Dr. Van Nostrand brought up how Trump is the perfect caricature of a conservative opponent for the left and feminists similar to how Roosh is another ideal adversary for feminists. This is true and they used the same tactic of promoting Trump as they have promoted Roosh just to take him down. During the primaries feminists were all pro Trump. Amanda Marcotte even said that Trump was the least anti-woman candidate in the Republican primary field.
Why did the attempt to “Roosh” Trump fail? Because Trump was willing to fight to the bitter end and beyond even if it made no sense. On the other hand, Roosh was a coward who would collapse at the slightest real world challenge (outside of meaningless internet arguments against nobodies). This is exactly what happened when he went on the Dr. Oz show. Roosh had several avenues to fight back against Dr. Oz and his audience, but he failed to use them. If Trump was on the Dr. Oz show instead of Roosh, he would have insulted Dr. Oz and his audience instead. Sure it would have been a stupid tactic, but unlike Roosh, Trump would at least fight back. That puts Trump a step above Roosh.
While this worked to get Trump the presidency, it does show that Trump is less interested in winning than constantly engaging in arguments in the real world. Trump had many opportunities to knock out Hillary, particularly in the debates, but he failed to use them. Some of that can be explained by stupidity, but too many of those opportunities were incredibly obvious. Similar to Roosh, Trump would rather have a fight than obliterate his opponents. It also doesn’t help that at his core, Trump is a mangina.
The good news about this is that Trump has paved the way for a real pro-male individual who is willing to fight and obliterate feminists, manginas, and other gynocentrists. I don’t know who that man will be yet, but he is coming. He is going to go for the jugular. He will be smart and understand that this is a war so his goal will be the total destruction of feminists, manginas, and other gynocentrists. He won’t back down like Roosh or miss opportunities & fight for the sake of fighting like Trump.
I found something that explains why you can’t trust women.
This is why women can’t be trusted. In the end a woman will always side with another woman over a man no matter how vile and evil, the other woman is.
This last week I watched a show on TV where an archaeologist traveled to Romania to investigate the source of the vampire myth, the strigoi. He found out that nowadays in Romania no one living in the major cities believes in strigoi anymore. In rural areas, its different. The archaeologist investigated a recent case where a group of men desecrated the grave of a newly dead man who they believed to be a strigoi. Besides desecrating the grave, the men preformed a bunch of anti-strigoi rituals including eating the dead man’s heart. The archaeologist talked to one of the men who did this, and the man was convinced that he did the right thing. He was absolutely certain of his own righteousness. At the end of the episode the archaeologist concludes that vampires or strigoi are an attempt to believe monsters are outside of us and avoid dealing with the monster within.
This is an excellent metaphor for how women treat men. Women whether feminist, traditionalist conservative, or in between have a million reasons why men are evil. Those reasons may conflict with each other, but they believe men are evil. Women even came up with the idea of “benevolent sexism” which is basically saying when men do things for women and are nice to women, men are still evil. The relationship between women and men is like that between rural Romanians and the fictional strigoi. Women fabricate all of these reasons why men are evil to avoid dealing with the monster within themselves.
The group that hacked the Ashley Madison database has released a single name from the database. They should release all of the names in the database. If there was a kickstarter or something to pay them the hackers to release the names in the database, I would commit serious money to it. That’s provided they didn’t include the credit card numbers because I’m against credit card fraud.
Every person who has ever used that website is guilty of defrauding their spouse so it’s not like there would be any victims here.
Apparently, feminists are pissed that Black Widow, a character from Marvel comics/Marvel movies got called a slut. When you consider the name, Black Widow, it’s clear that she is a slut. However, pointing this out is making feminists very angry even though Black Widow doesn’t exist. (Maybe feminists don’t realize that Black Widow isn’t an actual person.) In particular, one of the authors at the Dickless Mangina Project wants to punch any man who uses the world slut.
You can call me a slut (fair warning – you might get punched in the face if you do)
The Dickless Mangina Project thinks it’s fine for women to punch men who use the word slut. Since they’re fine with that, that must also mean that they fine with men punching women accuse them of being losers who can’t get laid or of being “creepy”. Otherwise, they would be hypocrites.
So next time a woman says that you’re a loser who can’t get laid or accuses you of being a virgin (regardless of whether you are one or not) or says you’re creepy, punch her. That’s how the Dickless Mangina Project says you should handle that.
Whenever a woman uses the word, creepy, against a man, it’s equivalent to calling a black person a nigger. Here’s an example that shows this to be true.
If a man takes a picture of a woman it’s “creepy”, but if the genders are reversed it’s perfectly fine. This proves that “creepy” is no different than nigger because Anita Sarkeesian is not applying a consistent standard. This is similar to applying a different standard to whites and blacks which is common is racist ideas. Thus, “creepy” and nigger are being used in the same way.
If you don’t know what a centillion is, here you go.
That 50 Shades of Grey movie is coming out this weekend. Obviously, I won’t be watching it, and I’m sure that most people reading this won’t either. The only reason I bring it up is because 50 Shades of Grey is a good example of what women really want.
50 Shades of Grey is a female fantasy of controlling men. All the BDSM is just window dressing to provide surface level confusion of the issue. Christian Grey one of the main characters is a victim of statutory rape by a woman who used him. That’s why he’s so messed up. Since he’s messed up, he ends up being controlled over time by Anastasia Steele. (Now, you don’t need to read the book or watch the movie.) What women want is to rule men and keep us as de facto slaves. They’re plenty of disagreement about how to do that, but the goal is the same. 50 Shades of Grey is simply an example of this.
What would the opposite of 50 Shades of Grey look like? Christian Grey instead of getting involved with Anastasia Steele would realize that women aren’t the solution to his problems but the case. He would end up going his own way. The lesson is that if you want to be free this Valentine’s Day (or the rest of the year), you must go your own way.