[AnonymousBosch]

^^ I've seen that 'Strap-On' picture 100 times, and have never noticed his eyes until now.

They're dead again, but in a different way to The Girl In Question. Her Dead Eyes are those of a Narcissist who believes we all exist to fulfil her wishes for us. She doesn't care what happens to others: she is all.

The dead eyes here are of a man who seems to have no interior life. He doesn't care what happens to himself. I've seen this look when trying to rehabilitate abused dogs.

Is it the absence of thought that makes them creepy? Where they've never developed Critical Thinking skills and never, even once, questioned what they were told, but simply believed it was Right and Just?

[Basil Ransom]

Reason.com rips her a new one for saying reducing prison sentences is BAD if it means less spending on poor people. And she goes on to contradict herself a few paragraphs later

http://reason.com/blog/2015/03/06/christ...er#comment

[infowarrior1]

(02-26-2015 09:45 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(02-26-2015 09:20 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

What can I say? I am a sucker for innocent faces that should stay that way - thus I am perfectly willing to provide a vitamin-rich face-mask.

I'm not attacking you mate, just saying, be wary. I've seen 'innocent' faces with tears in their eyes accuse family members of sexual molestation and then instantly drop the performance when called on their bullshit, with no shame or guilt whatsoever, too busy thinking of another angle that might work.

I've seen 'innocent' faces that have abandoned their babies, assaulted the elderly or cut the throats of their boyfriends.

I've seen 'innocent' faces harass other peers to a degree that their victims end up institutionalised, on the verge of suicide.

I've seen video evidence of them punching themselves to create believable bruises, or slashing their own bodies to say they were attacked.

Even after all this, those in power look at their baby faces, make excuses for their behaviour and don't punish them.

It's interesting I noted her dead eyes. Quintus also noted them a few pages later.

Eyes are the windows of the soul even if she deceives with her "innocent'' face

[Libertas]

(02-25-2015 09:44 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Those eyes betray a tad bit of instability.

She's attractive, but would not bang.

[Mortician]

It is as if they dont truly understand what rape is. Rape is about power, but not in the way the feminist think it is.

If a man puts a gun to a woman's head and forcibly inserted himself. That is real rape. Because the sex act with gun to the head, is done under the condition of massive power imbalance(due to the gun to the head) -- this is rape -- this eliminates consent.

When and where there is a massive power imbalance between two or more parties involved in any activities, it veers beyond consent, it veers into abuse.

This is also why it is wrong for an adult to sleep with underage children or for a adult to sleep with a severely mentally retarded 30 yr old. Even though the 30yr old is an adult, her mental handicaps renders her incapable of making informed decision, hence this creates a massive power imbalance with an average adult. This is why having sex with a mentally handicap adult will be consider rape.

It is also why two teenagers having sex with each other is not rape-- they are too young to fully know what the fuck they are doing... but an adult having sex with a teenager, is rape: the adult creates massive power imbalance.

Liz Bruenig and her ilk doesnt grasp this.

You voluntarily getting drunk and having sex, is an adult choice, since it is an adult choice-- by definition of choice then there is no power asymmetries. Where there is no power asymmetries, there is not rape. Rape involves the lack of choice. You are the one that DECIDED to get drunk and have sex. Personal decision making is the antithesis of power imbalance, hence there is no rape in drunk/regret sex. This is why UVA rape case is bullshit. this is why mattress girl rape case is bullshit. this is why somebody talking about WYB doesnt consistute threat to rape. Threat to have sex = implies rape = implicitly supposes a power imbalance, Roosh's WYB neither implies nor suggest in anyway such power imbalance. In fact, the power imbalance here is coming from the false rape accusers.

Finally, the idea of an older man sleeping with a younger adult woman, that is consider creepy or rapey is offensive. For the simple fact that, the age of consent should be the age of military service. If you are old enough to go to war for your country and kill and die for your country; then hell, you are definitely old enough to get a drink at a bar and also have sex with any consenting adult. If you are old enough to go to war, but somehow, when you get drunk and have sex but regret it the next day, you are magically been raped? this is ridiculous.

I think the reason why Liz Bruening reacts that way is because she felt that, she is under a sexual scrutiny. The comment of Roosh about WYB... she knows that hundreds of men are analytically dissecting her worthiness for fuckability. This makes her painfully insecure, therefore she lashes out with false rape implications. She plays the rape card to deal with her own discomfort of been put under a sexual microscope.

[Mortician]

To the silly, childish feminists; this is what actual rape is like : Scenes from Irreversible the movie. Monica Belluci. (NSFW)

[vinman]

(03-07-2015 11:11 PM)Mortician Wrote:  

It is as if they dont truly understand what rape is. Rape is about power, but not in the way the feminist think it is.

If a man puts a gun to a woman's head and forcibly inserted himself. That is real rape. Because the sex act with gun to the head, is done under the condition of massive power imbalance(due to the gun to the head) -- this is rape -- this eliminates consent.

When and where there is a massive power imbalance between two or more parties involved in any activities, it veers beyond consent, it veers into abuse.

This is also why it is wrong for an adult to sleep with underage children or for a adult to sleep with a severely mentally retarded 30 yr old. Even though the 30yr old is an adult, her mental handicaps renders her incapable of making informed decision, hence this creates a massive power imbalance with an average adult. This is why having sex with a mentally handicap adult will be consider rape.

It is also why two teenagers having sex with each other is not rape-- they are too young to fully know what the fuck they are doing... but an adult having sex with a teenager, is rape: the adult creates massive power imbalance.

Liz Bruenig and her ilk doesnt grasp this.

You voluntarily getting drunk and having sex, is an adult choice, since it is an adult choice-- by definition of choice then there is no power asymmetries. Where there is no power asymmetries, there is not rape. Rape involves the lack of choice. You are the one that DECIDED to get drunk and have sex. Personal decision making is the antithesis of power imbalance, hence there is no rape in drunk/regret sex. This is why UVA rape case is bullshit. this is why mattress girl rape case is bullshit. this is why somebody talking about WYB doesnt consistute threat to rape. Threat to have sex = implies rape = implicitly supposes a power imbalance, Roosh's WYB neither implies nor suggest in anyway such power imbalance. In fact, the power imbalance here is coming from the false rape accusers.

Finally, the idea of an older man sleeping with a younger adult woman, that is consider creepy or rapey is offensive. For the simple fact that, the age of consent should be the age of military service. If you are old enough to go to war for your country and kill and die for your country; then hell, you are definitely old enough to get a drink at a bar and also have sex with any consenting adult. If you are old enough to go to war, but somehow, when you get drunk and have sex but regret it the next day, you are magically been raped? this is ridiculous.

I think the reason why Liz Bruening reacts that way is because she felt that, she is under a sexual scrutiny. The comment of Roosh about WYB... she knows that hundreds of men are analytically dissecting her worthiness for fuckability. This makes her painfully insecure, therefore she lashes out with false rape implications. She plays the rape card to deal with her own discomfort of been put under a sexual microscope.

[Roosh]

Our favorite journalist got embarrassed the other day:

https://storify.com/shrubblogger/convers...seanmdav-c

She's not well-liked at the moment:

https://twitter.com/search?f=realtime&q=...g&src=typd

[Roosh]

Her feelings are fragile. There's no way she will last as a female typist.

[YoungAngel1]

Hahahaha. Wow. So, she wants equal rights, but also wants to be treated better than men. Jesus Christ.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(04-07-2015 06:33 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

Her feelings are fragile. There's no way she will last as a female typist.

It's ironic she dragged out the old feminist talking point of "how would you like your sister or mother to be treated that way?" Because I turned that around and directed it toward her in a comment I made under an article she wrote.

In her snarky, confused article at the New Republic, she dismissed people who wanted Rolling Stone to apologize to the frat it accused of gang rape as a "peanut gallery." Here is how I responded. I got some positive replies, too:

"So falsely accusing men of rape doesn't warrant an apology to the accused and people who think it does are dismissed as a "peanut gallery?" This sentence is stunning in its arrogance. How would the writer like it if one of these men were her brother or husband? With that in mind, I am calling on anyone who has known this writer's husband, Matt Bruenig, to look into his past see if there are any "transgressions" and if there are, to publicly accuse him of rape. Let's see then if his defenders are a "peanut gallery."

[Lizard King]

(04-07-2015 06:29 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

Our favorite journalist got embarrassed the other day:

https://storify.com/shrubblogger/convers...seanmdav-c

She's not well-liked at the moment:

https://twitter.com/search?f=realtime&q=...g&src=typd

That's excellent. AnonymousBosch's term typist exemplified.

Made funnier by her trying to infer that the guy is insulting her. No moron, he's criticising your writing.

[heavy]

I live and die by the Alpha Smirk.

I may have to keep her pic there as an example for newbies.

I've never seen an attractive chic with such an Alpha Smirk that screams, I *will* ruin your life.

   

[RexImperator]

I think she's only smiling like that because of her bad teeth.

[Dusty]

We should start a GoFundMe campaign to raise money for Lizzy's orthodontia treatment.

[iamdegaussed]

"fuck off ya degenerate commie witch"

Best possible response.

[AnonymousBosch]

(04-07-2015 09:00 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 06:33 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

It's ironic she dragged out the old feminist talking point of "how would you like your sister or mother to be treated that way?"

Not really. This is Girlthink 101: When faced with threat or criticism, retreat to the "Don't hurt me! I'm just a girl!" defense.

Feminism destroyed that social contract. She wanted equality: she's got it. If she says stupid shit, she's going to have to own it, defend it, and bear the brunt of negative opinion just like a man does.

I'd call her a hypocrite, but I've long accepted that as a core part of Feminism and Socialism. You might as well say the sun is bright.

Society would function a lot smoother if we could end Privileged White Girl Concerned Saviour Syndrome.

Quote:

That's excellent. AnonymousBosch's term typist exemplified

.

Thanks for the credit, but I didn't initiate the term. It was from the brilliant "The Typists Of Xo Jane, Rated By Bangability" thought experiment-cum Psy Op, which included the author's detailed explanation of expected response and Rage Profiteering. (I've noticed Amanda Hess has been very quiet between the two-pronged attack of that article and the one by The Last Psychiatrist).

I simply recognised it as a succinct tool for demoralisation, because women are socially-driven creatures lacking mental resilience, so ran with it.

We all have human needs required for happiness, and one of the least-discussed ones is the desire to be taken seriously. These middling intellects who have Daddy's Money degrees in soft IQ options like Communications and Women's Studies only believe they're the intelligentsia, which is what makes their intellectual arrogance laughable. (Yes, men don't want to date you because you're too intelligent for them. Keep telling yourself that.)

You can see how desperate this Typist is to be taken seriously by others for her intellectual-superiority. It oozes from every obviously thesaurus-sought word in her typing, when she's incurious enough about language - her chosen field - to assume any similar word can be readily-substituted for whatever word she originally-typed with no variation of meaning, because stupid people think that's how a Thesaurus works.

Women Type to be socially-liked and to be intellectually-respected, so, if they're peddlers of propaganda, deny them both. Call them out on their crap, and mock them mercilessly.

(Yes, My Dear Typist, the word is 'incurious'. I bet you thought it was 'uncurious').

[AnonymousBosch]

I did some searching. This is the Member who deserves credit for the elegant-dismissiveness of 'Typist':

LouieG

And the original thread:

Anatomy of A Troll Job

Remembering the outrage from the time, I noted that whilst the women were obviously going to get angry about being objectively-rated for their beauty, part of the success of the piece was the absolute dismissal of their intelligence as displayed through writing skill. Whilst it doesn't take much to cause outrage in rage profiteers, I think it was the added dagger of 'Typist' that's the difference between 1 or 2 'What The Actual Fucks?' by a Twitter Feminists and 30 increasingly-furious tweets leading to a total Narcissistic Fury meltdown that drives away her moderate followers, (since Narcissists forget to maintain the agreeable façade of who they're pretending to be when they're angry, and lash out at everyone).

Every moment spent swirling in a wild storm of narcissistic fury requiring social media hugbox reinforcement, depressive crying jags in bed and high caloric snack treat binge-eating to regain their emotional equilibrium is a moment they're not typing more propaganda.

This might seem cold, but I only see it as showing as much genuine - not faked - empathy and concern for the well-being of others as any average Female Typist piece. That's the level they set the bar. I see no reason to raise it just because 'they're women'. Yay, equality!

Female Typists reading this: of course there's a way out of this. You just have do develop emotional resilience and not respond emotionally to the point of indulging in hysteria over trivialities, like men are expected to do. Good luck with that.

Anyone still doubting I'm an INTJ?

[Chevy Woonsocket]

"We all have human needs required for happiness, and one of the least-discussed ones is the desire to be taken seriously. These middling intellects who have Daddy's Money degrees in soft IQ options like Communications and Women's Studies only believe they're the intelligentsia, which is what makes their intellectual arrogance laughable. (Yes, men don't want to date you because you're too intelligent for them. Keep telling yourself that.)"

This is something I've noticed about these types. They want the status of being nature's aristocracy, but they are unwilling/unable to put the work into becoming one.

I always assign it to women's inherent desire to increase status. If they can't do it through a man, they'll find another way that they can fake it till they make it.

[Lizard King]

Thanks for the detailed correction AB.

I should have made the connection. Anatomy of a Troll Job is a masterpiece.

[AnonymousBosch]

^ That's cool, Lizard. I've just noticed a couple of guys seem to think I initiated it, rather than recognised that the blade of a discarded post-attack dagger was still very sharp, so I want to give credit where it's due.

[andy]

Would I bang? yeah, I would...with a condom on! (i shudder to think what her off spring would be like)

[samsamsam]

(04-11-2015 02:09 AM)andy Wrote:  

Would I bang? yeah, I would...with a condom on! (i shudder to think what her off spring would be like)

They would have fucked up teeth.

[AnonymousBosch]

(04-11-2015 02:09 AM)andy Wrote:  

(i shudder to think what her off spring would be like)

[El Chinito loco]

The white liberal version of "communism" is actually royalism if you think about it.

You have an entire underclass of proles at your disposable who service you, adore you, and are subject to punishment if they don't live up to the society's quota.

You aren't beholden to the laws or social conditions set forth by the rule of the land.

You are above all that including the goofy WASP fucked up teeth which will be forgiven since you're a goddess..a princess to the people.

edit: Although something tells me princess can indeed suck a mean dick and will indeed swallow and gag.

If you can ignore the shark teeth that face is worth defiling and I believe most guys would happily indulge. WB.