Post: #51

(02-19-2015 02:57 PM)Flint Wrote:  I don't see the satire aspect of this piece. Prove me wrong, I'm not a native English speaker and might have missed some subtleties here.

Roosh, you write yourself

Quote:It's fine to disagree with my proposal, but I am stating it because I really believe it would decrease rape, just like how forcing you to lock your car door would decrease car theft. But as you know, anything that makes a woman take responsibility for her actions will be attacked.

I take your word at face value and have defended you and the forum in private conversation. But if you are serious about this, then I respectfully ask you to ban me, because I don't wish to be associated anymore with this community, which I owe a lot to.

Lol, cheer the fuck up dude, you sound like a woman.

Would you be equally huffy and puffy and morally outraged if Roosh had put out some article called "How to stop barfights by making assault legal"?

Post: #52

I think Roosh is just trying to make a point, using a hypothetical law. He is smart enough to see how this would actually backfire when tested in reality. If he was the king of the world, I don't think he would actually go ahead and legalize rape in private properties. Right?

Post: #53

Ah yes the comment sections, where little bitch boys pretend they're big burly guys who can beat the shit out of someone.

Where fringe rejected females scream rage and rape in the hopes a white knight will save them and give them attention.

Where people actually PUT IN THE TIME to write about shit they hate.

The comment sections are always the rejected wasted gutter of the internet.

Post: #54

(02-19-2015 02:57 PM)Flint Wrote:  I don't see the satire aspect of this piece. Prove me wrong, I'm not a native English speaker and might have missed some subtleties here.

Roosh, you write yourself

Quote:It's fine to disagree with my proposal, but I am stating it because I really believe it would decrease rape, just like how forcing you to lock your car door would decrease car theft. But as you know, anything that makes a woman take responsibility for her actions will be attacked.

I take your word at face value and have defended you and the forum in private conversation. But if you are serious about this, then I respectfully ask you to ban me, because I don't wish to be associated anymore with this community, which I owe a lot to.

It's quite definitely satire Flint. What Roosh is doing is very straightforward: taking a commonsensical idea (women should bear some responsibility for getting themselves into dangerous/ambiguous situations) and wrapping it in an intentionally outrageous proposition (legalize rape on private property) so as to shock people into paying attention.

Whether or not it will succeed or backfire is a different matter, as discussed upthread. Irony is wasted on most people nowadays. But clearly he's not being serious, and anyone who thinks he is (with a pass for nonnative English speakers) should get their head checked. No one thinks this is legitimately a good idea, just like no one actually thought eating children was a good idea when Swift proposed it.

Post: #55

Article in UK's Mirror: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/roo...al-5193802

edit:
And I made xoJane for the first time: http://www.xojane.com/issues/roosh-v-legalize-rape

Post: #56

XOJane too.

Roosh hit the Tuthmosis switch.

Post: #57

(02-19-2015 02:57 PM)Flint Wrote:  I don't see the satire aspect of this piece. Prove me wrong, I'm not a native English speaker and might have missed some subtleties here.

For the non-English speakers: Roosh is using extreme exaggeration as a rhetorical device to provoke strong feelings in the reader, and, as such, to force them consider a socially-accepted narrative from a different point of view. This is called Hyperbole, is best 'performed' with a deathly-serious tone to highlight the absurdity of a proposal based on the logical conclusion of the stupidity of the original narrative.

For context: I read Roosh's essay a few days ago over a morning coffee. I didn't spit my coffee on the monitor. I didn't start crying 'literal tears'. I didn't immediately jump on social media to furiously type 'WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK!!1!'. I didn't start planning his demise.

I chuckled, thought 'Swift would be proud', and got on with my day, secure in the knowledge that I'm not an unintelligent woman, consumed with fury that some man I'll never meet on the internet is mocking me, assuming she is even intelligent enough to realise she is being mocked, and not just revelling in drama because women thrill in indulging their uncontrolled emotions: "It's so hard being good!*"

Once again, the reaction by dim bulbs like Lindy West once again lowers my opinion of female intelligence even further.

* See that 'Let It Go' song from Frozen. That's the reason why it was popular with women.

Post: #58

Rape hysteria is the trojan horse for women gaining more power over men. It will be woman on top for new lays for the next decade or so.

Post: #59

Lindy West reads the forum, in case you were wondering:



https://twitter.com/thelindywest/status/...3269986304

Post: #60

her tweet is a complete non sequitur. I could say I really believed issuing every person in the United States an M4 rifle would decrease homicides, but it wouldn't follow that I "mean it literally" or that it was a serious policy suggestion.

Post: #61

Hey Lindy, you don't have anything to worry about. Roosh is still against Bestiality.

Post: #62

(02-19-2015 07:03 PM)JoyStick Wrote:  Hey Lindy, you don't have anything to worry about. Roosh is still against Bestiality.

HSLD

Post: #63

I see a lot of people thinking that those reading the article didn't get the satire. I'm gonna posit that most of the people getting outraged didn't read it in the first place. At least, they read no more than a paragraph or simply skimmed it. They saw MAN WANTS TO LEGALIZE RAPE, read a biased summation or counter article of whoever of whoever is signal boosting it for their own views and simply vented the typical outrage. After the opening paragraph Roosh could have written an article about horticulture and given it the same title and we'd still be seeing the same level of outrage.

These types are just looking for something to be outraged against to make them feel like their views are justified and that they're effecting social change by expressing their dislike over the internet. We're the bogeymen these people need to validate their existence.

Post: #64

(02-19-2015 06:15 PM)Seamus Wrote:  No one thinks this is legitimately a good idea

thanks god. seriously could not tell at first.

(02-19-2015 07:26 PM)Billy Chubbs Wrote:  I see a lot of people thinking that those reading the article didn't get the satire. I'm gonna posit that most of the people getting outraged didn't read it in the first place. At least, they read no more than a paragraph or simply skimmed it. They saw MAN WANTS TO LEGALIZE RAPE, read a biased summation or counter article of whoever of whoever is signal boosting it for their own views and simply vented the typical outrage. After the opening paragraph Roosh could have written an article about horticulture and given it the same title and we'd still be seeing the same level of outrage.

These types are just looking for something to be outraged against to make them feel like their views are justified and that they're effecting social change by expressing their dislike over the internet. We're the bogeymen these people need to validate their existence.

If your target audience are feminists, then why turn them off to your writing within only one paragraph? Why not hook them in, make them want to read it all, and pull them to the end? I pointed out earlier that there was antagonistic language at first that would likely turn off any feminist, or female, or betas. And then who reads rest and get Roosh's joke? His friends only?

Post: #65

(02-19-2015 07:28 PM)ChazKGB Wrote:  If your target audience are feminists, then why turn them off to your writing within only one paragraph? Why not hook them in, make them want to read it all, and pull them to the end?

Post: #66

(02-19-2015 06:38 PM)Roosh Wrote:  Article in UK's Mirror:

And I made xoJane for the first time:

(02-19-2015 06:55 PM)Roosh Wrote:  Lindy West reads the forum, in case you were wondering:

Post: #67

Spinning words to fit an agenda is fun!

Isn't Lindy West that fat chick that posted something on candy corn oreos? Don't ask me why I remember that... I've tried to forget.

Post: #68

(02-19-2015 07:58 PM)Gmac Wrote:  Spinning words to fit an agenda is fun!

Isn't Lindy West that fat chick that posted something on candy corn oreos? Don't ask me why I remember that, it's the only association I could recall.

You know it's a big deal when Gmac comes out for the party.

   

Post: #69

(02-19-2015 07:03 PM)JoyStick Wrote:  Hey Lindy, you don't have anything to worry about. Roosh is still against Bestiality.

Hey, women say they want to be judged for who they are as a person, so I'm going take the high road, and ignore her obesity.

I dislike her for her feeble intelligence; her illusory superiority; and her hideous, disingenuous writing, even when I correctly predicted she'd clean up her ALLCAPS EXCLAMATION MARKS!!! typing soup after the move from Gawker. Always ignoring reality and logic. Always favouring the superficial over substance. Always choosing easy platitudes over hard wisdom. Always scolding others, whilst never pausing for introspection. The worst offence: always encouraging her readers to be less, not more whilst claiming it will make them happier, whilst profiteering from their unhappiness and outrage.

I was a pretentious early twenty-something reading the astute social observations of Jane Austen; the complex intertwining narratives of George Eliot; and the delicate, erotic writings of Anais Nin, dreaming of a day I'd get to be Henry Miller, swapping passionate, erotic letters with a worthy female intellect.

Damn, was I ever naïve about female intelligence...

Instead, I'm born in a time where we have the intellectually-dire Little Lindy's of the world destroying both the craft of writing and journalism within a generation. I discard her and her typing utterly; never actively seek it out; and only suffer her unfortunate infliction when it appears embedded on here, as I know a click-through is like having to listen to my autistic nephew tell me a story whilst I struggle to make sense of the jumble - the difference being him I love him enough to cultivate patience, so obviously have little time for a miserable moral scold who actively-promotes sloth, yet thinks she's entitled to objectify my Jason Moama-esque physique, (though obviously that's wishful thinking on my past, as I'm a tiny-dicked, obese virgin, trapped in my mother's basement, masturbating into a sock).

The worst part is that she's not even noteworthy enough to be unique, including the dyed hair: she's just part of the blur of seemingly-indentical ideological drones pumped out by a decaying University System, making women stupider and lesser.

I'm sounding less Henry Miller and more Ambrose Bierce. Resume the fat jokes, fellas.

Post: #70

(02-19-2015 08:01 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

(02-19-2015 07:58 PM)Gmac Wrote:  Spinning words to fit an agenda is fun!

Isn't Lindy West that fat chick that posted something on candy corn oreos? Don't ask me why I remember that, it's the only association I could recall.

You know it's a big deal when Gmac comes out for the party.

Been busy... and recently single again. Party time indeed.

Post: #71

(02-19-2015 07:03 PM)JoyStick Wrote:  Hey Lindy, you don't have anything to worry about. Roosh is still against Bestiality.

Post: #72

Are these feminists just obsessed with critiquing and following everything Roosh does? Secret admirers perhaps?

Post: #73

(02-19-2015 07:03 PM)JoyStick Wrote:  Hey Lindy, you don't have anything to worry about. Roosh is still against Bestiality.

Stole that and posted it on Twitter. Hope you don't mind.

Post: #74

(02-19-2015 08:13 PM)Kizman Wrote:  Are these feminists just obsessed with critiquing and following everything Roosh does? Secret admirers perhaps?

They think by linking to his stuff they have ammo to validate their "cause" against men.

Post: #75

That was one hell of a rant Anonbosch