💊 Manosphere Return of Kings and Roosh V

[drtoboggan]

I haven't read Chateau Heartiste much, but from what I have seen, it isn't much different than Roosh and his tripe.

Don't bother. It basically is, just more racism in the comment section and religious idiocy. Apparently the red pill crowd is also into this nut calling himself Dalrock. Aside from sounding like a Flintstones character's name, Dalrock blogs about how great "traditional" marriage is and is really big into Christianity. He's a very disturbed individual.
A lot of the readers are into steroid use, too, from what I've seen from lurking on Reddit. I'm generally ok with responsible drug use, but juicing is never a good idea.
In all honesty, the only red pill blog I can recommend is The Rational Male, albeit with a grain of salt. I'll admit a sexual strategy is a good idea if you're into that stuff and being a standup guy is good, but the implied sexism in the community is asinine. It's possible to be an alpha or whatever the ass they call it without being a reprehensible person.

 

[Ian Brandon Something]

I'm generally ok with responsible drug use, but juicing is never a good idea.

Juicing is when you use a juicer to juice fruits and vegetables, creating a healthy juice drink. It has nothing to do with steroids or drugs of any kind.

 

[drtoboggan]

Juicing is when you use a juicer to juice fruits and vegetables, creating a healthy juice drink. It has nothing to do with steroids or drugs of any kind.

Juicing is also a colloquialism for using steroids. Granted, it's an old one (heard it in Fight Club) and pretty inaccurate (cheating would be more apt), but still in use.

 

[MLW RS 18]

http://www.returnofkings.com/32804/why-the-manosphere-doesnt-need-anti-semitism

Check out the comments on this one.

One of the worst offenders there is a commenter who goes under the name "Ruckus". He consistently denies the Holocaust, hypocritically claims to "be okay with individual Jews" and yet like many neo-nazi scumbuckets, regularly shows his hand and yells "six million more" when pressed.

The topmost comment by that tard is sick, but yet rather lulzworthy. A good demonstration of the disconnected "utopian" idealization that antisemites regularly demonstrate in their thinking. It also reeks of desperation too with the sheer amount of blood libels packed into one space. The best way to describe it is someone throwing feces at a wall in hopes that something will stick.

If they really want any credibility, having idiots of that sort as their supporters is counterproductive.

 

[drtoboggan]

http://www.returnofkings.com/32804/why-the-manosphere-doesnt-need-anti-semitism

Check out the comments on this one.

One of the worst offenders there is a commenter who goes under the name "Ruckus". He consistently denies the Holocaust, hypocritically claims to "be okay with individual Jews" and yet like many neo-nazi scumbuckets, regularly shows his hand and yells "six million more" when pressed.

The topmost comment by that tard is sick, but yet rather lulzworthy. A good demonstration of the disconnected "utopian" idealization that antisemites regularly demonstrate in their thinking. It also reeks of desperation too with the sheer amount of blood libels packed into one space. The best way to describe it is someone throwing feces at a wall in hopes that something will stick.

If they really want any credibility, having idiots of that sort as their supporters is counterproductive.

I'm of the opinion Rational Male is the closest they get to credible. I do agree: closeted Stormfront migrants ruin all legitimate arguments they have. I can agree on fathers being screwed by the legal system without these clowns though. Their gay bashing doesn't help, either. It's Chris logic, really.

 

[Niachu]

And he knows all of this how?

By projection.

 

[Pine Tar]

And he knows all of this how?

Because he's a nice guy. Seriously, I used to be one of those "nice guys" too. And then, I realized that I needed to get my shit together to even sniff a shot at getting laid. So, yeah.

 

[SU 390]

Because he's a nice guy. Seriously, I used to be one of those "nice guys" too. And then, I realized that I needed to get my shit together to even sniff a shot at getting laid. So, yeah.

How'd you stop being a "nice guy". What did you do to change? What were your results? What changed in general?

 

[Pine Tar]

How'd you stop being a "nice guy". What did you do to change? What were your results? What changed in general?

Okay, I realized that not having a job, living with my Mom and being obese wasn't exactly what the ladies wanted and being nice is just the minimum requirement. So, I got a job, got an apartment, got a better job lost 40 pounds. But, still nothing. So, I realize that I need to be direct with women to get what I want (most people realize this already, but "nice guys" aren't nice, just cowards). I go down to the bar district of my hometown and I keep trying to get a woman to come home with me. Eventually, I succeed. So, really, it's accepting failure if it means ultimate success, accepting that women can be your friends (Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with someone being your friend?), change your life and be direct. There's no magic spell book on getting women's panties to drop, it just takes initiative. Also, I have a date next Thursday, so I'm really looking forward to that.

 

[SU 390]

Okay, I realized that not having a job, living with my Mom and being obese wasn't exactly what the ladies wanted and being nice is just the minimum requirement. So, I got a job, got an apartment, got a better job lost 40 pounds. But, still nothing. So, I realize that I need to be direct with women to get what I want (most people realize this already, but "nice guys" aren't nice, just cowards). I go down to the bar district of my hometown and I keep trying to get a woman to come home with me. Eventually, I succeed. So, really, it's accepting failure if it means ultimate success, accepting that women can be your friends (Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with someone being your friend?), change your life and be direct. There's no magic spell book on getting women's panties to drop, it just takes initiative. Also, I have a date next Thursday, so I'm really looking forward to that.

Congratulations! I'm glad that you managed to turn things around.

(Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with someone being your friend?

"The agony of being friends with someone who's unrequited love and knowing that he/she is going to be in a relationship a week or month later." Anonymous.

 

[Pine Tar]

Congratulations! I'm glad that you managed to turn things around.



"The agony of being friends with someone who's unrequited love and knowing that he/she is going to be in a relationship a week or month later." Anonymous.

As far as the second quote goes, I've been there. Hell, that's actually why I started talking to the girl I'm going to on a date with. I had to accept that if I couldn't be with them at that moment, then why would I waste my time trying?

 

[SU 390]

As far as the second quote goes, I've been there. Hell, that's actually why I started talking to the girl I'm going to on a date with. I had to accept that if I couldn't be with them at that moment, then why would I waste my time trying?

Good point.

 

[NoMoreSleeping]

How'd you stop being a "nice guy". What did you do to change? What were your results? What changed in general?

"Nice" is often equated with boring, and passive - neither of those are exciting to girls (or really anyone).

"The majority of men act like little girls thanks to some combination of anti-male laws from childhood onward, lack of positive role models (being raised by a single mom), and paying the wrong kind of attention to what women say they want. A minority of men – collectively known as the douchebags women keep falling for despite themselves – represent masculinity which is biologically attractive.

This puts women in a precarious position – they despise their betaboy orbiters and are thus forced to settle for the alpha assholes, but it’s still not their first choice. The ideal man is both masculine and supportive, but he is so rare and so quickly snatched up that most women are left high and dry"
- http://myrealcoolblog.tumblr.com/post/79531163835/what-is-positive-masculinity-examples

More recommended reading:
http://therationalmale.com/category/positive-masculinity/

 

[NobleGreyHorse]

I'm just saying this for myself, having been through Some Shit (tm), but "nice" and "safe" to me are prerequisites for thinking of a partner in a naughty way. If I don't find them nice, if I can't relax around them and turn my back on them knowing that I will be perfectly safe doing so, I have zero urge to be naked near them. Girl boner = cruelly slaughtered before it ever fully existed. I know a "bad boy" type -- long hair, is in a band, rides motorcycles, yada yada -- but he is also exceptionally gentle to the point of being a vegetarian for ethical reasons. He would be horrified at the idea of harming so much as a houseplant, never mind me. He would be the one to get it if he ever felt like it, because even if he were pretending to be all sorts of naughty and fierce and scary, the real (safe, gentle, nice) him is never far from the surface.

 

[NoMoreSleeping]

I'm just saying this for myself, having been through Some Shit (tm), but "nice" and "safe" to me are prerequisites for thinking of a partner in a naughty way. If I don't find them nice, if I can't relax around them and turn my back on them knowing that I will be perfectly safe doing so, I have zero urge to be naked near them. Girl boner = cruelly slaughtered before it ever fully existed. I know a "bad boy" type -- long hair, is in a band, rides motorcycles, yada yada -- but he is also exceptionally gentle to the point of being a vegetarian for ethical reasons. He would be horrified at the idea of harming so much as a houseplant, never mind me. He would be the one to get it if he ever felt like it, because even if he were pretending to be all sorts of naughty and fierce and scary, the real (safe, gentle, nice) him is never far from the surface.

It's not about being mean it's about not being PASSIVE. Of course you don't want a guy who HURTS you, but you do want him to throw you down and fuck you hard. You want him to have the POTENTIAL to be rough - with someone else - if needed. You don't want a guy who says "is it ok if I kiss you now?" or "should I put a finger in?" you want a guy who takes charge, and leads. He let's you be yourself but you know you can turn to him during hard times.
Most girls can't stand a guy who is clingy, as clinginess is tied to desperation, which are both rooted in insecurity and undesirable traits. If you think your guy has no other options you may feel "secure" in your relationship but that type of security doesn't build PHYSICAL attraction. Right now you feel a physical attraction to that guy, but what if he turned out to be incredibly needy, clingy, and a pushover who was unable to decide something without checking in with you first? Suddenly he wouldn't be so attractive.

I know girls absolutely hate to be generalized, but I bet most girls can agree with many parts of this post.

On a more serious note, what really bugs me about these people is that they seem completely oblivious to the fact that you can actually love a sexual partner.

I'm not defending those people, but they aren't writing about "love" they are writing about game and sexual attraction. "Love" is part the romantic idealizations they are trying to help guys see beyond. "Love" is a feeling that varies from person to person, and any respectable writer discussing sexual dynamics will agree that the feeling of "love" is usually often a type of blindness. The reason "love" doesn't come into play in these articles is because it doesn't matter. Love isn't a requirement, and can actually do more harm than good. It doesn't matter if you "love" someone, because that alone is not enough to make them love you back. Ask any guy who has ever been "in love" or infatuated with a girl, and given her everything only to see her hook up with another guy who barely gave a shit about her.

I know this post will be taken out of context, but i'm not suggesting you can't love your partner. I'm not saying you SHOULDN'T love your partner either. I'm saying that "love" is irrelevant when realistically looking at elements of attraction. Plus, men and women have entirely different idealizations about what "love" should be like.

Maybe the authors really ARE incapable of loving someone, but that only enforces the point that (your perceptions of) "love" have no bearings on the dynamics of attraction. If you want to read about "true love" there are plenty of places to do so, but the manosphere (good and bad) is the place to read about the OTHER side.
Think about it like this: someone takes a prescription pill everyday because it makes him feel good. The problem is that the pill is killing his organs and slowly poisoning him. If you wrote about all the reasons the medication is bad for him, do you really need to say "but also it feels really good?" You could write about why pill heads are idiots (calling girls whores), or go the more mature route and stick to the science (comparing male and female idealizations to the reality in the sexual marketplace) , but either way, you don't need to talk about how fun the "high" is. Leave that part to the junkies.

People are ranking me "A-log" and "disagree" but hopefully they can express themselves a bit better than that with a response.

 

[DykesDykesChina]

For me, it would be impossible to be attracted sexually to a person without being attracted emotionally and intellectually.

But I fear this thread is in the process of being completely derailed...

 

[NoMoreSleeping]

For me, it would be impossible to be attracted sexually to a person without being attracted emotionally and intellectually.

Most girls would feel the same way.

But guys and girls do not love the same. Also, "emotionally" attracted doesn't really mean much, because attraction is already emotional.

Most gay guys and girls really don't need to say they disagree with the views because that's practically expected. It's about the idealizations guys have towards girls, which are completely different from the idealizations girls have towards guys. For a girl to say "I don't feel like that at all" in response to a post about how guys think is kind of just dumb. Sometimes things just aren't for you.

 

[DykesDykesChina]

Also, "emotionally" attracted doesn't really mean much, because attraction is already emotional.

Sure, but there's a bit of a difference between attraction a la "hmm this girl's cute, I like her butt" and "this girl has a fascinating outlook on the universe, she's an astrophysicist and a philosopher, she cares about the same questions that make me tremble with excitement. And yes, she also looks sexy."

 

[Ruin]

I always loved how autists can't seem to grasp that women are able to tell the difference between

"I'm being nice because I think that kindness is the magic key to a woman's panties and the second I get denied sex I turn from a fake nice guy into a cynical dick."

and

“I’m genuinely a nice person."

 

[NoMoreSleeping]

I always loved how autists can't seem to grasp that women are able to tell the difference between

"I'm being nice because I think that kindness is the magic key to a woman's panties and the second I get denied sex I turn from a fake nice guy into a cynical dick."

and

“I’m genuinely a nice person."

It's autistic to think being "nice" even slightly matters in attracting girls, regardless of it being "real" or fake.
If a guy is having problems getting girls would you suggest that he should just "be nice" and his problems will be fixed? YOU actually probably would, but that's also what the most autistic autist would say. I'm not calling you out, but I also won't ignore the coincidence.
Anyway, no, most of the time the PROBLEM is being too nice, and yes, I mean even naturally nice not just a "nice" ploy for sex. Guess what, you can also be "too mean" and have a hard time getting girls as well. Suggesting that "being nice" is a problem doesn't make "being mean" the solution.
Obviously I care about this topic, and it's always annoying when someone comes into threads like these to post "guess what guys, girls are smart" because nobody would disagree that girls are smart - but that doesn't make the points in my post any less true. It doesn't matter if a girl is smart, or dumber than the dumbest white knight on this forum, the best way to attract her is by being confident, fun, with a bit of drama. Being "nice" is not on the list.

This post has received: 136 likes, 497 people agree with this post and this post has earned the honorary "best post in the world" award.

And yes, she also looks sexy."

Again though, WHY bring up those other points? The important part is that you find her sexy. You thought she was cute, hot, sexy, whatever, when you first met her and became more attracted to her based on her "fascinating outlook" but you STILL were attracted to her in the first place. Who knows, maybe you grew more attracted to her after learning about her "fascinating outlook" because it made her seem more approachable to you. It made her "sexiness" more attainable, and therefore you grew more attracted to her . I don't know, but I've gone through that before myself.

Either way, you aren't talking about some ugly fat girl with a "fascinating outlook," you're talking about a girl you think is attractive who has a "fascinating outlook." Why try to suggest otherwise like it proves something?
That's what I don't understand about threads like these. Why do guys (and girls, and people not interested in girls for some reason) feel the need to come in here and say "look i'm different!!!!" when they actually AREN'T.

This post has received: 821 likes, 1,007 people agree with this post and this post has earned the honorary "professional sexual theory" award and "fascinating outlook" achievement.