http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/why-do-girls-date/5154ae1878c90a511200016b
As glad as I am to see George from 3rd Millenium Man grab the manopshere colors and go to the front lines, I’ll admit I’m a little disappointed with this. Roosh has predicted 2013 will be the year the manosphere goes mainstream, but my concern is less about the exposure and more about the representation. The MSM is the feminine imperative.
I understand the host here is contracted to the Huff-Po so the context begins in terms of what entertains women’s need for indignation. No indignation, no audience. George is hamstrung from the outset: we have the ubiquitous 50+, “I’m ok with the beta provider I married after fucking my spell of bad boys and learned my lesson so you gals should learn from my mistakes” woman (aka the Aunt Giggles, Kay Hymowitz archetype). Next we have the prerequisite “clinical psychologist” who looks like one of the mothers on Dance Moms, and rattles off the feel good humanist psychology truisms clichéd in the 1990’s. After that we have Nathan the self-identified White Knight who’s only purpose is to bolster both women’s feeble positions to better identify with any woman in the hopes that she might be watching and, God willing, anonymously seek him out to potentially hook up with him for being such a team player.
That’s a tough cast to work with so I will commend George on his effort, however, his dropping the ball here is less about his grasp of red-pill wisdom (I know and read his blog regularly), and more about the context that the MSM will allow the manosphere to be represented in. Learn this now red-pill literati before you venture into the MSM – the feminine imperative will gladly make you the red meat for the indignation that sells their advertising to women.
As I said, Roosh predicts that the manosphere will surface in the MSM this year, and I will concur, the manosphere will come to the attention of the greater whole of western society, but don’t think for minute it will be for the positive. With any luck it will reach out to a few blue pill men ready to realize the truth, but my trepidation is about the overall image the manosphere will be molded to by the Feminine Imperative. Men are simply not allowed to have any legitimate insight into intergender dynamics – as I’m sure George is realizing now. In girl-world, women are the sole arbiters of relationship wisdoms – men are simply foils for their legitimacy, even in the best of pretenses.
I don’t write too much specifically about the manosphere with good reason – the ‘enlightenment’ is still evolving. As I’ve been quoted many times before, unplugging guys from the Matrix is dirty work. It’s triage, and the greater majority of men aren’t ready or even in a mental position to be unplugged when you’re in a personal, one-on-one context. So when you extrapolate that to a larger context it’s easy to see how the feminine imperative will readily use men’s default lack of legitimacy for its own purpose. The greatest Threat to the Feminine Imperative is men becoming self-aware of their own sexual market value and the dissemination of information about how the imperative uses this lack of awareness to perpetuate itself.
The first recourse to prevent this is male-specific ridicule and derision for even attempting to explain the social constructs of the feminine imperative.
In a large public forum like this Huff-Po video we don’t see the underlying feminine social urgency and anxiety about men becoming aware of the mechanisms of the feminine imperative because for decades women’s unknowability has become synonymous with the feminine mystique. So it’s made laughable by default that any man would have a legitimate understanding of women – they are just unknowable, so men’s perspectives and insight about the psychology of women starts from a position of ridicule, even when it patronizingly agrees with women’s perspectives.
But underneath the Dance Mom psychological snark, underneath the accusatory tones 50+ woman uses to burn interview time, underneath the attempts at hopeful beta white knight feminine identification, even in the overall context the host uses to broach the topic, red pill men can see the nervous tension of the possibility of the rational exposure of the underpinnings of the feminine imperative.
When you’re in an isolated social setting, it’s a dangerous topic to venture into – like religion or politics – but you can make an effort without too much social repercussion. You can speak red pill truth and endure the wrath of women (who’ll likely fuck you after the fact) and white knights, but you’ll make a point. You may even open the eyes of a few men. However, the larger, meta-scale feminine narrative will use and distort your red pill awareness to make advertisers rich.
Women sustain themselves on indignation and nothing stimulates that better than a man who publicly declares he knows how women think. The Atlantic has made a very profitable business model for a dying form of media based solely upon this feminine-satisfying indignation. This host, the Huff-Po, are simply following the model. So yes, Roosh is right, the manosphere will go mainstream this year, to the overwhelming adulation of the media that’s discovered this type of feminine imperative indignation is extremely profitable.
April 3rd, 2013 at 4:37 pm
The only somewhat “red pill” guy I can think of who works for a major media outlet is James Taranto of the WSJ. Everyone else takes the female point of view vis-a-vis sex and relationships as unquestionable gospel.
April 3rd, 2013 at 4:59 pm
Roosh no.
He’s one of those MRA spearhead guys.
In the end, you are the spokesman for the Manosphere.
According to data on Alexa, Return of Kings has the largest readership of the main blogs. It is the most ambitious project to date to gather a variety of authors under the same masthead. And is an attempt to mainstream and legitimize the ideas of the movement.
It is no secret, my affection for this blog here. But to me, no one has done more for men than the Roosh brand.
April 3rd, 2013 at 5:04 pm
Rollo, that Krauser interview was in more than just a friendly environment with two guys of similar age as him, he was the only one there and had near carte blanche to steer the discussion.
As you rightly noted earlier in the thread, 3MM had to share the forum with a feminized host, an ugly 50 something manbeast, a dance mom psychologist, a total white knight, and a sheepish chubby guy. The amount of chaos (multitudes of directions) where the argument would go, the slings and arrows from multiple participants, and the inability to even get words into the discussion were excruciatingly difficult circumstances. The moderator shutting him down by insulting him was just too much.
Compare the ability to fly a kite on a sunny day with 10 mile an hour winds versus trying to fly one in the middle of a tornado.
I wonder if the manosphere would have to boil down their message to a five minute speech with a diagram.
Start with a picture of a girl in a carousel of cocks , put an arrow over to a short beta banker and the 35 year old at an altar and then a final arrow to a 45 year old woman in a convertible with a pool boy and the now ex husband in an alley with a torn suit and a bottle of vodka in a paper bag.
Heck, you could add your SMV curve to show an alternate reality for a bachelor .
April 3rd, 2013 at 5:07 pm
Oh, Mark. lol They’ve seen me and they’re not impressed ;) Thank you all the same for the very sweet sentiment.
As far as online sparring matches, I hate them. It takes a special bond to survive them.
I hesitate to even suggest this because I don’t want it to sound like selling out, but don’t discount women as allies or marketers for you. I’m sure there are quite a few who are willing to do whatever they can to help. Their name shall be: Henrietta the Homemaker. Henrietta is the feminine of Henry and means “ruler of the home” whereas Henry is the “ruler of the estate.”
April 3rd, 2013 at 5:55 pm
@Rollo
@3MM, have a look at Krauser’s appearance on London Real here:
LoL I think the two situations are so vastly different as to make your comparison devoid of any meaning Rollo. I’m an obvious fan of Krauser, but you’re going to have to come up with a much better example than that.
April 3rd, 2013 at 6:09 pm
So true it’s almost painful. Women will send a man down in flames to protect the power of their ‘mystique’.
April 3rd, 2013 at 6:13 pm
@ Retrenched: Glenn Reynolds, who does instapundit.com, does a column for USA Today. He’s linked to Roissy and Vox Day a few times each.
He also mentions hypergamy quite a bit in his instapundit blurbs. His wife is Dr. Helen who focuses on men’s rights issues.
http://pjmedia.com/drhelen/
April 3rd, 2013 at 6:18 pm
The key is to go into these MSM spots with a specific goal and a specific target audience in mind.
The red pill takes time to swallow – more than one writer has likened unplugging to the 5 stages of grief; it’s a long process that takes some introspection. The red pill’s strength is that it maps to real, revealed preferences and actual behavior. Appreciating this takes a certain base of life experience and reflection.
To expect full conversions based on one minute of talking as part of a hostile panel discussion is unreasonable. The MSM is terrified of these ideas being given sincere consideration – that’s why the MSM wants to present the manosphere as angry and manipulative, to ensure that moral disgust slams the door shut on curiosity. I think sparking that curiosity, and getting salvageable betas to seek out the manosphere with an open mind is the appropriate goal for the circumstances.
As right and as good as it may feel to castigate a manboob, or nuke a hamster, or preach to the converted, these things need to be about what was really accomplished at the end of the day.
A couple specific tactical points:
Being called out for your anonymity is a great chance to present the manosphere as “forbidden knowledge” and trade on the seductive allure of dangerous truths.
Hamsterrific stories are best responded to by bringing out the unseen – question them make those boring nice guys and unsatisfying husbands into people with their own feelings and value, so that the real target audience can identify with them and try to transcend their current role as insignificant bit parts in some woman’s psychodrama.
April 3rd, 2013 at 6:27 pm
Would you ask someone to take a big bite of a ghost pepper to try to get them accustomed to spicy foods?
i once got a girl to try pepper sauce made from scotch bonnets, i told her it was ‘salsa with a bit of kick, kinda like you’.
did eventually get the bang after her taste buds regenerated a week later.
April 3rd, 2013 at 6:28 pm
@ frigidnorth “Being called out for your anonymity is a great chance to present the manosphere as ‘forbidden knowledge’ and trade on the seductive allure of dangerous truths.”
It’s also a good way to call attention to their contradictions. If we’re actually oppressors, then why do WE have to be anonymous? If they were right about us, then Amanda Marcotte & Jessica Wakeman would be the ones using pseudonyms.
April 3rd, 2013 at 6:30 pm
@Boxterpaul- I get you. I’m no Rooshite lol so I agree with you.
April 3rd, 2013 at 6:31 pm
Wow! Sounds like a grim future to me, but I see it happening. The amount of bullshit changes Google has embarked on over the past 8 months is ridiculous!
April 3rd, 2013 at 6:35 pm
@Chuck- Clarify your analogy.
April 3rd, 2013 at 6:36 pm
3MM, I’m not trying to patronize you. Yes, Krauser is on friendly territory, but notice his degree of preparedness for the interview. If that’s the degree needed to make cogent points in friendly territory, how much tighter do you need to be when you’re playing in the feminine imperative’s territory?
As I stated in my post and in my comments, I’m glad you’re putting yourself on the line and I think you did a fantastic job given the context you were forced into. I’m not saying you should’ve turned it down or really done anything differently under the circumstances. I’m just saying that you need to know going in that in the brief time you’re allowed to make manosphere points you have to have impactful counterpoints at the ready.
Have a look at Vox Day’s post about this:
http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2013/04/how-to-enter-lions-den.html
April 3rd, 2013 at 7:23 pm
3MM didn’t get time to prepared for the interview. That’s the difference.
April 3rd, 2013 at 8:42 pm
“but Roosh, as much as we have our issues, he would’ve been the most ideal representative.”
lol. Yes, a guy who basically comes across as a dirty hippy that has to fly across the world to take advantage of poor destitute foreign women because he can’t manage a successful relationship with strong independent real North American women and who’s written a book titled Bang on how to buy foreign hookers.
Ya, I can’t see any way THAT could be turned around by the MSM to make the Manosphere look bad (not that this is the actual case, but this is how he looks to the MSM. Perception is reality).
I heart Roissy but he would be dragged into the mud for his racist/political views before he ever got to men’s self-development. I don’t read anyone else’s stuff really. Rollo would be great, he’s a married guy who doesn’t quite cross the line into offensive territory because when he does he backs it up with stats and calm rational explanations etc.
I could probably handle myself in the media decently because I’ve been into PUA since near the start before it was as MSM as it is now, so I’ve already dealt with being vilified and attacked in discussions about male/female dynamics, but the reality is that I’ve written about fucking married women etc and they would dig that up to attack me before I got a chance to say anything.
Hell I admitted to shitting on a chick at Roissy’s, as if that wouldn’t come up lol “Welcome everyone, today our guest is YaReally, who teaches men how to defecate on married women. Now we have a panel of married women here who say “Men shouldn’t be taught to manipulate women into being defecated on.” We’ve opened the phone lines so you can all phone in and share your stories of inappropriate things men have done in the bedroom.”
On Hookingupsmart a while back, Sue posted “is this that Mark Minter guy they all worship?” and posted a link to a sex offender profile or some shit online of a guy named Mark Minter with a pic etc. Was that THE Mark Minter? I don’t know, but does it matter? Did anyone reading that thread do any research on him themselves, or did they go “omg this guy hates women just like I thought, look he’s a sex offender!!!”?
The point is that once they have a name they will dig up anything, no matter how loosely connected, and try to drag that name thru the mud to stomp you out, because you can’t change your name/face…you’re basically giving them a weak point to attack to snuff you out.
Being annonymous? If “yareally” were fucked over tomorrow, the next day I could be back as “bananahammock” and continue business as normal.
Expecting guys to use their real name is thinking emotionally instead of logically.
“I wonder if the manosphere would have to boil down their message to a five minute speech with a diagram.”
You might be joking but this isn’t a bad idea. We haven’t formally done it, but over time from failing enough, us PUAs have pretty standard MSM-acceptable responses to attacks now.
“So you lie to women and manipulate their emotions to take advantage of them?”
“No, unless you consider makeup, push-up bras, and high heels manipulation of men. We simply show men how to demonstrate their most attractive traits. A lot of guys don’t get a chance to show what great people they are because they’re too shy to express themselves and they try to become what they think women want. How many girls have run into guys who just nod their head and agree with everything they say? It’s bland and boring. We teach men to be themselves and confidently show women who they are, so women like them for themselves, and women know what kind of man they’re getting.”
“What about these “negs”? Where you tell a woman she’s ugly and she should die alone so that when she’s crying, you can emotionally browbeat her into letting you rape her?”
“lol no I see where the confusion comes in, negging is a really complicated subject that sounds awful at first. Really, all a neg is is playful teasing to show the girl that you’re confident enough not to be intimidated by her looks. You’re showing her that while every other guy might give her extra credit just for having boobs, you expect her to have a personality as well…so if she does something dorky, you’ll call her a dork for it, with a playful grin. We always say that negging should make the girl smile and laugh, if it doesn’t then you’re doing it wrong and probably just insulting her lol”
“What is this LMR stuff? You basically encourage men to “make the ho say no” by telling them to try to push through a woman’s resistance and rape her?”
“Again this is something that’s a lot deeper than it gets summarized in sound bytes. LMR is about making a woman feel comfortable and choosing to have sex. If a woman says no, we stop, and we tell other men to stop when they get a no…in fact one of our LMR tactics is to back off completely, flip on the lights, and play a game of chess with her, to show her that we have complete respect for her boundaries and that if she doesn’t want to have sex that’s totally fine with us. We don’t get mad or kick her out, because we like her for more than just sex. Often, that demonstration of how respectful we are, is what makes the girl go “huh this guy is a pretty good guy, I can trust him not to make me do anything I don’t want to do and to go at my speed”, and then they choose to sleep with us. I can understand how it sounds bad at first glance, but that’s why we have a ton of literature and training to teach these nuances to guys. Ultimately our motto is to leave the girl better than you found her…if you leave her at all! A lot of men actually find long-term girlfriends or wives because they journeyed into self-improvement!”
Like, some of that is bullshitty or skirting around land-mines, but it’s all knowing the kind of attacks they’ll use, then reframing everything in a positive light. If they dig deep enough they’ll find quotes and such that are harder to defend, but the MSM does the least research possible and they only have short little interview segments so they’re going for summarizing shit, not getting into details.
The Manosphere should ask what are its main ideas it wants to get into the MSM that will be the most widely relatable by the average blue piller (hypergamy, incel marriage, men vs women SMV, men’s self-improvement VS “figuring women out”, etc).
Then figure out how to best summarize/explain those things in a non-offensive way.
Then figure out how each of those things can be twisted/vilified as harsh as possible (“so you’re saying women can’t control their emotions like men can?”, “so you’re saying marriage is only about sex and women OWE men sex and should be their sex slaves?”, “so you’re saying women shouldn’t be allowed to have careers or grow, they should just learn to cook and clean and hope a man rescues them in their early 20s? Our panel of strong independent beautiful 40yo single women would disagree”, “so you all hide online discussing what women want, that’s such a pussy thing to do, women want a man who takes charge duh!!”, etc)
Then figure out how to reframe those things to bring them back to the good frame.
Then figure out the 5 absolute worst things the Manosphere promotes or has done or even the very fringe writers have said, that will be brought up to attack/slander you when they can’t break thru your other defenses (immigration discussions, race discussions, political discussions, aren’t you bitter old men, aren’t you just like MRAs who hate women, mysogyny, etc).
Then figure out how to reframe or brush off those things. It’s trickier for the Manosphere than PUA because PUA just addresses relationships, Manosphere starts getting into MRA territory, and again lead the conversation back into a positive reframe.
If someone isn’t willing to sit down and do this stuff, then they either shouldn’t represent the Manosphere in the MSM or they should accept that they will fuck up and that fuck up will be on the Internet forever and be used to discredit the sphere for years to come, essentially doing more harm than good.
April 3rd, 2013 at 8:52 pm
Fuck it,
You should have just read ‘The Sixteen Commandments of Poon’ and called it a day.
April 3rd, 2013 at 8:53 pm
Roissy I can’t stand with an ounce of me. Roosh just pretends I believe. Roissy really believes his shit as far as his political rhetoric.
April 3rd, 2013 at 10:20 pm
@YaReally: That was about as concise and comprehensive as a blog comment on this topic could ever possibly be.
I said earlier that you would be perfect for this, and I was right.
As far as the shitting on married women thing goes, I’m sure you could re-frame it somehow, but if you don’t think you could pull it off, you gotta help train whoever goes instead.
PUA is the key to winning this thing. First, the PUA’s success in and of itself disproves feminism. Second, learning PUA is learning how to frame, manipulate, and sell. It’s the same thing as hitting on women, only the goal is persuading people of an idea instead of getting laid.
Awesome.
April 3rd, 2013 at 11:02 pm
“So when you extrapolate that to a larger context it’s easy to see how the feminine imperative will readily use men’s default lack of legitimacy for its own purpose. The greatest Threat to the Feminine Imperative is men becoming self-aware of their own sexual market value and the dissemination of information about how the imperative uses this lack of awareness to perpetuate itself.
“The first recourse to prevent this is male-specific ridicule and derision for even attempting to explain the social constructs of the feminine imperative.”
…a funny thing about this statement by Rollo is that when I’ve wondered to myself about why Futrelle doesn’t list RM under his list of “boobz” sites, and in spite of the fact that Futrelle is clearly aware of RM since he’s mentioned it in an article, pretty much this exactly is the explanation that satisfies my curiosity. The Feminine Imperative will out, doxx, parrot and indignantly ridicule a hundred manosphere sites before it takes on RM. This site is a poison pill to the whole enterprise.
April 4th, 2013 at 12:48 am
On a somewhat unrelated note- if you want to see what western men have become, check out the movie Liberal Arts.
Spoiler alert!
A 35 year old man turns down a virginal 19 year old hottie to bang his 50 something scotch swilling battleax ex professor, and finally ends up with a somewhat homely “age appropriate” (he actually uses those words) librarian.
The highlight of the movie was when the professor literally kicks him out of bed after sex.
I have had a few dating moments that I’m not proud of, but never in my life have I turned down a blatant offer of sex with a hot young woman while sitting on her bed.
What’s the saying? Oh yea…..I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.
April 4th, 2013 at 1:04 am
@Chuck- Clarify your analogy.
Baby steps
April 4th, 2013 at 1:55 am
This is a fight to the death make no mistake about it.
This wasn’t a battle nor a skirmish. Not even a fray, melee or scuffle.
Just the merest hint of a tiff.
When they turn their full guns on the manosphere, and everyone can be sure its coming, they will be ruthless. Just look at how politicians and criminals are looked at in the MSM as an indication of how it will go down.
And they won’t be necessarily turning their guns to the strongest first to discredit and frame.
Any qualms or second thoughts, any skeletons in the closet will be ruthlessly exposed again and again.
April 4th, 2013 at 2:06 am
We should listen to Sex Panther, 60 percent of the time he’s right every time.
April 4th, 2013 at 5:15 am
[…] ► http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2013/04/02/its-their-game/ […]
April 4th, 2013 at 6:23 am
@3MM, just to clarify things a bit more with you, I really don’t think you’re reading me the right way in my comments. As I said, I think what you did was commendable and I expressed that. I wasn’t trying to bust your chops for putting yourself out there, the only point I was trying to make is that when you, or anyone else, enter into the narrative of the feminine you’re going to be distorted by it, so be prepared.
I’m sorry if you think my pointing this out makes you look ill prepared – I think you did fantastic with what you were given – it wasn’t a commentary on your performance, it was a forewarning for anyone doing the same as yourself in the future.
Roosh has commented on this, Vox has commented on this, I have commented on this, we all have high praise for you. None of us is patronizing you. One of the reasons I say texting and IMing are social Buffers is because there’s no way to entirely understand a persons intent message. Unfortunately the same applies to blog comments. It’s an imperfect medium.
April 4th, 2013 at 7:49 am
“I blog anonymously, that’s why you called me to come here, then you ridicule me for blogging anonimously. One cannot imagine what could happen to my life if I showed you my ID.”
“There are guys in the Manosphere, like Roosh V who has appeared numerous times in the media showing the skills that make him a book writer of his experiences with women abroad, books that have brought to him criticism by the MSM in various feminist countries like Iceland and Denmark while at the same time, winning the respect, appreciation and admiration of men who, like me, have embarked in this road of self-actualization to kill the pretty lies we have been told all our lives…”
“Thank you for giving me the oportunity of representing before the MSM the views of the Manosphere. Despite my appreciation I suggest you to consider in future oportunities men like Roosh, Roissy, Rollo, Krauser, Virgle Kent…et al”
April 4th, 2013 at 7:51 am
[…] This is a comment I posted over at It’s Their Game […]
April 4th, 2013 at 8:18 am
Oh good grief. That sex offender thing about Mark is ridiculous. A guy I went out with this winter shared the same first and last name with a sex offender and as its a pretty unique name, I’m sure he gets a lot of flack over it. And it has nothing to do with him. Sure, he’s a dawg, but there’s a line between being good with women and immoral with children.
April 4th, 2013 at 9:18 am
On the contrary, my hunch, and I’ve written about this many times, as to why Manosphere bloggers are anonymous is because they aren’t good-looking. Now I’m not judging what’s good looking from not (women judge that), but I believe that is the reason why Manosphere guys are anonymous; they’re overweight guys with massive beer guts, and to reveal that image would kill the whole myth of them being Alphas who pump iron everyday and are ripped like a prime Arnold.
April 4th, 2013 at 10:07 am
@Socialkenny
Well, of course, I’m good looking, maybe I should start blogging about red-pill stuff so that there’s a public face.
/I like my professional career too much, aint gonna happen.
//I could lose a few pounds.
April 4th, 2013 at 10:13 am
@Jeremy- Dude, it has nothing to do with professional career. That is just a hogwash Manosphere excuse. Ok let’s put it this way, every guy in the Manosphere uses a pseudonym (so do I although I’m not Manosphere). Now, with that said, who the fuck in your professional career will be able to track you under your blogging alias? No one!!! So what is the chances of your employer stumbling across your blog and seeing your real name and real photos? Next to zero chances! So quit the excuses. Ferdinand Bardamu whom I’d destroyed which caused him to close down his bullshit-ass blog In Mala Fide, he was the main guy pushing this “I’m anonymous because of my profession” BS. Fail!
April 4th, 2013 at 10:21 am
Returning to the topic…
I don’t think any acknowledged PUAs should allow themselves to become the face of the manosphere in the MSM. This is just MHO. Of course I leave PUA’s to their freedom to do what they will with what they’ve got, I would never fault them for it, I do not look down on them for what they do. And honestly, it would be wonderful to be 20 again and know what I know now.
However, we should all be honest with ourselves and acknowledge that PUA behavior is exactly the kind of incendiary bomb the MSM will use to paint all red-pill people as selfish men only looking to have sex, to use women as we will.
Obviously, this is just powerless opinion.
April 4th, 2013 at 10:38 am
@Socialkenny
Let me tell you a story.
About 5 months ago, I moved into a marina in Southern California. That’s right, I live aboard a sailboat. The sailboat is not mine, it belongs to a friend who is slowly retiring to Hawaii (but yes, I do know how to sail). He has a house over there already but obviously crossing the pacific, even on a well-equipped sailboat (which his is) is not a trivial matter that you do on a whim. So, his boat is going to be in So.Cal a while. It’s nice for me, cheap rent and I’m essentially living on the beach.
Because I live in a Marina, I only have a P.O. box for mail for the first time in my life. This is a handicap I’ve never had to deal with, and I have typically done a fair amount of online shopping. So recently I went and started a consumer account with UPS so that I could re-direct new shipments to me to a UPS store for pickup. It’s an easy solution, there’s one less than a block away. I have never had an account with UPS or Fedex in my life, ever.
I got near the end of the sign-up process and UPS wanted to verify my identity. They asked three multiple-choice questions. The first question asked me to verify a street I had previously lived on. That seemed a fairly reasonable question to ask, I’ve had UPS ship me things before so they should know that sort of thing. The next question they asked was the street number at which I previously lived with my father. That seemed a little bit of a stretch for their database, but possibly within an easy cross-correlation capability, so I answered that one. The final question asked me to choose the birth month of my brother (and they named him (I have 3 brothers)).
So, UPS, a company with which I’ve never had a formal agreement with, already knew the names of all of my family members, where they live, have lived, when they were born, etc..etc.. The question literally popped up in a script within less than a second as I was filling out the customer app process. That should sound very scary, it should. Because if all these companies simply know everything about you before you’re a customer, essentially anyone on earth knows everything about anyone who is sufficiently plugged in to the developed world anytime they want to.
So, you say no one can track me down? Well, first of all, the feds have everything on me, I surrendered it as part of getting into the career I have. Private corporations have most everything on me that they need to figure out the rest, I just demonstrated that with my story. It is no stretch at all to believe that all any random motivated person needs is an e-mail or an IP# on a submitted comment or both to figure out exactly who I am. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but internet anonymity is getting very hard to protect these days.
April 4th, 2013 at 10:43 am
Lol dude, as I’d said in a previous comment, my pseudonym wasn’t and isn’t used for the sake of anonymity. I’m a PUA coach. As all Pick-Up Artists do, we adopt a cool name to match our persona as for seduction. Our names aren’t to be anonymous but to create a sense of “Cool”, which cannot be done with common names such as John Bob, Tim, Powell, Steve, Rick, James, etc. Nothing cool and attractive in those names. As you should know, seduction is an alternate reality for guys, so we adopt an alternate name to go along with it. It’s not about anonymity.
April 4th, 2013 at 10:47 am
Re: Anonymity. A guy like Athol Kay was public from the outset and now that MMSL is his full time gig it doesn’t matter who knows his identity. Same with Roosh, and while both of them aren’t going to be gracing the cover of GQ anytime soon, their situations make anonymity a non-issue (even a hindrance) for them.
Next take Roissy who after almost a decade of blogging no one knows what he looks like. He got doxxed by an irate and obsessed Lady Rain around 2009 and had to literally reinvent his identity and blog to recover from it. I’m not sure how that period impacted his financial livelihood, but I can’t imagine it helped his career.
Have a look at my gravatar. Although I try to remain semi-anonymous here I’m not a bad looking guy. I lift religiously and I’ve had my share of flak come from people who disagree with me about the importance of looks in Game. My career situation necessitates I stay anonymous in my blogging. I work in liquor branding and not only is manosphere blogging a lomg-term risk to my career, it’s risk to the brand identities I’ve created and/or represent.
Don’t think for a second the feminine imperative and social media would hesitate to silence and destroy everything I or anyone else has written by personal destruction.
Once my book is published I’ll have to go public of course, but I have a professional obligation to my brands to protect them from association with what I’m going to produce.
Kenny I understand your perspective and I don’t necessarily disagree with it, but until manosphere writers can blog with the same impunity that Jezebel writers enjoy, anonymity will be necessary.
April 4th, 2013 at 10:51 am
@Socialkenny
I understand and appreciate what you mean there. However, if you’re going to defend the truth that you and I both know about the SMP to the public on the MSM you will likely want to leave that cool PUA persona behind to protect you from the extremists who will want to track you down and do bad things to you and your family. This isn’t about why you use anonymity, it’s about protecting you and the movement you represent.
April 4th, 2013 at 10:51 am
When it goes mainstream, the haters are really going to be rolling out.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:01 am
I just feel that the Manosphere can never go mainstream once its figureheads are hidden. Well I shouldn’t say that because Roosh and Roissy aren’t anonymous. But a movement cannot go mainstream when 95% of its members are hidden (by face that is). Ppl just won’t take it seriously. One cannot advocate being Alpha when you’re hiding. It’s like saying fuck gays when you’re partying @ gay-pride parades. I’m not saying for guys to come out and reveal their faces. Just saying that, if the Manosphere wants respect and acknowledgment, its bloggers must surface at times by posting a pic or 2 of them at a bar interacting with a hottie or something. Even post some workout photos, whatever! People just want to see the face behind the character who’s telling them that they should do that or this. We want to see that these guys are actually living this too.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:07 am
You are absolutely correct Kenny. Why should anyone take an anonymous opinion seriously? With no backing of a human being with a name and credentials, it’s just hot air. Besides which, as you insinuate, clinging to anonymity is fairly beta behavior.
I would say the best shot at legitimacy is convincing a respected sociologist of the painful truth contained in the manosphere. Or, failing that, writing enough widely-sold/distributed books that the truth is as plain as the sky is blue.
There’s still inherent risk to people like myself if we just suddenly started blogging about gold-digging whores in an open manner. Anonymity is still a necessary tool.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:13 am
Relevant:
http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/08/13/reality-vs-the-internet/
April 4th, 2013 at 11:16 am
I understand trepidation, but I also feel like if I want to live truly free, other people have to know who I really am, and I can’t be ashamed for them to know it. I feel like once you have a certain reputational helft behind you, people aren’t going to mess with you. Or you’re prepared and have the proper security and protection measures in place. Thrusting one or two people into the spotlight as sacrificial lambs to be slaughtered so the rest of us can stay safe is not right. It needs to be a team approach. People need to have each other’s backs. That means protecting each other’s information and eliminating in-fighting.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:18 am
You’re being somewhat sarcastic I see. But don’t base it on the name as you keep doing. Whether a guy uses his real name or not, as long as he performs and live the life he claims and show us that he does, then that’s all we need for credibility. Reason I linked anonymity in this sense with Beta-malism is quite simple: Betas hide, Alpha aren’t afraid to take the heat, be scrutinized, laughed at, etc. The biggest attribute of an Alpha is his IDGAF what you think attitude. You cannot truly have this attitude and simultaneously be anonymous. Being anonymous means you give a shit about being judged, laughed at, etc. And this goes back to my point, most Manosphere writers are anonymous because of their physical appearances and lack of good looks. But a true Alpha shouldn’t give a shit if he’s perceived to be ugly by societal standards; he still doesn’t hide!
April 4th, 2013 at 11:18 am
@Rollo- Cool!
April 4th, 2013 at 11:28 am
Kenny, no, I’m not being sarcastic. I concede points when I’m wrong and I take the perspective of the person I’m talking to if I can stomach it. What you are saying is not unreasonable at all. I just feel that anonymity can’t be discarded, yet.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:29 am
And to make this a lot simpler, I’m not even talking about splashing your photo all across your blog’s header. Just having a gravatar image alone of yourself is what I really meant to be honest. A miniature pic says much; that you’re a real person and not a computer meme or something. Sure you can put up a fake photo of someone else as your avatar to accompany your comments, but we trust that guys won’t stoop that low to use their little brother’s photo as their own.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:32 am
Kenny, you are like a 12 year old girl on a sugar high. No one is going to change their opinion on whether they want to risk their personal and professional lives being fucked in the face just because you enthusiastically repeat that they should. It’s super-fantastic that you love PUA so much that you’ve made it your entire identity but the rest of us have lives outside of pickup.
Yes, I’ve picked up girls by telling them I’m a PUA. Yes, it’s exciting when you discover you can do that. But down the road when you’re significant enough that people hate on you, you’ll realize that associating yourself with PUA can come with unexpected repercussions.
It’s awesome that you haven’t run into that yet and that you can be blissfully unaware of that stuff, and I hope you never have to experience it and can keep on doing your thing with an enthusiastic smile on your face, but you’re not going to convince anyone who’s had friends shot by a bullet or almost been shot themselves to willingly stand in front of haters holding a loaded gun.
God, I feel like King A “lecturing the young’uns”. I must be getting old.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:35 am
Ok, point taken. And by the way, I’m definitely no Brad Pitt. I grew up being told I’m ugly, called banana face in school, shamed, etc. But my attitude and vibe is that of a Greek God when it comes to reinforcing how good I look, despite being told I’m ugly throughout my entire life. So for the Manosphere guys who are hiding because of their looks (or lack thereof); man up and come out the closet (in a sense) LOL!
Guys however like you Jeremy and the ones who claim to be anonymous in safeguarding their jobs; then remain so. We understand somewhat…although I still see it as an excuse.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:40 am
@YaReally- I get you. My previous comment was for the guys who do want to crawl out of anonymity but never been encourage to by the Manosphere. The guys who wanna remain in hiding; I guess they won’t change that is what you’re saying. I agree.
And I don’t brag about chicks I pick up. I’ve been on both sides of the spectrum also (from extreme Beta to a social guy).
April 4th, 2013 at 11:47 am
Ok – I just listened to the whole thing and having done so I have to say I don’t really understand the discussion we’ve had about it.
For one, I don’t agree that 3MM “dropped the ball”. It was a public/media discussion, there were elements of hostility to 3MM that were obvious but tempered, and then more tempered, but at no point would I say he dropped the ball. Actually I would say that this should be an encouragement to anyone – if this is the worst you can expect from MSM exposure it’s not so bad. Go for it. Of course, it isn’t the worst, but it wasn’t bad at all. Just a discussion among folks who don’t all see eye to eye, I’m not sure what else we’d expect. Too boot too I think the moderator did a fine job.
Couple comments, Editor baskethair at minute 16:00 says, “I was never unkind to someone who was a nice guy” … this remark was in response to the designated “nice guy” guest who had asked a moment earlier if the behavior of eventually coming around to getting the virtues of nice guys, oh when she’s 30, is really fair to nice guys. They all wanted to hop on that and mis-direct the question, it made them all extremely uncomfortable. THAT’s the news point. That too, and the fact that editor baskethair’s answer is basically for niceguys to console themselves that while she was younger, hotter and fucking badboys, she was “never unkind” to niceguys. That precise juxtaposition – the palpable discomfort with the misdirect and responsibility-dodging answer … therein the whole problem.
At moment 17:05 the moderator challenges Dr. Hamster who was monologuing that “badboy” is euphemistic for “confidence” and he firmly asserts that “confidence” really doesn’t seem to explain it, it really seems to be more about guys who are both confident and who show through their actions that they don’t care about the girl. No one sufficiently rebutted this, it was tacitly agreed on. Not a good moment for the Feminine Imperative controlling the frame.
Moment 20:05 was fucking hysterical, I think it was editor baskethair, said something along the lines of “I think it is about two very secure people coming together” in response to guest Niceguy’s complaints that what they are talking about with confidence seems to imply that women are not expected to have confidence, they are basically looking to seek it out in a man.
Yes editor baskethair, that is exactly it, hot women in their 20s exercising the sexual market power of their hotness to pursue the men who turn them on is “two very secure people coming together”, that’s what that’s all about, two very secure people coming together. It’s about fucking lust and two people who got it for each other.
Best was Dr. Hamster at 24:57, “I’ve been married for 19 years to the same bad boy.”
That should have been the title on the Huffpo handle, “Dr. Hamster on Successful Marriages: I’ve been married for 19 years to the same bad boy.”
April 4th, 2013 at 11:52 am
@Socialkenny
Remaining anonymous before the bursting of a movement onto the public scene is like contemplating what you are going to say before a big public speech. It is the margin that allows good thinkers to flesh out the ideas that must find expression in language before the test comes.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:53 am
I’ll have to try decipher that 1. I’m not being a dick, but I didn’t quite get that analogy.
April 4th, 2013 at 12:10 pm
The way to talka bout the manosphere is not to talk about the manosphere. Dont’ tell your sob story. Be a social observer. You’ve seen the modern SMP, the growing MGTOW contingent,the unhappiness to BOTH men and women AND the damage done to marriage and family by the “boys are stupid throw rocks at them” mindset of the past 30 years. Never blame feminism outright on an MSM show; no need, sounds whiny; but do chronicle its sins as general socital problems..
April 4th, 2013 at 12:18 pm
Rollo, lots of authors publish pseudonymously. It’s not unusual, there’s no shame it in, it has ancient, historical and modern precedent, you are on totally firm ground to do so. It almost alarms me a bit that you would consider jeopardizing your brands by trading in the pseudonym. Most authors get paid shit. Most books are not best sellers and a book does have to be a best seller to buy a one-life meal ticket.
I counsel great caution over breaking anonymity. Not at all clear what there is in it for you.
re: your remarks about Roissy and his politics and that his politics are obviously much more heinous than his views on gender, but the gender is all everyone focuses on …
That’s a really interesting observation that I’ve thought a lot about. I often wonder if this is one great meta big shit test by Roissy/Heartiste to the rest of the world, with joke most of all being on the dimwitted low volt lightbulbs who make his comment zone their virtual home to expose their cognitive warts and disfigurements. Sort of like Roissy is saying, “hey look what I managed to do … here I have collected from across the world the most hobgobliny mass of racist bastardism this side of Stormfront, and what do you all care about? That I have the temerity to expose of the actual rules of the sexual marketplace. Nice. Very nice. Paragon of virtue aren’t we?”
But … could be wishful thinking, maybe he actually believes that bullshit.
April 4th, 2013 at 1:14 pm
Omega male: http://paleyoungmen.wordpress.com
April 4th, 2013 at 4:06 pm
They key to handling the MSM is the same as handling women, or politics.
It is ALL about the framing.
When they call you mysoginistic, you tell them that you give women what they want.
When they accuse you of being bad, you tell them women like bad boys.
When they say you want women home cleaning the kitchen, you tell them also that women want men home cleaning the kitchen.
When they say you are manipulative, you tell them so are makeup and high-heels.
No matter the accusation, you always reframe it to expose their lack of awareness and to display to the audience the possibility of a different perception.
April 4th, 2013 at 4:15 pm
“The way to talka bout the manosphere is not to talk about the manosphere. Dont’ tell your sob story. Be a social observer. You’ve seen the modern SMP, the growing MGTOW contingent,the unhappiness to BOTH men and women AND the damage done to marriage and family by the “boys are stupid throw rocks at them” mindset of the past 30 years.”
If this comment section is any indication, the drive for fame and the further refinement of the beta’s instinct to white-knight won’t allow this.
“In girl-world, women are the sole arbiters of relationship wisdoms – men are simply foils for their legitimacy, even in the best of pretenses.”
Shit-Test: Fail
April 4th, 2013 at 5:34 pm
@Case: Oh I’ll be leveraging the Rollo Tomassi pseudonym as my author name for the book for a couple reasons. First being that RT is what anyone in the manosphere will recognize, and two being for protection of my livelihood.
My concern with going public will be more about MSM attention than anything else. It’s one thing to do podcasts it’s another to do in-person interviews.
April 4th, 2013 at 6:07 pm
Annnnd,..right on cue Aunt Giggles chimes in with her own distortions. See what I mean now 3MM?
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2013/04/04/politics-and-feminism/game-and-cowering-bad-boys
And you thought I was patronizing you.
April 4th, 2013 at 6:21 pm
Dude, it has nothing to do with professional career. That is just a hogwash Manosphere excuse.
Obviously you have no career or reputation to lose, otherwise you would look at this a little differently.
Here’s a little story for ya.
I have been sick for a couple of years. The details of my health problems aren’t important for this discussion, but to make a long story short- it was caused by a prescription medication and it isn’t something that most doctors either know about or are willing to acknowledge, so about the only way you can get knowledge and support is through online patient run forums and support groups.
I am a member of one of these patient run forums, and as it turns out there was one man who felt that he was slighted by the owners of the website, and he decided to make it his life’s mission to destroy this support group.
One of the ways he does this is to ferret out the identities of members, posting their real names and pictures on his blog, publicly exposing their identity and ridiculing their medical condition.
This might not be such a big deal but due to blue pill ignorance there is a stigma associated with this condition, so anyone who is the target of this blogger is subject to discrimination when someone googles their name and finds this blog and the supposedly legal “commentary”.
For most people having their identity exposed and being a target of mentally unhinged blogger might not be the end of the world, but for someone like me who has a professional internet presence under my real identity it could ruin my business.
Anything that is stigmatized by the general public is fair game for an unscrupulous attacker.
The side lesson here is that red pill knowledge as it pertains to the mating game is only the tip of the iceberg. Watch your back and do your own research. You can’t rely on ANYONE to see your best interests as a priority.
April 4th, 2013 at 6:27 pm
“the feminine imperative will control the message for you, and they’re learning the profitability in encouraging this kind of debate.”
Yep, Susan Walsh is already in, calling out anonymous bloggers and essentially saying “if you believe it, then stand up, be counted, and say it loud and proud”.
April 4th, 2013 at 6:36 pm
I nominate Good Luck Chuck for spokesman. (Sorry if my support kills your candidacy, brother.) Why tinker around with an internet business when you can lead a cultural revolution!
Kate for archgeisha.
YaReally confesses:
Welcome to the officer’s club, adept. Enjoy the promotion.
Matt
April 4th, 2013 at 6:47 pm
Moreover, Susan calls out Dalrock for blogging anonymously, in obvious reference to her dustup with him around Christmas 2011 leading to the First Great HUS Purge. Then she calls out Badger who hasn’t commented on Susan’s blog for a year. She’s called Badger out on HUS by his nom de blog before and publicly criticized some of his posts. Her feuds with Rollo are well known.
It appears to me that her calling out Dalrock, Rollo and Badger as examples of “cowardly” anonymity smacks of something personal going on. It looks like taking jabs and swipes at bloggers who have criticized her publicly and/or severed ties with her. Looks to me like it’s less about bolstering manosphere credibility and more about passive-aggressively settling old scores.
April 4th, 2013 at 7:00 pm
Susan’s latest reads like little more than shaming language and sophisticated taunting. “Whatsa matter, Dalrock, Rollo and Badger? Are you CHICKEN?”
April 4th, 2013 at 7:18 pm
Come on with the excuses bro! The give up blogging. That would be the logical decision.
And for clarification, I’m not saying for guys to put their photo and real name on their header. What I’m saying is, if a Manospherian was to write a post about buffing up and MMA, then it’s only fair that he post a pic or 2 of himself to appear more real to his audience. What would be wrong with that? Absolutely nada! So why won’t any Manosphere guy do that? Comes down to looks and insecurities again. The only Manosphere guy I’ve seen done this before was Going Dolo. He’d posted a pic or 2 of himself running some laps at what looked like a basketball court or indoor gymnasium. You’re telling me his career is on the line for that? Of course not and he knows it. And this is why I respect such a bold move so much; he is a fat guy! But he put pride, shame and Betaness aside and manned up and did the Alpha thing! How many other Manosphere guys are willing to do that even as a one off post as it was for Going Dolo?
April 4th, 2013 at 7:24 pm
An I the only one who noticed that the huff po bitchh used roisys maxim (or was it ur rollo)
The person who cares the least has most power int he relationship..
It was amazing to watch her reaction when 3mm said that indirectly women hit the wall and are no longer useful to bad boys .
April 4th, 2013 at 7:27 pm
You are fighting the war on the enemy’s terms and in the enemy’s territory. The culture will not be changed from the inside by deliberating gently and depending on persuasion by rhetoric. The enemy hasn’t just rejected that for a generation, it has turned such naïve generosity back upon those they are pledged to destroy.
Not only does the enemy enjoy all the commanding heights of culture, it accepts dissent exclusively in ways that allow for that dissent’s comprehensive manipulation. Whatever PR agent booked that guy on that platform should be fired.
Oh, he doesn’t have a PR guy? He’s operating without a professional adviser who is aware of the tricks employed by the vastly better organized enemy, which enjoys air- and ground-supremacy? He is a self-publishing shmo who declared himself your mouthpiece?
Babes sent to the slaughter. Naïfs, amateurs, dupes, fools. Do you imagine the enemy risks the possibility of sabotage by inviting any but those types to “participate” in a “dialogue”?
The internet is not a soap-box to promulgate the message, blog by egregious blog. It is a means of gathering the convinced and easily convincible under a single, if relatively small, command. Only after the legions are populated do you organize an assault on the walls, and you do not enter a battle piecemeal, suicide-volunteer by suicide-volunteer, or in any way other than Sun-Tzu-style, i.e., one which is over before it begins by virtue of the general’s preparation and the warrior’s discipline.
There is no more “mainstream.” The Puffington Host, that rag, that gussied-up tart of a gossip sheet, where they bring guests on to call them “pussies,” is your toe-dip into the “mainstream”? Susan Walsh’s criticism is deadly accurate. The honest observers among you should be embarrassed.
Matt
April 4th, 2013 at 7:37 pm
On Roissy, I ignore everything on his site that isn’t male/female dynamic related. The racist political etc shit is just nonsense and every article he posts about that I think “well no point checking the blog this week” and consider not posting there anymore. But his posts about pickup are 1) dead on and 2) not afraid to venture into controversial parts of seduction/psychology, that I have the most fun posting there lol I get banned on Sue’s blog for daring to even bring up “dark triad” shit for discussion, but Roissy is all about diving into the mud…discussing uncomfortable truths is how you make progress in this area.
lol @ Sue
“A blogger who hides behind an empty screen demonstrates that he does not have the courage of his convictions.”
I would say the same about a blogger who deletes/blocks any opposing views on their blog. Oh wait, that’s what Sue does. I have a lifetime ban at her blog, even if I post politely lol not because I’m an asshole to her, but because I point out when she’s wrong or ignorant of PUA when she makes statements that show she clearly hasn’t done any kind of research, and she doesn’t have any comeback because she’s just pandering to her echo chamber.
It’s that thing I said above where feminists can talk smack all they want but the information holds up and when people read it they go “sure this guy is a bastard but man, what he said gels with my life experiences……..” and start critically thinking for themselves. Since she can’t make the ideas seem wrong, she goes to shaming language and defamation of the person, then bans them so those ideas can’t be expressed or read at all. An extreme version of ducking her, and her readers’, head in the sand because she knows her shit doesn’t hold up under real-life scrutiny.
But hey, when has a woman ever been aware of her own hypocracy?
Of COURSE Sue is going to jump on the goading bandwagon, the more of us that get fucked over and have to disappear the easier her job is. Don’t fall for that shit lol
“It looks like taking jabs and swipes at bloggers who have criticized her publicly and/or severed ties with her. Looks to me like it’s less about bolstering manosphere credibility and more about passive-aggressively settling old scores.”
Sue?? Being passive-aggressive to people she doesn’t like?? You don’t say!! lol
And she’s technically a semi-red-piller…imagine how Jezebel would treat 3MMs interview, or the crazy bitches who are threatening violence at Toronto campus men’s rights speeches.
http://www.jezebel.com/jeff-allen/
April 4th, 2013 at 7:40 pm
Kenny, you are still retarded. lol
April 4th, 2013 at 7:41 pm
@Deti- I never followed Susan nor ever checked out any of her stuff but if it’s true that she’d called out Badger Hut and Dalrock on their anonymity, then I can co-sign her point as valid. The way I see it is, taking jabs at someone who is public while you’re in hiding is sort of cowardly. The Alpha Persona, Ferdinand Bardamu, Beer and Concrete and Professor Mentu of Uman had all attacked me during our Twitter wars and on their blog posts. I retaliated and wiped them out literally. All of their blogs are now deceased. What was my biggest weapon? A face to my character. A guy who’s anonymous cannot attack a guy who’s in public about Game, and them expects to be seen as the credible one. So those guys all committed suicide essential by attacking me (my credibility as a Game and seduction blogger). The audience won’t buy it! Readers won’t buy it! After launching his attack on me and I retaliated, Uman’s daily viewer ship plummeted from about 900 views per day down to 240 per day. Not only did Alexa documented this, but a credible source in the Manosphere had DM’d me on Twitter saying that Mentu e-mailed him saying that he regrets attacking Kenny because all of his readers flee so he’ll be closing his blog. The same thing had happened with Alpha Persona, Beer and Concrete, the giant In Mala Fide, Fly Fresh and Young and a few other bloggers who’d attacked me with bigotry and racist innuendos (Ferdinand). What all those guys had in common was anonymity. My point is, you will not taken seriously by readers once you’re an anonymous blogger. Sure they’ll reader your shit: but they won’t buy it (literally and figuratively). Alpha Person published an e-book on pickup. It didn’t sell at all so he quickly pulled it. Had he surfaced a few times within his blog posts where his audience can scrutinize him; he would’ve appeared to be more authentic and human.
April 4th, 2013 at 8:03 pm
3 things on Sue:
1) She has great frame control. Her frames are clearly retarded but she jumps into them with 100% conviction and steamrolls over her weaker-framed audience.
2) Her message is so blue-pill and acceptable to the MSM that of course she doesn’t have to be concerned about using her real name. She hasn’t done anything significant/controversial that would piss the MSM off in her life.
3) Note that her and Kenny are both approaching this in terms of “do THIS so you can win over your opposers!” Would she un-ban me if I showed her a pic of a girl sucking my dick? No, of course not. It’s just a shit-test. Like I say the second you show your name/face, your opponent will dig up all your skeletons and you’ll be fucked. If Sue DIDN’T heavily moderate her blog it would be a cesspool of red-pillers calling her out for her hypocracy.
We’ve already discussed that trying to convince your opponent is foolish. You jump through their hoop and they set up another. Again what’s going to happen? “Oh I was going to cut you off but you have a picture of yourself in a gym on your blog so okay, you’re right, my mom was a hypergamous slut and my daughter is getting gangbanged by badboys in college, I’m totally cool with that because of your pic!”
This is why you skip convincing them entirely and go right for the audience. Because the audience we want to reach are men, and men don’t give a shit where information comes from as long as it makes sense to them. Women care, Sue’s first attack is always “what are your credentials???” so her hamster can disregard anything it disagrees with.
But men focus on the content. That’s why even when Tyler and Style (who started out under a different annonymous name) etc were still annonymous, they gained a following. Because their information held up. Tyler was always a dick back then, we all thought he was an asshole, but the shit he was dumping on us made sense.
Any advice Sue or Kenny or the MSM interviewers etc give is advice on “how to win ME over”. But they’re not our target, don’t ever forget that or you’re going to end up chasing their frame and jumping through their infinite hoops just like they want.
This is exactly the same as a girl saying “you should be kind and nice to me and not make a move until I tell you to, that’s what will turn me on!” Do you listen to her? No, of course not, because you know that path is endless hoops and no results. You ignore her advice and control the frame.
April 4th, 2013 at 8:10 pm
Manosphere bloggers who use their real names tend to fall into one of three categories..
1. when their message isn’t too far outside of the PC mainstream — i.e., their ideas aren’t controversial enough to make them unemployable,
2. when they can make a decent living by writing under their real names (Aaron Clarey, Paul Elam, Athol Kay) or
3. when they have nothing to lose (Matt Forney).
April 4th, 2013 at 8:26 pm
Fuck Susan: http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2013/04/04/politics-and-feminism/game-and-cowering-bad-boys/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+HookingUpSmart+%28Hooking+Up+Smart%29
April 4th, 2013 at 8:27 pm
Hey, go ahead and delete that previous comment. I guess I already missed y’all jumping on it.
April 4th, 2013 at 8:55 pm
@Retrenched- No one is advocating for guys to use their real names. I’m advocating that whenever guys write field reports, it’d be much more convincing if there were accompanying photo(s) in the posts. Show the face, not the name. That is my position.
April 4th, 2013 at 9:00 pm
Digging up skeletons based on your photo? Come on! That’s a big far fetched. Digging up dirt on your real name is more plausible.
And how dare you group me in with Susan. I doubt that we’re coming from the same frame and position.
As for Tyler Durden and Styles; I agree! But as I eluded to earlier, their aliases were justified.
April 4th, 2013 at 9:14 pm
@Kenny
“I’m advocating that whenever guys write field reports, it’d be much more convincing if there were accompanying photo(s) in the posts. Show the face, not the name. That is my position.”
It is a stupid position, and you are a stupid person for not understanding why. Do you want me to post videos of girls sucking my dick for you to jack off to? You have a video of yourself harassing an ugly girl who isn’t interested in you on your blog. No one cares about whether they have your respect or not.
(see what I did there? Now what happens when a friend of that girl stumbles across my comment and goes “hey, these Internet guys are calling you ugly” and it all goes viral and you turn her into the next Star Wars Kid and she starts getting emails from random guys who call her an ugly slut who should die in a hole because 14yos on the net are just assholes that way? But hey, you’re SuperKenny, fuck thinking about anyone else or consequences, you do what you want bro!!!!!!)
See Tyler’s first few minutes in this video about creepy fuckers:
Like I say, it’s awesome that you haven’t run into any of this yet but god, shut up already.
April 4th, 2013 at 9:20 pm
It’s not about me, it’s about the wider audience and credibility of this genre. No one will ever take the Manosphere serious as long as guys keep thinking that the movement can pick up steam with the mainstream in hiding.
April 4th, 2013 at 9:29 pm
Digging up skeletons based on your photo? Come on! That’s a big far fetched.
You must be new:
http://www.google.com/insidesearch/features/images/searchbyimage.html
April 4th, 2013 at 9:31 pm
@Good Luck Chuck
You do understand that you are arguing with SocialKenny, right?
http://mattforney.com/2012/09/13/my-day-of-rolling-like-kenny/
April 4th, 2013 at 9:34 pm
@Furious- Matt Forney was lucky that I let his ass off the hook or his blog would’ve perished just like the other 10 or more clown bloggers who elected to attack me.
April 4th, 2013 at 9:53 pm
I do admire your frame though Kenny. It defines irrational self confidence hence the ‘Roll Like Kenny’ slogan.
April 4th, 2013 at 9:56 pm
This is an information war. You don’t need to go public to do that. Being anonymous works fine. The enemies goading you to go public is only for them to have targets to shoot at. What they are really afraid of is that there is no target, a movement with no leader to assassinate.
April 4th, 2013 at 10:17 pm
It’s not that serious. This isn’t Al-Qaeda vs the west.
April 4th, 2013 at 10:57 pm
Looks like you got under her skin, Rollo:
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2013/04/04/politics-and-feminism/game-and-cowering-bad-boys/comment-page-2/#comment-197533
Love the implied threat of exposing you there. Same shit she did with Minter before. Like I say it’s her go-to when she can’t argue facts/logic: try to threaten/slander the person themselves. And it’s exactly why the Manosphere should stay annonymous.
Anyway, in other news, MikeC posted my comment on her blog. Even when she bans me, people can’t resist facts and logic lol she can shit on me all she wants but what I write resonates with guys and the ones curious will listen.
The Manosphere’s target audience should be the 10% of the crowd who’s curious, frustrated, or on the fence…the other 90% will ridicule, threaten, and insult us. But we can claw our way into the mainstream, 10% of the crowd at a time. There is PHENOMENALLY more red pill information, discussion, and responses to MSM articles now than 10 years ago. Slow & steady and on our terms is the way to go.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:01 pm
@Socialkenny: “It’s not that serious. This isn’t Al-Qaeda vs the west.”
Who knows which is more “serious”, but they’re in the same league. If we rot from within, we won’t stand a chance against any external enemy.
I see anonymity or the lack thereof as nothing more than a tactical choice.
Your real name and/or face can be an incredbily effective weapon, but it sets you up for some pretty brutal counter-attacks. If you’re an intelligent strategist, you weigh the advantages of using your real name against the disadvantages and act accordingly. An advantage to anonymity is that there’s less chance of reprisal if you say something that “goes over the line.” An advantage to using your real name is that your very willingness to set yourself up for such an attack show you’ve got balls and aren’t afraid.
But there are lots of guys with huge balls dead on battlefields all over the world.
I’m willing to take some hits and I WILL take some hits (already have gotten a few jabs, even though I’m under a pseudonym). I just want to make sure that when they’re able to hit me hard that I’m able to inflict even more damage in retaliation.
But I’m not there yet. They could take me out with a simple Google search before they’ve even noticed I exist. I want to use my real name and I will use it, but I’m waiting until my real identity can be a weapon, not when it’s just an easy way to bring me down.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:16 pm
Another way to look at convincing the audience:
We’ve all tried to get guy-friends into game or to swallow some of the red pill. That’s like the first thing you do when you find it, you go “wow this is brilliant and puts so many puzzle pieces together! I want all my bros to have this wisdom too!”
So you try getting your friends into game but…what’s this? They resist? Not only do they resist, some of them ridicule you for it or are outright hostile about it! Can’t they SEE?? How could they not want to open their eyes??
That’s when you learn that you can never ever ever force the red pill down someone’s throat. They will ALWAYS rationalize it away or rationalize around it. They have to hit a point where they voluntarily start to swallow the pill.
The interviewer douche, the feminist chicks, the white knights, etc in that interview, none of them WANT to swallow the red pill. It doesn’t matter how many stats or studies or stories you give them…they will rationalize around it just like your buddies forgave their girlfriend for cheating on them to keep their reality in-tact.
Even most of the audience, they aren’t actively AGAINST the red pill but they’re so socially conditioned and it’s such a huge paradigm shift that they just aren’t in a position to accept or embrace it.
But there are those few guys in the audience who are on the fence and curiois, like you were when you typed in “how to get my wife to have sex with me” or “how to get a girlfriend” or “why did my girlfriend cheat on me?”, who, if offered knowledge and an explanation and a way to fit those puzzle pieces together, will latch onto what you’re saying and start doing their own research and convert.
Those are the guys who are receptive to the red pill. Those are the guys who will google 3MM’s blog after that interview.
All we have to do is ignore the frame they set for us and the hoops they want us to jump thru and come up with ways of reframing their attacks into a couple sentences where we provide links to stuff like MMSL or an article on Hypergamy, that’s going to hit these guys hard in their logical brains.
Once that link is out, the feminists and white knights can disembowel us in public Braveheart-style, but they can’t stop the little 10% of change our message put in motion.
Sue is looking at it like “this is a bad strategy, you won’t convince 90% of the mass market to agree with you if you just let men find the info” because she doesn’t get that we won’t convince that 90% regardless of our strategy because our message is too much of a mind-fuck. All we want is that 10%, like we’ve been doing, and has been working, for years.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:40 pm
Good Luck Chuck wrote on Sue’s blog:
“If I were to use my real identity in the manosphere all it would take is for one person to stumble across a comment that *might” be able to be misconstrued as misogynistic or distasteful and my ass is toast.”
Sue replied:
“*Might?* How about if it is misogynistic and your ass deserves to be toast?”
So she’s basically admitting the sole purpose of wanting guys to toss away their annonymity is so she can make them “toast”. There you have it in black & white. She didn’t actually give a shit about our “credibility”. It was 100% about giving her more power to crush dissenting opinions.
Why am I writing this here on Rollo’s blog when, as she says, “Every HUS reader knows that civil and respectful disagreement is always OK. I even let in hostile commenters who regularly mock me”?
Because she’s banned me for respectfully disagreeing with her lol. I even tried leaving a response today and it doesn’t show up. Feel free to quote this on her blog if you happen to not be banned there. :)
Her M.O. is basically to vehemently reframe anything she disagrees with and misconstrue and twist it long enough that she knows no newer readers to the thread will go back to read what was REALLY said. If you search for whatever comments of mine are still in her archives you’ll find that the things I write in the first few pages of the thread are nothing at all like what she says I wrote in the later pages of the thread after she’s banned me so I can’t defend myself or link to my earlier comments to show current readers how she lies lol
Okay fuck, this has been fun but now I seriously have shit to do. I’ve been on vacation but sick as a dog the past few days for anyone wondering why I’m posting so much lol Thanks to my evil sociopathic dark triad game, I’ve manipulated and brainwashed a chick into bringing me a case of chicken noodle soup tomorrow…ahhh women, how I heart you despite all your crazy. Looking forward to seeing how this all pans out down the road, I expect this interview will keep gaining traction for another week…I predict a scratching article by Lindy West on Jezebel where she taunts 3MM for being annonymous and jumps to accusations and slander the same way Sue does. It’ll probably have lots of “snark” and CAPITAL LETTERS AMIRITE??? because PATRIARCHY lolololz
April 4th, 2013 at 11:44 pm
@BananaHammock: I VERY respectfully disagree. Still, your description of those few guys on the fence who google 3M’s blog was spot on.
Bringing the manosphere into the mainstream is not a worthy goal. However, I think that bringing the mainstream into the manosphere is.
I’d draw an analogy between getting dudes to swallow the Pill with game itself. Before the Pill, it was about finding that special girl who would be receptive to us “being ourselves.” Either she was going to like us, or she wasn’t. We were shooting for that 10%.
As you learn game, there are still women who will never sleep with you, but by putting a different spin on “being yourself”, all of a sudden a ton more women are receptive. Some never will be attracted to you, but as you perfect your presentation skills, your odds go up substantially.
That 10% finding us is great (and I know I’m a bit too apocalyptic for some), but I see this whole gender thing as totally fucking our society. There are millions of men living the lives of zombies and millions more boys who are likely to grow up to do the same. We’re running out of time before the shit hits the fan HARD, and we won’t be able to do anything about it.
Game increases any guy’s odds of getting women to want to sleep with him. Likewise, Game applied in a different context (otherwise known as Rhetoric) is incredibly effective at persuading both men and women to adopt your views on something.
I advocate using the principles of Game to spread the knowledge of Game. Your previous post that I praised shows that your rhetorical instincts match your Game instincts. I just think we need to transfer those skills to the public at large.
I also don’t “get that we won’t convince that 90% regardless of our strategy because our message is too much of a mind-fuck.” Naziism, Communism, feminism, and a whole bunch of other crap have been even more of a mind-fuck in that they were FALSE. The Red Pill is TRUE.
Furthermore the Red Pill IS the very strategy we need to use to wake people up to it. Even as a beta I turned every women I slept with into a political clone of myself. After I learned Game, I realized that I was using Game techniques on them (and even on guys) to change their minds politicially. The Red Pill is more than political (some like Rollo might even say apolitical), but the rhetorical principles are the same.
You emphasize different things and use them different ways, but active indifference, agree and amplify, effective alpha framing, push/pull, cat-string theory, etc. aren’t just Game techniques, they’re Rhetorical techniques, and when applied properly they’re just as effective at getting men to recognize the Red Pill as they are at getting women to want to bang you.
I therefore don’t accept that we’re relegated to just convincing the occasional dude who already wants to be convinced.
If you don’t believe me, then years ago the idea of gay marraige was a JOKE. Now, it’s opponents are the freaks. Why? They Gamed the American public.
We know Game better than anyone, so we can do the same.
April 4th, 2013 at 11:59 pm
It’s a very female thing to have a need to personify or personalise ideas and things. Men can deal easily with the abstract as long as the idea is sound and survives field testing. We don’t need to know who Rollo T actually is, as long as what he writes makes sense and we can benefit from it.
April 5th, 2013 at 12:11 am
Good god Rollo, why did you have to link to that piece of shit blog again?
“*Might?* How about if it is misogynistic and your ass deserves to be toast?”
I almost pissed myself when I saw that.
April 5th, 2013 at 12:40 am
lol’ed at bananahammock
“I therefore don’t accept that we’re relegated to just convincing the occasional dude who already wants to be convinced.”
I agree with you’re whole comment, my point is simply that the platforms the MSM give us will not be conducive to actively spreading our message like you suggest. Like, a prisoner who wants to get out early by behaving good is out of luck if the prison guard never drops by his cell. The guy who comes up with a male contraceptive pill will never be given a platform by feminists to let us know about it. You can go to /r/mensrights and see dozens of legit verifiable news stories of false rape accusations and the Jezzies will still post articles about how that doesn’t happen and how MRAs are all mysogynistic liars.
Like, we’re going into a hostile environment where we’ll get a few seconds of exposure here and there in-between ridicule and demonization.
If 60 minutes said “we’ll give you an hour to share your red pill shit, show us what you want, we won’t interrupt you or bring on feminists to argue with you”, man, we could kill that shit. We’d convince 90% of the crowd no problem. It would cause mass revolutions in thinking. But they’re never going to give us that, even with our names and faces exposed.
Someone at Sue’s used the Vietnam analogy…head to head one on one America would have kicked their ass, but they hid and used traps and shit. It didn’t matter how much tougher we were, we weren’t given a platform to demonstrate that.
So I agree with you completely, but I’m looking at the reality of what we’re given to work with here. And I personally think that when all they’re going to give us is little demonizing, ridiculing, sound byte snippet fights against feminists and white knights, the best we can do with that sliver of exposure is create an opportunity for that 10% to find us and join us.
Down the road when the movement is more widespread, that’s when we can reveal ourselves and get more in-depth on these topics and speak to a more receptive audience. But right now we’re in the infancy of a revolution/movement and we have to work within that as optimally and efficiently as possible and trust that down the road we’ll get bigger and better opportunities to spread the pill.
That’s why Sue wants us to expose ourselves now. She knows that’s jumping the gun and that anyone doing it will get snuffed out because we don’t have enough mainstream support yet. She doesn’t want us to wait till we can expose ourselves to a receptive audience. She’s basically goading us with “c’monnnn how come you don’t want to sabotage your own movement?? C’monnnn just fuck yourself over already!! (Insert shaming, goading, threats, etc)”
Come out to a hostile audience and get killed as at best a martyr. Come out to a receptive audience and be worshipped as a god. There’s a reason comedians have warm-up acts instead of walking into a possibly unreceptive and distracted audience cold-turkey.
April 5th, 2013 at 1:06 am
Watch this:
April 5th, 2013 at 1:34 am
@Transmillenium: awesome
@ Banana: “Down the road when the movement is more widespread, that’s when we can reveal ourselves and get more in-depth on these topics and speak to a more receptive audience. But right now we’re in the infancy of a revolution/movement and we have to work within that as optimally and efficiently as possible and trust that down the road we’ll get bigger and better opportunities to spread the pill.”
One way we need to do this is to keep the people who’ve swallowed it from spitting it back up. I’ve had an idea on how to maybe do this, but it would take more work than I’ve got time for, and only a couple people have expressed interest. Maybe my idea isn’t the best, but if it’s not then somebody needs to come up with a better one, because I’m calling attention to a very real phenomenon:
http://alphaisassumed.wordpress.com/category/dead-beta-society/
“Like, we’re going into a hostile environment where we’ll get a few seconds of exposure here and there in-between ridicule and demonization.”
Entirely correct, and some environments are so hostile they’ve got to be avoided. But just like that tough four-set, sometimes difficult frames can be overcome.
SOMETIMES a hostile frame can be overcome by simply calling attention to it. If you’re about to be interviewed by Piers Morgan, the second he gets obnoxious (probably with the first question), you say something like “the only reason you’re having me on here is to discredit me.” He’ll deny it, of course, but his hostile frame is largely neutrailzed. Every time he interrupts you, every time he asks you a stupid question, you refer back to your initial prediction and therefore give yourself credibility. “Are you actually going to let me answer this question or are you just going to talk over me again?” “You seem absolutely terrified of letting me finish a single sentence?” “I thought you said you weren’t going to try to discredit me.” “That question obviously shows you know nothing about what we stand for and that you don’t want to know.” Piers will be Piers, but when you’re calling his shots as he makes them, even if you don’t make you’re points, like the brilliant video above shows, you’re proving him wrong.
It’s in a different context, but I address some ways to do this here:
http://alphaisassumed.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/de-framing/
But, if we’re not cool with that, there are some audiences that wouldn’t be hostile that we’re not exploiting. Glenn Reynolds of instapundit.com has huge readership, an internet talk-show, and he tweets back and forth with Roissy every so often. It’s not CBS, but it does have viewers, and we’d be guaranteed a fair shot.
I’m not sure if he’d want to be associated too openly with our more extreme elements, but he has linked to Heartiste, Vox Day, and Captain Capitalism a few times, so who knows.
April 5th, 2013 at 1:36 am
“”@ Höllenhund thanks for the good link
Dr. Jordan Peterson is a beacon of reason and many here will appreciate him. Not only for his perspectives that relate to this sphere, but for his broader and deeper work.””
Agreed, he was very good. You could tell he was bursting with some real red pill knowledge but the confines of political correctness wouldn’t let him. He even makes a point about current PC hindering any real discussion. Him and Mark Regnerus knew their shit, the other younger 2 not so much.
April 5th, 2013 at 4:14 am
Instead of being so eager to break the “feminist imperative”, enjoy the show. The more beta men = the less competition for women.
April 5th, 2013 at 6:54 am
@John
Your short-sighted, “in it for myself” view, is half the reason we’re in this mess. When you’re girlfriend “forgets to take the pill” and you end up with a kid you didn’t want and the government bending you over the table and extracting your hard earned income, then tell me how all those beta enablers that propagate the current status quo are benefiting you?
April 5th, 2013 at 8:22 am
@SI: That is a pretty commonly known concept in any relationship advice realm. I’m not sure Roissy originated it.
@GLC: That is despicable and I pray for your health. There are psychotics out there online for sure. I’ve met them. One had me so snowed for a while she even had my phone number. When things soured, I fully anticipated the worst, but it wasn’t so bad. It took over a year, but eventually those she turned against me saw her for who she really was.
In general: the power someone like Susan Walsh has is that they are presumable already “out” so there is nothing to expose about them. As far as I’m concerned, “Rollo Tomassi” is real enough. But, I agree it would be discrediting to go faceless in an interview, and I think the real issue at hand is what the “face” of the manosphere should be. As the outsider here, I’m just trying to offer some helpful opinions. What is worthwhile continuing to discuss is what the group wants in terms of the following:
1. do you want people breaking through individually, or do you want it to be a group effort?
2. what are the most important points you want anyone speaking to the media to make?
3. what is the focus of the movement? new recruits, promoting sites or books, etc.
The most effective way to defeat enemies is to be stronger than them. And as much as I might want to go tell off some woman for remarks about men I’m very loyal to, the most energy I should expend is one sardonic comment. Save energy for the furtherment of your cause, whatever you decide that is, rather than on defending yourself from others.
April 5th, 2013 at 8:32 am
Digging up skeletons based on your photo? Come on!
kenny, i guess you don’t realize that there are reverse image search engines now? if i had a photo of you, i can plug it into the search engine and it will find occurrences of it on the web. if you keep everything on the dl, maybe the search engine won’t dig up any pages with personal information. but maybe the results lead to a page with other photos of you, which i can then use to do more searches, etc.
April 5th, 2013 at 8:44 am
@Itsme- Dude, y’all are really taking this shit too seriously. I mean, what am I missing here? I’ve yet to hear a single case of any Manosphere, Game, seduction or PUA blogger getting framed or fucked due to his photos being searched online. The doom and gloom theories y’all guys revert to is just hilarious. And this is why the Manosphere is a joke as it is today: too many paranoid guys. Life is fucking short! Live it up! Live on the edge! Take fucking risks! Life in itself is a risk and gamble since we all can get our brains blown out by some random psycho tomorrow. So let it all hang the fuck out! That should be the Manosphere’s policy. Not a bunch of chodes whining and crying over Google searches and their professions being jeopardize. That is a Beta-Male’s mentality and approach. The reason I’m a very successful PUA (coach) is that I’m balls to the walls when it comes to women. Any guy who’s successful with women (be it Krauser, Roosh, etc.) All live by this motto.
Roosh has already predicted the Manosphere’s fall and the MRA’s fall, but no one seems to be raising that issue which Roosh blogged about not too long ago.