TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

      • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead

      • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

The Web's most infamous misogynist regrets nothing

VivaLaManosphere_com
February 14, 2014
72 upvotes
/r/TheRedPill
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title The Web's most infamous misogynist regrets nothing
Author

VivaLaManosphere_com
Upvotes 72
Comments 159
Date February 14, 2014 10:09 AM UTC
(12 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1xvy1e/the_webs_most_infamous_misogynist_regrets_nothing/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/the-webs-most-infamous-misogynist-regrets-nothing.231216
https://theredarchive.com/post/231216
Red Pill terms in post
the red pill

Comments

[–]McDoogleSnatch 27 points28 points29 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Bear in mind his answers are edited and parsed by the writer.

[–]throwwhatthere3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah. A lot of this just sounds way too deferential for Roosh. A lot of, "Oh I don't know about that..." or "I'm not sure on this issue." Roosh may have said these things, but it stinks of heavy redaction.

The interesting part is that the intrinsic bias of the interviewer is probably so internalized that s/he(?) didn't even consciously realize that edits they were making were substantially altering the meaning. Things that to the interviewer seemed meaningless or extraneous probably carried real meaning.

[–]McDoogleSnatch 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

To be fair, I don't think the writer explicitly misrepresented Roosh's point of view. However, on this topic, writing only one's conclusions without the step-by-step reasoning that brought one there can be easily made to look more foolish, asinine, crazy or otherwise idiotic than one really is.

It's the same reason why hold TRP close to our chests when talking amongst even our peers.

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]TRP Vanguardnicethingyoucanthave10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I think he really missed the mark with that answer.

In my opinion, the real reason that women are subjected to threats online is that it bothers them, and people (trolls) enjoy bothering people. If you want the evo-psych explanation, I think it's just primitive dominance behavior.

It's stupid. It's childish. It's sad that so many people are so obviously slaves to instinct. But I don't think it necessarily has anything to do with politics.

There is some conservative talk show host, I forget her name or even what network (probably Fox) but she is Thai, I think. Anyway, I remember seeing an article she wrote about the hate mail she gets. People called her a "little brown fucking machine" (reference to the prostitutes in Thailand).

It's difficult for me to believe that anything she has said has made men in general angry. So, I don't think this phenomenon is due to politics. I think it's just that people enjoy trolling, and being assholes to each other.

[–]fiat_lux_12 points13 points14 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

If you're talking about Malkin, she is Filipina.

She gets a lot of racist hate mail from liberals both men and women. A lot of it is political. I agree though that some people will just say whatever they can to get their targets upset.

[–]TheRabid0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, didn't she post up private information about a journalist? Then have a freak out when the guy did the same?

[–]fiat_lux_2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't really follow her closely enough to care. I just know she gets a lot of hate from liberals, deserved or not.

[–]JohnPeel1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A couple of things:

1) They're made up (they cannot prove they get threats and I've never seen any proof)

2) Everyone gets trolled on the internet

3) A considerable proportion of them are women anyway

Given we know how women will make false accusations of something as serious as rape, and women like that liberal hambeast will even make threats against themselves, it's not much of a stretch to see that this stuff is all bullshit.

A lot of it is solipsism. They assume that if they get threatened it's because they're a woman - they're so perfect that if someone hates them it must be because they hate all women.

[–]jacobman0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I always had to tell my mom this when I was younger. When I would occasionally swear at her she would get all upset about the swearing and miss the point. Now obviously threats are a little different. Still, I agree that they're missing part of the communication, what's behind the anger.

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]Blaw40 -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Had to downvote. Your anecdote doesn't prove anything. Until "Science" proves it Homosexuality is a choice. I can also prove it with logic if you want to argue.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan20 points21 points22 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The definition of rape is expanding every year.

I think this is the biggest problem with feminism. They've expanded the definition of rape to such a ridiculous extreme that nobody is taking it seriously any more.

A woman who killed four kids, and this group is falling over themselves to say it’s not her fault.

LOL he's talking about the pussy pass.

Little boys are being given Ritalin and turned into zombies.

This is so true... I constantly lament the idea that if I had been born 10 years later they would have doped me up on these drugs. I wonder if using these drugs actually hurts the kids in the long run since you're giving it to them while their bodies are still developing.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Speaking of pussy pass here in my city Calgary a 29yr old female teacher just got charged with sex offenses for having sex with a 16yr boy.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgary/Teacher+charged+with+offences+involving+teen/9508435/story.html

I bet 10 to 1 she gets off easy.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But you'd need to find someone who would bet against you...I've not even met bluepills who would.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh she'll get off, she's gotten off at least once already hasnt she? now she just needs to do it in the courtroom.

[–]sniperhiding 12 points13 points14 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Wow. Not only do feminists and betas hate him, but so do many in the manosphere. Lol.

[–]1spicy_fries3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And many will firmly stand by his side because he has balls enough to speak the truth.

[–]drewbaccha8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

afiak Roosh's homosexuality comment seems to be referring to the feminization of western society. The concern is that by suppressing normal masculine behavior in boys while promoting non-heterosexual behaviors (have Tim play with a doll, put him in a skirt, he's cute like that) there is quite the real chance that we will raise a mentally damaged generation of confused, emasculated men.

And before we argue about sexual identity and all that bullshit, sex is optional, we all know it. The rabble rabble is based on attraction, which is merely a preference for the act.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRS738 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

afiak Roosh's homosexuality comment seems to be referring to the feminization of western society. The concern is that by suppressing normal masculine behavior in boys while promoting non-heterosexual behaviors (have Tim play with a doll, put him in a skirt, he's cute like that) there is quite the real chance that we will raise a mentally damaged generation of confused, emasculated men.

EXACTLY. And it's an accurate, insightful comment on our society. TRP is the last place I'd expect this has to be explained.

The gayapalooza eruption here against his comments just shows how coerced our society is into thinking and repeating the "right" kinds of things, about men, about sex, about all kinds of things.

[–]1spicy_fries4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

+1up.

Their behavior proves just how far gone male culture is. They just bark back like Pavlovian dogs.

Roosh's comments were far from inflammatory yet they start a shitstorm nonetheless. "That is an inappropriate way to think" blah blah. I don't see how they can be "red pill" and still buy into this shit.

[–]ufaild46 points47 points48 points 12 years ago (103 children) | Copy Link

Being gay is not a choice. If you think it is, I dare you to choose to become one for a month, go suck dick, and see if you enjoy it.

[–]robesta33 points34 points35 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I agree with this with a caveat. I think sexuality isn't as cut and dry as yes you're gay or no you're straight. I think there are levels of predisposition, and then environmental factors bring it out fully.

[–]jacobman7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You mean it's not a binary :p

[–]p3ndulum1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

There was a documentary on a couple of weeks ago that suggested homosexuals' role in evolution is something akin to a supernanny/uncle.

The chances of a person being born gay increases as the number of children a mother has grows, so it makes sense (to me, at least) that natural selection is producing homosexuality in an effort to support itself better.

Many of the gay dudes that I've gotten to know on a personal level have disclosed that they have that same maternal drive/feeling to have kids that women do. Some have even suggested that the reason so many gay men live such a self-destructive life style has much to do with the hopelessness they feel from knowing they'll never be able to have their own kids.

Homosexuals can't reproduce, but if you give a gay man an opportunity to help raise your children and help make a home, they'll invest wholly.

[–]Sufferix1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Similarly, homosexuality has been linked to the fertility of the mother. My friends and I believe that it's the homozygous expression of this trait.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Seriously this is why I don't think it can be genetic - it's such a huge blow in reproductionary fitness, it is the equivalent to being allergic to any food that has protein in it. Basically game over.

This does not necessarily mean it is simply a choice. My bet is on something going weird with prenatal T releases.

[–]mbr90200010 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agree, it isn't a choice. How many of you in here at any point in your life thought to yourself that you wanted to get some dick? I have a friend that is bi but no chance in hell I'm gonna let another mans dick even enter my zip code let alone my ass. Think of gay male celebrities. Ricky Martin had the looks and status to plant his seed in the finest puss imaginable yet you think that he just decided "Nah, I'm going to suck dicks instead." Pussy disgust guys like that and I am betting it isn't a feeling you can understand unless you are a genuine butt pirate

[–]ggqq7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

That's not what he's saying. He's saying that homosexuality shouldn't be promoted by a society as a whole from the very beginning of fucking time. We have 8 year old boys saying they're gay now - do you think they know any better? Do you want to push them in that direction and pretend it's some sort of rainbow-coloured heaven? Fucking-aye, why don't we just create even more of them for even less reproduction. If society needs ANYTHING, it's a stronger dominant male presence to let everyone know who's in charge. Men should strive to be like them, and women should feel weak at their knees in their presence. Turning them down the wrong path early is essentially the mental castration and emasculation of a significant portion of the males within society.

[–]1spicy_fries2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Absolutely. This isn't about hating on gays. It's that we as a society should stop championing homosexuals. Instead we should be fighting for the true underdogs... hetrosexual male culture. That point seems to be completely lost on some of the members of this subreddit. Their kneejerk reaction "OMG! Homophobia! Team Rainbow assemble!" Redpillers agree that destroying male culture is damaging to society. Doesn't it also make sense that promoting the polar opposite of it (homo culture) would likewise be damaging. They don't get it. They some how believe in the fairytale that they mutually exclusive.

Oh yeah, and "science."

[–][deleted] 6 points6 points6 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]TheCasualHistorian1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not only that, but an 8-year-old boy hasn't even entered puberty yet. Biology tends to accept feedback from psychological behavior (i.e. Being happy makes you smile and smiling can also make you happy). It is possible that acting gay during a child's development could force his body to respond and develop accordingly - to a degree. The genetic expression of sex will still take place as it was meant to, but the behavioral feedback may somewhat impede that sex expression, at least within the brain.

By promoting a homosexual identity as an option for a young boy he may just choose it on a whim (to get along with peers, to socialize with girls that he seems to want to get close to for some unknown reason, etc.). But when his sexual expression doesn't manifest itself as gay, you're going to end up with a very confused kid who was all about being gay but now finds himself desiring girls.

But that's a double standard, says the Straw Man. Yes it is - and a very necessary one. Being gay runs contrary to the biological imperative of all human nature. Just because it's cool to accommodate it in the modern world doesn't make it correct from an evolutionary standpoint. If you force a larger percentage of the population than naturally occurs to be gay, you're hurting the birth rate by that much. You're better off letting men realize they're gay than letting boys grow up gay because they thought it was some kind of option when they were actually straight the whole time.

[–][deleted] -2 points-2 points-2 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]ggqq0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Have you read about (forgot his name..) the guy who did mice population tests within a limited space with limited resources? The end results of overpopulation as a future projection of society as a whole are disturbingly accurate. Would like wikipedia if I could remember the guy's name.

[–][deleted] 5 points5 points5 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 5 points5 points5 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] -1 points-1 points-1 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 6 points6 points6 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]btcnr2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Same thing you do when you're attracted to a woman but she doesn't consent.

[–]iseeyou13122 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Using science as a buzzword? Hardly scientific....

Why is there a large variation in the sexual preferences of identical twins if it has nothing to do with one's environment or other, non-genetic factors?

[–]iBendYourSpoon2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

A tendency towards bisexuality combined with epigenetics, not to mention those studies don't take into account the social forces that may be at play (one might feel more pressured to act straight even if bi or gay); there are plenty of gay men who act straight their whole lives because they want to live "normal" lives. Remember, these studies aren't purely scientific, they are ultimately based on what people are self-reporting and how they are acting in their lives. It's only slightly more rigorous than a survey; it is hardly a mathematical equation, or a series of observational cause-effect tests.

Not that i think culture doesn't have any affect on sexuality, i just don't think those "scientific observations" are the end-all-be-all to this discussion.

EDIT: I also don't necessarily think that even identical twins are exposed to the same levels of certain hormones in the womb.

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] -14 points-13 points-12 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Speaking of anti-gay which I'm not I have a bone to pick <grin> I wish people would learn the english language. Retard society Spams society with a word for hating gays...Homophobia its a bullshit word and inherently WRONG Homo=Gay + Phobia=Fear as in people fear homosexuals but what if...just what if you just don't like them? Theres a big difference twixt fear and like. Heres an example I love watermelon but not apples, am I applephobic do I fear apples? Or do I just not like them?

[–]linggayby6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

When we say molecules are hydrophobic, I don't think anyone attributes the feeling of fear to them...

[–][deleted] -2 points-2 points-2 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You misunderstood my post. I don't give a rats ass about someones sexual orientation. I was taking issue with the misuse of language. Re-read my post.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Homophobia is by no means an english word

[+][deleted] -9 points-8 points-7 points 12 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Ok so I admit ignorance, what language is it? And don't cop to latin.

Edit: Forget I said that, I know it's latin my point of contention is the definition implied.

[+][deleted] -6 points-5 points-4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Homo and phobos are greek/latin. But as i tried to look for it i found out that i maybe understand you wrong. I haven't found proof that homophobia was used as latin were spoken, so maybe some english guys invented the term. Sorry if you meant something like that. Btw... you are right with it is the wrong term anyway. Should be more something like hate/ don't like and not fear.

[–]1PaulRivers10-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Science backs up the claim that whether you're straight or gay is in no way an environmental choice.

No, science backs up exactly the opposite, that with identical twins very often one will end up gay and the other will not.

Environmental Choice/Factor is exactly why some people are gay and others are not. You as a person have very little control over it, but that doesn't change that it's not genetic.

[–]Sufferix1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

There are multiple evidences on both sides. There's some biological differences in gays and hets (some brain cluster shit I saw in that Scandinavian film) as well as some correlative data for families and twins having a prevalence to being gay if the other/another in the family is gay.

Also, the terrifically unethical experiment where a young boy was sex-changed after a botched circumcision and was conditioned to be a woman. He never identified as a woman, declared he was a male at nine, was depressed, and committed suicide.

Edit: An interesting study would be to see if the homosexual percentage increases or decreases once the social stigma completely evaporates. If it is a gene, it will stagnate or decline (as homosexuals don't reproduce).

[–]1PaulRivers100 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

But the "best" evidence on the genetics-gay side suggests there's a small increase in certain genetics causing you to be gay. But that's a small increase - from the best they can find. And it's a far cry from the mantra that it's "in way an environmental choice".

On your second paragraph, that doesn't seem like it relates to being gay or not.

On the third one, thing is, gay women can still have their own children. So we will probably never find out...

[–]Sufferix0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It was a parallel to being conditioned to behave a certain way, to act a certain way, and identify a certain way.

Are you going to tell me that behavioral science from psychology, often considered a pseudoscience, has stronger evidence.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Biological difference != genetic difference. How about simply something getting botched up at prenatal T release and not affecting every part of the body equally?

[–]Sufferix0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The person is arguing for socialogical reasons, biology and genetics are counter to that.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Are you arguing that bisexuals don't exist? If so, what about their choice?

[–]ufaild-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They absolutely do. I think there's a whole spectrum of sexual preferences between gay and straight.

It's not a choice though. You can't choose to like sucking dick.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think that's a really 1990s perspective that doesn't make a lot of sense given history or modern science on homosexuality. The revulsion that people feel towards gay sex acts is largely a cultural thing. Numerous cultures throughout history promoted gay acts without considering the people who perpetrated them to be gay. In that sense, you absolutely do choose whether you're into it or not. Whether you find a particular person attractive is less a matter of choice. Whether you get pleasure out of a particular sex act seems much more culturally defined. In any case, if someone is 10% or 60% "gay", and they choose not to be with people of their own sex, then they have surely "chosen not to be gay."

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]Sufferix-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, matriarchies only work in times of surplus and the US is moving towards that, but then they fail in times of strife and patriarchy resumes. So, assuming this happens, as long as the US doesn't explode and become worthless, men will take back over.

[–][deleted] -1 points-1 points-1 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Heuristics9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

It's also perfectly natural to be a pedophile.

[–][deleted] -3 points-3 points-3 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]Heuristics4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It's called a reductio ad absurdum. It's used to demonstrate that an argument is shitty.

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points0 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Heuristics1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Moving the goalposts. Lack of consent happens all the time in nature.

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points0 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Heuristics1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

You are using the word equivocation wrong.

[–][deleted] -2 points-2 points-2 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Heuristics1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

No. You are an idiot. I explicitly even mentioned what method of argumentation I was using.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRS731 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Arguing with btcnr is like arguing with someone with a head injury. He's frequently wrong but never in doubt. He reminds me of some guys I've known who smoke tons of weed.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

You kicked the nature argument (which is right) but not the consensual. Now you go after him and not the consent argument.

[–]Heuristics1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Well, I dunno what the argument would be really. Something like: 'Anything that two people consent to is morally right'? There are some interesting cases of consented cannibalism in Germany that could work as a counter example to that.

At the end of the day anything that fails to take into consideration the proper directness (proper aim, proper function, teleology) of humanity will just generate these weird outlooks on morality.

[–][deleted]0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't know about this cases in germany so i cannot say if they are counter examples. Could be a legal problem and have nothing to do with morality (eating human flesh on it's own?) or maybe one of the persons wasn't able to consent to anything (drugs, illness; hey come here, cut a stripe of and eat it?). That would be moving the goalpost again, i think? When it comes to morality, there are lots of grey areas for right and wrong, especially because it's context dependent.

But i don't think that having sex with children at an age where they have no sex drive nor a concept of sexuality is within a grey area of 'is consent possible?'. Neither are two adult and sober persons without noticable mental illnesses or something, who decide to fuck each other. But maybe only i see this difference in quality in this.

To be honest, i don't understand your last sentence. Don't know if it is because english isn't my native language and i don't get the meaning or if im just to stupid.

[–]Heuristics2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Person1: Hey, I want to cook and eat parts of you while you are still alive.

Person2: I consent, that sounds cool!

Person1: Ok, i'll go grab a knife.

Consent is not all it's cracked up to be. Not to mention that there is no a-priori reason for why it would be the arbiter of morality.

[–][deleted]0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Hmm, thats fucked up, but i have not necessarily a problem with it.

Not the arbiter, you're right. I think consent could be a necessary but not sufficient variable. Tough one, because i have not the expertise to prove my point. While i get your point of view i still disagree with it.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes it is if you understand the word. Pedophile=Love For Children NOT Love Of Children aka sex with them. All parents are pedophiles because they love their kids. Media has corrupted the language to make it wanting to have sex with kids and most people are too ignorant to understand the word.

[–]modawg1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Would it be cheating if the dick was attached to a really hot transsexual?

[–]imjgaltstill2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Being gay is not a choice.

Having homosexual impulses is not a choice. Acting on them is.

[–][deleted] 11 points11 points11 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points4 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]imjgaltstill0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I give precisely zero shits until the proselytizing begins.

[–]Gstreetshit-3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

hows about incest between consenting adults?

[–]btcnr4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Just fine. Just don't make babies.

[–]Gstreetshit-3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Why not?

[–]btcnr8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Genetic defects much more likely.

[–]Gstreetshit-4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

But if they are consenting what does it matter? Who are you to stop consenting adults?

[–]btcnr4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It was a recommendation. I'm not stopping them.

I don't think most people want a deformed baby anyway.

[–]imjgaltstill0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How is babby formed?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So what?

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

An interesting concept pertaining to your "dare" is cognitive dissonance. If you were to suck dick for a month, your mind would theoretically eventually rationalize out an "attraction" of sorts.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRS734 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't know if that's true and I hope I never find out.

[–]kratol1 points 12 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Just like how many people do a job, but loathe it?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Stockholm syndrome is considered by some to be a form of cognitive dissonance.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I thinks its like 80-20 or 90-10. Most of the flamers and gay people you see are probably born that way. But there's a segment who may be gay by choice, traumatic experience, or prison.

[–]TheEveningSnooze0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Who can say? That said, I can understand the view about being "made gay".

If you're lonely enough, than sucking a dick (man or woman) to get some level of connection or to join a movement (like being gay is nowadays) is the easiest thing to do.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, plus his rationale for homophobia is stupid--gays have never and will never threaten steady population growth, nor should population growth even be a goal of the human race at this point (personally I think we had plenty of people back at 2 billion). If you really want to see what threatens population with, check out what's happening to heterosexual men in Japan.

[–]SlickJamesBitch0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I wish taste in food was a choice, I'd go to the beach and eat sand for every meal.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points2 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why shouldn't they? Every day in this fucking sub i read about differences between man and women.

[–]wakingslowdiver -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

male sexuality is fluid. Kinsey pointed that out a long time ago.

A lot of guys get uncomfortable about that fact, hence downvotes.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRS734 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What Kinsey "pointed out" was more a matter of giving imprimatur to his own proclivities by way of his flawed research than it was telling the truth about the vast majority of the population. Men aren't as gay as the modern social theorists want us to believe. And yes, women are in fact more psychologically inclined to dabble in same sex sexuality.

[–][deleted] -6 points-6 points-6 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Endorsed Contributornyrp0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think that this happens more often than you think. And a lot of guys choose not to do it again.

[+]1spicy_fries-12 points-11 points-10 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Whatever Macklemore. How about you go suck dick for a month and field report it. After all, you seem so comfortable with the idea of it.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Only half were born that way. The other half were just sucked into it somehow.

[+]1PaulRivers10-6 points-5 points-4 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Being gay is not a choice. If you think it is, I dare you to choose to become one for a month, go suck dick, and see if you enjoy it.

That's like saying that what food tastes good to you is not a choice. Yet it's "amazing" how people who grow in in America like American food, and people who grow up in Japan like Japanese food.

People who are gay should be able to live out their lifestyle in the same way that people who like racing cars, watching fringe films on their tv, or working the night shift at home depot do - without outside interference. No one should be going to jail, getting attacked, etc about it.

But it's gone far beyond that, into promoting it as superior to being straight. If you're a straight man - rapist! you're trying to "trick" a girl by inviting her over! Omg straight men bad! But if you're gay? Oh, that's wonderful, we should all be accepting and encouraging of you!

Why would one have to deal with societal critisism for choosing a low paying job vs a higher paying but boring corporate job, but expect everyone to be validating of social norms that result in relationships where they can't have their own kids?

Taken to the extreme, with current technology, society will continue to try and keep men and women apart (pregnancy), how do you think that's going to turn out when being gay is applauded and being straight results in nothing but negativity? You'll end up with the reverse of what you have now - 10% of people will be hardcore straight, the 90% of the rest of the population will go with any and every gay urge they have at any point in their life and all be gay.

It will just be easier. I remember how horny I was in high school - believe me, if getting with guys was an option for me (in that it interested me in any way whatsoever), I would have done it. I never would have gone back to the bullshit of dealing with girls if guys did it for me. Shit.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

That's like saying that what food tastes good to you is not a choice. Yet it's "amazing" how people who grow in in America like American food, and people who grow up in Japan like Japanese food.

How do you explain gay people born in places like Africa or Jamaica where there is an extremely anti-gay and patriarchal society? Or gay people born in the societies you people hold to such great heights?

[–]1PaulRivers10-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

First, your language is rhetorical, since gay people aren't "born" there are no gay people "born into" places.

Second, how do you explain that a few Americans like Lutefisk despite not being from Norway?

[–]smokeybehr6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

If you're pissing off HuffPo and Jezebel (appropriate name for that site) then you're doing something right.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points2 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]6TLaRm4g 8 points8 points8 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

He has some good points and some obviously wrong ones. He's overly opinionated and too closed minded imo. With the knowledge he possesses he makes too strong conclusions. Too strong in a sense that, given what he knows, is not enough to say what he is saying.

[–][deleted] -8 points-8 points-8 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points4 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Endorsed ContributorRS732 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

One of the questions: "In the U.K., feminist campaigners have been receiving very graphic and near-constant threats on social media of genital mutilation, sexual assault, rape, etc. What do you make of this?"

First of all, it's a cheap smear to try to attach this to Roosh and imply that non-subservience to feminism is a dangerous, rapacious evil that must be stamped out. Secondly, feminists have a long, extensive history of faking these kinds of threats themselves. Women in general frequently use fake victimhood to gain advantage of some kind. And feminists love to make themselves and other women the star martyrs of various dramatic episodes.

Feminists make plenty of their own threats against men and they are far more full of boiling, demented hatred of men than the so-called manosphere is of misogyny.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Thirdly, how's that Muslim population as a percentage nowadays in the UK?

[–]RG681 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The UK islam issue is hugely overblown by the press. Those guys are like our version of the Westboro Baptist Church.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If every man, woman, and child in the world turned homosexual tomorrow, the human species would cease to exist. Really, really think about that.

[–]Doctor_Mayhem0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I gotta say, Roosh fucking smashed that interview. Every one of his answers, I just couldn't think of a better way to put it.

Like this gem...

Isn’t it hypocritical to criticize “sluts” while making your living from teaching men to sleep with as many women as possible?

Men don't get to choose what they get from women. In the last 20 years, women announced they don't wanna get married right away, they want to focus on their job, have fun. So I'm teaching guys to get something anyway. I could stay home and cry that no woman wants to marry me, or find out what I have to do to take advantage of this new goal women have.

[–]dvrzero0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I meant to reply further down.

I thought the whole word association between gay and paedophile was broken years ago.

All of this shit was taking one thing the article mentioned and the argument bugged me.

[–]Dealbreaker-Jones0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

He said a lot of good stuff but that Alpha vs Beta video was pretty cringy.

[+][deleted] 12 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–][deleted] -7 points-7 points-7 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] -3 points-3 points-3 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 9 points9 points9 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points4 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points2 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points2 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]ohsweetword1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The guy has some balls. Great read.

[+]watersign-8 points-7 points-6 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

i stand 100% behind this guy. Homosexuality IS fucking deviant and wrong and we're supposed to accept it while this vile putrid filth is in our education system today. People like Roosh are the Martyrs of the freeworld

[–]1spicy_fries-3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

And you'll be a martyr in this subreddit for holding that view. I swear to god.

What I don't get is why the social justice warriors in this sub feel the need to speak up on behalf of homosexuality. They act like it is their duty. They must protect homos from big meanies.

Homos are not going to step in and defend hetros. Never gonna happen.

If you are hetro, let the gays fight their own fight.

But thing is that we aren't even antigay. We are just not "pro-gay". Doesn't matter. White knights still want to burn us at the stake.

[–]Modredpillschool2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Nah, I stand by Roosh's sentiments as well. They're not unwelcome here.

[–]1spicy_fries-4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Awesome. Good to hear.

[–]Modredpillschool-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm a big fan of his. I think he's more emotionally honest than people would like- you get these faux-alpha-bro types here that claim he (or others) aren't alpha enough just because they illustrate their mental thought processes. I think it's a shame that those trolls do that- I like hearing his through process on his outings, his self doubt, his understanding, his decision making, it's very raw.

Anybody claiming to be successful without an inner monologue like his is trying to sell you some snake oil. Roosh admits his own shortcomings and owns it.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRS732 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't see how anyone who actually understands what you're saying here could vote it down. whatthefuck. It's just saying he's completely candid about his thought processes and his decisions that are based on what he thinks is happening in the world around him. I wish more people were that honest.

[–]1spicy_fries0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's not from our sub. TheBluePill linked these comments and are downvoting.

[–]watersign0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

huh..i dont see anyone protecting fags from meanies....i personally have no problems with gays but i dont think we should be glorifying their way of life

[–]TRP VanguardCyralea-2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

TIL, I look similar to Roosh.

I like a lot of Roosh's ideas (and reject obviously incorrect ones, like his views on homosexuality). That said, I'm not sure he's doing much good by doing these kinds of public interviews. He's not nearly eloquent enough to make a good figurehead for a movement. I doubt he cares to be one, but it's trending that way.

It creates a lot more cognitive dissonance in a dissenters mind when their opposition provides cogent, well-articulated points.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Maybe, but at least he's giving out the brutal truths without regard for the PC witch hunt.

He could stick to solely the PUA shit but he's going an extra mile. I can respect that.

[+]fin8 -11 points-10 points-9 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Roosh is a douche bag and proof that it's all a numbers game.. hope he's making decent coin off this schtick

[–]hamstercide5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sorry but isn't this guy's material in the sidebar?

[–]jacobman1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I'm not a fan of the interview, but I would say you're jumping the gun if you think that's proof it's a numbers game.

[–]fin8 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I just don't think he has much game aside from sheer number of approaches, I've read his stuff.. not particularly impressed

[–]jacobman2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's different than basing your opinion off of that article, which doesn't really talk about seduction techniques at all.

[–]fin8 -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not basing opinion off article.. i didn't even read it

[–]Modredpillschool-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think Roosh is an incredibly smart pragmatist- maybe it is a numbers game.. but he has been very specific about adjusting variables when approaching the game. His work has done a lot in my life, and I know a lot of other people who have been positively affected.

[–]ThisisMalta-2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

He states, "They don’t reproduce on their own, so in the long run you’ll have to use immigration to make up for that downfall caused by your millions of happy gay couples".

Regardless of traditional marriage views, that's pretty unrealistic; considering there are millions of foster kids needing homes today, and a growing population.

[–][deleted] -17 points-17 points-17 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 12 points12 points12 points 12 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[removed]

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[removed]

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[removed]

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[removed]

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[removed]

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[removed]

[–]puaSenator-1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Jesus Christ that acting was horrid.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter