't have the Web on which to discuss it.

Actual scenario: I was 21, and my longtime g/f was dumping me, saying I was too nice and being with me was like "being with her brother." I exploded and called her out on it, and said she was a total bitch and I should have just used her for sex instead of getting involved. Her response? "Now you're turning me on!"

Another thing I've written about here before is that the women I dated when I was younger and was polite with blew me off when Facebook came around. Yet the women who I was a total asshole/cad with sought me out (and I'm taking about being a TOTAL prick to these girls: I used them to cheat behind my g/f's back, didn't call the next day, denied ever being with them, etc.).

So what you're seeing now I think always went on, it's just more obvious. Thank the Internet (and male ingenuity -- hehe) that you can at least be hip to it sooner than I was. As "nice" as I thought I was, I also had a jerk side -- and so do we all. Not so hard to cultivate.

The following post by darklightdispatch is BY FAR the best piece on this tragedy! This should be published in ROK to give it the required platform to reach out as many people as possible as opposed to being buried in ths thread.

It should also be sent out to any and all publications, both online and offline. It's that good! It does a very deep and thorough analysis of the social reasons causing and leading up to that tragedy. As well as what is required in order to avoid ths type of tragic event to re-occur in the future.

Dark,
You've perfectly nailed it in the most comprehensive way like no one else. Anywhere! You should have a blog or at the very least, be a regular contributor to ROK!

I wanted to write a lengthy post on that topic but you just said everything I wanted to say in a better way.

(05-25-2014 01:32 PM)darklightdispatch Wrote:  Yeah, absolutely. In addition, boys and girls are both socialized exactly the same these days (as female, more or less.) This is both bizarre when you think about and, for young men, hugely confusing.

Young guys who play team sports or maybe join the military are saved from this to some extent because they are shown an alternative to the 100% feminization they get in school. They get a chance to interact with other males without having to stifle and censor themselves to appease female sensibilities. More importantly, they (hopefully) develop some concept of what it means to be a man and have a male identity. A guy with a strong, involved father also has a good shot at escaping the feminist matrix of public schools and TV programming.

A lot of young guys, such as Rodger, have no such luck. They literally have zero guidance when it comes to what it means to be a man. They've been taught to be girls, essentially. Be nice, be polite, look pretty, buy crap and good things will just come to you because you're a special snowflake.

Females ARE taught, accurately for the most part, that they're entitled to love, attention, sex, etc. just for existing. I say accurately because all they have to do is not be repulsive and those things will be given to them just for being there and being young and passably attractive.

Women feel 100% entitled to men's bodies, to use their own awkward language. And they should, reality supports this idea entirely. Any decent-looking young woman can get sex from men more attractive than her just by showing up and making herself available.

We should remind ourselves of the simple truth: women are valued for what they are, men are valued for what they do. Feminists confuse this idea with the whole pretending-to-be-men-with-aggressive-careers-and-oh-so-many-degrees act. Consciously, they may believe that their education and title, etc. affects their attractiveness and SMV the way it does for men. On a deeper, more accurate level, though, they realize that just being a female of reproductive age makes them inherently extremely valuable in a way that men can only become via marked accomplishments.

Do you see the fatal error in socializing men to be women? Young men today don't understand that masculinity hinges on accomplishment, struggle, and, well, just doing shit. They've truly been taught/brainwashed to think that just showing up and being pretty is how you succeed and find happiness.

Yes, this Roger guy had personal mental issues that lead to what he did. Most guys in his situation will just fade into the background and live miserable, empty lives and eventually die alone. A few might figure shit out and improve.

People aren't just born knowing what to do. Society is not a "natural" arrangement, we can't just go by instinct. Without culture, tradition, rights of passage, people are lost. A few exception will figure things out on their own but it's not realistic to think that most will be able to.

Feminism and liberalism in general has destroyed the majority of what could legitimately be called culture in the west. The closest thing many young guys have to culture today are increasingly radical feminazi schools, feminist TV, and music scenes that are dominated by anti-masculine far-left whackos of various stripes.

Here's what things are like for a large percentage of young American guys in the 21st century:

Absent or distant fathers. No male role models worth shit. Being told they're sooo privileged and abusive when they're actually confused, lonely, timid, lost, and anxious 90% of the time. A society that disparages the male role or downright insists it doesn't exist. "I don't need a man." Constant, intense sexual titillation via ubiquitous pornography, revealing fashions, and sex-focused pop culture.

These guys are told that, if they happen to be born handsome, have perfect bodies, and play be all the right rules, they'll be rewarded with casual sex. If you can't quite measure up, though, politely fade away and down make anyone feel awkward by being creepy. In earlier times, being able to find a wife of similar attractivess level was a given for nearly all men. You might have to work hard and do certain other things, but it was all clear and unambiguous.

Today, the impression young guys get is that if you happen to be born "hot" or be a star athlete or super rich or something, then a world of sexual delights is automatically given to you. If you're not one of those guys, though, you're a born loser reject and should just give up. Obviously, this does not bode well for societal stability. One of the fundamental ways civilization was able to happen was be getting the majority of men to feel invested in the group by having families. As we've destroyed that by unleashing hypergamy to an extreme degree (minority of men get all the women) and removing male authority over the family via the courts, society is quickly moving back to primitive, pre-civilization patterns, only with advanced technology and vastly higher populations.

So, two big issues: One -- society has become a nihilistic wasteland where sex and love is governed exclusively by the fickle whims of spoiled young women. Two -- countless young men are given NO guidance how to navigate this brave new world.

It's not accurate to say that Elliot Roger was "just a nut." He embodies his time and place. Countless young men throughout the West, who would never do what he did, never-the-less can somehow relate to his feelings and experience. Even for the men on this forum, who have gone in the opposite direction and turned the 21st century into something dramatically positive rather than dramatically negative, his story still seems to strike a nerve. He's not a bizarre headcase, he's the extreme, but somehow still logical and predicable result, of liberalism/cultural marxism/feminism/whatever you want to call it.

The current social climate here in the U.S. can be an incredible time to be alive if you've cracked the code and figured out how to take advantage of it. We're the tiny, tiny elite, though.

(05-26-2014 02:12 AM)Roosh Wrote:  The Daily Mail completely ignores the Asian victims: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...in-22.html

Pictures of them can be found here: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national...-1.1805488

The Racist little shit, that he was, likely resented the fact that those "dirty" Asians got more pussy than him. His roommates I guess.

Also it must have been truly galling for him to be so close to A-list-celebrities and not even have a whiff of pussy, while the men he met were drowning in it.

(05-25-2014 10:48 PM)Blunt Wrote:  I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but I'm starting to notice some similarites with a troll we recently had here, who was interested in ways of destroying his father's marriage with his stepmom:

-claims his dad was weak
-claims his stepmom was "spreading rumors" about him in town
-lack of concern for even his own father

Probably just another young entitled narcissist, but good thing he was banned. The troll detecting ability of the RVF is very sharp.

In that thread, the boy says he's in high school. So, that rules him out for being Elliott Rodger.

Another theory was proposed that Elliott Rodger started this thread:

http://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-35058.html

Here's another gem by darklightdispatch that needs the proper exposure:

(05-25-2014 09:18 PM)darklightdispatch Wrote:  Well, yes and no. A fundamental characteristic of any large-scale, prosperous society has been that men and women, as long as they remain within the law and customs of the society, can expect to find a mate. They'll be a few exceptions, sure, but just being average should pretty much guarantee not being alone or an outcast.

In modern, what I would call post-cultural, societies, we're all atomized individuals that don't owe one another anything. This is actually a very strange way to live, historically speaking, and almost certainly doesn't mesh very well with human psychology.

The results of this sort of thing are what Elliot recognized in the above chart he made and what Roosh and countless others have observed, as well. Namely, letting women do whatever they want -- ensconced in a legal, academic, and cultural bubble that protects them from both physical and social consequences -- results in run-away, every-increasing hypergamy.

Fewer and fewer men get the lion's share of the women. A huge, and growing, percentage of men are shut out of the game completely or close to it. Getting laid consistently will require ever more extreme and heroic efforts. Life will be amazing for the minority of alphas at the top but, by definition, few men will reach that level.

Giving women the sort of radical autonomy (only possible as long as we have an excess of wealth, high technology, can manage with sub-replacement birthrates, and the majority of men agree to pay and work to support it) is very much incompatible with sustainable civilization. Men won't continue to invest in society, such as:

-- pay taxes,
-- build businesses,
-- do all the dangerous jobs like military, firefighting, law enforcement
-- and all the dirty ones like plumber, construction, sanitation, oil extraction

unless they feel "entitled to women's bodies." This doesn't mean any woman's body at any time (no man thinks that, anyway) but it does mean that, unless men believe that all their hard work and risk-taking means a reasonable expectation of sex and love, you can't have a (good) society for very long.

When you remove the incentive for men to invest in society, they either leave, become depressed drop-out incels, become players, or otherwise find a way to live a life as detached as possible from society. They have little connection to any community, certainly won't protect it and, occasionally, one of the endless, faceless rejects like Elliot will take out his rage and frustration in a violent way.

Are these guys crazy and abnormal? Sure. But does this sort of society that intentionally removes a huge portion of young men from meaningful participation (and leaves them clueless about their role as men) absolutely guarantee that we will have a small but steady stream of them? YES.

I think this is the first time that cultural commentators pored through our words so quickly after a national event. It's like they are waiting to see what we say so that they can construct an outrage article.

Also, this thread definitely has the best analysis of the shooting out of anywhere on the internet. Newbies are revisiting it often.

(05-25-2014 08:47 PM)draguer Wrote:  It's provoking an outpouring of White Knights on Twitter.

The poor kid has no chance

So that's what a 'stay at home dad' looks like.

(05-26-2014 02:20 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 01:56 AM)Flint Wrote:  I like Freud as a cultural critic but psychoanalysis is pseudo-science at best a rock solid predictor of behaviour and most of his theories have been disproven attacked and ridiculed by feminists to thorougly discredit him because they are largely unfalsifiable hugely-applicable to the type of neurotic, low-resilent upper-class woman who attend universities, and they're incapable of the intelligence required to truly understand his work, and of accepting the uncomfortable truths he speaks of, so run the hamsters with their own idiotic theories to reduce cognitive-dissonance. Meanwhile, these same critics, firmly-entrenched in their mundane +1 SD thinking start theorising about unfalsifiable crap like 'innate privilege' and 'the social construction of gender' and the herd moos uncritical approval because of feels. In the meantime, the majority of girls I've fucked call me 'Daddy' during the act of their own accord, and my current girlfriend gets soaking wet whenever I growl that she's 'my baby girl' in her ear.

I fixed that for you.

Freuds work does not become much more credible just because some feminists didn't like him. You rightly say that theories of patriarchy, social construction of gender and privilege are unscientific bullshit but so is psychoanalysis. Freud certainly deserves credit because historically his writings helped to shape the field of psychology and he was right about some things.

Yet there is a reason why psychoanalysis is rarely used in mental health care today as opposed to behavioral therapies. Steven Pinker, an evolutionary psychologist, wrote a good criticism of Freud in "How The Mind Works" if you're interested in that. These critics are not inspired by feminism but by its opposite: logic, reason and rational scientific discourse.

(05-26-2014 03:35 AM)Roosh Wrote:  I think this is the first time that cultural commentators pored through our words so quickly after a national event. It's like they are waiting to see what we say so that they can construct an outrage article.

Also, this thread definitely has the best analysis of the shooting out of anywhere on the internet. Newbies are revisiting it often.

I had been taking it for granted just how good the level of discourse is here, subconsciously thinking that RVF has had the best analysis of this issue that I know about. Really thinking about it, I challenge anyone to find a more civil and reasoned discussion of this issue anywhere on the internet.

Thank you Roosh and Tuthmosis for providing this fantastic platform and everyone for your well thought-out contributions.

This place is a sanctuary of reason in a world of hysteria.

There's little--if any--in depth analysis in the mainstream media. And there won't be, because probing into the subject leads in directions that they dare not wander.

In 2009, George Sodini stormed a women's fitness club and did exactly the same thing that Rodger did, and was motivated by the same repressed rage:

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/08/05/....shooting/

Remember that?

Most of the mass shooting incidents that preceded and succeeded Sodini's rampage also had a repressed sexual element to them.

Yet the mainstream media refuses to acknowledge what all these incidents point to: severe marginalization of an entire class of men, actively encouraged by the the high priests of American culture.

In previous posts in months past, I talked about the likelihood of this type of thing happening, again and again.

If current cultural trends continue, we're likely to see eventually the rise of the following:

*Armed, roving bands of marauders in rural areas living lives of criminality and brigandage, totally living off the grid.

*Massively expanded police powers of state and federal law enforcement agencies, in order to conduct neutralization operations against armed groups of young, unemployed, marginalized men.

*Tossing out of the posse comitatus legal concept.

*Rise in actual kidnappings and possible forced sexual servitude of young women, conducted by beta/gamma males with no access to normal sexual activity.

It's only a matter of time before the other Rodgers and Sodinis out there come together and form groups. It may already be happening now. And all of this will give the Big Brother state that much more of an excuse to institute a police state, which is what they really want.

Our future is authoritarianism, followed by precipitous collapse.



.

(05-26-2014 03:49 AM)draguer Wrote:  I had been taking it for granted just how good the level of discourse is here, subconsciously thinking that RVF has had the best analysis of this issue that I know about. Really thinking about it, I challenge anyone to find a more civil and reasoned discussion of this issue anywhere on the internet.

Thank you Roosh and Tuthmosis for providing this fantastic platform and everyone for your well thought-out contributions.

This place is a sanctuary of reason in a world of hysteria.

Ha ha: That's unintentionally feint praise: very feint. I've been trolling Twitter for the past day, mocking feminists (who all admit they're sexless, after light negging) and Social Justice Activists. I find them via the "trending" hashtags such as "#YesAllWomen".

What I'm rediscovering, alas, is that modern liberal social justice activism has snaked its way down even into the grassroots level of every civic-minded American under the age of 40. Virtually every one. I always like to tell myself that twisted social justice activists aren't as numerous or repulsive as it seems from the sites I read (Heartiste, Roosh, then some New Right sites like CounterCurrents). I always like to tell myself that social justice activism ("rape culture" protestors and such) are just a tiny minority that seems large because they're super loud.

That can't be. There are TONS and TONS and TONS of these social justice activists, snapping photos of themselves with these pretentious wannabe memes and making utterly inane declarative statements (just refresh that Twitter page and you'll see 500 new examples of what I mean). There are TONS of people just gleefully itching to call you "racist" "sexist" "homophobic" at the first sign of disagreement. Their default emotional response to confrontation is utterly devoid of logic: moral hysteria. Their default defense to this confrontation is also devoid of logic: brainless snark and liberal death labeling (snark and insults usually combined in one, such as: "Sexism. Awesome. Your mom must be proud.")

The social justice activists who cover up this murderer's true motives, who are diminishing and even denying the deaths of his male victims, who are encouraging and even mocking the "loser" and "creepy" betas who are suffering sexlessness (truly agonizing for a man)....they are many. They are the dominant cultural force in the West, for certain.

The only "good thing" is that these people, since they are sexless and against families, will all die childless, or at most with one trophy baby desperately conceived with in vitro in their late 30's. So, the social justice activists are literally cheering their own evolutionary doom, and that's one angle that can give you some relief.

(05-26-2014 01:21 AM)Wadsworth Wrote:  I swear feminists age poorly due to the constant anger, resentment, and (often) hate they live with.

Anger. Resentment. Self-pity. Lack of empathy. These are the traits of the entitled spoiled women of Jezebel and these are the traits Elliott Rogers had which made him go on his killing spree.

Game moves men beyond this. It's a waste of time trying to chase the girl that said no. Before I learned game, I would chase and chase girls who said "no" until they hated my guts. I thought chasing a single girl until she said yes was somehow romantic. All the movies, after all, show the man getting the girl after chasing her and putting her on a pedestal. But, in the real world the girl never said "yes" and I was left alone in bed masturbating.

There was a lot of hot girls -- hotter than the ones I was chasing -- and a lot of pussy I could have had if I had concentrated on the girls who gave me IOIs instead of the ones who rejected me. Indeed, one time I was chasing a semi-cute but mentally ill girl instead of hitting it with a girl in my life who was so hot, she was fucking a rock star (she, to this day, fawns over me on Facebook, but sadly did not hit the wall too well).

Since my "inner game" told me I couldn't have a girl, I got attracted to girls who reflected that view of myself. I chose to be in self-pity instead of getting hot pussy. I chose to be resentful instead of building up my game. A lot of my screw-ups is because it was before the PUA scene existed, but still.

Game taught me to not try and control what I can't control ... I can't make that one girl who said "no" say "yes" by being charming enough or what not. But I can let go of her if I focus on other girls and the girls in my life who want some of my dick.

Back to Elliott Rogers, I am sure there were girls who saw him and wanted to fuck him. But he couldn't see them because he was too busy hating himself instead of concentrating on the girls who would give him an enjoyable dick massage with their pussy.

Some guys break the cycle of not getting laid by fucking a fat chick then moving up. Others by fucking a MILF. Others by fucking a hooker. Others by learning game until they can bang a decent-looking girl (that's tricky, because a guy on a dry spell has a hard time covering up his desperation). Like Roosh, I broke the cycle by leaving my country and finding pussy abroad.

I think one of the reasons there is a lot of bullshit on the Internet (rationalizations for remaining in unhealthy behaviors, such as the "fat acceptance" movement, or the feminists and white knights who hate on men trying to get laid) is because it's really easy to go online and mouth off instead of improving oneself and becoming a better person.

I'm no friend of MRAs but this truly is a disgusting article:

The Men's Rights Movement Taught Elliot Rodger Everything He Needed to Know
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/anne-theria...86818.html

Quote:We don't know whether Elliot Rodger was mentally ill. What we do know is that he was a Men's Rights Activist, or MRA.

He was an active member of the "PUAhate," an online forum (which has been down since the shootings) dedicated to

(05-26-2014 04:23 AM)Roosh Wrote:  I'm no friend of MRAs but this truly is a disgusting article:

The Men's Rights Movement Taught Elliot Rodger Everything He Needed to Know
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/anne-theria...86818.html

Quote:We don't know whether Elliot Rodger was mentally ill. What we do know is that he was a Men's Rights Activist, or MRA.

He was an active member of the "PUAhate," an online forum (which has been down since the shootings) dedicated to

It's a small consolation, but this vindicates game. Game teaches that women care only about attention, drama, and immediate ego gratification. Lawyers in the PUA community often remark about how startled they are that female attorneys don't give two shits about justice, but only furthering their careers and appearing to look like crusaders for justice.

So, that the feminists at HuffPost are lying about mass murder matches up entirely with what we expect: women don't care about the murder. They don't care about how to prevent future murders. They don't care about the truth for its own sake. All they care about is appearing like they care about justice, and they care about drama. The best way to do that, nowadays, is to jump on whatever liberal social justice activism is getting the most attention.

Modern life's a stage, and every feminist is an actress.

Quote:We have no evidence yet that he suffered from any kind of mental illness

He has a 140 page manifesto, a whole gang of YouTube videos and a clearly dysfunctional relationship with his parents and had multiple therapists, but no, we have no fucking evidence of mental health issues.

These are the same pieces of rancid shit that run to the breach to proclaim their understanding of and devotion to mental health issues.

Quote:The threat of violence is the main reason why many women feel unable to leave an abusive relationship -- because after leaving is when they are at their most vulnerable.

Let me get this straight, women are not consenting to the relationship with an abuser, they are just scared of leaving? It is amazing, only white men get to do what they want, everybody else is just...hanging around, fearing violence? Right.

Quote:We can't just write this one off -- we need to talk about all of the fucked up parts of our culture, especially the movements that teach men that they have the right to dominate and intimidate and violate women

#Ban50ShadesOfGrey

Quote:"Why do men feel threatened by women?" I asked a male friend of mine. So this male friend of mine, who does by the way exist, conveniently entered into the following dialogue. "I mean," I said, "men are bigger, most of the time, they can run faster, strangle better, and they have on the average a lot more money and power." "They're afraid women will laugh at them," he said. "Undercut their world view." Then I asked some women students in a quickie poetry seminar I was giving, "Why do women feel threatened by men?" "They're afraid of being killed," they said.'

Classic Atwood quote.

It's funny, isn't it? I got robbed violently at gunpoint, had a pistol stuffed down my throat and forced to beg for my life. You know what never crossed my mind -- nor any anybody in the real world -- that it was somehow better because a person with the same genitals was about to kill me. Never crossed my mind.

Women don't fear men because we will actually hurt them, it is because they are taught that. Men make up the overwhelming majority of violent crimes, but stories like mine get drowned out in the narrative of women fearing men because...some dude touched their ass at the local watering hole.

Female victim narratives is big business and is the primary driving force for corporations and government to exploit women financially. That hashtag #YesAllWomen? That's nothing but a bunch of self-absorbed women desperate to the have the validation as a victim in 170 letters or less. "70 retweets!?! SO COOL!!"

The world outside their kitchen must be absolutely terrifying to these women, so they invent fictions like "rape culture" and "male entitlement" to explain away their utter and complete capitulation to stereotypes of women as fearful girls in desperate of some smelling salts while they recover on a fainting couch.

Is that boy even that white knight's seed. Hair colour doesn't match.

Or as part of his feminism has he accepted his wife's right to have another man's baby. Seriously where do these losers draw the line.

(05-26-2014 04:45 AM)2Wycked Wrote:  

Quote:We have no evidence yet that he suffered from any kind of mental illness

He has a 140 page manifesto, a whole gang of YouTube videos and a clearly dysfunctional relationship with his parents and had multiple therapists, but no, we have no fucking evidence of mental health issues.

These are the same pieces of rancid shit that run to the breach to proclaim their understanding of and devotion to mental health issues.

My expectations concerning feminist drivel are at an all-time low, but the statement that you quoted just floored me. There are truly no depths to which these depraved people will not stoop in order to promote their causes.

Holy fuck