Post: #26

(02-18-2019 01:13 AM)doc holliday Wrote:  

(02-17-2019 11:59 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(02-17-2019 11:41 PM)Fortis Wrote:  You would almost think the forum is being bodysnatcher'd and slowly replaced with bad faith actors designed to make us look ridiculous.

It's not just me who thinks so, then?

I find myself being condescending and sarcastic in like every post I make, and I wasn't sure if it was just me being an asshole because it's winter and gloomy outside, or the posts really have been a lot stupider.

Nah man we have a serious problem here and while membership on the forum has gone way up, the quality of the new members is pure trash. Even though Roosh has changed back to his old policy of new memberships at the beginning of the month, I don't think it's going to do much in terms of improving the quality. More and more, I'm becoming convinced that the problems we are having with our females is directly due to the low quality of too many men such as our original poster here.

This.

The women are not the root problem. The men are.

It's A LOT easier to convince a man to:

-Learn game.
-Recognize good quality women.
-Not reproduce with shit women.

AND/OR

-encourage low value men to go MGTOW and not reproduce with shit women.

THAN

Taking voting rights away from entire gender.

Simply put: The real battle is convincing a majority of men to have some dignity and stop reproducing with shitty women. Better yet, not even acknowledging/dating/banging shitty women. And that in the end, it is better to die childless than have your children raised by some militant feminist.

That's how you win the war.

Post: #27

Asking people to think about their problems in creative and constructive ways?

Too hard, bro, let's just roll back rights for half of the population. That's sure not to have 2nd and 3rd order sequences at all.

Post: #28

Peter Griffin had the right idea...

Post: #29

(02-17-2019 11:59 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(02-17-2019 11:41 PM)Fortis Wrote:  You would almost think the forum is being bodysnatcher'd and slowly replaced with bad faith actors designed to make us look ridiculous.

Gentlemen (and women posters pretending to be gentlemen), if you think this thread is stupid, then you need to find another forum. Because in case you didn't notice it, this is a forum run by Roosh who is on record for being opposed to women't rights and women't voting.

You are in the wrong place...try Huffington Post.

For myself, I have stated many times that, after many many decades of being a supporter of women's voting, I've come to realize that it cannot continue. Women voting in a democracy will always lead to social collapse. It's simple, provable game theory, and it's based on women't genetic makeup. I think that we're either going to have society similar to The Handmaid's Tale or Cherry 2000. I won't like either of these worlds, but that's what I think is coming in 10-20 years tops.

By the way, women in my family, including my daughters, are all super-high-IQ achievers. But I am very close to persuading them to get married and pop out 3-4 kids. Because that pathway, not a career, is their best route to fame, fortune, and happiness. And, we aren't reproducing ourselves, so either women start having 4 kids, or we all die.

Post: #30

(02-17-2019 09:17 PM)jasond Wrote:  In listening to Roosh's recent podcasts, and analyzing the life experiences of both myself and friends, it seems that the most important task for the next 100 years will be to rollback/eliminate women's rights throughout the world.

Unless we can restore a patriarchal social system, very little else will matter. Our current system, where women can vote, use birth control and have the same rights as men, is leading us to a society that doesn't reproduce itself, families are broken, and where most men are marginalized without families (and thus have less incentive to contribute to society). The will all lead to economic stagnation and a barbarian invasion.

The problem is that our ancestors who promoted women's rights didn't fully understand the hypergamous nature of women, and the chaos that would result when allowing women full control over choosing their sexual partners.

So what is the solution? Throughout history, religion has been one of the main forces in keeping women's behavior in check. I believe that biologically, women are much more susceptible to religion than men are, as they are emotional creatures and have a tendency to believe in superstition.

However, Christianity today has been so watered down, that it can hardly be called a patriarchal religion anymore. In addition, advances in science would cause most thinking men to question many of the core tenets and stories of the Bible (resurrection of Jesus, virgin birth, etc).

I believe the world today needs a new religion. (I think most religions were simply created by a group of wise men, writing stories about how to live a good life, and then wrapping them in divine inspiration). This new religion should keep all the wisdom of Christianity (and possibly other belief systems), while updating it to be more believable given what we know about science today.

These are just my preliminary thoughts, but perhaps some RVF members reading this will agree, and be willing to engage in this long-term effort to save civilization from the abyss.

Man did not need advanced science to understand that virgin births and resurrections are not things that happen. Look to the lives of the apostles; everything they accomplished and sacrificed, after Jesus left. Those were some convicted men, who were persuasive enough to convince others to believe the impossible.

Post: #31

I might be alone in this, but I would take away voting rights for a lot of males too.

Only fathers should be allowed to vote, because they have a dog in the fight.

Post: #32

IMHO, only those who pass a basic civics/IQ test should vote.

Post: #33

(02-18-2019 12:32 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  

(02-17-2019 11:59 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(02-17-2019 11:41 PM)Fortis Wrote:  You would almost think the forum is being bodysnatcher'd and slowly replaced with bad faith actors designed to make us look ridiculous.

Gentlemen (and women posters pretending to be gentlemen), if you think this thread is stupid, then you need to find another forum. Because in case you didn't notice it, this is a forum run by Roosh who is on record for being opposed to women't rights and women't voting.

You are in the wrong place...try Huffington Post.

For myself, I have stated many times that, after many many decades of being a supporter of women's voting, I've come to realize that it cannot continue. Women voting in a democracy will always lead to social collapse. It's simple, provable game theory, and it's based on women't genetic makeup. I think that we're either going to have society similar to The Handmaid's Tale or Cherry 2000. I won't like either of these worlds, but that's what I think is coming in 10-20 years tops.

By the way, women in my family, including my daughters, are all super-high-IQ achievers. But I am very close to persuading them to get married and pop out 3-4 kids. Because that pathway, not a career, is their best route to fame, fortune, and happiness. And, we aren't reproducing ourselves, so either women start having 4 kids, or we all die.

This is the second post in a month that's called for the creation of a "new religion", as if a religion could be planned out on an obscure message board by a bunch of angry, charisma-less autists.

But sure, let's roll with it. Let's hear the plan! Tell us precisely how you intend to "eliminate women's rights". You can't convince an internet forum not to laugh at you, how are you going to convince a planet of 7.5 billion people to roll back a century's worth of civil rights law? You gonna write some REALLY persuasive essays on it? Maybe post some game theory charts, and then watch as all opposition melts away in the blinding light of your brilliant intellect? Or is the plan to just post about how much you hate women voting, and then hope that somebody else does something about it?

Post: #34

(02-18-2019 01:05 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  ...as if a religion could be planned out on an obscure message board by a bunch of angry, charisma-less autists.

It worked for L Ron Hubbard.

Post: #35

If we are to be placing wholesale restrictions on an entire gender, we should in kind respond to the fact that some posters on this thread ought not to be reproducing with anything besides their right hand.....





......assuming they already don't do so *sniggers*

Post: #36

(02-18-2019 01:13 AM)doc holliday Wrote:  

(02-17-2019 11:59 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(02-17-2019 11:41 PM)Fortis Wrote:  You would almost think the forum is being bodysnatcher'd and slowly replaced with bad faith actors designed to make us look ridiculous.

It's not just me who thinks so, then?

I find myself being condescending and sarcastic in like every post I make, and I wasn't sure if it was just me being an asshole because it's winter and gloomy outside, or the posts really have been a lot stupider.

Nah man we have a serious problem here and while membership on the forum has gone way up, the quality of the new members is pure trash. Even though Roosh has changed back to his old policy of new memberships at the beginning of the month, I don't think it's going to do much in terms of improving the quality. More and more, I'm becoming convinced that the problems we are having with our females is directly due to the low quality of too many men such as our original poster here.

Doc,

I haven't met you but I've heard good things about you second hand.

I've also met JasonD and know enough to say he has no want for money or women. Agree that some recent joiners come in a bunch of fruity flavors, but JasonD isn't one of them. In fact, he's been on the forum for three years longer than you, and has added his fair share of value as well. The last part of your post is uncalled for.

As for the original post, I am treating it as a thought experiment.

All the best - no beef with you, just want to add this to the record.

Post: #37

In my ideal world, only male, married, landowning citizens over the age of 30 would have the right to vote.

Post: #38

I think changing the religion is closer to the solution. In the 1950s, the majority of women voted for Eisenhower over Adlai Stevenson despite the heavy Democratic Party propaganda. Christianity contains several poison pills that weakens us. Today, a group of protesters went into the office of the Border Patrol and defaced pictures of the fallen angels, children killed by illegal aliens. Our enemy has no constraints to block vicious behavior in service of their goals. But Christianity has the poison pill: "turn the other cheek". We need to return to pagan values where brutality is considered a positive virtue when used in service of maintaining civilization. The problem is conservative men today are wimps due to indoctrination into a poisonous value system.

https://news4sanantonio.com/news/local/p...rol-museum

Post: #39

(02-18-2019 01:05 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(02-18-2019 12:32 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  

(02-17-2019 11:59 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(02-17-2019 11:41 PM)Fortis Wrote:  You would almost think the forum is being bodysnatcher'd and slowly replaced with bad faith actors designed to make us look ridiculous.

Gentlemen (and women posters pretending to be gentlemen), if you think this thread is stupid, then you need to find another forum. Because in case you didn't notice it, this is a forum run by Roosh who is on record for being opposed to women't rights and women't voting.

You are in the wrong place...try Huffington Post.

For myself, I have stated many times that, after many many decades of being a supporter of women's voting, I've come to realize that it cannot continue. Women voting in a democracy will always lead to social collapse. It's simple, provable game theory, and it's based on women't genetic makeup. I think that we're either going to have society similar to The Handmaid's Tale or Cherry 2000. I won't like either of these worlds, but that's what I think is coming in 10-20 years tops.

By the way, women in my family, including my daughters, are all super-high-IQ achievers. But I am very close to persuading them to get married and pop out 3-4 kids. Because that pathway, not a career, is their best route to fame, fortune, and happiness. And, we aren't reproducing ourselves, so either women start having 4 kids, or we all die.

This is the second post in a month that's called for the creation of a "new religion", as if a religion could be planned out on an obscure message board by a bunch of angry, charisma-less autists.

But sure, let's roll with it. Let's hear the plan! Tell us precisely how you intend to "eliminate women's rights". You can't convince an internet forum not to laugh at you, how are you going to convince a planet of 7.5 billion people to roll back a century's worth of civil rights law? You gonna write some REALLY persuasive essays on it? Maybe post some game theory charts, and then watch as all opposition melts away in the blinding light of your brilliant intellect? Or is the plan to just post about how much you hate women voting, and then hope that somebody else does something about it?

OK, well congratulations for a well-written parry.

It is certainly true that my intellect is blinding, and I appreciate you notice.

But of course, I already told you my plan: I'm convincing my own daughters to give up politics and get pregnant. That IS the plan. Get enough women pregnant, combined with the unstoppable forces of counter-feminism and the great pendulum of history, (which I alone fully comprehend with my blinding intellect) and yes, the rest of the pieces will fall into place.

I might do an L. Ron Hubbard too. We'll see.

Post: #40

We already have a thread for how MrLemons daughters will turn out.


/thread-72057.html

Post: #41

Can I be the God of this new religion?

We can turn my blood into Busch Beer and get little hats.

Aloha!

Post: #42

Women don't need fewer rights. Women need actual equality. That's not what we have now. What we have now is a system based on outdated chivalry that favors women.

Here are some things that need to be changed to achieve true equality between men and women in the U.S.:

We need equality in the judicial courts. Women receive less prison time and lighter sentences for the same crimes.

We need equality in education. Women receive "minority" scholarships even though they're the majority of students virtually everywhere. Boys are also more likely to be put on meds and fail out.

We need equality in physical standards. Standards are lowered for women in police departments, fire departments, and other places.

We need equality when it comes to violent crime. Men are most often victims of violent crime. But there is a Violence Against Women Act. If women are equal in police departments and women's boxing is legal, why do we need this law?

We need equality in divorce courts and family courts. They're heavily biased in favor of women.

We need equality in draft registration. Women don't have to sign up for Selective Service. This might seem a trivial point but 1). It's symbolically important and 2). Men can't vote unless they sign up.

We need equality in healthcare/lifespans. Women outlive men in the U.S., so most of the research on health should be allocated to men.

We need equality for men when it comes to the paternity of their kids. Paternity testing should be mandatory because up to 30 percent of "dads" turn out not to be the actual fathers. If you reversed the genders and if men were deceiving 1/4 of women about such an important (and costly) issue, we'd already have such a law.

This is just off the top of my head. I'm sure others here can add much more to this list.

Post: #43

Kona Wrote:Can I be the God of this new religion?

We can turn my blood into Busch Beer and get little hats.

Aloha!

You and LDN have to be co-gods. Busch and Fosters for everyone!

Aloha, mate!

Post: #44

The only religion anybody needs is lifting. The gym is church, mass is in session. Make sure to thank the lord for these gains you are about to recieve. Read the swoly bible daily, and thou shalt covet these gains.

Post: #45

(02-18-2019 05:08 PM)cascadecombo Wrote:  We already have a thread for how MrLemons daughters will turn out.


/thread-72057.html

Thank you for self-identifying yourself as a loser. Adding you to my "losers to ignore" list now.

Post: #46

(02-18-2019 02:37 PM)polar Wrote:  

(02-18-2019 01:13 AM)doc holliday Wrote:  

(02-17-2019 11:59 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(02-17-2019 11:41 PM)Fortis Wrote:  You would almost think the forum is being bodysnatcher'd and slowly replaced with bad faith actors designed to make us look ridiculous.

It's not just me who thinks so, then?

I find myself being condescending and sarcastic in like every post I make, and I wasn't sure if it was just me being an asshole because it's winter and gloomy outside, or the posts really have been a lot stupider.

Nah man we have a serious problem here and while membership on the forum has gone way up, the quality of the new members is pure trash. Even though Roosh has changed back to his old policy of new memberships at the beginning of the month, I don't think it's going to do much in terms of improving the quality. More and more, I'm becoming convinced that the problems we are having with our females is directly due to the low quality of too many men such as our original poster here.

Doc,

I haven't met you but I've heard good things about you second hand.

I've also met JasonD and know enough to say he has no want for money or women. Agree that some recent joiners come in a bunch of fruity flavors, but JasonD isn't one of them. In fact, he's been on the forum for three years longer than you, and has added his fair share of value as well. The last part of your post is uncalled for.

As for the original post, I am treating it as a thought experiment.

All the best - no beef with you, just want to add this to the record.

Polar, I appreciate you standing up for JasonD here. I guess in this case I was criticizing the post as much as the poster but if you vouch for him, that's cool. I just think it was a poorly thought out post and having not ever met him plus given the infestation of some truly detestable guys to the forum, my posting what I did made sense. Cobra and Dantes have said great things about you. Whatever they've told you about me is all lies.

Post: #47

(02-18-2019 04:36 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  I might do an L. Ron Hubbard too. We'll see.

Post: #48

(02-18-2019 01:09 PM)questor70 Wrote:  

(02-18-2019 01:05 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  ...as if a religion could be planned out on an obscure message board by a bunch of angry, charisma-less autists.

It worked for L Ron Hubbard.

L Ron Hubbard wasn't a charisma-less autist, he was a pimp.

Quote:Much like King Henry VIII, L. Ron Hubbard had lots of wives. Unlike the famous king, Hubbard didn’t even have the common decency to behead his old wives by way of a parting kiss, instead just choosing to marry another woman on the quiet. Although Hubbard’s teachings often denounced sexual promiscuity, he certainly didn’t seem too bothered by this. Throughout his life, Hubbard would have seven different children by three different wives. He was married to his first two wives at the same time, although they didn’t know about one another. He was a serial philander who caroused his way through women at a rate that would make John F. Kennedy blush.

Post: #49

Bro, this is a straight up synopsis of Handmaid's Tale.

Come on.

Post: #50

I think the fact that he wants this to be an RVF project is a bit unsettling. At the very least he should poll us before he assumes we all consent to such majestic tasks.