Post: #76

(02-11-2016 08:53 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 08:46 PM)Enigma Wrote:  All of the "wins" for our side were pushed and publicized by the people you claim have no morals.

What wins would that be?

Twitter, Reddit, exposed university rape hoaxes. The things you just identified as potential turning points in the post I quoted.

Quote:

Quote:It's funny that you have a problem with Mike using the rules of Twitter and a university to get this guy suspended, but you specifically bring up a man using divorce laws to potentially take tens of thousands of dollars and children from a woman.

I didn't post anything about Mike. Is he doing stuff he is morally against?

This thread is about Mike. The OP specifically quotes an article written by Mike, multiple tweets by Mike, and then goes on to ask if people agree with his methods

Can you clarify who all of your posts in this thread have been about, if not the subject of the thread?

Quote:What does that have to do with divorce laws?

You tell me, you're the one that brought up divorce laws. It was part of the text I quoted.

Quote:

Quote:By the way, can you link us all to your Twitter? I'd love to see what you're doing to help men. Surely you're not just criticizing other people's methods without doing anything at all yourself.

I better hurry up and join Twitter since it seems to be the only place to win wars.

The little time I spent there leaves me to believe it is mainly trolling, doxxing and threatening other anon people.

What are you doing to help men? It doesn't have to be Twitter.

You are the one who suggested you know better than Mike and Roosh, I'm simply asking you to show us what you are doing differently. I'm sure any of us would be open to alternative methods that are equally effective.

Quote:Hopefully Mike and Roosh are making sales off of Twitter to compensate for their time there.

Is it about helping men or book sales? You said it was a question of morals to do these things on Twitter, now it's a question of ROI?

Both guys could make a lot more money than they are if that was their intentions.

As I alluded to earlier, Mike specifically has given free legal advice, offered to represent people probono, and put cold hard cash where his mouth is on numerous occasions.

Roosh barely monetizes this forum or his other sites.

Either way, I assure you that Mike and Roosh have both helped more men and sold more books than anyone else in this community.

Quote:How about you post what you have been up to.

You're the one who claimed to have an alternative way of fighting, not me. All I'm asking is that you show us where that method has been effective for you.

Hell, it doesn't even have to be you. Show examples of any guy within our broader community having the kind of influence Mike and Roosh have while not "trolling" or "lowering themselves".

All I'm asking is that you show us your better method at work. Surely this is a reasonable request?

As for me, I'd love to have the kind of impact Mike and Roosh do. Unfortunately, there's only so much a guy in his mid 20s can teach people. I'm still figuring things out myself.

In the meantime, I will definitely provide value where I can and support those who are actually fighting for my interests.

Post: #77

Enigma, I responded to a specific post about people doing the same things they find morally unacceptable.

Are you saying Roosh and Mike do those things? I didn't, but it seems like you are saying that since you keep bringing them up into this conversation.

As for "wins", what is the end goal here? There should be a end goal otherwise how does everyone know if these wins are actually helping the end goal.

I don't get the Twitter and Reddit comment. Boycott them if you don't like what they are doing. Using their platform still helps them.

I can see how bringing attention to rape hoaxes helps other men. The only way to win is for this to stop. The only way this will stop is if these schools hurt financially by lower admissions.

If we are talking about wins, how does this kid getting thrown out of school help the end goal?

I agree that Roosh could make a lot more money. Still, he is making more and more from the attention he is getting. Regardless if he wants it or not.

I suspect the same thing is happening with Mike and his books.

I don't get compensated for my time on social media. I have to work. I run my own business. Instead of fighting with a bunch of crazy people I would rather put my time into the forum and help men that want to be helped.

By helping I mean answering questions, pms and even some skype calls (depends if I know the person enough). I rather dedicate my time to helping men here accomplish their goals if I am able too.

I also purchased most of Roosh's books even if I didn't read most of them.

Just because you're in your mid twenties doesn't mean you don't have a lot of value to add. Don't sell yourself short. You would be surprised.

Post: #78

The assumption that we're no better than SJWs if we use their tactics on them relies on the relativism of who is right and wrong.

If a man breaks into my house with a weapon and a clear intent to harm my family, do I not have the right to use equal force to stop him?
In that hypothetical situation, clearly the intruder is in the wrong and nobody can argue against self defense.

What if you were given a promotion over one of your coworkers, and they decided to call you a rapist and pedophile online and doxx you? Is it wrong to expect some kind of justice for that action? Again, in this case we know who is the wrong here, and there needs to be punishment.

In childhood, everybody remembers doing some kind of mean thing towards another. Maybe you threw sand in someone's eye or pushed a kid, but at the end of it, either your teacher or parent would try some reasoning with you.

"Why did you spit on Jimmy's lunch? Why do you think you're allowed to do that? How would you feel if someone did that to you?"

What happens when you still don't understand that spitting in someone's lunch is mean? Someone then spits in your lunch and you quickly understand that maybe, just maybe it's a dick move, and you won't do it unprovoked again. All of us here certainly understand what it would be like to be doxxed, harassed and your life ruined. Hell, the last couple of weeks has been a great showcase for that.

We all know about the woman who poured booze on Roosh in Montreal and how she's never been held accountable for that. She's even gone out of her way to doxx and harass and ruin other people's lives because they share a different opinion. The authorities aren't acting upon this, and they're letting it continue.

Should we just let her and other's get away with it because we disagree with using her methods? Should they not be taught how their actions affect other people? Should they not be held to the same moral and ethical standard as us?

Granted, I know it gets morally hazy when it's one persons word against another.

But when they've clearly done someone harm, is it morally wrong to teach them how it feels when the shoe is on the other foot?

Post: #79

(02-11-2016 09:52 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  Enigma, I responded to a specific post about people doing the same things they find morally unacceptable.

Are you saying Roosh and Mike do those things? I didn't, but it seems like you are saying that since you keep bringing them up into this conversation.

Again, the OP is specifically about Mike. He is the main one responsible for pushing the narrative we're discussing in this thread. You may have replied to a "specific post", but that post was based on a discussion about Mike. If you chose not to read the thread before commenting, that is not my fault.

Mike and Roosh have both used the same "SJW" tactics you are condemning throughout this thread, both now and in the past. There are numerous examples of this (including the first post of this thread).

Quote:As for "wins", what is the end goal here? There should be a end goal otherwise how does everyone know if these wins are actually helping the end goal.

I don't get the Twitter and Reddit comment. Boycott them if you don't like what they are doing. Using their platform still helps them.

I can see how bringing attention to rape hoaxes helps other men. The only way to win is for this to stop. The only way this will stop is if these schools hurt financially by lower admissions.

Man, you're the one who brought Twitter's stock falling, Reddit's issues, and lowered admissions because of rape hoaxes. Not me.

I even quoted the post where you said that in my initial reply to you. Again, that was your argument, not mine.

Quote:If we are talking about wins, how does this kid getting thrown out of school help the end goal?

See, you say we are not talking about Mike, yet you're referring to the things Mike is doing.

Mike is the one putting pressure on the university to take action, Mike is the one who proved this kid's real name, etc. He is the main driver behind this whole story.

Also, the goal is not specifically to get the kid thrown out of school.

The goal is to expose to a wide audience the hypocrisy and double standards pushed by SJWs, Twitter, liberal universities, Black Lives Matter, etc.

One of the biggest stories on Twitter over the past week is that they are pushing to introduce more "anti-harassment" rules, yet they will allow people to doxx Roosh, harass female Trump supporters, etc. and either not take action or take unusually long to take action.

Black Lives Matter protests any incident of violence against blacks, yet are threatening to protest the university if they take action against a black student threatening a non-black student. To be clear, it is not specifically a "race" issue, as many black men are also effected by false rape accusations, etc. It is an issue of clear double standards within that particular group.

Not only that, it sets an example that groups can no longer push people around without being held to the same standard.

Our side has the benefit of being "right", so when you level the playing field the SJWs will lose every time. Their whole power comes from the fact that they control the media, which is why it's so important that people in our side effectively challenge that narrative on a wide enough platform.

Quote:I agree that Roosh could make a lot more money. Still, he is making more and more from the attention he is getting. Regardless if he wants it or not.

I suspect the same thing is happening with Mike and his books.

I don't get compensated for my time on social media. I have to work. I run my own business. Instead of fighting with a bunch of crazy people I would rather put my time into the forum and help men that want to be helped.

By helping I mean answering questions, pms and even some skype calls (depends if I know the person enough). I rather dedicate my time to helping men here accomplish their goals if I am able too.

I also purchased most of Roosh's books even if I didn't read most of them.

Okay, that's great. But this forum wouldn't exist without Roosh. It wouldn't have such a large membership without Roosh. And Roosh uses the same tactics you are saying are morally wrong.

Post: #80

Enigma, I wasn't originally talking about Mike. I responded to your post talking about Mike and this incident.

(02-11-2016 10:17 PM)Enigma Wrote:  And Roosh uses the same tactics you are saying are morally wrong.

No, you are having a comprehension problems. I said if people find something morally objectionable they shouldn't lower themselves to doing the same thing.

Twisting what I am saying isn't doing you any good. If you can't follow the conversation you would do better to not involve yourself.

Post: #81

(02-11-2016 10:21 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 10:17 PM)Enigma Wrote:  And Roosh uses the same tactics you are saying are morally wrong.

No, you are having a comprehension problem. I said if people find something morally objectionable they shouldn't lower themselves to doing the same thing.

Twisting what I am saying isn't doing you any good. If you can't follow the conversation you would do better to not involve yourself.

This is getting ridiculous. You bring up Twitter, Reddit, and rape hoaxes, then ask why I'm bringing it up.

You bring up divorce laws, then ask why I'm bringing it up.

Now you're going to claim that you never condemned the tactics that you have clearly condemned multiple times. Do I really have to quote your own posts to remind you what you said?

(02-11-2016 06:30 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 06:26 PM)kaotic Wrote:  So what, we just shutup ? Let them keep eating away at morals to the point there is no high ground for it ?

What do you suggest then ? How do we combat it ? How do we fight ?

Empty threat or not, posting shit online is a guaranteed way to get shamed/bullied/slandered.

Sounds like you are saying the only way to fight is to lower yourself to their level.

You really feel that helpless if you can't doxx or call employers on people you disagree with?

Is threatening people on social media really fighting the good fight?

Is that what you really believe?

(02-11-2016 06:47 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  Continue pushing the truth. You can do that without lowering yourself. Reason without emotion.

Arguing with people on social media won't help the cause anymore than showing the truth.

I have been watching this whole thing on twitter. Twitter looks to be a bunch of endless trolling, arguing and threats. I don't see how anything will get "solved" working in that type of environment.

Especially when participating.

Quote:Doxxing and threatening someone is WHOLE different ball game.

I agree and it should be called out on each side of the fence when it happens.

Post: #82

Well, WWT, what you don't seem to grasp is to win a war, you have to fight in a way the enemy understands.

In any war there are two ways to win: destroy the enemy's capability to fight, or destroy their will.

There's no realistic way to destroy the SJWs ability to fight--all they need is the internet--so we must attack their will.

Right now the SJWs believe they can act with impunity. They can attack us, threaten us, hurt us, or even destroy us and never face any consequences for it. How do you propose to change that? How would you crush their will while retaining your "moral high ground"?

This reminds me of the saturday morning cartoon crap where the good guys won't kill because "that makes them just as bad as their enemies." It's bullshit. If the bad guys know they're never going to get seriously hurt or killed, they're simply emboldened. The moral high ground ends up causing a lot more harm to innocents, because a significant part of the risk is off the table from the start. The same thing applies here. If the SJWs believe we won't crush them, especially if it's because we're so foolish as to say so, they will never stop.

You don't want to fight the war in an effective way? Fine, go be a conscientious objector. The rest of us have a fight to win.

Post: #83

(02-11-2016 10:31 PM)Enigma Wrote:  This is getting ridiculous. You bring up Twitter, Reddit, and rape hoaxes, then ask why I'm bringing it up.

You bring up divorce laws, then ask why I'm bringing it up.

Now you're going to claim that you never condemned the tactics that you have clearly condemned multiple times. Do I really have to quote your own posts to remind you what you said?

Yes it is getting ridiculous. You can't seem to follow the discussion and trying to twist my words to say I was condemning Mike and Roosh.

I am well aware of what I wrote.

Post: #84

(02-11-2016 10:34 PM)weambulance Wrote:  If the SJWs believe we won't crush them, especially if it's because we're so foolish as to say so, they will never stop.

You really think you're going to scare them where they stop?

I don't think you understand them if you think so. They feel righteousness is on their side. Same as your little post.

The only thing you can do is to take their influence away from them. Arguing with them is a waste of time.

Post: #85

(02-11-2016 10:37 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  Yes it is getting ridiculous. You can't seem to follow the discussion and trying to twist my words to say I was condemning Mike and Roosh.

I am well aware of what I wrote.

You are condemning certain tactics.

This thread is about Mike using those same tactics.

But you're not condemning Mike.

Makes sense.

If anyone else on our side doxxes or goes after someone's livelihood, you don't agree. But you do agree with Mike doxxing this kid and starting the hashtag #ExpelClifford.

Got it.

Post: #86

(02-11-2016 10:49 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 10:37 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  Yes it is getting ridiculous. You can't seem to follow the discussion and trying to twist my words to say I was condemning Mike and Roosh.

I am well aware of what I wrote.

You are condemning certain tactics.

Nope, I am not.

Quote:This thread is about Mike using those same tactics.

But you're not condemning Mike.

Makes sense.

I responded to a specific post. My response wasn't about Mike but about a specific comment that was made.

Quote:If anyone else on our side doxxes or goes after someone's livelihood, you don't agree. But you do agree with Mike doxxing this kid and starting the hashtag #ExpelClifford.

Got it.

It isn't about me agreeing or not agreeing. Again, the comprehension problem.

Post: #87

(02-11-2016 10:51 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

Quote:If anyone else on our side doxxes or goes after someone's livelihood, you don't agree. But you do agree with Mike doxxing this kid and starting the hashtag #ExpelClifford.

Got it.

It isn't about me agreeing or not agreeing. Again, the comprehension problem.

(02-11-2016 06:47 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

Quote:Doxxing and threatening someone is WHOLE different ball game.

I agree and it should be called out on each side of the fence when it happens.

Good talk, man. You have a great evening.

Post: #88

(02-11-2016 10:57 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 10:51 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

Quote:If anyone else on our side doxxes or goes after someone's livelihood, you don't agree. But you do agree with Mike doxxing this kid and starting the hashtag #ExpelClifford.

Got it.

It isn't about me agreeing or not agreeing. Again, the comprehension problem.

(02-11-2016 06:47 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

Quote:Doxxing and threatening someone is WHOLE different ball game.

I agree and it should be called out on each side of the fence when it happens.

Good talk, man. You have a great evening.

lol You're really stretching. You seem like you want to help so much you need to manufacture some drama so you can ride in and come to their aide. Sounds like the rape SJW's.

Funny.

My comments were not about my morals or what I agree/disagree no matter how hard you try to twist it. It's about doing things you are morally against because you want to win so bad. Even so far as to twist comments like you are doing.

I doubt you will get it even after I posted this several times. If this conversation makes you believe you're helping the cause, then I am glad to be of some help to your self esteem.

Post: #89

I keep seeing reference to "our enemy". Can anyone explain why Clifford is the enemy?

Post: #90

(02-11-2016 06:14 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

(02-11-2016 12:21 PM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  This crock of shit again.

Sorry brah, but we are, and will continue to, use "their mentality" against them. If you want to keep spreading your ass cheeks and getting anally penetrated in order to "not be like them" instead then by all means do so, but do it in the privacy of your own home and don't bring us into it. Nobody likes to see that gay shit in public.

Sounds extremely passive aggressive to me.

Telling the guy to shut up because you don't like what he has to say? SJW 101 there.

You don't like their tactics and will use them against them. You lost the moral ground which has been discussed here quite a bit in the last week. Congrats, you are a SJW now.

Gay shit is bitching about the behavior of others and doing the same thing in order to exact revenge.

I understand the appeal, but you end up becoming the very same thing you say you abhor.

They way you fight is just as important as the fight itself.

When I meet you on the street and punch you in the face, are you going to fight back or stand there like a pussy? Because you're asking us to keep taking the leftists' punches and standing there like a pussy, not hitting back. If you want to be a pussy, fine, but don't ask us to be pussies, mmkay?

Post: #91

(02-11-2016 11:24 PM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  When I meet you on the street and punch you in the face, are you going to fight back or stand there like a pussy? Because you're asking us to keep taking the leftists' punches and standing there like a pussy, not hitting back. If you want to be a pussy, fine, but don't ask us to be pussies, mmkay?

Post: #92

WB

Post: #93

My guess is that Clifford is the enemy because he wants to smash Trump supporters, and SJWS are coming to his defense.

Post: #94

I will have to retract my previous statement that I made on the Donald Trump thread concerning the case we discuss on this thread.

According to the security camera recordings, the girl (WPW - Would Procreate With) did not throw anything at that asshole. I got that information from Mike - and it is not in his best interest (he is a lawyer, is he not?) to lie.

I did, however, presume that the media will twist all of this.

That guy (the BLM asswipe) is in even deeper heap of trouble (probably you can add obstruction of justice to the case).

I am not going to lie, I am getting fuzzy from all recent events. So much lies. So much misinformation... .

Post: #95

You got the throwing coffee on him but from Cliff himself via his tweets. It is just his word and we have no way of knowing that it occurred. Directly after that he claims she was pushed in the throat, by him or someone else is not clear.

The facts of this situation are that this guy threatened to smash someone's property because of their political affiliation. Moreover he threatened to do it in school property to another fellow student. The university bylaws and the laws of the land are clear on these facts regardless of the sex or race of either person. They are documented and concrete and the punishments for such are as well: suspension or expulsion and possible legal prosecution for assault.

Talk about "adopting enemy tactics" doesn't even enter into relevancy for me, and I don't feel it should for any reasonable person. This guy was idiot enough to make a threat and try to draw public attention to it. He broke the law and the code of conduct for a student. People are merely calling for the proscribed punishment to be meted out. Nothing more.

The fact that it isn't is up for debate but likely a matter of political correctness affecting the outcome. That is why people are talking about it and using social media to pressure the powers that be: To uphold the rules. To treat this as it would be if it were between two white students.

Post: #96

I think you guys are missing something about the doxxing and call-outs coming from our side.

If I'm working for a company and I say something in public that the SJWs really don't like, they'll attempt to get me fired by screaming about what a horrible person I am, doxxing me and pointing out my Crimethink to my company. The company like most will then fire me, because Crimethink and HR departments are full of SJW women.

If an SJW tweets she wants someone to brutally kill Roosh, we can do the same thing, but the result is unlikely to be the same. Unless it's truly off the charts bad, nothing happens. Because SJWs protect their own. That's assuming the SJW even has a job.

On the rare occasion that either report comes to a company that is run by one of us (someone pro free speech) - then nothing will happen except maybe a notice to remove their company affiliation from their twitter feed. We like free speech. So this is where the moral equivalency would come in - if we are the boss, and we would fire for SJW speech, then there's us "sinking to their level."

The sad truth is that we would have consequences for doing that - it would be firing without cause, as opposed to the SJW side, where Crimethink is cause.

But, there's a benefit to following their tactics even if we won't get the same results - it exposes SJW hypocrisy.

If they'll fire someone for retweeting a cartoon video with a Feminist and an Islamist singing, but won't fire someone who tweets death threats at someone they disagree with, then that's some good ammo. Corporations don't like being made to look bad. It also helps pull in rational onlookers who see the madness.

Post: #97

As has been stated many times before: if we lived in a rational world, then the powers of logical argument would always let the truth come to light, and break the narrative.

This, however, is obviously not the case, as we all had the dubious privilege to witness during the events of the last week: we see that 'truth' for the average consumer of media is not the same as absolute truth, rather it is a matter of interpreting reality to conform with one's own beliefs. The average feminists thinks that America is undergoing a rape crisis, and believes that most evils of this world can be traced to men and/or masculinity. Then, bombarded by a co-ordinated flood of media articles describing Roosh and his evil gang of rape-sympathizers, the subject immediately accepts this account as being the truth, due to its conformance with internalized feminist beliefs.

Once this occurs, as we observed, absolute truth ceases to matter. Even the most elegant, convincing, logical of arguments disproving the obvious lies of the media will slide off the minds of these fanatics, like water off a duck's back.

WWT's posts seem to show some kind of idealistic belief that all we need is to present our arguments better, then, the masses, convinced by our superior reasoning, will realize the error of their ways, and discard the lies thrown out by the media. In a purely, rational world, this would indeed be the only necessary action, but again, this is not the case!

Anonymousbosch really opened my eyes concerning the mentality of SJW's, when he described them essentially as puritans, or modern-day religious fanatics. Substitute radical feminism with radical (any other religion), and you have the same thing!

Attempting to convince a radical SJW that someone who makes an innocent joke about women (or anything else on their verboten list) does not deserve to be doxxed, and made to lose his job using the mighty powers of truth and logic is just about as effective as trying to convince a radical Muslim that the Danish guy who made a comic of Mohammed shouldn't be stoned to death. (for reference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-P...ontroversy).

Post: #98

(02-12-2016 03:23 AM)thebassist Wrote:  WWT's posts seem to show some kind of idealistic belief that all we need is to present our arguments better, then, the masses, convinced by our superior reasoning, will realize the error of their ways, and discard the lies thrown out by the media. In a purely, rational world, this would indeed be the only necessary action, but again, this is not the case!

No, that isn't what I believe.

I don't think most people are radical SJW's. I also don't think everyone will listen to common sense if they are not ready to listen.

All you can do is be there when they are ready which is why I rather dedicate my time to the guys seeking to better themselves and their lives than waste it arguing with people who will never change.

Sooner or later (probably sooner), the person siding with the SJW point of view will be their next target. There is nothing like sweet irony when a self confessed male feminist gets accused of rape.

They will cannibalize people looking for the next outrage. Those new victims of the SJW may then be ready to listen to reason. Then again, there is a lot of stupidity out there. hah

One of the reasons Donald Trump is so popular is because people are sick of this pc/sjw nonsense. It's already happening.

Post: #99

(02-10-2016 08:24 PM)Rush87 Wrote:  My take away: Girls who support Trump are hot.

I searched hashtags on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram related to Trump. #trump2016. #trump16, #makeamericagreatagain, #trump and so on, the people who support Trump look to be above average looking, and especially the women, you do not see anything below 7, sure there are older people but they seem to be attractiveness in the female Trump support ranks.

Post: #100

Interesting Twist on BLM BLAMs who claimed a racial attack!

http://nypost.com/2016/02/25/charges-aga...as-attack/