Misogynist meetings to be held across the world

[Graceheart the Leopard]

Link.

Spoiler :

Supporters of the group will meet at a variety of points including Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds, Manchester, Newcastle, Cardiff, Shrewsbury and London on February 6, joining other members before heading to a series of secret locations.

The UK events are part of a worldwide ‘tribal meeting’ taking in 43 countries throughout the world at 8PM local time.

Roosh states that meetings are restricted to only hetrosexual men and any women attempting to attend the event will be recorded and the footage will be sent to his worldwide “anti-feminist” network who will then “exact furious retribution.”

A petition set to stop Roosh “being allowed to promote his hateful violent views” in Scotland has received over 38,000 signatures.

Its creator, Cay Boyd, said: “This makes our cities unsafe for at least half the population.

“Promoting rape is hate speech, and should be treated as such.”

In all honesty, I hope counterprotestors show up everywhere they meet, if not the police. Any support against these horrible people must be taken.

 

[Phrossack]

How the hell can this guy get away with campaigning for rape? He and his followers are a disgrace to humanity.

 

[Wolfbeckett]

How the hell can this guy get away with campaigning for rape? He and his followers are a disgrace to humanity.

Is that what he's doing? What the OP has posted here accuses him of doing that but does not provide any support for that whatsoever, I'll need to read the article I guess would be a good start.

And after reading it the pro-rape thing appears to be based on things he's said in the past, but what he's organizing now does not appear to be related to that. So that bit of the article seems to be something of a sensationalist clickbait trap.

 

[Graceheart the Leopard]

He advocates that rape be legalised on private property.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Is that what he's doing? What the OP has posted here accuses him of doing that but does not provide any support for that whatsoever, I'll need to read the article I guess would be a good start.

And after reading it the pro-rape thing appears to be based on things he's said in the past, but what he's organizing now does not appear to be related to that. So that bit of the article seems to be something of a sensationalist clickbait trap.

Based on things he has said in the past, but he certainly doesn't seem to have disavowed the position. Overall, I wouldn't shed any tears should someone choose to dispatch him.

 

[Graceheart the Leopard]

Is that what he's doing? What the OP has posted here accuses him of doing that but does not provide any support for that whatsoever, I'll need to read the article I guess would be a good start.

And after reading it the pro-rape thing appears to be based on things he's said in the past, but what he's organizing now does not appear to be related to that. So that bit of the article seems to be something of a sensationalist clickbait trap.

He's still not very nice.

Q: What if crazy feminists show up?
A: Record them with your camera, upload the footage to Dropbox, and then send it to me at roosh@rooshv.com afterwards so we can tear them up. If accosted during the meetup, travel to the final venue in pairs or triplets using an indirect route so the final location is not compromised (make sure you are not followed). While I wouldn’t mind a bit of excitement, there is currently zero chatter online that a single meetup will be disrupted.

 

[Wolfbeckett]

I should say right out that I do already know who Roosh V is and I am familiar with what he's said in the past. I'm not a fan of his at all and think that the entire PUA movement is somewhat skeevy.

But unlike, presumably, most of the people who will be posting in this thread, I have heard Roosh explain what he meant by that with his own words, unedited with nothing taken out of context and no quotes cherry picked (yes, the video is long, I don't expect anyone to listen to it, just citing my source). I don't agree with his reasoning, but his position is not "Hooray, rape is awesome!" the way it's been portrayed in most media. He suggested it as a thought experiment to explore ways that women might be encouraged to sort of take matters into their own hands and make safer choices. Again, I don't agree with him and think that this kind of thing would be terrible in practice but it does provide something interesting to think about and any story or article that frames the narrative as him being pro-rape is misleading at best, his actual intent behind that whole kerfuffle was somewhat more nuanced than that.

 

[BvBPL]

Pick up artist culture is more than somewhat skeevy. It relies heavily upon using psychological and physiological tactics as a mean to obtain consent from potential sexual partners. In my book, that is quite skeevy indeed.

However, it is not as though one cannot be prepared against those tactics. Getting to Yes, which itself describes a battery of psychological tactics by which one can obtain consent from another party albeit geared towards business relations rather than sexual ones, contains a very good run down of how to recognize and defeat dirty tricks from the other side.

We are far better served by educating and informing people who may be subject to skeevy tactics about how to avoid them then hunting down and banning those who present skeevy tactics.

 

[Nexlev]

I might attend out of curiosity, I just need to work out in my head whether it is a good use of my time. I have my doubts many people will attend, since I don't live in a large city.

I've been following the outrage for LULZ. Roosh is not above "trolling", and it's no secret that he uses outrage as a marketing tool. People love to be outraged.

The meetings were never intended as anything more than a social hour for men who read the site, and to branch out into unaffiliated "tribal" social groups for men to discuss common interests.

 

[Wolfbeckett]

Pick up artist culture is more than somewhat skeevy. It relies heavily upon using psychological and physiological tactics as a mean to obtain consent from potential sexual partners. In my book, that is quite skeevy indeed.

However, it is not as though one cannot be prepared against those tactics. Getting to Yes, which itself describes a battery of psychological tactics by which one can obtain consent from another party albeit geared towards business relations rather than sexual ones, contains a very good run down of how to recognize and defeat dirty tricks from the other side.

We are far better served by educating and informing people who may be subject to skeevy tactics about how to avoid them then hunting down and banning those who present skeevy tactics.

There definitely is that aspect to the PUA community which is why I'm not a fan of it. There are some good things there too though. A lot of PUA advice is geared towards helping men be more confident, helping them present themselves better, helping them become more attractive to women, helping them make women feel good about themselves. A lot of PUA stuff actually reads like any sales book you might pick up at Barnes & Noble except it's geared towards selling yourself instead of a product. It's only a subset of the culture that heavily pushes the psychological manipulation aspects of it. That part of it is real but there's more to it than that.

 

[BvBPL]

A subscription to GQ achieves the same worthwhile ends while generally avoiding the skeeviness.

 

[caketastydelish]

What I'd like to understand is why all the people saying "MRA's are guys that can't get laid" also say "PUA's are misogynist for tricking women into sleeping with them" and then say MRA's and PUA's are essentially interchangeable.

Newsflash: they're not. They are entirely different groups, even if both groups have misogynistic tendencies doesn't make them one and the same in every other way.

And besides- even if "MRA's are all guys that can't get laid" is a statement to be believed, wouldn't the PUA thing (teach men how to get laid) cure MRAism?

It's a logical fallacy that the "MRA=PUA" people just can't explain.

As far as what I've witnessed on reddit, MRA's *sometimes* bring up good points, at least. For instance there's now debate in the United States that women have to register for the draft, not just men anymore. I suppose that could be a legitimate issue.

On the other hand people like Roosh who literally say rape should be legalized on private property- there's nothing respectable about that at all. I've read some other PUA's such as Neil Strauss who are very tame in comparison to Roosh. Roosh is pretty much the worst of the worst in the PUA community. Just like Paul Elam is the worst of the MRA's. (as far as I can tell, anyway).

 

[Hygro]

Roosh made his argument as a method of incentivizing women to be more self-protective and to keep ambiguous situations black-and-white, therefore resulting in a drop in rape. A terrible argument sure, but not pro-rape without some epistemological gymnastics.

 

[caketastydelish]

The problem though, is that Roosh is the same guy who makes misogynistic comments on an outright regular basis. "Rape should be legalized on private property" sounds terrible coming from anybody, but from him sounds especially creepy.

 

[Hygro]

Of course. But then you have guys like Farsight who not only want to feed on confirmation bias but spread, well, lies, to the rest of us. Lies disguised by being on the winning side of history. So at some point you gotta defend a d-bag like Roosh just to keep the conversation honest.

 

[Graceheart the Leopard]

Of course. But then you have guys like Farsight who not only want to feed on confirmation bias but spread, well, lies, to the rest of us. Lies disguised by being on the winning side of history. So at some point you gotta defend a d-bag like Roosh just to keep the conversation honest.

Look, I wasn't aware of the context at the time.

 

[Wolfbeckett]

Look, I wasn't aware of the context at the time.

I appreciate your ability to own up to it!

I can think of several other people... who may or not be on this site and will remain unnamed in either case... who would instead double down on the initial accusation and begin the mental gymnastics to try to make it work.

So at some point you gotta defend a d-bag like Roosh just to keep the conversation honest.

Yeah that's basically what I was going for too. I don't like Roosh, he comes across as a smug provocateur without the charm or comedy to pull it off. But if his ideas are bad then they should be able to be argued against successfully without resorting to tricks like taking him out of context or quote mining.

 

[caketastydelish]

Oh, I'm not really taking him out of context.

The guy's main idea (not just a minor point) of the video was "rape should be legalized on private property". With his reasoning being it will make women more careful who they go out with.

That's a completely absurd thing to say.

 

[Narz]

Everyone should say inappropriate things about rape to boost ratings. I'm surprised Trump hasn't made a few rape jokes yet.

 

[useless]

This creep is coming to my city soon. I'm hoping he won't, the guy admitted to having sex with a woman who couldn't give consent in one his books, he's not only a rape apologist, he's a literal rapist.