Why I’m not All In On Roosh

I keep bringing up discussions on John C. Wright’s blog. I want to make it clear that this isn’t really a bad sign for his blog; at least we’re HAVING the discussions, and Mr. Wright and his commenters are smart guys. And it results in a lot of interesting posts for this blog.

Mr. Wright put up one post (linking to Vox Day) showing a link to a video of Roosh standing up to the press about lies made against him. He posted the video and praised Roosh.

In the comments my first reaction was as a response to somebody who questioned why we were all supporting Roosh; I stated that it was less about that and more that Roosh was combating. But later in a response to another comic I mentioned that we shouldn’t be taking Roosh as an ally.

Wow. It was as if I said we should stop backing Superman. Eventually people started questioning why I was still talking about (Uh, because I was still responding to other people?) and then literally did counts of my posts defending vs. opposing Roosh (I had more opposing because that’s what the conversation ended up being about). It eventually ended with everybody telling me to shut up. I obliged, thought probably after too long…

Here is my issue: We can spend our time backing all sorts of people who stand up to the press. Roosh is not somebody who is on our side. He opposes the press, but he’s also a pick-up artist. In response to the people who all mentioned that we were all sinners as well, true, but I don’t get on a platform to specifically treat men how to sin better. That is what Roosh does. The press lies about him, yes, and that is wrong. He stood up to them, yes, and that is good. Yes, we should be opposing lies.

But as *everybody* there admitted, that’s not really what it was about. It was about picking allies. Roosh, because he opposed the press, was looked at as an ally. Of course, he opposed the press because he wanted peace to teach men how to be cads properly, but hey, let’s not get into motives. As several people said, the press is the first enemy. Taking them down was compared to America and Russia becoming allies in WWII.

Well – and I hate to say this, but it’s true – believe it or not, we’re not really in a war. Seriously. The culture war is a good and many times useful shorthand, but it’s analogous to a real war, not literally a real war. Supporting Roosh and picking him as one of our spokesmen is also supporting somebody getting out the message on how to use girls for sex then dump them. Lots of ink was spilled on how I wasn’t condemning the women. I won’t even dignify that with a proper response.

This is different from supporting Russia in a war against Germany, because in this case it’s as if Russia is also bombing our side. Believe it or not, what Roosh is doing is ALSO opposed to what we should be trying to do. If together we take down the press we’ll be doing with the guy bombing Pearl Harbor. That’s not who you choose to ally with.

The idea that I’m doing this to virtue signal is ludicrous. As my “liking things I’m not supposed to” post hopefully made clear, in the circles I run in this is the UNpopular conclusion to reach. Come on. Do you really think I give a rat’s ass what the press, SJW’s, or anybody else thinks of me? I’m being published by Vox Day’s publishing house and have one of his stories in my anthology. I write for his publishing house’s blog, and he’s quoted two of my articles. If I want to make nice with the SJW’s this is not the hill I should be dying on.

So: Nope, I oppose Roosh. We shouldn’t be spreading lies about him, but there are better people to be supporting if we want to bring back the good, true, and beautiful. I’ll try and stick with them when I find people to endorse or not endorse.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Why I’m not All In On Roosh

  1. dpmonahan says:

    I get wanting to restore some sanity to sex relations and thinking the world of Roosh is better than the crap and misery you find out there, but if you don’t catch how profoundly opposed PUA is to the spirit of Christ there is something seriously wrong. Jesus of Nazareth died a virgin. Reading some of these christian manosphere blogs you would think that made him a loser.

    • I think the key here is recognizing that Roosh isn’t allying himself with us. Maybe he’s saying he is, maybe he’s acting like he is, but if he hasn’t repented about the things he’s done to get out the word on how to be a cad, he’s stabbing us in the back with one hand and using us with another.

      I’m not going to go out of my way to support this guy.

  2. Zippy says:

    But a lot of alt-righters like being Roosh’s abused sluts. Sure he is a bad boy, but he is their bad boy, and he really has a heart of gold even though he hits her. Eventually she will win him over. And in the meantime, don’t the things he says make you hot?

    It isn’t just modern women who like being smacked around by a sociopath.

    • True enough. I don’t think most of Wright’s posters were (or Wright). I think they genuinely are tired of being lied to, and Roosh is, at least, honest. This they find sufficiently admirable to throw their support behind him.

      Of course, honesty is not the only virtue.

  3. GJ says:

    It eventually ended with everybody telling me to shut up.

    If you keep this up the natural outcome will be you getting expelled in one way or another from “[y]our side”.

    • I’m well aware of this. They can take me or leave me.

      • GJ says:

        But you’re not willing to leave them? (I’m not saying you should; I’m genuinely curious.)

      • Not really. Believe it or not, I actually LIKE John C. Wright, and Vox Day, and probably agree with both far more than I disagree.

        And the discussions are interesting, if nothing else. At least I’m having them.

        The folks on sites like theirs don’t hate me. Many are quite sympathetic to me. There are far worse places for me to be, and not too many better. And at least they’re saying stuff that’s interesting. I’d rather argue with pick-up artists than SJW’s.

  4. Scholar-at-Arms says:

    I recall the link being posted on Mr Wright’s blog, but wasn’t around for the conversation at the time. Could you put up a link to the post please?

    • No problem. http://www.scifiwright.com/2016/02/signal-boost-press-conference-with-roosh/

      I think the big thing to take away is that despite rhetoric that this is just about supporting somebody the press lied about, just a little bit of digging reveals that it’s not about that at all, but rather about picking allies.

      Which, frankly, is obvious. Another “Emperor has no clothes” scenario.

    • I also lost my temper at natewinchester at one point, who I normally like. I regret that, though I do think his responses to me got increasingly bizarre.

      • Scholar-at-Arms says:

        Allliances are extremely important; as a corollary, also very important is being aware of their limitation. IIRC from his posts (this is not the first time he’s touched on Roosh) Mr Wright seemed aware of the limitations of their alliance. Another good example is Christina Hoff Sommers, aka “Based Mom,” who has been a terrific ally in GamerGate but as a liberalish feminist, is not always aligned with the likes of you & me. Her coming out in favor of “listen & believe”-ing Michelle Fields’ gambit for attention was thus disappointing but not surprising.

      • Scholar-at-Arms says:

        Okay, I’ve read the whole comment section now. And maintaining disinterest between the parties, all of whom I like, I agree with Nate and Mr Wright and disagree with you.

        Here is my chief disagreement: you said “Just because he might be replaced with another, worse scoundrel, does not make what he does something worth supporting.”
        Frankly, I disagree. I think that the Manosphere has been inevitable for decades, and Roosh is the best possible leader of the Manosphere. Dalrock is a fine writer, but not a leader. The Manosphere, as shown by its long-standing inclusion of Christians such as Dalrock & Vox, is an ally to traditionalist anti-feminists. As an ally, they can fight alongside us and we can aid & possibly convert them. After all, many of them reached there by seeking reality (I saw this back when I read several manosphere blogs regularly), and the so-called Red Pill only differs from reality where it differs from Christianity.

        I aso agree with Nate that if we Rightists add our voices to the innumerable throng condemning Roosh & his ilk, a) it won’t make them any more condemned, and b) it adds weight to the Cathedral’s ability to excommunicate wrongthinkers such as Roosh or ourselves. To be honest, I think your arguing with Nate & John was worse than useless. While not a “cuckservative” (which you seemed at the time to think Nate was calling you, I couldn’t read it out his comments) you were as Vox says, talking like a moderate: showing more interest in firing on our own side then the foe. Supporting Roosh against our foes is more important than constantly offering disclaimers to how we aren’t PUAs. I think you think that as well, and I infer that you got over-involved in that conversation.

        I hope after our previous conversations, you’re aware that I’m offering this criticism in a spirit of friendship, as my honest and disinterested opinion.

      • Oh, I don’t take this at all personally. No worries on that score.

        I leave for school soon, so quickly:

        The Manosphere, as shown by its long-standing inclusion of Christians such as Dalrock & Vox, is an ally to traditionalist anti-feminists.

        I would say it CLAIMS us as allies, but anybody who is teaching men how to be better cads while at the same time claiming they’re “allies” with Christians isn’t being truthful. If we’re continuing with the war analogy, you can be against Germany but you’re not a good ally if you’re also bombing Pearl Harbor.

        …the so-called Red Pill only differs from reality where it differs from Christianity.

        Besides the fact that I’m not at all sure if I agree with that, the issue isn’t Red Pill vs. Blue Pill but with using your platform to teach people how to be cads. THAT is the issue here.

        As for my position on what to do in regards to Roosh, I clarified later in: For the most part (with this post as an exception written to explain what went on in that thread), I think we should be ignoring him. There are other allies.

        You are right that I took things too far and overreacted to Nate, which I regret and wish I could take back.

  5. Chad says:

    People are crazy. As Zippy says, they’re sociopaths.

    The reality is that it takes a certain amount of (in)sanity to live while going against the general modernist fallacies so pervasive in everyday life. Catholics are made for battle – and all humans are meant to be Catholics, so we look for a war to fight.

    And, along the way, many souls forget that the point of the war is to win salvation. Not the mere battle itself or mere survival.

    People talk about whats practical or how to make allies with the devil you know. They forget they’re still prostitutes to the devil of the deal.

  6. GJ says:

    The idea that I’m doing this to virtue signal is ludicrous.

    Raising objections to associations on moral grounds is now wrong. And so the anti-SJWs themselves embrace virtue signalling: demonstrating their devotion to the cause against by SJWs by embracing cads and others while denouncing those who have objections on the grounds of virtue as ‘cucks’, ‘moderates’, and so forth, with the intention of bringing true Freedom.

    Everyone’s a SJW.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s