Counter-Currents
Roosh Really is a Rape Advocate
(& a Rapist, if He’s Telling the Truth)
Greg Johnson
1,643 words
Spanish translation here
Feminists have cried “wolf!” so often that I have gotten in the habit of ignoring them, so my first reaction to the recent campaign against Roosh V was just to dismiss it. The typical SJW is so indifferent to truth that it often seems that an important part of her brain has simply stopped working. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and sadly they are right about Roosh.
But first let me get something out of the way. Roosh’s position in his much pilloried article “How to Stop Rape” is basically defensible. No, rape should not be legalized on private property. But if a woman invites a man to her place or accompanies a man to his place, then claims that she has been raped, it is very hard to prove such charges beyond a reasonable doubt. And the American legal system errs on the side of letting guilty people go free rather than on the side of convicting the innocent.
Feminists, however, are working to destroy the standard of reasonable doubt. They are creating a world where it is possible for a man to be arrested for rape — which has devastating consequences even if he is found innocent — simply on the basis of an accusation that could never stand up in a properly conducted trial by jury.
Police, prosecutors, and judges need to stop pandering to feminists. Women need to know that accusations of rape in which there are obvious grounds for reasonable doubt will simply be ignored, and they need to act accordingly. Fewer women will be raped, fewer men will get away with rape because of reasonable doubt, STD and abortion rates will fall while marriage rates rise, fewer women will behave like sluts, and men like Roosh will get laid a whole lot less. In my book, those are all good things.
But still, Roosh’s critics have a case. His enemies cite three rapey passages from his sex tourist travelogues. In the first version of this article, I included all three, beginning with two passages attributed to his book Bang Poland. I clearly said that these probably were not rape “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Unfortunately, whoever quoted these passages did not include brackets with ellipses [. . .] to indicate omissions. Roosh’s defenders have seized on this to cry “foul!,” even though I assigned no probative value to the passages in the first place. To deny them this distraction, I have simply eliminated the offending quotes. Instead, I urge everyone to read Bang Poland
The most damning quote is from Roosh’s book Bang Iceland. Roosh claims that this passage has been taken out of context. Here is what I quoted, with the paragraph breaks corrected:
While walking to my place, I realized how drunk she was. In America, having sex with her would have been rape, since she legally couldn’t give her consent. It didn’t help matters that I was sober, but I can’t say I cared or even hesitated.
I won’t rationalize my actions, but having sex is what I do.
At this point, I asked: “What kind of man rapes a drunken girl without remorse because ‘having sex is what I do’?” And I declared, “The proper emotional reaction to this is disgust.”
Roosh’s defenders, however, point out that I did not quote the full paragraph. I am happy to oblige. You tell me if it helps Roosh’s case:
I won’t rationalize my actions, but having sex is what I do. If a girl is willing to walk home with me, she’s going to get the dick no matter how much she has drunk. I’ll protect myself by using a condom (most of the time), but I know that when it comes to sex, one ounce of hesitation or a feeling of morality will get me nothing.
Roosh also claims that he and the girl had sex again the next morning when she was sober. Of course, if that really happened, it would not alter the moral meaning of what happened the night before. Indeed, it makes it worse. Roosh has written a rape story with a happy ending, which only makes it more likely that someone will imitate him with a less happy outcome.
Roosh was asked about the Bang Iceland passage in his February 6, 2015 press conference (transcript here):
Female Reporter: . . . There are several instances in the Bang books where you recount having sex with women who were too drunk or incapacitated to consent. Now people reading that would certainly come away with the impression that you raped those women.
Roosh: I don’t know anyone except for maybe you that thinks that, and people who have lost their minds when it comes to consensual sex. People who don’t have any idea what girls are doing outside right now and what they will do in an hour or two once they get drunk and pick the guy that they like and let him do whatever he wants with her. So macho sex writing, to convert that to rape takes such a leap of faith that you have to be a liar to think that’s true.
Female Reporter: You literally say that they were too incapacitated to consent.
Roosh: Macho sex writing is not a court. It’s not a piece of evidence that you can… Maybe some things I wanted to come across as an aggressive guy. Maybe I did. But just because there doesn’t means that there is a victim out there and she suffered. Have I raped anyone? No.
Reporter: Is that fiction?
Roosh: No. It’s not.
As my friend Seventh Son pointed out on The Daily Shoah (Episode 71, February 10, 2016), this is not a satisfactory response. Roosh faces a dilemma here, and the reporterette knows it. If he is telling the truth, he raped the girl. (It is rape in Iceland too.) And if “macho sex writing” just means Penthouse Letters-style fiction, then it casts doubt on the veracity of all of his sex travelogues, which function as testimonials to his pickup artistry. In short, Roosh is either a rapist or a fraud.
But even if Roosh is a fraud, he is no mere fraud. He is a fraud with a large audience that regards him as a role model. Even if he never raped anyone, one day one of his followers will. Does anyone seriously doubt that somewhere in the world, a woman has been (or will be) raped because of what some pussy nerd read in a book by Roosh V? I’d bet money on it. And not even Roosh’s most ardent supporters would take that bet. So it is not just feminist hysteria to describe Roosh as a rape advocate.
Roosh also argues that since no woman has accused him of rape, he has never raped anyone. But how do we even know that no charges have been filed against him? How would Roosh even know? Roosh was just a sex-tourist; he was just passing through; he could have used a false name or no name at all. There are probably quite a lot of Middle Eastern-looking John Does in open rape cases all over Europe, and it is only getting worse.
But that’s just speculation. So let’s just take Roosh at his word. Even so, his argument does not follow, because genuine rape victims might not come forward for a whole host of reasons: shame; lack of evidence; fear of reprisals; fear of a bad reputation; fear of losing a boyfriend, husband, or family; etc.
It pains me to write this, because I have long regarded Roosh V as something of an ally. No he’s not a White Nationalist, because he is not white and does not identify as such. His father is Persian and his mother Armenian. But an ally is not one of us. He is someone with whom we share delimited common interests and with whom we can fight common enemies. The manosphere is part of the larger reactosphere. It performs an important red-pilling function on human biodiversity. And it shares a border with White Nationalism that is as long and porous and the US border with Mexico. Roosh, moreover, is highly intelligent; he has promoted Kevin MacDonald’s The Culture of Critique to his readership; and in our limited email interactions, he has always been prompt, civil, and helpful. Beyond that, I despise moralistic ninnies and shit-stirrers who advance the premise that we can’t cooperate politically with anyone if we wouldn’t want to share a pup tent or take a shower with them.
But rape is rape, and all the red-pilling in the world does not change that.
I cheered Roosh when he asked reporters why they are going after him while covering up mass rapes by Muslims in Europe. All Roosh would have to do is convert to Islam and show up in a track suit, and feminists would shut their mouths and spread their legs.
But the hypocrisy charge cuts both ways: how can White Nationalists decry the mass rape and sexual exploitation of white women by Middle-Eastern men but stand in solidarity with Roosh V?
How can White Nationalists extol Eastern Europe as the most racially and culturally healthy part of the white world and condone the kind of man who treats it as a cheap brothel?
How can we stand in solidarity with Polish nationalists against Middle Eastern rapefugees and defend the author of Bang Poland?
For all its benefits, I am on record that the manosphere morally corrupts men. It does not promote the resurgence of traditional and biologically based sexual norms. It simply teaches men how to make sexual chaos work for them. I was concerned that it gives narcissistic sociopaths tools and encouragement to rape and sexually exploit women. Now I have proof.
138 comments
What we want on the Alt-Right is complementarity of the sexes; the unstoppable dynamic of virile men and nurturing women– Not a one-way depredation. That’s never been our way in the West. Our destiny excludes kebab-tier degeneracy.
At some point our way in the West… lost its way. Women have been out of control for a long time now.
Bringing back complementarity is going to require firm male leadership.
That’s just the way the world works.
I don’t disagree. But I see no place for this Roosh garbage. The dudes I see coming out of the Manosphere (or one foot in the Manosphere and the other foot in the Alt-Right) always seem to be ressentiment-fueled ex-betas looking to “get even” with women. This often reaches absurd proportions. The other day I saw someone assert that “the Female Question comes before the Jewish Question.”
Should probably save this discussion for when the forum comes back up, but the counterpoint is that some of the guys with zero grounding in the Manosphere seem to have overly-egalitarian, modern, dysfunctional, “beta” attitudes towards women.
Not accusing the big names, but it was an undercurrent on the forums. And the demise of libertarianism illustrates how dangerous these sorts can be.
I think that if the Manosphere types really believed that women were simply the property of men, they would respect those of us who have don’t have property troubles and feel the need to read about how to get property. And then let us treat our property in a way we deem fit.
The Poland examples are a lot more damning.
Girls do get drunk when they want a ONS.
However as you saw, the lack of remorse and simply going ahead with it is the real issue.
Now lets be honest, there’s a minor tradition in masculist writers of exaggerating or outright fabricating the themes of sexual transgression and dominance in their supposed autobiographies. I don’t agree this ought to be taken at face value regarding the puerile genre in question.
RoK has turned people to WN if Roosh’s financial interests (that is, book sales to minorities) and genetic ancestry prevent him going 100%; how many other non-WN figures have cited Macdonald on the JQ? Few who are as high profile, I’m sure. Roosh V is himself an Aryan accordng to Nazi racial laws, don’t forget; he merely looks dark.
Michael Anissimov has questioned my statement that Roosh was reckoned as racially Aryan under the laws of the Nazi regime, although it must be the least important part of what I was trying to say. If he had checked his facts, he would see that Roosh would have been entitled to marry and sleep with German women under Hitler. He would not have been regarded as German of course, but Aryan did not mean German because even Indians were regarded as Aryan for legal purposes. Now of course the PUA lifestyle was not encouraged there, mind you that’s not what we’re talking about and nor is Roosh’s race. This is all just silly outrage about one ‘mud’, well if so many people objected to things like Bang Poland so badly why didn’t all this kick off before (((feminists))) dogwhistled.
Anyone who has followed panics like this will know people like Mark Ames have attracted a similar fuss in the past; each time its presumably just masculist fantasies acted out in print. Every single time. Though I suspect that Roosh’s refusal to defend his own honour and reputation, here, is because it would be an admission he bluffs it. Whatever; I’m not bothered about Roosh himself and his racial classification is not at all my point here, I just hate lynch mobs that we all know to have been stirred up by feminists.
For the record I don’t consider Greg’s piece to be part of a hate campaign, its just that to take Roosh’s sexual boasts at face value you have to be unaware of a history of brief moral panics and a recurring tendency among male biographers to exaggerate their own sexual potency. So people ought to let the non-issue drop, all the more so if you don’t want to boost his book sales.
I have higher standards of behavior, and a moral compass other than the Third Reich.
I have to thank Roosh’s feminist furies for bringing this issue to my attention.
Sometimes there really is a wolf.
“if so many people objected to things like Bang Poland so badly why didn’t all this kick off before (((feminists))) dogwhistled.”
We did. Ramz/roosh and others called us FBI trolls who were pretending to be 1488ers. This what was behind that entire shameful and stupid episode.
Roosh’s website, Return of Kings, is focused now primarily on restoration of patriarchy and regenerating healthy sex roles. We don’t have to like Roosh’s character in order to be allied with him. Contrary to your claim, we have no evidence to indict Roosh as a rapist, and therefore your much lauded “reasonable doubt” applies to Roosh as well. I read everything you write Greg and I must say this is one of the most disappointing. Pure holyness signalling and to impress whom? The beta white knights of the Alt-Right? Roosh said he has grown weary of PUA just like Roissy, so we are just going to judge him by his past and not his present and mostly predictable future course? Like it or not Roosh is a great asset to our cause and not someone we should throw under the bus so quickly. We have nothing to gain from this petty secterianism and moralizing. I mean this as constructive criticism as a great admirer and patron of CC. Please so not take undue offense.
We have a confession. That somewhat sidesteps the issue of reasonable doubt. Or he made it up, in which case Roosh is a fraud. In either case, he has many fans who regard him as a role model. If he did not rape these girls, an imitator has or will rape girls just like them. There’s really no way out of this for Roosh. You may think “Dear is Roosh,” but dearer still should be the truth.
Or he was simply trying to evade the question because the interviewer caught him in a double bind. If he says he raped her, the SJWs are vindicated. If he says he didn’t he becomes discredited. Either way he loses. It was quite ingenious. That said he has nothing to gain from answering the question, and so he rightfully evaded it. This does not count as a “confession”, firstly because it is all circumstantial and second because it was given under duress.
Do we blame the teacher of martial arts when one of his students seriously maims a rival of his? No, we blame the student for using these martial skills in an unmoral manner. The same applies to Roosh and Roissy, the teacher of the skill is not to blame for the misuse of the skill. Remember Roosh’s tactics can be used to find a good quality mate and start a family as well. Something he has been urging his audience of doing instead of banging random bar sluts. Judge the man not merely on his past Greg.
You just don’t get it. You keep ignoring the issue and doing mental gymnastics to avoid the only possible conclusions. Greg is not talking about what Roosh said in the interview, he’s talking about what he wrote in his book. Did he make it up or not? Is he a fraud or did he actually rape someone? Those are the only two possibilities. I hope he made it up but either way it does not reflect well on his character.
He’s either a liar or a rapist. Pick which one you think it is.
Personally, I would bet on him being a liar. I find it very hard to believe that anyone who actually did rape a girl (or even ‘quasi-rape’ a girl) would brag about it, especially not if he’s aware of the anti-male hysteria which pervades our culture (which Roosh certainly is).
No, I think it’s far more likely it’s just run-of-the-mill male exaggeration, designed to enhance his prestige and acquire a following.
That said, I see no moral equivalence between lying and raping. It’s hardly the case that the two are every bit as bad as each other. Obviously actually raping a girl is a far more grievous sin than the ‘fraud’ of concocting a fiction about having raped. If you take into consideration the context of Roosh starting out as a sexually frustrated chemistry nerd who worked out a few handy ‘game’ rules of thumb, it’s really not that surprising he’d attempt to parlay it into fashioning a badboy persona for himself. Even if you insist on calling it ‘fraudulent,’ there are frauds and then there are frauds.
Lastly, I’m not saying any of this in order to defend Roosh (even if that is the effect of my post), since I plum don’t like the guy. Something about him just rubs me the wrong way. To the extent that he helps shake up the anti-white status quo he’s useful, but I would be wary of unilaterally declaring him an ally.
If he’s a fraud, he’s no mere fraud. He’s a fraud with a following. The danger is that his rapey fictions will be templates for rapey facts. They may already be. Still none of Doosh’s defenders is willing to bet money on the non-rapey inclinations of his followers.
Most likely a liar, but then again you can’t expect a PUA’s accounts of sex to be objective. Anyone who expects Roosh to tell the whole truth in a book called “Bang X”, x being the country, is a dunce.
Holiness signaling? Really?
He gets off on fantasies about raping white women. If you are okay with that, then you should seriously reconsider involvement in White Nationalist circles. Do you think Pierce or Rockwell would be okay with that kind of filth?
Honestly that post he made is all the evidence we need to permanently shun him from this movement. Even if he was trolling, it speaks volumes to his character.
I know very, very little of these MRAs but everything I read about them makes me dislike them.
A young man isn’t going to better himself, his society or his race by learning how to pick up club sluts.
Patriarchy isn’t about getting off as much as you can with the lowest and most damaged of women, it’s about leadership in the household and in your nation.
I highly doubt this Persian cares about Western Civilization or the survival of the European Race; people who use the moral decay to feed their own sexual appetites are not allies.
Towards what end? What will shunning him accomplish? We do not have the power to purge people and as long as Roosh serves a utility to the larger reactosphere he should simply be left alone. The impulse towards moralizing is something that must end if we are to achieve any kind of hard power. Unless we have hard evidence Roosh is a rapist I am not willing to hang him out to dry. This is a war, not some schoolyard dispute where you can frivolously denounce people with little to no consequence. We are in a total war, and just as the SS had non-White combatants, we will as well.
We should shun and distance ourselves from people with dubious morals. What if Roosh had bragged about banging ten year olds? Obviously that would cross a line, wouldn’t you agree? For most of us a non-white bragging about how he rapes white women crosses the line (for the record even if he were white I’d still not want to associate with him.) Perhaps you are just more “liberal” than the rest of us.
Roosh is sick. If the manosphere borders white nationalism than it is indeed more like Mexico than Canada and we need to build a wall. I see all of these MGTOW and PUA-types who blame white women for everything and it’s becoming absolutely poisonous. Married white men generally make the best advocates for white nationalism because they aren’t bitter and they hold the best example for white men to follow.
http://blog.jim.com/politics/in-support-of-roosh/
Quick point: MRA =/= PUA. They’re not the same thing.
Japan let a grand total of 27 Muslim refugees into their country. Out of thousands of applicants they hand-picked only two dozen of the best and brightest from the least-insane country known to be the “least extremist of Muslim nations.”
Two of those refugees has already raped a woman. Real rape. Actual dark alley rape. Not “I drank too much while flirting with men to lower my inhibitions because I wanted no-fault sex” American-style college girl “rape.” Knifey-dicky dark alley rape.
Just like they’ve raped in the UK. And Germany. And every single other city we’ve been forced to let them into.
You silly liberals still won’t let us protect our nations from real “rape cultures…” and instead go after a guy that sleeps with whores.
http://www.tokyoreporter.com/2016/02/22/tokyo-cops-arrest-turkish-asylum-seekers-in-gang-rape-of-woman/
He says he does, but should we believe him? I don’t think so, he is trolling us and it is working. Lets say he does seriously get off to fantasies of raping White women, that still doesn’t mean he has done it or ever will do it. Roosh’s utility to the larger reactosphere overshadows any of his dubious personality traits. Any person fighting against the Cathedral with sufficient impact is useful to us. We are using Roosh as a vaccine against Cathedral brainwashing, nothing more. When his utility becomes moot he can be discarded or exiled to Iran or whatever revenge fantasy you have on this hypothetical non-White rapist.
So what does this article have to do with restoring patriarchy, exactly?
http://www.returnofkings.com/78898/9-secrets-about-female-nature-told-by-a-hot-girl-dying-of-cancer
“Women are receptacles for cock, that’s how we have been biologically designed. Nothing feels better to us than being completely filled up with multiple penises, than being the center of sexual attention, than being the object of unbridled group lust. Since it’s something we can’t risk doing on our home turf (don’t shit where you eat), we have to think outside the box, in order to get our boxes completely satisfied. And you might find this shocking, but many women – many, many women – have sex with dogs on a routine basis. This is just one example of how insatiable we truly are.”
These people don’t know a thing about patriarchy, they are fans of the modern world, they don’t want Patriarchy because it would take away the women they supposedly sleep with who they turn around and and label whores when they are just as low and base as the women they insult. They are 2 sides of the same coin.
Why do they post these fake articles anyway? Do they think putting these words in the mouth of a fictional character some how makes them true? It fulfills some of their many fantasies about how women supposedly are? In a Patriarchy the people who read ROK wouldn’t be within 100 feet of a mans daughter. If they are going to make up fake bs like this they should at least not put it into the mouth of a dying woman on her death bed. Who in their right minds actually believes this ?
Thank you Greg. I was date raped by a prominent White Nationalist in 2002. The situation was that I was profoundly concerned about how bad it would look for our racial community if I called the police. So I didn’t. I’m still not sure that I would because of the bad press and embarrassment. I know so many who would call me a slut or a whore and defend this man and his actions. To add insult to injury he has stalked me online for over a decade and defamed me on multiple forums and at multiple WN events. So I can relate to women who don’t go to the authorities. Thanks again for choosing to write this article. It makes me feel a lot better about the situation of women involved in the alt right community.
I am aware that there is a community mentality in WN as elsewhere that can be very positive at its best, but part of the nature of any in-group is a healthy defensiveness as regards its treasured members and outwards appearance to the world. But then again not all claims of wrongdoing are confirmed, faced with the realities of nasty allegations and the listen-and-believe mindset, based skepticism is always best.
I can easily believe what you’re saying is true but no one should take sides without evidence. In a way people forget white advocates are like any other minority group, but unlike those other communities will likely not receive the same sympathy from courts and the media.
Oooh, just read about your date rape. That is horrific. Good luck to us in finding a solution to this problem so that women will not fear White Nationalists.
Greg, if you honestly believe Roosh is a rapist, why don’t you report him to the police?
Given the fact that he’s made a “confession,” as you put it, it should be easy to lock him up. Extradition treaties will ensure he faces retribution in Iceland, Poland or anywhere else he’s allegedly raped women. Not only that, if you do believe he’s a rapist, then by extension you also believe that he may rape more women if he continues to walk free. His supposed victims certainly won’t get justice if no one reports him.
At bare minimum, if you report Roosh, the police will open an investigation into him. Why haven’t you done it?
I believe, based on his own words, that he’s either a rapist or a fraud. Which do you believe?
Greg, you didn’t really address the meat of Matt’s question. I’ll rephrase in a slightly less douchey way: do you believe Roosh’s statements in his books amount to a legal admission of rape, or simply a confession that he’s a scumbag?
To be clear, I’m not decided yet myself. It’s important, though, that we not just say “OK, feminists, you can have this one” because he’s less defensible.
I watched that press conference and he had the balls to call out the press more directly and forcefully than even Trump has done. He presented himself in a way that any young man should be proud to emulate. We’re better off with men who are slightly too sexually aggressive but have the fundamentals of masculinity right; their aggression can be reined in by a healthy society.
Let’s not do any of the feminists’ work for them.
I didn’t address the meat of Matt’s question because he put a false frame on it. Either Roosh is a rapist or he’s a fraud.
Having sex with a woman who is too drunk to consent is like having sex with an underage child or a mental retard or a lunatic. It is rape, because the other party cannot consent.
The question, though is whether Roosh is telling the truth, in which case he is a rapist, or if he is making it up, in which case he is a fraud.
I cheered Roosh’s aggressiveness with the press, but guilty men are often quite aggressive at throwing accusations around. If he is just aggressively trying to distract people from the real question, I am sorry, but that is not behavior to praise or emulate.
For it to be meaningfully said that someone is “advocating” for something, there must be an audience who is receptive enough to what is being advocated for that it may alter their decisions.
In other words, you’re conceding to feminists that the only reason rape happens is because men haven’t been taught hard enough that it’s wrong. That if a man who would otherwise not be a rapist is given an excuse by some dude writing a book to violate the sacred Vagina with his oppressive patriarchal tool without obtaining affirmative consent, he’s reasonable likely to take it.
This is a completely false framing of the issue that sets up any man writing about sex to have his words dissected and turned every which way to find evidence of rapiness. I’m certain a could pick a few quotes out of your books and find a way to accuse you of being literally pro-Hitler omg i cant even. Can you prove you’re not?
And that’s the point: the left throws around accusations where require proof of a negative is required to exonerate the accused in order to keep us constantly on the defensive. The lesson of Trump is we don’t apologize and we don’t give leftists the benefit of the doubt about their intentions. Roosh is a scumbag and a degenerate, but his ideas and willingness to stand up to the feminist tentacle of the Cultural Marxist hydra have helped bring a lot of young men, including myself, out of the dark hole of blue-pill existential despair and cuckery. I’ve never taken anything he said to mean he was telling me to go rape anyone, and even if he were, I wouldn’t make a decision to do so on that basis. He gets the benefit of the doubt from me on this question.
I believe that if you’re going to accuse someone of a serious crime like rape—and you claim to have evidence—you need to inform the authorities. Otherwise, you’re just engaging in rumormongering.
Feminists demure from reporting rapists to the police because they claim that rape victims are”re-victimized” or “shamed” by the cops. Surely no one on the alt-right would use those excuses.
Matt, I am disappointed with this transparently dishonest spin-doctoring.
Roosh accuses himself, but he always has the option of admitting that he is a fraud.
He published this stuff himself. Raising questions about it is not rumor-mongering.
Do you seriously believe that all rape victims file police reports?
I’m tired of people flinging around rape accusations like they’re children insulting each other on the playground. Rape is not only a serious crime, being falsely accused of rape can (and often does) destroy men’s lives.
Over the past year, I’ve been repeatedly, falsely accused of raping one of my closest friends (I won’t invoke her name again because we’re both sick of having to talk about it, but she writes for your site), an accusation that nearly destroyed my life. Said friend has repeatedly, publicly denied that I raped her and my accusers keep changing their story every other week, yet I still have people calling me a “rapist” based solely off a rumor her vindictive, narcissistic ex-boyfriend started.
This is a personal issue for me. I’ve experienced first-hand how casual accusations of rape can tear a man’s life apart. Seeing the alternative right engage in the same hysterics that the left does fills me with disgust.
What you call a “confession” of rape is normal, heterosexual behavior. There’s a language of sexual intimacy that goes beyond the verbal and overt. The girl that Roosh purportedly “raped” in Bang Iceland continued seeing him and sleeping with him (he wrote about this in his article “The Accusation That I’m a Rapist is a Malicious Lie,” which you conveniently failed to mention). Mind you, this was in Iceland, a country so feminist that it elected an openly lesbian prime minister who banned strip clubs during her tenure. IIRC, the Polish women he “raped” kept seeing him as well.
In accusing Roosh of rape, you have placed yourself on the side of cultural Marxists who want to redefine heterosexual sex along the lines of “affirmative consent,” i.e. men having to beg for permission at every stage of a sexual encounter. There is nothing “traditionalist” about this definition of rape, and in fact, the left is using it to dismantle white families and marriage.
And that’s why I’m asking why you won’t call the police on Roosh after accusing him of a felony. Feminists have degraded rape accusations to the level of playground insults, the only difference being that a false accusation of rape can ruin a man’s life. Given that the left’s rape hysteria has exploded into outright violence (see: feminists stalking and harassing men who tried to attend ROK’s tribal meetups), the last thing the alternative right needs to do is feed into it.
As Roosh himself put it, “All Public Rape Accusations Are False.”
Doosh can say anything he wants about his conquests, and in the case of the Icelandic girl, what he said fits the definition of rape. He can also say that they went on to have a beautiful relationship after that, and that she sends him herring gift baskets every Christmas. I hope it is all a story, but if it is, what are we to make of a man who tells rape tales with a happy ending to his hordes of pussy nerd imitators? It is not just feminist hysteria to call this man a rape advocate.
You act as if it is improbable/impossible for a modern woman to consent to a relationship after having been raped. Yet a great deal of your writing is about how modern women are degenerate. How can you make both of these claims? Your own experience of a false rape accusation is unimportant. The psychological/emotional damage you suffered because of it is likewise unimportant (keep the news of that damage to yourself). Roosh made an admission that you never made. His reputation will live or die by that admission, so to speak. To give him the benefit of the doubt, I will say, Roosh’s business model depends on lies. He spins his lies so that their aim seems to correspond roughly with aims of our own. Given time, we will see that his aims are deeply different, in principle, from our own, though perhaps we now see a shared detail here and there (e.g. a distaste for reporters). We do not need Roosh. We do not need another liar. We do not need a society built atop the premises of “Game”. We do not need to strike a devil’s bargain with Roosh and allow him in the movement simply to gain access to his readership/platform. We will convince his readers to join us; our strategy is simply being right. We will enforce standards of truthfulness on ourselves and our leaders. We will wish Roosh good luck as he goes his own way.
Matt, how can Greg call the authorities in Poland on behalf of a woman whose name we don’t know? And who in all likelihood doesn’t exist?
Doosh’s sex stories are about as credible as the letters to Penthouse Forum or the journalism of Jayson Blair.
Problem is, as Mr. Johnson notes, some of this Tucker Max wannabe’s fanboys will try to emulate their hero by forcing themselves on some hapless drunken woman.
I’m pretty much in total agreement with this article.
@Matt Forney: Why waste time when the odds of a successful prosecution are so slim? There’s many people that I think are guilty of crimes, being able to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt in court is something different altogether.
I have always been uncomfortable with the degeneracy of the manosphere and its influence on the AltRight, which is why the rise of groups like the TRS community has been so cheering over the past year. There seem to be a growing number of vocal men on our side who understand that traditional sexual roles and the rejection of feminism don’t necessarily have to involve the mockery and degradation of all women.
It’s cheering to see this thoughtful post as well. I hope the praise of a woman won’t get you in trouble for white-knighting! (Though I’ve always been a fan of knights, myself.) Thanks, Greg.
Roosh realized his shtick was getting old. Maybe he had his own Socratic moment of introspection and realized he wasn’t living a life worth living. Neo-Masculinity and ROK is all he has left after fruitless years of misspent youth.
Like the crazy cat lady has her cats, Roosh has Return of Kings.
Am I the only one who thinks “pounding her pussy like a pedophile” is the most disturbing part? He must have been running low on macho analogies, had to dip into the creepy reserves.
Yes, rather chilling in light of Rotherham, don’t you think?
Exactly. “I got the poor white catholic girl to sin. Score!” Sex-as-humilation by alien tribes. They covet white women. It’s creepy and disgusting, and has a biological reason. Eventually he’ll knock up some blonde and produce mudlets.
Or digging deep for edgy alliteration?
Pounding this Polish peasant prostitute like my perverted pedophile Prophet (PBUH) pillaged his prepubescent partner.
Really Greg, this is the sanest and most reasonable treatment of Roosh, who gets far more attention than he deserves. Let’s hope your article puts him to rest as a celebrated cause among a few of us.
I too read the Iceland Bang book out of curiosity and was appalled by the rape passage you quote.
Richard Spencer’s piece on the subject was a disappointment.
I’m still waiting for someone to bet money on the non-rapeyness of Doosh V’s audience.
It occurred to me the other day to ask myself; what are the odds that a single rape has happened because someone regards Roosh as a role model?
I still find myself conflicted about Roosh; if there are white men who find their way to white nationalism after reading his blog & RoK, then I’d consider his influence a net positive. I was reading Roosh before Counter-currents, (albeit by way of Heartiste) because it was a longer road to the JQ than simply wanting sex. It’s only because of recent alt-right hatred that I’ve stopped thinking of Roosh positively.
In his own words: “Don’t take advice from any man who doesn’t have what you want.”
After hearing about all the hub-bub, I read his “pro-rape” article and was not at all convinced by the media’s line that he “advocates making rape legal.” That’s all I’ve ever really read of Roosh directly. And his video with the journalists was pretty decent too. So, I really had no reason to think this was anything other than the feminists and liberal media freaking out over nothing.
Also, I did like Colin Liddel’s take (I think it was him) about how Roosh is a soft and easy target compared to the mass rapes going on in Europe now. Roosh, though non-European, has a fan-base which is largely white men and so it’s much more acceptable for feminists to direct their rage at him than the poor, defenseless refugee brown people.
The quotes from the books here do sound a lot worse, on the other hand.
I had exactly the same reactions as you, and then I read those quotes and Roosh’s evasive non-reply.
But even if Roosh is a fraud, he is no mere fraud. He is a fraud with a large audience that regards him as a role model.
No, not a role model, but a source of empirical data. I’d rather learn from a truthful degenerate than a “virtuous” liar.
Sure. But you do realize that people like Doosh have the power to influence other people’s behavior, right? You do realize that people go to Doosh in order to imitate him?
you should change year to 2016.
Thanks
The Counter-Current Year is 2015!
Whenever the terrain gets foggy and unclear, trust Greg Johnson to see clearly and choose path wisely!
Not always. Most of time. This time, for sure. But definitely not always.
The roosh forum along with return of kings is a ceasepool just as much as the other sites they criticize. The rank hypocrisy of calling women whores for how many men they have fornicated with while they themselves partake of it is another reason that site is a joke. Complaining about the degeneracy while being part and parcel and a promoter of it. I don’t think he raped any women, he promotes it. It says a lot that so many white men can be duped by Roosh the fraud. Weren’t some of his pics with Russian women he “banged” proven to be fake?
“It took four hours and at least thirty repetitions of “No, Roosh, No!” until she allowed my penis to enter her vagina.
The sex was painful for her.”
“she allowed” —> Cited as an example of “rape.”
We should find a way to ostracize Roosh without resorting to Swedish feminist definitions of rape.
Like I said, it probably would not stand up in court. But Roosh is a real Doosh.
Ooosh!
(I simply couldn’t help it)
Thanks for this, Greg. I am an advocate of co-operating with as many people as possible to advance the pro-white cause, despite small differences. But that does not include middle-eastern rapists – focus on ‘rapists.’
I have always disliked Roosh. He has the mentality of a primitive ME male in almost everything he writes, and just because he isn’t a muslim doesn’t mean I will in any way support him. Western feminism has become cancerous, yes, but the Arabic handling of women like cattle (stoning, raping, wrapping in burqas, cutting off clits) as well as throwing gays off of buildings (or hanging) is not something europeans should ever approve of in the name of being ‘traditional.’
Yes, the pro-european cause lacks enough public support, but aligning with Roosh is not the right way to go. He’s reprehensible. We need more people like you, Spencer, Jared Taylor, Coulter, etc. for mass appeal, not vulgar low-IQ clowns or horny RooshVs.
Roosh is a piece of shit on several levels and, by his own admission, a rapist (if, as Greg stated, he’s being completely honest). Even if his words are purely fantasy, he’s still clearly creepy. I’m a bit taken aback at all the debate about this. Do people really see this guy at the face of the new masculinity/”patriarchy?” Absurd.
Roosh is an interesting study in ethnic types, and the degree of influence that genetic heritage has on personality. While I am not positing that race is everything, it is stRiki-Eiking the degree to which Roosh’s flaws and his strengths are stereotypical of a Middle Eastern / Caucasian / Islamic type. While his parents were probably more traditional in a Middle Eastern type of way, overall it seems that Roosh was raised and saw himself as “a normal American guy”: he isn’t Islamic, doesn’t speak the languages of his ancesters, was born and raised in a suburb in Maryland. So to the extent that he exhibits characteristics of his ancestry, it should be largely “nature”, not “nurture”.
Flaws: The anecdotes quoted by Greg above show that Roosh has, at least some of the time, engaged in what can almost be called “accelerated grooming” or “grooming in miniature”. His aggressive strong pushes for sex strike one as similar to what the grooming activities of Islamic men in Europe must be like.
Strengths: Now that Roosh has largely given up PUA and is focusing on neo-masculinity and reconstructing a kind of patriarchal and traditional society, it is — again — stRiki-Eiking that his recommendations and overall vision seem much more Middle Eastern and Islamic in nature: he does not seem do envision a return to a Germanic style, traditional nuclear family that Europeans would probably pursue if left to their own devices. Rather, in keeping with his jaundiced view of woman, he sees a need to control them more along the lines of what would have been found in Islamic societies.
I am not entirely a biological determinist, but it is interesting to note Roosh “reverting to type” in this way. Moreso than Greg, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt concerning his reforming his ways. He appears to have largely repudiated the PUA lifestyle and is now about constructing a traditional patriarchal society.
I think you are absolutely right. That his vision of patriarchy exposes hist true racial spirit.
He even advocates that women should be accompanied by males at all time, to avoid unwanted attention. And that women who break this rule, should be open to aggressive stalking from men.
Thats like textbook muslim male behaviour. Its completely opposed to european and especially germanic ideals of how society should be built. Women are in practice supposed to fear for their safety when not accompanied by male relatives or their husband.
“Mean reversion” is a pretty adequate description. The euro-American upbringing he has been exposed to is really just a superficial layer.
Who cares what feminists say? It’s not relevant. Roosh is trash and a profoundly contemptible piece of filth. As a father of daughters with enough to worry about already when it comes to the possible influence of the wider culture on my family, I find it really demoralizing to see leading figures and a good number of rank-and-file on the dissident right embracing this Asiatic rapist. It’s a symptom of the alt right’s growing incoherence.
I would like to have a daughter. Stuff like Roosh’s reduces the appeal of my becoming a father. Another aspect to consider.
A few thoughts.
I wouldn’t be quick to leave my wife alone with Roosh or any other woman I’m friends with for sure. He is at the sleazier end of the whole PUA scene, and much of the sleaziness is designed to get hits on RoK. You can compare it to the PUA version of Daily Stormer, where controversy equals traffic, which equals more money. It’s a business, like Counter Currents is a business.
That said, I’m not sure if Greg has read Bang Poland because what Roosh wrote in full is much easier to stomach when read in full. When you take out a few sentences it seems much worse.
““Do you want to see me again?”
“Of course. You’re pretty, you’re sexy, you’re fun. I see no reason why I wouldn’t want to see you again.”
I kissed her. Her tiny size really hit me when she took off her heels. I asked her how much she weighed. Thirty-five kilograms (77 pounds). Besides her surprisingly round ass, she had the body of a gymnast who hadn’t quite made it past puberty.
We moved to my bed. I got her down to her bra and panties, but she kept saying, “No, no.” I was so turned on by her beauty and petite figure that I told myself she’s not walking out my door without getting fucked. At that moment I accepted the idea of getting locked up in a Polish prison to make it happen.
She tried to go down on me but her mouth was too small. Then I grabbed her and made her sit directly on my face. I ate her pussy, the first time I had done so in a couple of years. I enjoyed it.
I put on a condom, lubed up, and finally got her consent to put it in. The best way to visualize our lovemaking is an elephant mounting a kitten. My dick was half the thickness of her neck. I put her on her stomach and went deep, pounding her pussy like a pedophile. She took it like a champ even though I imagine it must have felt like being fucked by a telescope. My orgasm was from another world.”
Doesn’t sound like rape to me when you read the whole thing. The “pound her like a pedophile” thing is gross, for sure. I can’t even think of something much more douchy to say. Even if this is 90% likely to be fiction – it’s very well known PUA’s write stories like this to establish themselves as “authority” figures, to give them more credibility. It’s a marketing thing common in their industry.
Maybe discussing Roosh’s merits or lack of them is a good thing, but we should discuss it looking at all of what he said and not cherry picking sentences to either hang him or nominate him King of the Movement. Misquotes and sentences out of context are more our enemy’s Kosher style than ours right?
Yeah, like I said, it probably would not hold up in court but it still sounds plenty creepy, and it communicates certain attitudes to his pussy nerd acolytes, like being willing to risk jail for sex. Jail for what? Rape obviously.
You know now that I think of the message it sends to his people – many of whom are likely creeps – I better understand your point.
Almost as disturbing as this Middle Eastern degenerate boasting about having raped European women, is the large number of defenders he appears to have here on the Alt-Right.
I agree with the moral argument but the political argument is wrong imo.
It’s a war so you have to balance casualties not avoid them completely.
Will there be more female casualties because of PUA yes but there are also the ongoing male casualties from the poisoned feminist culture to consider e.g.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/this-8-year-old-boys-very-special-dream-just-came-true_us_568e844be4b0cad15e639b11
So does anti-feminist red-pilling from pua reduce casualties among boys more than they increase casualties among the girls?
Hard to know for sure but my guess is probably yes – i think pua currently reduces net casualties.
That doesn’t mean being allied; it means being neutral while staying close enough to recruit any who come out of that scene looking for a broader solution.
Or alternatively – full on nationalists can attack them if they want as long as they understand that people in the middle playing neutral are acting as a bridge.
If all his descriptions fit reality then there really are no moral questions, he is a douche.
The real question is what to do concerning the perceived need of these people, because shunning or not shunning, in the current marginal state of the WN movement, it is of very little importance. Even though we in fact already have the moral high ground, jewish media will never portray it as such. And as we all know, propaganda hits minds harder than truth.
So in the end, Roosh will be headlined as associated with us no matter how much we shun him.
Now, the real problem is that these PUAs are able to peddle their crap because there are alot of desperate men out there, especially white men, in general as well as in our movement.
If you ever visited a WN networking site you can see them in droves, or if you ever went to a rally you will always meet at least one (if I am to understate the issue).
The recent news about the proclaimed “supremacist” – albeit in actuality apolitical – white dating site (Where White People Meet or something like that) we probably all read about further illustrates how these WN networking sites probably did not cut it for the larger white crowd.
The real problem with these PUAs are not that they are possible inciters of rape epidemics, because those few men that would be able to commit rape based on words and writing, those men would be capable of doing that in any case, it is hardwired and only a matter of time.
E.g. is Arabic rape culture solely hinging on the Quran?
I think we can all answer that with a no.
No, the real problem is that the PUAs have revenue, that there is a market and a need for them.
This problem has many levels and many bad dysgenic outcomes.
The root cause is of course modernity and feminism, which adds to the confusion of how men perceive women and their needs. This PUA crap further confuses true gender roles.
Men get an overly simplistic view of women (and vice versa when women see men reduced to unoriginal sleazebags through the techniques peddled by PUAs)
In the case that PUAs sometimes are dead on in their descriptions of female behaviour (in individual cases) and can correctly calculate responses to certain pick-up lines, this eventually creates (although; abortion are certainly way more common in this group) second generations of more of these single-minded, trashy, sleazy types, simply because they are able to mate more.
So it is a sort of negative feedback loop that grows stronger over the course of time.
It will foster and breed a certain type of men (PUA customers) and a certain type of women (the targets that actually fall for it) in the long run.
Idiocracy or the proles of 1984 are not far fetched dystopian scenarios based on this trend.
Now, how do you take away their revenue? That is the real issue. Because they seem to be building strong enterprises on this, which would make me assume that there is a base crowd of followers who pay regularly because they actually get laid by using the techniques. It must work for some type of men, because obviously, otherwise PUAs would not be making money from it.
So the solution?
WN:s, real traditionalists, the manosphere, etc, they need to produce outlets that actually give betas real and useful advice on dating, without being sleazy or destructive in the process.
I find it hard and I bet alot of other people in relationships, find it hard to actually give any useful advice to single desperate men who come asking, because women are actually not that easy to understand in general terms. What may work in one case is most likely to be unique.
There are a few very, very general ideas that seem to describe not just women, but actually all human activity when it comes to, not just mating, but anything relating to the perception of what/who has value and what does not (‘marketing’ in one word, sad but true), but how to describe the particular application of those ideas is not the easiest thing to do.
But sadly, in essence, they way society has progressed, the art of dating is sort of like the art of making deals, how to produce artificial scarcity, how to seem unique and valuable, etc.
So how do we actually alleviate their needs for knowledge on the subject?
No offense but the intellectual tone and pursuits of the crowd on this and similar sites don’t cut it for the vast majority, I think we can all agree on that.
It just goes way over their head.
So how to propagate healthy and simple (perhaps even dumbed-down) dating advice to white men?
The future of our race actually depends on this. I see so many men of my age, including friends, who suffer from not knowing how to please and to properly catch the attention of a woman. It is truly an art. That is why these PUAs will keep making profits on it, even if they probably are frauds in a great many cases.
Nice to see someone say this, it’s been a bit nauseating to see people you thought okay defending some asian or north african invader who preys on White women.
He is an alien, end of.
While bickering amid ourself in the Alt. Right and co. is seldom productive and it’s mostly just little dogs yapping, I do think it’s fair to call-out “figureheads” — as you indicate, Greg, Daryush has a significant following and is seen as an authority figure.
We all make mistakes — we’re but mere mortals — but as explained, some of Daryush’s “exploits” are less than acceptable. Safe to say if I had a close friend who bragged to me some of the things quoted in the article above, I’d punch him in the face. This cannot be accepted by other figures. Paul Ramsey, Richard Spencer, etc. are in error in defending Daryush overmuch. It’s clear that what’s desired is for us to get along — divide-and-attention-whore personalities shouldn’t be tolerated — but certain standards must be upheld.
Knowing how to approach women is not a novelty skill. It’s basic social interaction. Screwing girls you find at bars and clubs for the sake of it is not commendable, it is degenerate and merely indicative of our present social/cultural/spiritual circumstance: it is not mastery over society, but the enslavement to it. A better thing to teach men would be self-reliance and self-knowing, or how to find a good wife, how to construct a family and how one raises children. That is what a man should pride himself upon, not how many drunken whores he’s fucked or how merely biologically desirable he is (the latter ought to be consequential of self-respect, not the crux of it).
Daryrush’s “work” is unsurprising and predictable given the state of society, masculinity and men. But it is not adequate. It amounts to indulgence, hedonism and vain egotism.
Richard Spencer is an enigma sometimes. His musing on Twitter are a top priority for me because of his clarity and force of thought. He’s smart, witty, incisive, poised and a great teacher, and lately he also seems to be shoring up the main weakness in his discourse by giving more exposure to Kevin MacDonald’s work. And just when I started to think one can’y say enough good things about his efforts, he came out in support of RooshV.
You can’t please all of the people all of the time. Missteps are inevitable. But when he makes a misstep, it always seems like it is a big one. It makes no sense in my view to re-tweet and, in effect, put hard-earned credibility behind both a traditionalist woman like “The Wife With Purpose” and absolute scum like RooshV. Both tactically and morally, endorsing the former makes a lot more sense than the latter.
Men of the right who can’t see the wisdom in cutting loose RooshV and the whole manosphere are either muddled in their thinking about sex, or they still have a lot to learn when it comes to right-wing and traditionalist thought and life in general. Many of them may not be worth the effort. Many of them actually seem to believe that anyone who doesn’t view women as chattel is a white knight feminist.
I think it’s a mistake to delve too deeply into sexual politics, period. We should encourage sexual realism, just as we encourage racial realism, but we should not attempt to stake out and defend a definitive position on sex the way we do with race because sex is not nearly as important as race.
Sex and race are both extremely emotional issues. Entire armies of psychologists would struggle to catalogue the myriad emotional reactions that people have to sex and race. People generally – young people, especially – spend a lot more time thinking about sex than they do about race, and this only multiplies the idiosyncrasies. What sense does it then make to dissipate the energy of youth on the fool’s errand of promoting a one-size-fits-all doctrine of sex, particularly when doing so necessarily comes at the expense of advancing our position on race?
I think lines need to to drawn against harmful sex norms. This principle, if applied, rules out Roosh and rules in traditionalist women.
I have not personally read both accounts but from what I read in this text I’m not sure if I would describe the here listed events as rape. And I don’t think it would be percieved as rape before the 1960s. Here are two girls following a strange man home to his place in the middle of the night probably after both of them been drinking alcohole. What did these girls expect would happen? I think both of them knew he wanted to have sex and they probably wanted it to. With that said I think he acted in a pretty shameful manner, but rape? Probably not.
Roosh suffers from Avoidant Personality Disorder (whereby, due to a deficit of parental love, he finds it very hard to form close relationships even with kind people–note that it was Gentile psychologists John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth who overturned the anti-attachment ideas of (((Freud)))) and speaks of pumping and dumping caring, White, Polish and Ukrainian women who treat him well (though he admits that this behavior is wrong, to his credit). Not someone the alt-Right needs. Thanks for this excellent article, Greg.
We only have Roosh’s word that any of those “rape travelogues” are true and not just the product of the imagination of a lameoid fraud who lives in his mother’s basement. He may not be a rapist (and probably isn’t) but he certainly is an apologist for rape. I would not recommend allying with him, regardless of what he says that I might agree with.
When I first found out about Roosh and his books, I was offended too. How can this kind of rape be justified? When ask someone who’s into “Game,” they usually reply that weak people and prudes are shocked to this behavior normally, but then, after learning the techniques, the casual person becomes good at Game. Those who read Game theory and have no success are called Pussy Nerds. Even if they were successful, what makes the difference between a jock “Bro” and one who reads?
I am always confused at this dichotomy. Does the Alt-Right admire Roosh because it’s a revenge against feminism? Is it the male-equivalent of feminism? Or is it a repressed, sexual fantasy hold by most millennials that they wish they were having sex everyday? It really is nerds hating themselves and wishing to become apart of “society.” Anyone looking to to climb the Alpha-Beta-Delta ladder is acting in Bad Faith.
Game is a declared science for the post-Sexual Revolution. It doesn’t stop it, it just advocates it.
Roosh is Rotherham, Roosh is Cologne. He is racially seperate from white women, and at a base level sees them as something he owes no kindness, no respect, no allegiance, no loyalty. The same primal reaction Roosh has to Icelandic women, to Ukranian women, is the reaction the Arabs occupying Europe have to our women – they see them as rightful spoils. They have successfully invaded our homelands, and now follows, as throughout history, rape, pillage, plunder.
But there is a larger, uglier aspect to all of this. Our women have been complicit. For decades and decades now women have voted and acted and pushed the culture and politics of the white nations into the positions we are now in. I know in my family all of my female relatives have enthusiastically supported all of the worst and most destructive movers of the culture.
We have to remove people like Roosh from contact with our women, but to do so we more or less have have to reorganize our society in pretty much the way Roosh advocates. He isn’t wrong about that.
I’m glad this is being thought-through.
My two cents are: I don’t think “does he rape White girls?” is the issue here.
The mere fact that you have a Middle Eastern man writing books about having sex with White girls should be enough to make any White Man cringe.
I agree with Matt Forney above that he hasn’t actually raped anyone in these passages. That would be the feminist definition of rape to say “OMG she so drunk, not her fault!!!111”
I don’t care about that line of reasoning.
The issue seems to be: what sort of White Man is reading these books about a Moslem banging 77 lbs Catholic girls and making them cry? This is pure cuckold pornography.
I can admit that I was positive toward Roosh after having read a lot of the RoK stuff, which is rather objectively very good. But I didn’t know about this other stuff. Anyone who can read this shit about fucking little innocent Polish girls “like a pedophile” without developing murderous rage must be a full-cuck.
The crap about “consent” doesn’t matter to me. The whole modern idea of “consent” is basically a feminist social construct. Men used to be held responsible for “seducing” women, as it was taken for granted that men had an amount of psychological power over women that made them responsible for initiating a sex act.
White women should be viewed as the property of White men, and a non-White “seducing” White women should be viewed as an act of racial warfare.
Welcome Andrew. You are 100% right. This is cuckoldry.
I agree with Matt Forney above that he hasn’t actually raped anyone in these passages. – Andrew Anglin
Out of curiosity, why do you assume that Roosh is trustworthy? When it comes to his word, the logical possibilities here are “rapist or fraud” only.
As a rapist or a fraud, Roosh might be telling all, part or none of the truth in these accounts. He might be telling the truth about the brutal sex but making up the part about the drunk girls saying “No,” but then ultimately giving their consent. We only have the word of a fraud or a liar to go on here.
A lot of in my opinion gullible people in these comments seem to be giving Roosh the benefit of the doubt that it happened as he said or didn’t happen at all. In fact, he may well have committed straight-up coercive rape on the Polish girl sans any form of consent and just leaving that part out for plainly self-serving reasons.
Boasting about inflicting “pain” and summoning the image of the child rapist shows Roosh has a very sick mind and a sadistic streak. It’s not out the question there was no consent given at all.
Rapist or not, Roosh is guilty of race defilement (Rassenschande). Sex tourists like him should have their journey in this world cut short. Although he’s not a Jew, his predatory conduct is reminiscent of Hitler’s words: “With satanic joy in his face, the black-haired Jewish youth lurks in wait for the unsuspecting girl whom he defiles with his blood, thus stealing her from her people.”
Still, we need to put things into a larger perspective: millions of wogs who are just as greasy as Roosh are flooding into Europe. Hitler explained the policy behind this:
“With every means he [i.e., the Jew] tries to destroy the racial foundations of the people he has set out to subjugate. Just as he himself systematically ruins women and girls, he does not shrink back from pulling down the blood barriers for others, even on a large scale. It was and it is Jews who bring the Negroes into the Rhineland, always with the same secret thought and clear aim of ruining the hated white race by the necessarily resulting bastardization, throwing it down from its cultural and political height, and himself rising to be its master.”
Facts like these should determine one’s priorities. Contrary to what certain gurus in the game milieu may say or believe, a “strategy” of “sitting poolside” and banging sluts is not the summum bonum of life.
This is the best anti-Roosh argument I’ve heard. I’ll have to think on this one.
“White women should be viewed as the property of White men, and a non-White “seducing” White women should be viewed as an act of racial warfare.”
That’s a very aggresive sentence. And I like it. But I get you mean property in a ‘belonging’ sense and not in a material one, right?
As a person interested in the concept of Dharma and how it applies in our day and age how can what Roosh Valizadeh promotes whether it’s fiction or non-fiction be considered anything but adharmic ?
When I tended bar in downtown Detroit during the Piston’s Championship run decades ago, no cocksmith was respected unless he challenged himself against men as well. And I don’t mean sexually. He had to be well-rounded as a street fighter, a martial artists or a drug dealer who risked getting shot or jailed. To simply test yourself against women was to be a kind of sissy and relegated you to secondary status at the disco. It put you only slightly above the rank of the male-strippers who came in from Canada.
I think that a top Western Playboy like Taki would approve this club hierarchy based on broader male proofs. Of course, there was little class. Little nobility. In any case, I don’t follow Roosh or the man-o-sphere because I’m post-randy. Plus, it’s toxic.
A high caliber man can’t scorn spoiled and calloused White women in America, then plunder their tender antithesis in Poland. James Bond, the Western archtype of international cocksmith, never forced the issue. He never created an ugly mess in the bedroom. And he soothed the women he conquered like a real romeo. Roosh, on the other hand, seems to have the sadistic touch of an asiatic who just hates White women across the board and borders. I know that he’s a high-class Persian. But from a distance he seems to have the soul of a Chaldean liquor-store owner. Predatory.
It is pretty disgusting seeing supposedly race-conscious people come out and defend this guy who writes manuals for Arabs and bindis on how to get laid in European nations.
I must say that I really can’t understand why our people are so impressed by the “manosphere”. Of course, I agree that men should get in shape and meet women, but the general attitude is wrong – they are doing it from the same, nihilistic framework as “Sex and the City” does for women. The manosphere is compared to feminism as Ayn Rand is to Herbert Marcuse: at first glance it isn’t as repulsive, but in the end it is just as corrosive to the cultural foundations of our entire civilization. It is probably even more dangerous, since it isn’t as obviously ridiculous; people don’t notice the danger.
What they are pushing is basically a homosexual San Fransisco lifestyle, with going out to sleep with a different person each night. Remaining a teenager for the rest of your life. That is not how great civilizations are built, and that is not how we conquered the other races. To be sure, most of us don’t even come close to living up to our ancenstors’s standards – but actually having standards is superior to being a nihilist, even for “sinners”. The manosphere is pushing capitalist consumerism; they just expanded the from money and plastic junk to also consuming women. This is nothing but sexual Rand-ism, and most PUA:s would probably be proud to say that it is.
P.S., I would like to welcome Anglin to C-C! Hope to see more of your comments here.