Post: #1

Update for week ending November 13, 2016

Content:

• Notable new pages: The Culture of Critique, Obamacare, Mike Pence, Ego, Social Justice Warrior
• Idris continued plugging away at Category:Women mentioned in the Bible. There are guides to this massive effort at List of women in the Old Testament, which is up to 117 (!) active pages, and a List of women in the New Testament. Great project! As it develops, this could be a great reference.
• Significant additions to the pages related to the Moore-Gillette masculine archetypes
  

Technical:

• A sitenotice template was added to recognize the impending ascendance of Donald Trump to his rightful place in the cosmos. A dismissal link was then added.
  

Post: #2

Update for week ending November 20, 2016

I did not introduce myself last time. I am Conchis, a Count with the wiki. I've been an admin since May. Feel free to leave me questions or feedback on my talk page.

New & Notable Content

• Featured women: "Diana" the Canadian bartender who loved fucking a Trump supporter, Candice the Cuckslayer
• New pages: regret rape, Glenn Beck, Rules For Radicals, Multinational alt-right revolution (2014-present), Matt Harrigan, Joe Bernstein, Professional Muslim, Fuck, Marry, Kill
• Expanded pages: Russia, pseudo-intellectualism
• High-activity pages: Project:Round table
  

Technical & Administrative Work

• Significant categorization activity throughout the week to improve page navigation, including contined subcategorization of Category:Women mentioned in the Bible
  

Post: #3

Update for week ending November 27, 2016

It was a pretty slow week this week, given the Thanksgiving holiday.

New Pages

• Salon, with links to articles defending pedophilia
• A Rulebook for Arguments, a good resource for arguments among friends (with "us", not with "them")
• Ctrl-Left, another term for social justice warriors
• Michael Hirsh
• Super shit test
• Tim Wise
  

Significant Updates

• Baggage
• Donald Trump
• Richard Spencer
  

Post: #4

Update for week ending December 4, 2016

New Pages

• Books: Think and Grow Rich
• Lists of books: to hone strategic thinking by Ryan Holiday; life-changing books from RVF; from GreatBooksForMen; man's library from Art of Manliness; for boys and young men from Art of Manliness
• Biblical women: Heroine of Thebez; Jephthah's daughter
  

Significant Updates

• Development of Portal:History
• List of people and groups opposed to neomasculinity (formerly Master List of Enemies)
• List of people and groups supportive of neomasculinity
  

Post: #5

Anyone else getting database errors when trying to get onto KW? It's saying "(Cannot access the database: Too many connections (localhost))".

Post: #6

The site is down. I'm working on getting it back up.

Post: #7

Update for week ending December 11, 2016

New Pages

• Anti-Trump reporters: Kurt Eichenwald‎‎
• The entire basis of feminism summed up
• Reading lists: Life-changing novels (Ryan Holiday), Life-changing biographies (Ryan Holiday), Moral Biographies (Ryan Holiday), For young & ambitious men (Art of Manliness)
• People: Geert Wilders, David Seaman
• Coquetry
  

Significant Updates

• List of people and groups opposed to neomasculinity
• Transnational alt-right revolution (2014-present)
• Robert Greene
• Friendzone
  

Post: #8

Update for week ending December 18, 2016

Content pages: 1904
All pages: 5949

New Pages

• Cuck-elector Chris Suprun
• Red Piller John Locke
• Biblical women Belshazzar's mother, Ezekiel's wife, Maher-shalal-hash-baz's mother, Lemuel's mother, Keziah, Keren-happuch, Jemimah, Jeroboam's queen consort, and others
  

Significant Updates

• List of people and groups supportive of neomasculinity
• List of people and groups opposed to neomasculinity
• Sovereign citizen
• Peter Andrew Nolan
  

Post: #9

I've deployed the Christmas message sitenotice (http://en.kingswiki.com/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice). It's staying up until a week after New Years Day.

Post: #10

Is anyone else having trouble logging into the wiki? When I click the "Log in" button, it sends me back to the page where I was, but it still shows me as an anonymous user. I'm using Brave v0.12.15
.

Post: #11

Disregard the last post - turned out the cookie was probably corrupt. Clearing my cookies worked.

Post: #12

Update for week ending December 25, 2016

Content pages: 1926
All pages: 5992
Page edits: 22,098

New Pages

• Berlin Truck Attack
• Mary
• Appreciation
• Marriage 2.0
• Anger
• Donald Trump Shitpost Analysis
• Bastard
• Elizabeth (mother of John the Baptist)
  

Significant Updates

• Facebook
  

Post: #13

From the Facebook article:

Quote: A big part of the reason you'll deal with nothing but lying, duplicitous scumbag women nowadays is because they've become so accustomed to bullshitting themselves and everyone else on their social media platforms.

I apologize if this derails the thread, but I believe it's important to point out: Quotes like the above need to be jettisoned from our community.

Do we want to be a community of rational men known for promoting cold, hard truth and self-improvement, or a community of bitter, hateful lunatics known for exaggerated emotional rants and pathological disdain for women?

While most guys here are far too level-headed and nuanced to write something like this, there is a sizable enough minority of toxic individuals among our ranks to make us look like the latter sometimes. I can't be alone in not wanting to be associated with shit like this.

Post: #14

When writing Kings Wiki articles, I try to act as if I'm writing a Wikipedia article. I've recently gone through my earlier edits and tried to remove editorialisation from them.

Regarding that quote you highlighted, it's a quote from one of AV8R's ROK articles.

Post: #15

(12-27-2016 01:47 AM)Delta Wrote:  I can't be alone in not wanting to be associated with shit like this.

Delta, if you look around the rest of the wiki, I'm certain you'll find more views that you find objectionable.

The small sentence you selected was part of a much longer quote about the social impact of Facebook and includes severe censure of men and women alike.

Ideally, all of the articles would have a range of views from manosphere sources. Ideally, the quote you mentioned would have some preamble. Ideally it would be edited down to the key points. Ideally, there would be better transition as it moves from privacy concerns to social impact. Ideally you'd make these revisions rather than complaining about them on the forum.

Post: #16

(12-31-2016 10:36 PM)jps Wrote:  

(12-27-2016 01:47 AM)Delta Wrote:  I can't be alone in not wanting to be associated with shit like this.

Delta, if you look around the rest of the wiki, I'm certain you'll find more views that you find objectionable.

The small sentence you selected was part of a much longer quote about the social impact of Facebook and includes severe censure of men and women alike.

Ideally, all of the articles would have a range of views from manosphere sources. Ideally, the quote you mentioned would have some preamble. Ideally it would be edited down to the key points. Ideally, there would be better transition as it moves from privacy concerns to social impact. Ideally you'd make these revisions rather than complaining about them on the forum.

I think A.V. Yader was using hyperbole to hammer home his point that the propaganda that women put out about themselves and their lives on Facebook needs to be taken with a big grain of salt. If he were literally correct that there are no good women left out there, I guess we would all have to go MGTOW, but he's just saying to be skeptical and not take everything at face value, as so many naive and infatuated men are liable to do.

Yeah, people outside the manosphere will quote stuff like that on sites like We Hunted the Mammoth and accuse us of being misogynists, but only die-hard feminists (whose minds we're unlikely to change) read those sites anyway. I would argue that what's most important, at this point in the manosphere's development, is that we save good men, who could make good mates for the right women, from being victimized by the wrong women. Society will not have these men's back when the divorce and/or the false rape accusations happen, so it makes sense for men who see red flags to suspect the worst until proven otherwise (for example, it's commonly-dispensed Red Pill wisdom to assume a girl is a slut unless there's evidence that she isn't) and err on the side of caution. And when, as often happens, Blue Pill men who have already been victimized are looking for answers about "why did this happen" and "how can I keep this from happening again," it's good that we help lead them to the Red Pill truth, however bitter that pill may be.

I think A.V. Yader makes a legitimate point that, all else equal, women who don't use Facebook much are preferable to women who do.

Post: #17

(12-27-2016 01:47 AM)Delta Wrote:  From the Facebook article:

Quote: A big part of the reason you'll deal with nothing but lying, duplicitous scumbag women nowadays is because they've become so accustomed to bullshitting themselves and everyone else on their social media platforms.

I apologize if this derails the thread, but I believe it's important to point out: Quotes like the above need to be jettisoned from our community.

Do we want to be a community of rational men known for promoting cold, hard truth and self-improvement, or a community of bitter, hateful lunatics known for exaggerated emotional rants and pathological disdain for women?

While most guys here are far too level-headed and nuanced to write something like this, there is a sizable enough minority of toxic individuals among our ranks to make us look like the latter sometimes. I can't be alone in not wanting to be associated with shit like this.

I couldn't find the URL that the the A.V. Yader quote originated from, so that turned out to be a good excuse to remove it from the article.

However, one thing I'd like to say about bitterness and disdain for women as a sex is that it comes about for a reason, which is that women, relative to men, do a poor job policing their own sex. Rather, they tend to enable other women's bad behavior, or at best remain silent as they observe other women wreaking havoc in innocent men's lives, as long as it doesn't directly affect them. It is, therefore, up to men to take on the traditional patriarchal role of restraining women from antisocial behavior, because no one else is going to do it.

Men will call out a man who abuses women, and restrain him from causing her further harm. Women are much less likely to call out a woman who abuses a man; they are much more likely to close ranks and defend their fellow woman if a conflict breaks out between a man and a woman. They will leave it up to men to defend their fellow man. (I'm not aware of there being a term for the female equivalent of a "white knight" who goes out of her way to attack any women she sees who harm men, because such women don't seem to exist, although Christy0misty was accused of being anti-feminist in order to get guys to like her.)

It wasn't long after I discovered the Internet, that I became aware that mail order brides could be obtained by financially stable men with zero game, as long as they didn't have too much anti-game. Then, after reading books like The Game, I realized that sex with beautiful women, even those of American nationality, was attainable by any man willing to put in the effort. It made the situation seem much more egalitarian and meritocratic, much like a capitalist economy, in which money is attainable by any intelligent man willing to put in the necessary hard work. Similarly to how an awareness of economics gives a man less reason to hate the capitalists, having an awareness of game gave me less reason to hate women and the men who were able to attract them, because I knew that what those men had, I could have too.

Then I married an American woman, was betrayed and hurt badly by her, and at first blamed myself but then, with the help of friends, began to wake up to the reality of what had happened. She had effectively brainwashed the whole circle of family and friends, including me, into thinking I was an abuser, as a way of justifying her breaking her marriage vows. But that was just one woman, and therefore her behavior did not, by itself, cause me to feel disdain toward American women as a whole. What did that was when I saw how other women who heard both sides of the story, and saw the evidence, supported her rather than calling her out.

Men, being men, know how men are, and so if men hear a woman complain, "My husband cheated on me," they'll probably believe her and sympathize with her. Even when men are not yet aware that All Women Are Like That, they still know, from being men and hanging around men, that All Men Are Like That. On the other hand, if a man complains, "My wife falsely accused me of rape and left with the kid," women will usually believe, or claim to believe, the woman's accusation, even though they should know better, since women have been hanging around other women all their lives and know about the kinds of manipulative practices that many women engage in.

The women who dissent from women's and society's abuse of men usually stay quiet about it, as is the tendency of most women when they hold a view that diverges from mainstream opinion. Women are more likely to go with the flow and look out for their own reputations rather than martyr themselves for the sake of a principle. This creates an appearance that all women are bad, because in these situations, the good women usually don't speak out and thereby make the presence of good women known.

Interestingly, according to Heartiste's theory, feminism is actually a conspiracy by low-SMV women to wreck high-SMV women's prospects of getting an alpha male to commit to them. Some go a step further to say that feminism is actually a conspiracy by alpha men to hoard all the high-SMV poon for themselves, rather than sharing with greater betas. Either way, we have to acknowledge that the current state of affairs has given women who, in a different culture and under a different legal system, would have behaved well, an incentive to behave badly. Since it's in women's nature to conform to society's expectations, in a bad society, women will tend to be bad. Therefore, there's some truth to the statement that in our society, all women are bad.

Post: #18

Update for week ending January 1, 2016

Content pages: 2018
All pages: 6097
Page edits: 22,263

Lots of fitness-related content added this week.

New Pages

• 84 CrossFit workouts have been posted, with references, spanning the "Girls", the "New Girls", and the "Heroes" series
• Tightened shoulders (also known as "packed shoulders"), important for safe and strong lifting, with pointers on achieving it
  

Significant Updates

• Portal:Body
• Negative game
  

Post: #19

Update for week ending January 8, 2016

Content pages: 2,041
All pages: 6,142
Page edits: 22,428

New Pages

• List of manosphere websites
• Patriarch
• RAHOWA
• Biblical women: Mary Magdalene, Mary, mother of James and Joses, Salome (Zebedee's wife), Joanna, Martha
• Julian Assange
• A Guide to the Good Life
• Brittany Covington
  

Significant Updates

• Cock Carousel
• Concern troll
  

Post: #20

(12-31-2016 10:36 PM)jps Wrote:  

(12-27-2016 01:47 AM)Delta Wrote:  I can't be alone in not wanting to be associated with shit like this.

Delta, if you look around the rest of the wiki, I'm certain you'll find more views that you find objectionable.

The small sentence you selected was part of a much longer quote about the social impact of Facebook and includes severe censure of men and women alike.

Ideally, all of the articles would have a range of views from manosphere sources. Ideally, the quote you mentioned would have some preamble. Ideally it would be edited down to the key points. Ideally, there would be better transition as it moves from privacy concerns to social impact. Ideally you'd make these revisions rather than complaining about them on the forum.

I take no issue with A.V. Yader's overall message that facebook profiles are just carefully crafted bullshit, and I'm not terribly fixated on the "lying, duplicitous scumbags" quote either. I'm speaking to a larger problem.

In any ideological group, not just this one, members have a tendency to say outrageous and idiotic things when speaking to their like-minded peers. Not having to consider the opposition's counterarguments (because the opposition isn't around to present them) brings out the worst in people. It's how college liberals have become so unbelievably crazy with the lack of intellectual diversity on campus. Unfortunately, we're not immune to the effect either, and the quote I highlighted earlier is just one example of many.

Consider it this way: How hard would you want to hammer a feminist who said that men are "nothing but scumbags?"

I strongly encourage everyone, whether posting or writing articles, to write under the mindset that you're speaking to a general audience, not just fellow RVF members. It's the best way to ward off intellectual laziness and prevent yourself from saying something ridiculous that may turn off men who could otherwise benefit from the community.

Post: #21

(01-10-2017 01:41 AM)Delta Wrote:  I take no issue with A.V. Yader's overall message that facebook profiles are just carefully crafted bullshit, and I'm not terribly fixated on the "lying, duplicitous scumbags" quote either. I'm speaking to a larger problem.

In any ideological group, not just this one, members have a tendency to say outrageous and idiotic things when speaking to their like-minded peers. Not having to consider the opposition's counterarguments (because the opposition isn't around to present them) brings out the worst in people. It's how college liberals have become so unbelievably crazy with the lack of intellectual diversity on campus. Unfortunately, we're not immune to the effect either, and the quote I highlighted earlier is just one example of many.

Consider it this way: How hard would you want to hammer a feminist who said that men are "nothing but scumbags?"

I strongly encourage everyone, whether posting or writing articles, to write under the mindset that you're speaking to a general audience, not just fellow RVF members. It's the best way to ward off intellectual laziness and prevent yourself from saying something ridiculous that may turn off men who could otherwise benefit from the community.

The feminists and SJWs drove us out of the relatively neutral, mainstream forums where we otherwise would've shared our views. For the sake of reaching more people, we would've moderated our tone to appeal to the masses, if we'd been allowed to continue speaking in those places. But whenever we dissented in the slightest from the party line or said anything mildly politically incorrect, they called us extremists, bigots, misogynists, etc. and kicked us out.

Therefore, we had to retreat to our own "safe spaces" where we could speak freely, and where entryist feminists and SJWs were banned in order to keep them from taking over and disrupting the conversation through censorship, shaming, etc. (as they do in every other online community that tolerates their presence). Naturally, this tended to produce a radicalization and a polarization of the discourse. But whose fault is that?

For the most part, feminists and SJWs refuse to engage their opponents in any kind of civil debate. When we're on their turf (e.g. a college campus, or a corporate workplace policed by HR), we're forced to stay quiet to avoid offending them, because they don't want to hear what we have to say. So it's easy to get out of the habit of accommodating their sensibilities when we do decide to express our opinions, in a place where we're free to do so.

Our only choices are to either acquiesce entirely to all SJW and feminist doctrine, or be branded intolerant, ignorant, hateful, etc. Since they're going to hate on us anyway, we have no particular reason to try to moderate our tone to appease them, when the time comes that we decide not to go along with their agenda.

We can try to meet our opponents halfway, but they're not going to meet us halfway, so what's the point? Whom are we trying to appeal to? The public is not going to openly come over to our side (although they might vote for someone like Donald Trump in the privacy of the voting booth) till the rebellion against political correctness has been successful enough that people feel it's safe to speak their minds. In trying to accomplish that rebellion, sometimes we can make effective use of tools like rhetoric, which help us to excite and rally the troops, and provoke a rash response from our critics. (So yes, it's arguably a form of trolling, but it's for a good cause.)

Post: #22

Update for week ending January 15, 2016

Content pages: 2,054
All pages: 6,170
Page edits: 22,534

New Pages

• RVF Threads: How do you deal with your GF's misbehavior?, Women hate it when guys date younger girls
• No contact
• Getting an ex-girlfriend to come back
• Cathy Reisenwitz
• Biblical woman: Lydia, Mary, mother of John Mark, Sapphira
• Books: Intelligence: A Very Short Introduction
  

Significant Updates

• Plenty of new pages this week, most existing pages only had minor updates.
  

Post: #23

Update for week ending January 22, 2016

Content pages: 2,159
All pages: 6,300
Page edits: 22,743

New Pages

• Chad Thundercock
• Biblical women: Apphia, Chloe, etc.
• 101 kettlebell workouts (example here - not showing up properly in the category after the import...)
  

Significant Updates

• 1-to-10 scale
  

Post: #24

Update for week ending January 29, 2016

Content pages: 2,184
All pages: 6,366
Page edits: 22,947

New Pages

• Femiservative
• Disillusionment
• Laconicism
• Casino effect
  

Significant Updates

• Getting an ex-girlfriend to come back
• Alpha
• Red pill
• Richard Spencer
  

Post: #25

Update for week ending February 5, 2016

Content pages: 2,196
All pages: 6,401
Page edits: 23,052