Post: #26

Right wingers can be more PC, within their frame, than "liberals".

Who gets more pussy, right or left?

Post: #27

(05-03-2014 09:49 PM)Kingsley Davis Wrote:  The excellent Lance Christopher consistently kills it in the comments. He'd compliment RVF with his contributions.

He reminds me of myself when I first started reading red-pill blogs. I used to get angry, but had a good understanding of what the authors were saying. Now? I just accept things as they are. Shit happens.

Lance is an intelligent guy who can achieve whatever he likes once he gets rid of the anger and bitterness.

I am obliged to make a correction to my earlier comment. There are 2 types of guys who are angry and bitter on manosphere comment sections. The first are the frustrated loser types. The second are productive members of society who have been lied to. I'm sure that most of us got pissed off when we realized we were being lied to about women and life by everyone at first, before choosing to improve our own lives.

Lance, if you're reading this, you are an intelligent motherfucker who has a lot of potential. I'd like to see you join the forum sometime. A healthy dose of bitterness is always good; its what keeps the cogs of society running. But don't let it affect your personal life. Only action can cure the problems we face individually.

Post: #28

(05-03-2014 11:13 PM)soup Wrote:  Right wingers can be more PC, within their frame, than "liberals".

Who gets more pussy, right or left?

Right gets more sex, left gets more strange. If I had to guess

Post: #29

(05-03-2014 11:13 PM)soup Wrote:  Right wingers can be more PC, within their frame, than "liberals".

Who gets more pussy, right or left?

You should write an article on that for ROK...

...if you want to start a flame war in the comments.

Post: #30

(05-04-2014 12:04 AM)BiggNastee Wrote:  

(05-03-2014 11:13 PM)soup Wrote:  Right wingers can be more PC, within their frame, than "liberals".

Who gets more pussy, right or left?

Right gets more sex, left gets more strange. If I had to guess

Are you saying that right gets more sex from the same pussy.. over, and over and over and over an.. etc.,

But, left get more girls? Fresh pussy, fresh pussy, fresh. etc.?

Post: #31

I commented on unmoderated anonymous comments before:

/thread-34540-...#pid689219

To summarize:

Quote:The problem we're seeing here is [is that] anger is the easiest expression to express online. Anger causes passive lurkers to suddenly become active posters, expressing their anger. This results in trolls, who deliberately incited anger in posters to get attention online.

[...]

Discussion board like this have the ban hammer to keep trolls away. On the other hand, Livefyre and Disqus are, by design (very telling that neither service has killfiles), troll magnets (since a long flame war is a surefire way to attract more clicks for online newspapers)

[...]

Twitter is just as bad: It's pretty easy to express anger in 140 characters, but it's impossible to make a well-reasoned argument supporting a position in a single sound bite sentence.

[...]

I like online forums where the moderators know how to use a ban hammer to keep flame wars under control. There's a reason I'm a regular here -- lots of well-articulated discussion and very little flamage.

Here's a relevant article http://theweek.com/article/index/257915/...ne-outrage

Post: #32

The United States will go bankrupt someday and "those angry right-wingers" are going to take over huge swaths of the United States. The arrogant lefties should pay more attention to their arguments because one day they will be ruling over you. Only a fool believes that their political paradigm rules forever.

Remember, all of the political ideas ruling over us today were once formed by young men back in the 1960's. 40 years from now it's gonna be our generation in charge so if you don't like what ring wingers are saying, now's the time to do something about it. Otherwise just sit back and await the inevitable back swing.

Post: #33

(05-04-2014 02:25 AM)Samseau Wrote:  40 years from now it's gonna be our generation in charge so if you don't like what ring wingers are saying, now's the time to do something about it. Otherwise just sit back and await the inevitable back swing.

Our generation is the most socially liberal alive, and especially since the GFC more fiscally liberal than any generation since the Greatest Generation. The traditional conservative revenge from the cradle isn't supposed to kick in until late in the 21st century, when their higher fertility is supposed to start outstripping secularization and decline in religion in America. That said, so many things could happen in the intervening time to push that back or bring it forward.

Post: #34

Old-school players, Hugh Hefner types and even first-generation PUAs (Mystery, Style, etc.) were mostly liberal because liberalism equaled women being available for casual sex. Leftism went along with drugs, sex and rock & roll. Conservatives wanted everyone to work hard and get married.

As the 'sphere/red pill community, whatever you want to call it, has moved from being just about picking up women to a larger political/social/lifestyle context, it's inevitable that it would shift right. All mainstream Western political parties are liberal. Some are just slightly less enthusiastic about it. Republicans in the U.S. today are just as liberal in most ways as democrats were a few decades ago.

The idea that men and women are inherently different and that traditional gender roles are both natural and a good thing is a very conservative idea. More conservative (one could say, based in reality rather than wishful thinking) than any idea that's "allowed" in polite conversation these days. Roosh's recent epic post "Cultural Collapse Theory" is an extraordinarily conservative document. More conservative, I would suggest, than literally anything else most people have ever read.

Feminism is, of course, a very leftist ideology. I can't see how you could be against feminism and still liberal in every other way. Rejection of one sort of imaginary, dysfunctional equality inevitably leads to questioning others. "Hmm, if what mainstream society (the Cathedral in the parlance of our times) says about men and women is made-up bullshit, maybe what they've taught us about other stuff isn't so wonderful, either..."

Post: #35

The problem isn't right wingers, it's people mindlessly screaming hate for jews, blacks, women and so on. They're not hard to spot, and they will likely never make any valuable contribution to the site or the forum.

Post: #36

All this argument about right and left, it boils down to personal choice.

My family can be considered conservative and my mother is religious. I'll take the Tories/UKIP over Labour or the Liberal Democrats anyday.

But taking this into account I would not get laid that easily if society was strict and incredibly right wing like Islamic countries tend to be.

Post: #37

I consider myself a centrist, but i do keep it real with myself knowing that some of my views are inherently conservative. On the flip side i believe in environmental conservation(which is actually conservative in a sense).

It's a decision between a sustainable society with less disregard or a socially uninhibited society that's open to experimental routes.


I agree that Lance Christopher is great. Somebody should send him an invite possibly?

Post: #38

(05-03-2014 09:43 PM)Switch Wrote:  I saw a comment recently on the Donald Sterling article saying, "That moment when RoK readers don't know whether to applaud Donald Sterling because he hates blacks or hate him because he's a Jew." It had 100 upvotes or something. I think that a lot of blue pillers reading the site and slowly being converted to red pill as the writers keep dropping truth and advice.

But there should be some sort of login required to post comments. Jezebel assholes are running crazy with the trolling.

Not sure why this particular comment would be regarded as "trolling". I think it hits the comment section of ROK square on the nose. A lot of hostility toward blacks and Jewish people---anyone who denies this simply hasn't been paying attention.

Post: #39

(05-04-2014 11:00 AM)TonySandos Wrote:  I consider myself a centrist, but i do keep it real with myself knowing that some of my views are inherently conservative. On the flip side i believe in environmental conservation(which is actually conservative in a sense).

It's a decision between a sustainable society with less disregard or a socially uninhibited society that's open to experimental routes.


I agree that Lance Christopher is great. Somebody should send him an invite possibly?

Does he bring value in terms of game, traveling, or self improvement?

Post: #40

(05-04-2014 11:31 AM)randomForest Wrote:  

(05-03-2014 09:43 PM)Switch Wrote:  I saw a comment recently on the Donald Sterling article saying, "That moment when RoK readers don't know whether to applaud Donald Sterling because he hates blacks or hate him because he's a Jew." It had 100 upvotes or something. I think that a lot of blue pillers reading the site and slowly being converted to red pill as the writers keep dropping truth and advice.

But there should be some sort of login required to post comments. Jezebel assholes are running crazy with the trolling.

Not sure why this particular comment would be regarded as "trolling". I think it hits the comment section of ROK square on the nose. A lot of hostility toward blacks and Jewish people---anyone who denies this simply hasn't been paying attention.

A lot of those guys are just sockpuppet spammers; I'm pretty sure RoK has a ban on sight for those posters but they never stop coming back.

So anyways, don't be fooled by the spammers. The vast majority of right-wingers with any amount of intelligence are not merely hate-mongers towards one race or another.

Right-wingers are generally far more interested in culture than race. Race is only viewed as the icing on the cake, but not the cake itself.

Post: #41

Right-wing commenters aren't generally scorned just because of the liberal media domination and pussification, but because many make poor and needlessly inflammatory arguments (just as liberals do). For every Nigel Lawson or Scorpion, there are a dozen screaming "it's blacks or us" or "the NWO is real" people who are going to become automatically despised just as fast as the most rabid of feminists.

Post: #42

Don't forget the "MGTOW" trolls, with their standard comments of stuff like

"There's no point learning game its a waste of time, just go to a hooker and spend your time more wisely bla bla bla."

"Hookers are the only honest women"

"Women are all lying cheating whores who want to divorce rape you and cuckold you"

These type of comments receive a lot of up votes. I also don't understand the arguments for the game is waste of time and effort type of comment. If you're not willing to spend the time and effort in "gaming" women become a fucking homo where you don't have to put any effort in and get all the ass you want.

I also remember in one of Athlones/Excelsiors articles about black men dating outside their race the comments section on that particular article was mostly gifs of black men fucking white women. I was just wandering who were posting them comments. They must of been either black guys looking for a reaction or jezebel trolls looking for evidence for the claim that all the manosphere are white nationalists?

Post: #43

(05-04-2014 10:18 AM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  The problem isn't right wingers, it's people mindlessly screaming hate for jews, blacks, women and so on. They're not hard to spot, and they will likely never make any valuable contribution to the site or the forum.

This is what I predominately referencing with my first post. Have the RoK team talked about making it harder to comment on the site? Would that affect site traffic?

As for the whole left vs right debate I think that there can be a significant gap between what we call ourselves and what others see us as. For example I would call myself a centrist but I would be branded a conservative by someone with more of a media fed mainstream point of view.

Has anyone else noticed that the media has been experiencing a large and rapid shift to the left? It seems to me that US media is hardly representative of a country where both the House of Representatives and 30 of the governorships are controlled by Republicans. More and more of the people I talk to express some level of dissatisfaction with the "pussifcation of America." Is this perception bias by me (I'm more right now then I used to be, I spend more time with people who are similar) or have you guys been seeing the same sorts of trends? Could we not be headed for a cultural collapse but instead more of a regression towards the mean?

Post: #44

(05-04-2014 11:42 AM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

(05-04-2014 11:00 AM)TonySandos Wrote:  I consider myself a centrist, but i do keep it real with myself knowing that some of my views are inherently conservative. On the flip side i believe in environmental conservation(which is actually conservative in a sense).

It's a decision between a sustainable society with less disregard or a socially uninhibited society that's open to experimental routes.


I agree that Lance Christopher is great. Somebody should send him an invite possibly?

Does he bring value in terms of game, traveling, or self improvement?

He's highly intelligent. I don't know his value towards game, but the man is traveled according to several comments of his and also follows the improvement doctrine of the site

Post: #45

I've given RoK and Roosh flack before, but I actually like both sites. I'd imagine that almost every one of the writers is pretty cool and they'd be fun to hang around. But man, the comments...

I think that it's just something that comes with having a huge site. Weirdos and losers flock in like no other.

On my own site, which has way less traffic, I've noticed that growing popularity seems to bring an increase in trolls. I Tweeted something about blogging the other day and then some Neo-nazi guy replied with some rant about Jews.

Comments sections are like Elise Island. All the eager new faces show up, but you have to sort out the riff raff. Otherwise they'll bring the whole place down.

Post: #46

A couple thoughts:

1) There is a large movement that is seemingly sweeping the world and changing culture & humanity. This movement includes feminism, politically correct thought and enforcement, the LGBTQ alphabet soup, strict egalitarianism, technocracy, and atheism. The movement doesn't have an exact name, and no overt leadership, but you can find people that follow its unstated ideals all over the world. It is particularly strong in the Anglosphere but spreading. Possible names: cultural marxism, "blue pill", Progressive, feminist, etc, but my feeling is that each of those names only describes part of the movement, and not the movement as a whole.

2) The Left establishment of the US is so deeply intertwined with parts of this movement that they might as well be the same thing.

3) Almost all major media outlets are either sympathetic to the Left establishment or in fullblown support of it (with some exceptions)

4) People that see the effects of this movement and feel that something is wrong will be drawn to the opposition, supposedly the Right establishment and its publications

5) The Right establishment voices only small opposition, offers no strong philosophical arguments against this movement, and provides no alternative viewpoints. At most, the Right establishment serves as token last minute resistance, simply requiring adequate rationalization, "compromise", or rewording before begrudgingly accepting the viewpoint.

6) As such, the people from 4) that are looking for a viewpoint in opposition to the movement in 1) either head to the Right establishment, or, finding them lacking, look to other sources of opposing viewpoints

7) These opposing viewpoints come from a myriad of different philosophies and marginalized sources. This viewpoints often include the socially acceptable (in most circumstances outside of Left establishment circles) such as small-L libertarians, traditional Christians, Muslims, Austrian economists, etc. You will be labelled a kook and possibly a racist or misogynist by the mainstream media and Left establishment for expressing these viewpoints. Additionally, the alternative sources will include Jewish/Zionist conspiracy theorists, other conspiracy theorists, Stormfront members, End-of-the-world types, straight-up nutcases, and many, many other groups and individuals that have been marginalized and mocked.

8) The only common thread among many of these opposition groups is their opposition, and not much else. They generally concentrate on strongly opposing portions of the movement in 1), or are just against the establishment as it is, and have different ideals and social structures they are trying to promote.

9) RoK presents one of the broadest opposition viewpoints against this movement in 1)

10) As RoK grows (which it will, as disaffected people search for reasons for their disaffection) it will attract people from all across the political spectrum, but it will especially attract those that already seek alternative sources. This includes the less savory types presented in the second half of 7), hence the current state of the comments there.

Food for thought:

How does a site like RoK continue to grow without the purpose and message being either diluted or hijacked? I don't know if heavy handed moderation will be feasible when articles are regularly getting 150+ comments.

Many people that come to RoK have a different idea as to the root causes of the problem they are seeing, and this is reflected in the comments. Some people genuinely believe that there is a conspiracy by certain groups, or a root cause found in letting undesirable races into society. There is at least one prominent game site that will lose itself in rants about multiculturalism. These people aren't just trolling, and comments like those very much marginalize "the manosphere" into the realm of kooks. It's a problem that needs to be addressed, and I'm not sure how to do it. Perhaps a well-written article?

Post: #47

edit

Post: #48

(05-03-2014 06:49 PM)KorbenDallas Wrote:  What's concerning is that there are more sexual losers now than there used to be.

Is that really true? Or is it just the internet now facilitates communication about these topics that before would have been censored? It's also true that the sexual losers are now, thanks to technology again, much more vocal than they were in the past.

I think a lot of what we see is old waves of the movement still echoing around and not evolving to the times.

1st wave PUA was "I can't get laid. I need to learn how to trick girls into sex despite me being a loser."
2nd wave PUA was "I got laid a few times and got married, now I'm divorced. I hate all women because they think I'm a loser, but still want to get laid again."
3rd wave PUA was "Become a better, more attractive man, and girls will flock to you."
4th wave PUA was "Turns out most women can't appreciate a better, more attractive man, and body building attracts boring slores. Be the center of your universe, and just burn through a pile of boring, disposable women. Marriage and kids is for suckers. Enjoy the decline."
5th wave PUA seems to be, "Religion and other social structures that promote families and work against atomization actually are important if you want a society to not decline. Traditional society men don't need game, don't need body building, and the guys still roll in pussy. Become an expat in a traditional society or seek out micro-climates of traditionalism in your own locality. But only be a tourist that visits --those traditional culture dudes have too many responsibilities."

Post: #49

Blackhawk-
Yes, there are more sexual losers. I didn't get laid in high school, but did really well in college until I stopped going. It was a small clique of us actually get laid. A lot of people "partying" but not actually getting sex. The sexual depravity of the girls...really shocked me. Just 30 years ago in the 80s girls were 2-3 times more chaste just from talking to guys who lived through those times. Plus with the bad economy that's hit men especially hard...there are just a lot of disgruntled people in general out there, but yes, I think there are more sexual losers now than 30 years ago. This is also reflected in the rates of 20 year olds who have ever been married. The number is like 36% among men. In 1960 it was like 80%. American society has changed. Yes, the internet enables communication, but that's not the whole story.

Post: #50

I've tried reading the comments on RoK articles a few times... Yeah. I come here for the quality of discussion and good game advice.