I’m still very busy at a Vegas tradeshow at the moment, but briefly, I’d like to take this opportunity to personally embrace all the newly disenfranchised and disillusioned commenters who were once regulars at the Hooking Up Beta echo chamber.
I understand that you may have once believed that Aunt Giggles was sincere in her assertions of wanting to come to some gender neutral middle ground as a mission statement for the catharsis that passes for her blog. I understand your frustration, but always know that the comment threads here at RM will never be edited or censored of conflicting viewpoints and insight (only spam). You see, personally, I believe that a real understanding of gender issues can only happen in an open forum of debate. A true marketplace of ideas needs all voices to determine the strength and validity of those ideas.
Again, welcome, and please feel free to browse the categories and archive.
Ahaha, the benevolent subtlety of that jab made me laugh. Nice one Tomassi.
I really wanted to like that site, but the answers and posts provided always left me cold and with more questions. It all reminded me of the teachers, coaches, parents, salesmen, mangers, et al, who would rather be your friend than truly help you by preparing you for the tasks and challenges ahead of you.
You need to do a post specifically about women’s debating style.
How does it go? Get frustrated then angry then resort to name calling and shaming then refuse to participate in the discussion (or BAN someone, if you have that power).
It’s quite comical, really.
Let’s not forget that when arguing with women her anecdotes trump all facts, statistics, averages, medians, modes, ranges, standard deviations, confidence intervals…..
If she, or one of her friends, don’t think/act like that well then it’s you who is wrong because she hasn’t seen/heard of it before
Hmmm…I saw the comment about Rollo and Yohami as “woman-haters” and “toxic” and then in the next breath/sentence accusing them of using invective. Something ironic about that. I’ll admit I’m somewhat surprised at the direction she has gone in in terms of the substance and tone, and the actions to really come down hard with censoring and banning commenters. My sense is there is some frustration and she very much sees Rollo as a sort of Emperor type figure corrupting decent men to “Dark” game. Its become a battle of “good” vs “evil” and any nuance/subtlety is lost. In any… Read more »
Rollo is hardly ‘dark’. He just happens to be an advocate of male awareness. The reaction you’re seeing by Susan serves as an excellence case study in what he’s explained before: “Nothing is more threatening yet simultaneously attractive to a woman than a man who is aware of his own value to women.” The Threat http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/02/10/the-threat/ As Rollo continues to expose many faces of hypergamy, Roissy/Heartiste’s Maxim #77 is also proven to be true: “Maxim #77: Women will screech louder the closer your words get to damaging or exposing vulnerabilities in their sexual market value.” – http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/how-to-tell-that-being-called-a-slut-matters-to-girls/ Here, ‘sexual market… Read more »
i don’t know if its a great time to be a man…there is a long struggle ahead to give our sons a more balanced reality.
there are some juicy sluts to cum on though!
HUS: where hamsters go to convalesce.
H(‘R)US: Hamsters ‘R US
A little harsh, aren’t we? HUS just trying to convice the young females that it’s hopeless to count on a LTR by chasing alphas. A much taller order for her than your job to convice betas to swallow the red pill. A lot of her commentators are over the top. Except for my pal Munson. But you two are not that far apart. She recognizes alpha cues for what they are: the LTR road to nowhere. You suggest guys avoid marriage until their 30’s. Sound advice. I actually enjoy the back and forth. She did overreact to your Roissy riff… Read more »
That’s begging the question. One of the points of contention is that Aunt Wiggles is wallowing in ulterior motives.
Senior Beta She recognizes alpha cues for what they are: the LTR road to nowhere. Not exactly. One of the guiding principles of HUS is that women can be trained to recognize which guys are ‘cads’ and which guys are ‘dads’ so they can build relationships with the ‘dads’. My understanding is that this runs 180 degrees counter to Game principles for two reasons. The first reason is that the core principle of game is imitating alpha cues well enough to generate attraction. Secondly, it runs counter to the ‘ladder’ principle of relationship selection. She pretty much rejects any attempt… Read more »
It’s completely understandable though, why expect a woman to debate like a man?
What baffles me is that Vox Day has hitched his wagon with HUS, he’s a pretty sharp dude and it doesn’t make sense.
FWIW, he posted a comment on HUS (I can’t find it now) where he kind of explained his position vis a vis HUS and more “hardcore red-pill” type gender dynamic sites.
Women have a built-in bug (err, feature!): Autoshame (I’m tempted to add Autoflirt as well). When you call them properly out on their bullshit its amazing the backpedaling that can suddenly happen. Though sometimes a great deal of anger/hate can appear as well.
My personal red-pill started with Roissy/Chateau, then The Spearhead, and now here. All three have different slants and often the comments sections are pure gold.
There is still a long way to go.
I like it here. I think I’ll stay awhile…
To be fair, even though I’ve read it a long time I stopped commenting a long time ago.
I wasn’t expecting to be banned for calling her out on her ridiculous behaviour though. That would be an unacceptable act of cowardice for a man, there’s some hamster action happening there for a feminist like Susan to do that.
She obviously “feels” like she is under siege from the brutal forces of misogyny (ie, men, not the manginas that appear to be comfortable in that environment.)
Women simply and trust just cannot help themselves.
It’s funny, if pathetic.
I’ve thrown a few comments on her site but I really objected to her approving link of that graph of study-time vs romance that supposedly showed that nose-in-the-book nerds are eventually going to clean up in the relationship department. As if. I’m probably not strident enough to get banned so I just left the thread after throwing in my comments. I checked back later and found the typical 500+ comment digression away from the topic of the post had occured. I had some fairly high hopes for the site when I first started reading. I know I’m out of the… Read more »
Eventually the beta guys at HUS will all come to the realisation that making a heartfelt appeal for women’s sympathy for their situation is a fruitless pursuit. That blog serves a very useful purpose in that prolonged exposure to it will kill any notion of “NAWALT” in the beta’s head. The truth is sometimes best learned straight from the horse’s mouth.
What baffles me is that Vox Day has hitched his wagon with HUS, he’s a pretty sharp dude and it doesn’t make sense. I don’t see how I’ve hitched my wagon with anyone. First, Susan and I get along well personally, which has nothing to do with whether we agree on anything or not. Second, how can anyone who knows anything about Game expect a happily married mother’s perspective to precisely match that of a single thirty-something player? Third, Susan is intelligent and usually has something interesting to say. I also think it’s unrealistic to expect Susan to ride herd… Read more »
The problem is that her advice will probably do more harm than good to betas. Her blog is a platform for Game 2.0. Some older MRAs have warned that as Game becomes more mainstream, women and white knights will start to turn it against men in order to fulfill the feminine imperative. They were apparently right.
to ride herd on her site
What does this mean?
manage the crowd.
Perhaps you should defend her some more, VD.
It’s my opinion that HUS is becoming less and less useful to anyone as it slides farther and farther back towards the blue pill.
Ruthlessly purging anyone who disagrees with your clueless female perspective just because you can’t take the intellectual heat makes for a pretty useless blog.
Yohami was toxic? Really? Bullshit. I’ve seen the posts she labelled toxic. She just didn’t understand what he was saying, and got pissed about it.
Embrace accepted. Although I should point out that I never actually bought the idea of HUS being some sort of ’gender-neutral middle ground’, gynocentrism and female solipsism being what it is. I have this pet theory that any public venue NOT specifically created as anti-gynocentric and anti-feminist will inexorably and inevitably become a quasi-feminist gynocentric echo chamber, and HUS seems to be the perfect example.
The latest gem of wisdom from Aunt Sue in the comment section of “Is the End of Hypergamy real?”:
“I agree with you about soft harems. Not gonna happen. That prediction is also a form of the desire to see women pay, based on an inflated view of the LTR appeal of alpha males.”
A “desire to see women pay”? What kind of paranoid nonsense is that? How exactly do women “pay” when they join a soft harem as opposed to say, marry some beta chump or become a lonely spinster with cats? The mind boggles.
‘A “desire to see women pay”? What kind of paranoid nonsense is that? How exactly do women “pay” when they join a soft harem as opposed to say, marry some beta chump or become a lonely spinster with cats? The mind boggles.’
I think it means women shouldn’t be accountable for their own choices (I.E. same old same old just amped to 11)
The problem is that her advice will probably do more harm than good to betas That could be. Of course, isn’t one of the core principles of Game for men to not take female advice about women? HUS is primarily for the young women, not the young betas. Any beta dumb enough to take advice for young women over Roissy et al merits his subsequent experiences. Ruthlessly purging anyone who disagrees with your clueless female perspective just because you can’t take the intellectual heat makes for a pretty useless blog. That’s an overstatement. Susan and I don’t agree on everything… Read more »
Yohami’s not posting at HUS is a real loss there. He is one of a kind and illuminates anyplace he posts. Yohami pushed Susan and other commenters hard and didn’t give any quarter. He really made me reconsider a lot of things.
I’d agree….Yohami is brilliant as he is analytical in an allegorical and storytelling type of manner. In a previous life, I imagine he was an Indian chieftain.
The problem with being that perceptive is sometimes you can hit on things people absolutely do not want you to expose or discuss.
VD, you really think she has any credibility left? She’s an 8 year old, throwing rocks into the boy’s playground.
Rollo, she did leave a little winky smiley thing at the end of that post. I don’t think she would ban him there if he came here and started posting in his usual manner.
Why do the two of you continue to read each others blog? I understand that posters are coming here and telling you what’s happening. It’s understandable that you would react to that. It’s part of your blog. But as far as going over there at this point, why do it?
Why do it? Hamsterwatching, I suppose, which is similar to birdwatching. At least that’s why I occasionally go there. And to have fun reading Aunt Sue’s and her minions’ ridiculous attacks on the Manosphere.
Believe me, I don’t make a point of reading her any more, but I do get PMs from guys I know on various forums about her inability to “get over me” in damn near every comment thread on her blog.
I should also add that I don’t make a point of picking her blog posts apart as part of my blog fodder. She’s the one who’s got a problem with me.
It occurs to me that I should have given you a heads up out of respect, but I asked her the same question (my apologies). She reads you when you link to her and she said she would be delighted if you “killed” the links as she doesn’t want traffic from here. Seems like neither of you want attention from each other, so why not end it? If she keeps it up and then you respond or vice versa it won’t end. If it makes for good blog information, so be it.
her inability to “get over me”
She’s the one who’s got a problem with me.
She reads you when you link to her
I didn’t link to her, here:
Yet these posts are her favorites.
Hmmmmm, I don’t know. I’ll will stay out of it now.
That Jesus guy seems like an odd character to me. He used to come across as a typical white-knighting, irritating beta smartass who snarkily attacks other men for their ‘misogynistic’ ways. Once I commented on HUS that it’s psychologically advantageous for men to have men-only places where they can be free from women’s never-ending bullshit. His response was to call me clinically insane and a probable victim of abuse. He obviously felt compelled to defend woman’s ‘honor’, you see. I mean, come on…we know this type of betas, don’t we? Now Aunt Sue and her minions are kicking him around… Read more »
Vox, I would tend to agree, but she knows she’s getting traffic from your Alpha site. That’s how I found her, IIRC. At least one warning would be in order given the likely composition of at least part of her audience. She didn’t give me one, and then she deleted my attempts to apologize and clarify. That’s pretty weak and pathetic. No big loss, though. She seems to be all about “how to keep being the same old whore while trying to keep some modicum of dignity” anyway. It’s weak advice so far as I can tell. But it gives… Read more »
Aunt Sue bans commenters for the flimsiest of reasons. Once a commenter said that MRAs want to see all women suffer a bit before pushing back the pendulum to its normal state. I pointed out that there are no MRAs that I know of that express this view, that I, for one, don’t want women to suffer either, that making women suffer would be pointless anyway because they wouldn’t understand WHY they’re suffering and it’d give more ammunition to feminists and white knights. Aunt Sue labeled all this ‘toxic shit’ and banned me. True story.
If all Sue did was ban commenters I would agree that she’s censoring based on what she feels is offensive to her readers, but that’s not what she does. She selectively moderates comments from users she ‘bans’ in order to affirm her own narrative. For instance if I or Yohami or Dalrock made a comment that she agreed with or thought she could in someway challenge, she’d allow that comment to post in order to patronizingly agree, or to offer up her take on how NAWALT. But post something she categorically disagrees with or has no immediate rebuttal for, and… Read more »
There’s a game/relationship advice site written by a woman? And women and white knights deny and suppress dissenting opinions? Shocked, shocked. I will now delete this information so that it does not take up useless brain storage.
When it comes to game, as with anything, I’m an empiricist from Missouri. Show Me.
Whoa, what exactly happened over there?
All I can say is that there’s no such thing as bad publicity……
Stop it right there brother.
VD, you really think she has any credibility left?
Of course. Ideas stand or fall on their own. I have no doubt plenty of people would love to be able to dismiss the ideas I present due to my own personal idiosyncracies.
Yes, but your idiosyncracies don’t include plugging your ears while insisting on your own veracity when anyone has a counterpoint to your own perspective.
Vox, that reads like an evasion. The question was about SW’s personal credibility in light of her behavior. Your answer is about the validity of her ideas.
Ignoring anything SW says because she has demonstrated a pattern of disingenousness is the same kind of practical approach as assuming that an atheist is lying until you’ve verified his statement.
Apparently you Red Pill swallowers are all branded misogynists now by Aunt Giggles.
What have you done????
What happened to the Cesar post?
I tried to get into that site a year or so back. Wanted to see if there really could be a valid female opinion about this stuff that wasn’t blinded by solipsism. Turns out there isn’t. I was immediately called a troll by Auntie for posting only a mild rebuttal of some inane point or another. I tried another comment and was again called out by Auntie. I read through the comments and was sickened by the prevalence of white knights and beta suckups. I saw that Aunt Sue’s “wisdom” was only the same old hamster spinnings with a bit… Read more »
“I saw that Aunt Sue’s “wisdom” was only the same old hamster spinnings with a bit of clever repackaging and rebranding.”
and that is what makes it so dangerous.
i feel strongly about this issue cause i used to be the biggest beta alive, and it is a pathetic way to live. no male should have to live this way, and i would hate for a young dude to think he has discovered real game when instead he has discovered crap.
HUS = pink pill
rollo = red pill
[…] rollo’s blog: I’m still very busy at a Vegas tradeshow at the moment, but briefly, I’d like to take this […]
rollo i have no idea what happened but keep up the great work. you are one of the rocks of the game community.
HIlarity continues. Aunt Sue has just banned the word ‘female-centric’ on her blog.
Give her enough rope,..
I’ve been gone for two and a half weeks from the ‘Sphere. Was there more ridiculous drama kicked of by Susan seeing illusions of attacks, making them personal, and escalating? Anything that brings more men here instead of there, I’m in favor of. Either way, I found my way into the ‘Sphere with HUS and am glad I didn’t stay limited to it. No room for an real growth for men over there in that minefield of Feminist Twister. Spin the wheel, put your left foot on game real quickly, your right hand on moxie, your left on femininity, and… Read more »