[Cr33pin]

ITs not every day I scroll through my facebook feed and see a big photo of Roosh.... followed by some lovely comments

"He wants to do that because the only way he can get laid is by raping someone" comment from a guy

"This guy will be alone forever" comment from a fairly hot fuckable blonde

"Someone should rape him" OP, uglyish single mom.. looks like she may have been cute if you would have put effort into it years ago

"Maybe we should make law that if a girl says a guy assaulted her then he automatically gets his penis cut off. THIS WAY a guy will look out for himself more and only have sex with someone he cares for or has a relationship with. Sure there will be some "incidents" but other guys will learn from that.... Maybe I should run for congress.... What a butt clown" Also posted from hot fuckable blonde

[Seamus]

Clearly this is satire, and it's kind of worrying to see some posters unironically defending the "legalize rape" idea. That's like people reading Swift, then saying "well you know what, eating kids might actually be a good idea if we just tweak it a bit."

The whole point of satire like this is to present an outrageous idea in such a way as to make you reconsider underlying principles (i.e. sex is a two-way street, girls should be held as responsible for their actions as men). It's hilarious to see these feminists not realize it's satire. Let's not make the same mistake on the forum.

[Roosh]

My response video:

[Private Man]

Excellent video.

Nice hair.

Is your beard creeping up even higher on your cheekbones?

Also, is Paul Elam trying to reach out to the PUA community? I was stunned with your interview (by Obsidian, of all people!) on AVfM.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(02-20-2015 03:42 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

My response video:

I like the video and the response, but while your solution is one that would eliminate all incidences of fake rape and it might decrease some real ones, the reality is that legalizing anything negative is never a good idea.

The measures for rape just need to go back a century - every woman who enters a private room with a man has no reason to be offended if he takes her even violently. This includes also all relationship rapes - if your husband or boyfriend has sex with you against your will, then you are free to leave him, but it's not a pussy pass to accuse an ex-husband of rape to get full custody (and full child-support) for their children.

While the proposal makes sense from a viral PR viewpoint, the reality is that such a law can be misused in so many ways that the impacts to society would be manifold - gang rapes, male rape, child abuse, bestiality rape, hypnotic suggestion rape, extension of terrains of "private property", private armies, private securities, professional rapists, either more marriages or hardly any marriages since women would not trust men, sons could legally rape their mothers, fathers could rape their daughters or family members/ daughters in law etc.

It is similar to a proposal from the movie THE PURGE in order solve unemployment and overpopulation. You never want to legalize any crime, just put some decent common sense into it. You know - the same common sense the law had in the West decades ago. The judge asked if the lady entered the gentleman's house at her own free will at 10 p.m. If she said yes, well then the case was closed, because no sane and decent lady goes to a man's house at night to discuss Shakespeare. It was understood that sex could happen. The old generations knew that, but with the current crazies all common sense is thrown out of the window.

[Sp5]

The lawyer Harvey Silverglate, who is with the Foundation of Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), wrote a piece on the hysteria in the Boston Globe:

Harvey Silverglate, The New Panic : Campus Sex Assaults

Edited, there is more in the piece:

Quote:

THE CAMPUS sexual assault panic — one of many runaway social epidemics in our nation’s history that have ruined innocent lives and corrupted justice — has now reached its peak. A return to sanity is called for before more wreckage occurs. . . .

My own first memory of a similar panic is the hunt for Communists in America in the period following World War II. . . .

A more bizarre panic emerged decades later in an unlikely place — child daycare centers. In the early 1980s, reports of sexual abuse by child care workers were picked up by national news outlets and struck fear into parents around the country. Allegations of sexual molestation, including rape, allegedly committed on young children by teachers and school employees, flooded police stations. These accusations often crossed over from the improbable to the utterly fantastic (sometimes with a Satanic bent). But a panoply of unscientific physical and psychological tests, bolstered by highly suggestive child interview methods, proved sufficient to land a still-uncounted number of innocent men and women in prison. . . .

The latest national hysteria over campus sexual assault combines aspects of its predecessors: the salacious outrage that characterized the daycare sex panic and the dubious federal stamp of approval that made McCarthyism’s excesses so dangerous. Spectacular — but widely disputed — statistics are touted: 1 in 5 women is sexually assaulted in college, 1 in 3 male students is a potential rapist. The rhetoric popularized by mattress protests and awareness documentaries is a simple one: “Believe the accuser!” . . .

What’s more, the definition of “sexual assault” has become so broad as to encompass nearly all romantic contact. A sexual advance is considered “unwelcome” on subjective, rather than objective, grounds. In other words, if a complainant feels she was violated, then she was. . . .

The situation on college campuses has become so dire that civil libertarians are calling for sexual assault investigations to be left to police and prosecutors. Despite the fact that conviction in a criminal court carries severe sentences and other harsh ramifications, frustrated and fearful students, parents, and lawyers seem prepared to risk criminal convictions in their search for investigatory and prosecutorial fairness.

If the past is prologue, it is almost certain that the current campus sexual assault madness will burn itself out, leaving in its wake the wreckage of many young lives. My concern is how long it will be before sanity and decency return.

Graphic with the piece was pretty good:

[kosko]

Just bring back the death sentence for rape as it used to be sentenced in America up until the 70s. The irony it was femenist who started the charge to get it repelaed. The crux was that if rape could be tied to ethier a man or a woman then women would be executed also and femenists thought that was unfair as they believewoman "can not rape".

Back in the day if you didn't get mobbed or lynched by men in the community if you raped a woman you would get it on the other side in prison. Only the true crazy men of the world would attempt it and they still are the few who attempt it today, but this has always been a small percent who would have no trouble killing or raping and are totally detached from the world. Rape has always had bad negative stigma tied to it. Men for the longest time heavily enforced it and it was women who pushed for more lenient punishment out of pure selfishness in our modern age. In many other countries you get executed for rape.

Now its getting to the point where women take classes on 'Consensual Non-Concent" to learn how to play rape games in the bedroom. Because of course as I always have said women secretly want it. It is thier most evil and dark desire with the biggest negative consequences. Because if you match up the climate in this modern age with women with impunity to chase you see the circus we have today. Why do women moan that rapist are around evrey corner yet sign up to learn how to recreate rape in the bedroom? Why do women have rape fsntasies when polled? Why do they consume media and books that detail aggressive sexual acts, many violent?

If women were serious about ending rape culture they would march for it to return as a capital crime. They are all full of shit on this. The biology of female anotomny, thier actions, and womens actions in bed all descredit them.

[Dr. Howard]

(02-20-2015 03:42 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

My response video:

The quality of your speaking since starting your official youtube videos has gone up substantially. There's alot more energy vs. deadpan clown roosh style.

[Suits]

(02-21-2015 07:36 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

The quality of your speaking since starting your official youtube videos has gone up substantially. There's alot more energy vs. deadpan clown roosh style.

On a related note, the lighting in this video is excellent and the resulting video, despite being shot in a plain and unadorned apartment, still comes across as very professional.

I'm pretty impressed.

[Sailor]

(02-20-2015 11:07 AM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  

(02-20-2015 01:12 AM)enderilluminatus Wrote:  



s.e. smith is a writer, agitator, and commentator based in Northern California. Ou focuses on social issues, particularly gender, prison reform, disability rights, environmental justice, queerness, class, and the intersections thereof, and has a special interest in rural subjects. smith delights in amplifying the voices of those who are often silenced and challenging dominant ideas about justice, equality, and liberation. smith’s international publication credits include work for the Sydney Sun-Herald, The Guardian, and AlterNet, among many other progressive news outlets and magazines. Ou is most happy when ou has an opportunity to rile people up while also informing them about ongoing issues in the world around them, and adores any opportunity to discuss pop culture. Assisted by Loki the cat and a flock of roaming chickens, smith lives in Fort Bragg, California.

I honestly can't tell what gender this organism is.

.

Its own words :

"Your gender identity is a pretty intimate part of who you are, and an especially important aspect of how you relate to intimate partners; you want to date someone who respects and understands your gender, and who is attracted to people of your gender. Not being about to describe and define your gender means missing out on matches when people perform searches by "gender," and it requires you to add an awkward note to your profile about your gender, which makes you stand out as an oddity, something peculiar, instead of a normal human being"

[MMX2010]

(02-20-2015 12:57 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  

Times change, Poaster. Things change. We have to be responsive to conditions on the ground.

Quintus, I agree with everything you said, but I omitted most of your argument for readability.

You may not have noticed the irony of Poaster's complaint. Poaster (now banned; thanks Roosh) was an active member of this forum when he complained, and therefore could've shaped this forum into his ideal image by travelling and posting excellent data sheets.

So Poaster was trying to use negativity and complaints to make others no longer be negative complainers. Good riddance.

[Krusyos]

Jordan Owen bashes Roosh in this hour-long rant.

[demolition]

(02-21-2015 07:36 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

The quality of your speaking since starting your official youtube videos has gone up substantially. There's alot more energy vs. deadpan clown roosh style.

I agree. Roosh has a very confident, masculine style of speaking regardless though. You can tell that he has faced rejection many times and overcome any anxiety over it. He's also a very thoughtful guy who has carefully considered his perspectives. That shows in how he communicates directly and doesn't rely on a lot of the rhetorical tricks that you will see from other people (especially on YouTube): Snarky asides or other 'jokes', exaggerated reactions & body language, constant camera cuts. It's actually refreshing in its honesty.

(02-20-2015 04:16 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(02-20-2015 03:42 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

My response video:

I like the video and the response, but while your solution is one that would eliminate all incidences of fake rape and it might decrease some real ones, the reality is that legalizing anything negative is never a good idea. ...

While the proposal makes sense from a viral PR viewpoint, the reality is that such a law can be misused in so many ways that the impacts to society would be manifold - gang rapes, male rape, child abuse, bestiality rape, hypnotic suggestion rape, extension of terrains of "private property", private armies, private securities, professional rapists, either more marriages or hardly any marriages since women would not trust men, sons could legally rape their mothers, fathers could rape their daughters or family members/ daughters in law etc.

... You never want to legalize any crime, just put some decent common sense into it. You know - the same common sense the law had in the West decades ago. The judge asked if the lady entered the gentleman's house at her own free will at 10 p.m. If she said yes, well then the case was closed, because no sane and decent lady goes to a man's house at night to discuss Shakespeare. It was understood that sex could happen. The old generations knew that, but with the current crazies all common sense is thrown out of the window.

Approaching this proposal from a legality-minded angle is probably not the correct one.

Human beings aren't machines of pure logic, and expecting the law to be 100% airtight logic that accounts for every scenario is, in my eyes, a fool's errand. What we do need, as you say, is common sense. Sadly the dominant legal mentality in Western culture is very Asperger's-like in its focus on certain aspects of law, to the detriment of understanding of the basic natures of human beings.

What we end up with is law that is written not for our actual society that exists, but law that attempts to criminalize every society but the one that certain specific agitators want to exist. In this sense, the law is less about creating a stable social structure for human beings to live within and more about signalling their vision of the ideal society. If a person argues for a more 'perfect' society (according to the socially accepted dogma), this must mean they are a better and holier person, right? Well, that's the subconscious mechanism at work.

But human beings are never going to be ideal, especially not when law is attempting to cater to complex and irreducibly conflicting female imperatives. So what we have by pursuing these particular notions of ideal society is a deeply unjust society that hurts everyone.

[magicone]

(02-20-2015 05:30 PM)kosko Wrote:  

Just bring back the death sentence for rape as it used to be sentenced in America up until the 70s.

If women were serious about ending rape culture they would march for it to return as a capital crime.

kosko comment is probably the most bluepill that I read on RVF.

Death sentence for rape ??? WTF... that would mean that every day
a thousands of men would be executed just because they had sex and the girl they had sex with didn´t sign "Yes I am sober, Yes I want to have sex in every position, Yes I consent" notarial agreement with lawyers besides.

Within the modern world that we live in, somewhere between 60% and 80% of rape accusations today are false.

Let´s take the example of any prostitute. She has sex with 1000 men.
And everything is ok.

But whenever a man has sex with her, he should be at risk of death sentence. Really ?!

Especially in a world where number 1 most common fantasy of all girls worldwide is rape:

http://www.lovepanky.com/sensual-tease/f...-fantasies

[Slim Shady]

Great work Roosh! People have obviously not gotten the sarcasm/rhetoric of your original post. Your response video obviously makes it clear and is very well thought out. People who have harped against the original post will obviously conveniently ignore it because the dark hairy boogeyman can never have rational thoughts. It has to be more "There goes that crazy rapist Roosh again!" and it's funny that you are providing them with more fuel to bitch about consciously.

We who know what you are actually trying to say get this, but is it also not good to put more of your logical rational points out there for people to see directly? A smart man [or even woman] questioning the world on their own will read your points and turn to the side of right. I just get worried sometimes that these rational people who don't know about you or the community will see your viral type articles and get the wrong idea from a first impression and be turned off....

I don't know, maybe what you did is the right thing because it puts the name out there.

Again, great video! Well done.

P.S. Your hair needs more play. More comments on Roosh's hair please. It is gold, literally.

[Geomann180]

(02-21-2015 01:41 PM)magicone Wrote:  

kosko comment is probably the most bluepill that I read on RVF.

Death sentence for rape ??? WTF... that would mean that every day
a thousands of men would be executed just because they had sex and the girl they had sex with didn´t sign "Yes I am sober, Yes I want to have sex in every position, Yes I consent" notarial agreement with lawyers besides.

Within the modern world that we live in, somewhere between 60% and 80% of rape accusations today are false.

Let´s take the example of any prostitute. She has sex with 1000 men.
And everything is ok.

But whenever a man has sex with her, he should be at risk of death sentence. Really ?!

Especially in a world where number 1 most common fantasy of all girls worldwide is rape:

http://www.lovepanky.com/sensual-tease/f...-fantasies

Oh come on!

That's not a fair reply to Kosko's post. You took everything at face value (on a thread about satire!) and discounted the implied assumptions.

Let's examine his points.

Quote:

Back in the day if you didn't get mobbed or lynched by men in the community if you raped a woman you would get it on the other side in prison. Only the true crazy men of the world would attempt it and they still are the few who attempt it today, but this has always been a small percent who would have no trouble killing or raping and are totally detached from the world. Rape has always had bad negative stigma tied to it. Men for the longest time heavily enforced it and it was women who pushed for more lenient punishment out of pure selfishness in our modern age. In many other countries you get executed for rape.

Only a crazy man would rape a girl because there are enough outlets for it in past society - prositutes and wives (and occasionaly sluts). Only a CRAZY community of men would lynch a man for the crime of raping a woman on basis of the word of either his wife, a prostitute, or the town bike. In those other foreign countries, I bet you have a more stringent due process on rape than the US does. Women's word is not simply taken as gospel there (girl who cried wolf and all that).

Now you said:

Quote:

Especially in a world where number 1 most common fantasy of all girls worldwide is rape:

http://www.lovepanky.com/sensual-tease/f...-fantasies

And Kosko said.

Quote:

Now its getting to the point where women take classes on 'Consensual Non-Concent" to learn how to play rape games in the bedroom. Because of course as I always have said women secretly want it. It is their most evil and dark desire with the biggest negative consequences. Because if you match up the climate in this modern age with women with impunity to chase you see the circus we have today. Why do women moan that rapist are around every corner yet sign up to learn how to recreate rape in the bedroom? Why do women have rape fantasies when polled? Why do they consume media and books that detail aggressive sexual acts, many violent?

Clearly you would have to take all that into account when you create such a law, such as line of questioning for due process so that no one who is instantly accused is immediately guilt.

I can conclude that you either did not read Kosko's post properly and in which case your reading comprehension sucks, or you intentionally misrepresented his post and ideas on purprose. I see you have two courses of action; you can either lurk more to get a better handle on forum etiquette (and work on that reading) or you can:



G

[AnonymousBosch]

3 am here. Just returned from a late night bang with a lot on my mind. I've no idea if this will end up making sense, but wanted to get it out of my brain before I hit the pit.

I've mentioned before a main driving force of female behaviour is the need to subsume their personality and act on pure emotional drives: to 'become' emotion itself.

Faced with having to control their behaviour when working towards a goal, their natural instinct will be to think it's 'too hard', and give in. It's the moment of 'giving in' they crave, not mastering control, because it gives them permission to indulge their vices.

You know the mantra from women: "It's so hard being good." It's why it's easy to market to them by preying on themes of indulgence, and suggesting they 'deserve it'. It's why their sexual desires are fiercer and more depraved than men.

This, not the patriarchy, is the reason for eternal female mediocrity in any field, because there is no-one who will respect a man, and carry his burden for him if he chooses to gives up. Women know they are excused from judgement, and know some stupid man will pick up their slack.

If you spend any amount of time around children playing, you'll eventually hear a girl emit a blood-curdling scream that fires up your protective instinct, only to discover they're screaming over nothing. If there's other girls around, the scream is catching, and they'll all scream. They're learning: unrestricted emotion is a thrill to them. Of course, to us, it's a sign of danger, and we come running. They learn further: unrestricted emotion gets us attention.

As they move into their early teen years, this takes on a sexualised element, and girls will gather in groups to scream, cry and tear their hair out over boys, usually celebrities and bands. They might convince themselves that they feel some deep emotional connection with some random musician on the other side of the globe who in unaware of their existence, but it is simply permission to indulge in hysterical emotion.

The Beatles once said that Beatlemania had nothing to with them: 'They were just using us as an excuse to go mad.' And they should know.

In the later teen years, and onwards this transitions into managing real relationships: relationship dramas. They get their thrill from the instability of a relationship - nothing turns a woman off quicker than stability and knowing her man adores her - and are always ready to push it to the brink of destruction to feed their voracious need for emotion drama. This is why you cultivate unstable relationships if you want to create deep obsession from a woman: they'll tell themselves it's the man, but it's just the drama they're in love with.

In the wider world, men long to build, and women to destroy, and so it goes in relationships. She gets permission to eat Hagan-Daaz and to become the sole conversational focus of her friends during the 'crisis', and some hardcore make up sex to resolve it. Once again, she learns, drama is good.

Female entertainment functions as emotional porn. 'Twilight' is just a fantasy of the hottest boy in the coolest clique in school chosing the reader substitute as his girlfriend. Groups of women quickly return to a feral state in a situation that allows them to indulge emotion: note the recent stories of women acting out watching 'Magic Mike', or glassing a man during '50 Shades Of Grey'. One of my mates is a male stripper, and the scenes I've seen women enacting in a social group at his shows are animalistic at their core. It's never about the triggering excuse, it will always be about permission to become hysteria.

That's my basic theory that I use for sexual seduction and to manage relationships. As corny as it sounds out of context, one of my tactics to create quicker intimacy is a suggestion that she doesn't seem to fit with her friends, and that they seem a bit ... straightlaced, whereas she seems more spirited.

That was the traditional growth process for women, but what happens with Millennials, when women are too socially-awkward and loathe themselves to such deep degrees that attracting a man for a relationship to provide them with the drama they need is impossible.

I wonder if this is part of the reason behind every girl suddenly coming out as a rape survivor. Their self-loathing creates a desire to be viewed as damaged by those around them, and excuses them from their lack of romantic success and emotional connection with a man. It's the same instinct that makes them hack off their hair. "I'm a (strangely-unashamed) rape victim. I am damaged: so it's not weird that I'm alone."

But this is what I was thinking tonight and I banged another idiotic 20-something girl, so hyped up her YOLO attitude that she was forward enough to be pulling out my cock in a public park at 2 in the morning, not caring who saw us, wanting to give in and become her raw sexual desire without thought for consequence or public decency, despite her fake porn star attitude and insincere gasping about needing my cock 'sooooo bad' guaranteeing that we will never truly emotionally connect, because I just wonder how she learned to perform:

What influence does the internet have on a woman's need for drama? How does it risk fundamentally-changing them?

I mentioned long ago that I suspected the cultivation of social media likes from multiple men could provide so much more positive self-affirmation and ego boosting than a relationship with any one man could ever hope provide, and, as such, connected women eventually won't desire them.

But tonight, expanding on that thought, what if Millennial women have become damaged even further by connectivity?

What if one man can no longer provide their need for emotional drama either? What if women aren't going to be drawn to relationships because there's always a hysterical group of schoolyard girls screaming online, offering her a chance to join in and get a sweet, sweet spike of raw fury? To cry 'literal tears' and to share the outrage with everyone in her circle so everyone cries with her. Where women are screaming for the sake of screaming, of being outraged to be outraged, to become anger and fury and the community of voices making the drama so much more intense and every tiny imagined slight and offense into the goddamn end of the world until they have no emotional setting left but 'nuclear', because they're trained themselves out of realistic levels of emotion, the same way they seem to have no setting anymore between raging slut and outraged prude.

Then I noticed just how consistently ugly the screaming women always are, and could only come to the most likely conclusion: Social Justice isn't their cause: it's simply a boyfriend substitute.

Man, I'd better get some sleep.

[pheonix500000]

(02-22-2015 11:36 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

3 am here. Just returned from a late night bang with a lot on my mind. I've no idea if this will end up making sense, but wanted to get it out of my brain before I hit the pit.

I've mentioned before a main driving force of female behaviour is the need to subsume their personality and act on pure emotional drives: to 'become' emotion itself.

Faced with having to control their behaviour when working towards a goal, their natural instinct will be to think it's 'too hard', and give in. It's the moment of 'giving in' they crave, not mastering control, because it gives them permission to indulge their vices.

You know the mantra from women: "It's so hard being good." It's why it's easy to market to them by preying on themes of indulgence, and suggesting they 'deserve it'. It's why their sexual desires are fiercer and more depraved than men.

This, not the patriarchy, is the reason for eternal female mediocrity in any field, because there is no-one who will respect a man, and carry his burden for him if he chooses to gives up. Women know they are excused from judgement, and know some stupid man will pick up their slack.

If you spend any amount of time around children playing, you'll eventually hear a girl emit a blood-curdling scream that fires up your protective instinct, only to discover they're screaming over nothing. If there's other girls around, the scream is catching, and they'll all scream. They're learning: unrestricted emotion is a thrill to them. Of course, to us, it's a sign of danger, and we come running. They learn further: unrestricted emotion gets us attention.

As they move into their early teen years, this takes on a sexualised element, and girls will gather in groups to scream, cry and tear their hair out over boys, usually celebrities and bands. They might convince themselves that they feel some deep emotional connection with some random musician on the other side of the globe who in unaware of their existence, but it is simply permission to indulge in hysterical emotion.

The Beatles once said that Beatlemania had nothing to with them: 'They were just using us as an excuse to go mad.' And they should know.

In the later teen years, and onwards this transitions into managing real relationships: relationship dramas. They get their thrill from the instability of a relationship - nothing turns a woman off quicker than stability and knowing her man adores her - and are always ready to push it to the brink of destruction to feed their voracious need for emotion drama. This is why you cultivate unstable relationships if you want to create deep obsession from a woman: they'll tell themselves it's the man, but it's just the drama they're in love with.

In the wider world, men long to build, and women to destroy, and so it goes in relationships. She gets permission to eat Hagan-Daaz and to become the sole conversational focus of her friends during the 'crisis', and some hardcore make up sex to resolve it. Once again, she learns, drama is good.

Female entertainment functions as emotional porn. 'Twilight' is just a fantasy of the hottest boy in the coolest clique in school chosing the reader substitute as his girlfriend. Groups of women quickly return to a feral state in a situation that allows them to indulge emotion: note the recent stories of women acting out watching 'Magic Mike', or glassing a man during '50 Shades Of Grey'. One of my mates is a male stripper, and the scenes I've seen women enacting in a social group at his shows are animalistic at their core. It's never about the triggering excuse, it will always be about permission to become hysteria.

That's my basic theory that I use for sexual seduction and to manage relationships. As corny as it sounds out of context, one of my tactics to create quicker intimacy is a suggestion that she doesn't seem to fit with her friends, and that they seem a bit ... straightlaced, whereas she seems more spirited.

That was the traditional growth process for women, but what happens with Millennials, when women are too socially-awkward and loathe themselves to such deep degrees that attracting a man for a relationship to provide them with the drama they need is impossible.

I wonder if this is part of the reason behind every girl suddenly coming out as a rape survivor. Their self-loathing creates a desire to be viewed as damaged by those around them, and excuses them from their lack of romantic success and emotional connection with a man. It's the same instinct that makes them hack off their hair. "I'm a (strangely-unashamed) rape victim. I am damaged: so it's not weird that I'm alone."

But this is what I was thinking tonight and I banged another idiotic 20-something girl, so hyped up her YOLO attitude that she was forward enough to be pulling out my cock in a public park at 2 in the morning, not caring who saw us, wanting to give in and become her raw sexual desire without thought for consequence or public decency, despite her fake porn star attitude and insincere gasping about needing my cock 'sooooo bad' guaranteeing that we will never truly emotionally connect, because I just wonder how she learned to perform:

What influence does the internet have on a woman's need for drama? How does it risk fundamentally-changing them?

I mentioned long ago that I suspected the cultivation of social media likes from multiple men could provide so much more positive self-affirmation and ego boosting than a relationship with any one man could ever hope provide, and, as such, connected women eventually won't desire them.

But tonight, expanding on that thought, what if Millennial women have become damaged even further by connectivity?

What if one man can no longer provide their need for emotional drama either? What if women aren't going to be drawn to relationships because there's always a hysterical group of schoolyard girls screaming online, offering her a chance to join in and get a sweet, sweet spike of raw fury? To cry 'literal tears' and to share the outrage with everyone in her circle so everyone cries with her. Where women are screaming for the sake of screaming, of being outraged to be outraged, to become anger and fury and the community of voices making the drama so much more intense and every tiny imagined slight and offense into the goddamn end of the world until they have no emotional setting left but 'nuclear', because they're trained themselves out of realistic levels of emotion, the same way they seem to have no setting anymore between raging slut and outraged prude.

Then I noticed just how consistently ugly the screaming women always are, and could only come to the most likely conclusion: Social Justice isn't their cause: it's simply a boyfriend substitute.

Man, I'd better get some sleep.

You are onto something big and if you truly think about it this is truly a scary scenario.

[Deluge]

[philosophical_recovery]

Holy shit, AnonymousBosch, that was brilliant.

Your closer, in particular, is prescient.

(02-22-2015 11:36 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

What influence does the internet have on a woman's need for drama? How does it risk fundamentally-changing them?

I mentioned long ago that I suspected the cultivation of social media likes from multiple men could provide so much more positive self-affirmation and ego boosting than a relationship with any one man could ever hope provide, and, as such, connected women eventually won't desire them.

But tonight, expanding on that thought, what if Millennial women have become damaged even further by connectivity?

What if one man can no longer provide their need for emotional drama either? What if women aren't going to be drawn to relationships because there's always a hysterical group of schoolyard girls screaming online, offering her a chance to join in and get a sweet, sweet spike of raw fury? To cry 'literal tears' and to share the outrage with everyone in her circle so everyone cries with her. Where women are screaming for the sake of screaming, of being outraged to be outraged, to become anger and fury and the community of voices making the drama so much more intense and every tiny imagined slight and offense into the goddamn end of the world until they have no emotional setting left but 'nuclear', because they're trained themselves out of realistic levels of emotion, the same way they seem to have no setting anymore between raging slut and outraged prude.

Then I noticed just how consistently ugly the screaming women always are, and could only come to the most likely conclusion: Social Justice isn't their cause: it's simply a boyfriend substitute.

Man, I'd better get some sleep.

I like to mock women that sit there on their phones and Facebook/swipe/attention whore at social events. Sometimes it stirs up conversation and gets them tingly. Other times, it doesn't. As of late, the younger girls (18-22) prefer the comfort of their FacePhones. Then, I realized, Facebook has been around a decade. These girls have likely spent a significant proportion of their puberty being hard wired into attention getting via social media.

The other realization then dawned on me about my generation (older, but still with internet access) having high speed internet porn access during puberty. There's been the whole NoFap (very minor) rebound from that phenomenon, where men realize how bad it has been to have been stimulated by digital screens for so long. It's way, way more obvious to the blue-pilled society because masturbation usually has ejacuation, usually makes a mess, and has always had a stigma against it until very recently.

But, look at these girls. They're being stimulated by digital screens during the major developmental period of their young adulthood, fixing behavior patterns on what stimulates them. The backlash against it will probably never be even as strong as the pathetic NoFap movement, because the effects are less obvious and clearly misogynist . But will there start to be a No-iWhore movement? Or NoSelfie, NoLikeWhore, NoSnapChat, I don't know, some kind of movement to help counteract this? How can it get kicked off?

Anyway, sorry for the derail. That was an interesting post.

[Wahawahwah]

Holy Fuck AB.

I just leveled up after reading that.

[Deluge]

That was too good for a random post deep into a thread.

[kbell]

I believe that's the same Jordan that was working with Aurini to make some gamergate documentary. Why would you rant for an hour? I'm sure if you wanted you could make the point in 20 minutes or less. His camera angle is disorienting as well, its a dutch angle. I expect a monster to appear or something bad to happen in the shot.

[Roosh]

Someone needs to go through AB's best posts and put them in a PDF.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(02-22-2015 11:36 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

...

I wonder if this is part of the reason behind every girl suddenly coming out as a rape survivor. Their self-loathing creates a desire to be viewed as damaged by those around them, and excuses them from their lack of romantic success and emotional connection with a man. It's the same instinct that makes them hack off their hair. "I'm a (strangely-unashamed) rape victim. I am damaged: so it's not weird that I'm alone."
...

Then I noticed just how consistently ugly the screaming women always are, and could only come to the most likely conclusion: Social Justice isn't their cause: it's simply a boyfriend substitute.

Man, I'd better get some sleep.

That's some bloody good post with some excellent insights into the female nature.

It helps to explain their mediocrity in achievements, why Deep Conversion Game is always a roller-coaster of emotions that you engage in consciously (Dark Triad guys do it naturally but overdo it often), why rape, SJW craze and Tumblr feminism are just giving her the admission of creating drama in her life.

Whether she will become broken by it? Yes - she will as some women have noticed that all their fuckbuddy relationships and being plates to Alphas makes them bitter and jaded over time. http://elitedaily.com/dating/fck-closure...es/940622/ They are calling those guys Almost-Exes here as they get emotionally attached, while the Alpha fucks many of them. Of course during that time they ignore the hordes of Betas or are even in real relationships with Betas while still thinking of their exciting Alphas.

I read once that the reason that women desire the hysteria in their lives is because women are created that way to be mothers early. Think about it - evolutionary speaking as soon as a woman was around 15-16, she would quickly become a mother and would have plenty of drama with her children who would keep her busy. Then her man would keep her barefoot and pregnant for the next years and she would get all the additional drama she needed. By the time she was in her late 20s, she would have calmed down and bonded with her husband and the children who would have forced her to become more reliable.

While we men might benefit from that early marriage experience too, we can equally be happy being a soldier and mercenary for 15 years and settling at 30+. We could still be happy and content with our young wife forgetting about our previous women and exciting battles, while women lack that psychological makeup as they try to emulate us and only end up alone, bitter and unable to bond with any man who does not give them expert Deep Conversion Game with an emotional roller-coaster.