Post: #1

In general I feel it is best to hold onto money rather than spend it, as most things you buy will be putting money in the enemies (feminist, anti-male, etc) pocket.

But list any companies that are actively anti-male for purposes of avoiding giving business when possible, for those that choose to do so.

Inspired by this ROK post: http://www.returnofkings.com/62259/fires...-narrative

So to start with, Firestone.

Post: #2

I would include T-Mobile based on their Super Bowl as with Sarah Silverman ("sorry, it's a boy.")

Post: #3

How about Samsung TV?

Post: #4

We might as well add most if not all big corporations to this list.

One more reason to be frugal and focus on life experiences, not buying stuff.

Post: #5

Do you not think it would be better to have a list of companies that we should always (if possible) try to buy from, such as Protein World?

I suggest having a list like that as there are far less manosphere approved companies than ones we'd like to boycott.

Post: #6

No large company does their own advertising. They pay good money to people who know more about what sells and what doesn't. An ad would have to be really over the line anti-male before you should blame the company too much.

Post: #7

Starbucks. I refuse to pay $4 for coffee. I outright refuse.

Apple. The most malignant corporation in existence. Completely ignored by SJW types because they like the products.

Post: #8

Women are the largest consumers. And I'd guess they watch more TV than men so ads are typically pro-female.

Post: #9

I haven't looked into the Firestone thing, but I have a couple of race cars and use Bridgestone tyres (own the Firestone brand) where I can. I even have a set of very rare Bridgestone wheels from late 70s that I imported from Japan.

I was about 2 weeks off doing a full Bridgestone livery colour theme on one but I won't be doing that now and would have ripped it off if I had.

Maybe women are buying more tyres than men now, which is highly likely.

Post: #10

Playing devil's advocate here but not meaning to offend.

This reminds of the SJW's screaming boycott's and lists.

Post: #11

(04-29-2015 04:16 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  Starbucks. I refuse to pay $4 for coffee. I outright refuse.

Apple. The most malignant corporation in existence. Completely ignored by SJW types because they like the products.

^^Not just that...their coffee SUCKS!

Post: #12

I'm now ashamed about my samsung tv

Post: #13

What kind of pumpkin spice latte mocha milkshake bullshit are you all buying? I can consistently get regular black coffee from Starbucks for under $3. That is hardly outrageous. While not the best joe out there, it's better than a lot of other chains and certainly better than what you get at gas stations and convenience stores.

Post: #14

Boycott anything 'green' or 'ecofriendly' that isn't food. Gas guzzling trucks keep the boys in the oil sands working, bright white 100 ply virgin forest toilet paper keeps the loggers going and coal burning power plants pumping juice into incandescent light bulbs keeps coal miners on the job.

A woman can shame you into recycling but she won't be telling you how she watched her sister die under a 'widow maker' in a logging accident any time soon. Anything mined, farmed, fished, welded or logged is male job security.

Post: #15

I stopped eating Burger King after this.

Post: #16

Boycotting is beta.

Post: #17

(04-29-2015 05:13 PM)kaotic Wrote:  Playing devil's advocate here but not meaning to offend.

This reminds of the SJW's screaming boycott's and lists.

This offends me. Boycotting you because of it.

Post: #18

I agree with kaotic on this.

I make informed purchases based on my own thoughts, not the thought of a collective. I take my business to local businesses where appropriate. The corporate sphere gets my money sometimes, it's impossible to avoid in this society. I like MikeCF's approach to money, it comes from a flexible mindset.

Post: #19

(04-29-2015 04:17 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  Women are the largest consumers. And I'd guess they watch more TV than men so ads are typically pro-female.

And they more emotional. Buying is a rarely a logical act.

Advertisers aren't blue or redpill, they're 100% amoral. They're trying to sell a product and will play on popular cultural trends to sell to their targeted demographic so they're doing the logical thing with pro-gay, pro fat, ads.

If redpill was mainstream you'd see fat shaming commercials. Ads don't challenge people's deeply-entrenched beliefs but rather go along with them.

Not to be a pessimist but the ratio of blue pill Americans to forum members is probably like 50,000 to 1 so any boycott wouldn't make a dent the company's 2Q revenue(which is the whole point of boycotting).

Post: #20

(04-29-2015 05:13 PM)kaotic Wrote:  Playing devil's advocate here but not meaning to offend.

This reminds of the SJW's screaming boycott's and lists.

Agreed. I mean technically I boycott high fructose corn syrup, fast food, and other fat foods, but that is to be healthy, not to boycott someone's company

Post: #21

Absolutely disagree that boycotting should be seen as something only SJWs would do.

Boycotts are the only effective nonviolent means for dealing with your enemies. As long as you continue to financially support corporations that are actively trying to belittle and marginalize you, trying to pass laws to make your speech or posture on the subway illegal, you are giving them the tools for your own destruction.

We can't win with rhetoric or politics. All we have left is to vote with our feet. While women may be the majority of consumers, men produce the bulk of income. This is a war of attrition. If you starve the beast, it will be forced to change it's tune or die. A company won't be able to afford snarky SJW marketing if they have to sack their entire marketing department. A company can't donate to planned parenthood if it can't pay its employees. A state can't fund false rape investigations if tax revenue is barely enough to cover murder investigations.

What I would like to avoid is "boycott campaigns", which might have the opposite of their desired effect. We're a minority, and calls for boycott might be picked up by SJWs as a reason to frequent the establishments we call on to boycott. Think of what happened to Chick-fil-a, but with the roles reversed.

However, I do think personal boycotts are a healthy way for men to give the finger to those who seek to disparage us. "Oh, you think all men are potential rapists? You want to pass legislation to imprison men for consensual sex? Fuck you. I will never set foot in your store again." For me, it's a matter of personal dignity, and helps me keep a clean conscious that I am not supporting evil. If enough people vote with their feet, the impact would be real. The global economy is already dangerously precarious, and margins are razor thin. Even a modest reduction in consumers could have a huge financial impact on antagonistic corporations.

I would urge that we avoid groupthink, and decide on our own reasons of what constitute moral or political grounds for adding a company to our own boycott lists. Naturally there will be some overlap. I would also suggest that benign alternatives be offered up to reduce the personal impact of the boycott. I'll throw out a few:

Starbucks: supports gay marriage, planned parenthood, transgenderism, and the growth of acceptance of deviancy
Alternatives: Local coffee shops, Dunkin Donuts

Leftist media (huffpo, jezebel, gawker, all other major media corporations): Propaganda outlets that create and police the toxic acceptable modern narrative.
Alternatives: RVF, red pill blogs, certain youtube channels

Post: #22

Chipotle, for its SJW pandering and unsanitary food practices.

Post: #23

Sjws have no boycott power. Chic fila and protein company in Britain proved this.

Post: #24

All corporations buy into the social norm which currently male hate!

The more possessions you have the less happy you will be. Your possessions own you.

How do you take down a corporation? You dont buy their crap!

Post: #25

Could not believe this dangerous SJW demanding all of their suppliers follow her man hating example - this is a major company that effects millions of lives...

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/people-cal...39804.html

People are calling Sam's Club CEO 'racist' after she gave an interview about diversity

Now here's the comment that ignited the uproar. Brewer said:

Just today we met with a supplier and the entire other side of the table was all Caucasian males. That was interesting. I decided not to talk about it directly with [the supplier's] folks in the room because there were actually no female, like, levels down. So I'm going to place a call to him.

Critics are claiming that Brewer's remarks are evidence that she advocates against employing and hiring white men — even though four of the eight people on her executive team are white men. Some customers are now accusing Brewer of being "racist" toward white men and are threatening to boycott Sam's Club.

We knew it was bad in Corporate USA - here is the proof.