Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Socialists rally against PUA, MPs try another country ban Watch

    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jebedee)
    Ok, if you had any experience with his writing or any in the manosphere then you would be well aware of their common opinion of Huffpost the like who are often spreading untruths. The fact you aren't aware of this speaks to why you think this is not satire. However, anyone who has read a few articles can catch on.

    Here is the quote again "This issue concerns me since I have a sister who I don’t want to be raped, so I carefully examined the articles on Salon, Buzzfeed, and Huffington Post that were written by professional journalists who pursue truth and justice over mass hysteria and delirium."

    How about the last few words, can you not pick up on sarcasm either?

    Here is another you missed ". Thankfully, a man only has to be told the phrase “rape is bad” at some point after puberty by an overweight feminist to definitively stop his future brutal and bloody rape career."

    Again you missed the sarcasm.

    I think you should steer clear of any kind of fiction based literature to be honest. You might hurt yourself trying to fly on a broom through a giant peach while trying to harpoon a whale.


    Don't be ridiculous, as I've made clear I'm quite capable of identifying satire and fiction from fact, however you might notice that he repeatedly insists that it's not satire, his behaviour (see the links to the wales online articles with the screenshots of operation bullhorn) goes far beyond satire (at no point has satire involved advocating stalking and harassment). It is evidently not satire, and a small degree of sarcasm doesn't mean the message isn't seriously meant, to suggest as such is just nonsense.

    That I don't frequent the "manosphere" (because I'm a socially competent human who has actually seen a women outside of porn) doesn't mean anything - he says it's not satire, the all-round behaviour isn't satire... it's not satirical, and you claiming such just serves to try and sweep the problem of people like this guy and their seriously retrograde views under the carpet.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    Mindless drivel
    I'm not interested in what Wales online has to say about it as they are one of the media outlets who lied. If you want to know about Roosh then go to his website and read for yourself. The media just takes headlines and odd sentences taken way out of context. It was quite rightly pointed out that these days a man can declare himself a woman and everyone has to accept it (by judicial force in NY apparently) but a man cannot write an article and say how it is intended.

    Everything about it was satire and I don't genuinely believe you are as stupid as you are appearing. Which makes you a liar, which is worse.

    I recommend you go watch his most recent press release in full before attempting to partake any more in this thread. I even did the liberty of linking to it in one of my previous posts.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    So they just made up the screenshots from his forum as a smear? :laugh: grow up and admit you're wrong. Roosh is not a satirist, he's just a misogynistic *******.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    So they just made up the screenshots from his forum as a smear? :laugh: grow up and admit you're wrong. Roosh is not a satirist, he's just a misogynistic *******.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'm looking at it now and he specifically states in brackets about the journalists (don't publish addresses but save them for future use).

    I don't see anything resembling an admission to not writing satire but feel free to link to it.

    You're right Roosh isn't a satirist, he wrote 1 satirical article out of thousands. He might be a misogynistic ******* to you and it is your right to think that but it doesn't justify censorship or the media spreading lies. If he was as bad as they say why would they need to lie?
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jebedee)
    I'm looking at it now and he specifically states in brackets about the journalists (don't publish addresses but save them for future use).

    I don't see anything resembling an admission to not writing satire but feel free to link to it.

    You're right Roosh isn't a satirist, he wrote 1 satirical article out of thousands. He might be a misogynistic ******* to you and it is your right to think that but it doesn't justify censorship or the media spreading lies. If he was as bad as they say why would they need to lie?
    You've already been linked the admission that he's not writing satire (the big disclaimer in so many of his posts saying "this is not satire"), but for the operation bullhorn stuff - Satire does not involve, nor has it ever involved, getting people to stalk and harass those who disagree with the message you're satirising.

    The media haven't spread lies, everything they've reported has been taken straight from his words. What justifies censoring him is the same thing as justifies censoring the likes of Anjem Choudary - he's a hate preacher and poses a serious risk to women where-ever his talks were going to take place. That's not to say I agree with it, as I've already said I'd have preferred to see him forced to do something despite changing his mind and whether he felt safe or not (it might have taught the little scrote a lesson), but I'm not the one he's preaching hate against.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    You've already been linked the admission that he's not writing satire (the big disclaimer in so many of his posts saying "this is not satire", but for the operation bullhorn stuff - Satire does not involve, nor has it ever involved, getting people to stalk and harass those who disagree with the message you're satirising.

    The media haven't spread lies, everything they've reported has been taken straight from his words. What justifies censoring him is the same thing as justifies censoring the likes of Anjem Choudary - he's a hate preacher and poses a serious risk to women where-ever his talks were going to take place. That's not to say I agree with it, as I've already said I'd have preferred to see him forced to do something despite changing his mind and whether he felt safe or not (it might have taught the little scrote a lesson), but I'm not the one he's preaching hate against.
    Oh I thought you had something else. So you have nothing essentially. It is amazing how you demonise and accuse him of "getting people to stalk and harass those who disagree with the message". How about everyone who stalked and harassed in the meeting places worldwide, bringing weapons and getting more idiots fired up? You clearly don't mind that because you agree with them.

    Really? How about when they said he lives with his mom and eats her meatloaf every day? Was that also from his own words? Clearly you have no idea how the media work, anyone can cut and paste quotes from things you have said or written and turn you into a monster. Like I said, watch his press conference. Until you do, you have no business being here.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jebedee)
    Oh I thought you had something else. So you have nothing essentially. It is amazing how you demonise and accuse him of "getting people to stalk and harass those who disagree with the message". How about everyone who stalked and harassed in the meeting places worldwide, bringing weapons and getting more idiots fired up? You clearly don't mind that because you agree with them.
    Nothing except him telling them to gather all the data they can for revenge strikes, and I suppose also the story of one journalist who's been harassed by him and his pathetic cronies for years for the "crime" of being a feminist: http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ytes-pilloried It's not an accusation, it's a statement of fact, and you'd do well to stop digging yourself into a hole and just admit he's serious and a threat to people.

    Jumping to conclusions without knowing anything seems to be a forte of yours - no, I don't agree with threatening them. I completely agree with non-violent protests against the presence of him and the troglodytes that follow him.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    Except he openly admits it's not satirical
    Where? That'd be a bit weird when you consider that he's added the following, bolded, to the top of the relevant article:

    Note: The following article was published as a satirical thought experiment. It’s conclusion is not to be taken literally

    ..and also includes the following Q&A statement, linked to from the above preface note:

    Q: “Why do you want to legalize rape?”
    "I don’t. Legalizing rape is a notion so insanely absurd I never imagined that people would take it 100% seriously, including politicians. I don’t believe any form of physical violence against men or women should be legalized. I’ve said that “How To Stop Rape” was a satirical thought experiment so many times that it’s clear to me current misinterpretation of it by the media is deliberate"

    Some of his determinations are too binary, and prescriptions too retrograde, but I saw no incitement of hate/violence and his core argument is irrefutable (albeit naturally hardly exclusive to the fairer sex e.g. as per the behavioural psychology/economics lit) e.g.

    “Women are scratching their most hedonistic and animalistic urges to mindlessly pursue entertainment, money, socialist education, and promiscuous behavior that only satisfies their present need to debase themselves and feel fleeting pleasure, at a heavy cost for society”

    Missed the rape advocacy already linked to in this thread then?
    Yes indeed, hook me up would you sport? :top2:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    Nothing except him telling them to gather all the data they can for revenge strikes, and I suppose also the story of one journalist who's been harassed by him and his pathetic cronies for years for the "crime" of being a feminist: http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ytes-pilloried It's not an accusation, it's a statement of fact, and you'd do well to stop digging yourself into a hole and just admit he's serious and a threat to people.

    Jumping to conclusions without knowing anything seems to be a forte of yours - no, I don't agree with threatening them. I completely agree with non-violent protests against the presence of him and the troglodytes that follow him.
    Why should we have one rule for one group and another for another group then? I never heard any outcry when his family were doxxed who have nothing to do with any of his work. He specifically said not to post their addresses which is more respect than what he was offered.

    As for Lindy West I had never heard of her before but from what I can see she tried to attack an airline business and blame them for not making special concessions for her morbidly excess adipose tissue. She appears to be promoting fat acceptance which is a socially damaging doctrine. It is a good thing there is at least one community willing to speak out against this kind of thing. Obesity is a bigger killer than smoking (and more costly to health services) yet we have separate smoking areas, extra tax on cigs and health warning labels. What do we get to warn us about poisonous trolls encouraging even more obesity? Only Roosh apparently. BTW so far you have linked to Wales Online and The Guardian to back up your points. It's no different than quoting Al-Jazeera on an anti-Islam rally.

    Those anti Roosh protests were far from peaceful in intent. I was monitoring a lot of the facebook groups started by socialists and it was shocking how many people were claiming they were scared of being attacked, in order to justify bringing pen knives and various other hideable weapons to the protest. But of course, it is only violence when the right does it.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mojojojo101)
    Is relevant because both cases are an example of excluding some person from the country because the government/society/whatever doesn't like what they are saying.

    However, when it's Abu Qatada it is absolutely necessary, when it's this dude it's an attack on free speech by the fascist PC brigade...

    All I'm asking for is a little consistency on the issue.
    It's irrelevant because the comparison you are making are between two cases that have different characteristics and are therefore irrelevant to this specific case.

    I see your point about consistency, but you're assuming that all cases require the same reaction, which is simply not possible.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    Does him admitting to being serious count or are we just going to pretend he's a satirist so we don't have to confront the vile nonsense he espouses?
    Or we could use a bit of rationality and not take everything at face value? Or is free-thought no longer a 'thing'?

    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    I could also point out that he's gone on to harassing female journalists as well, including advocating doxxing them and sharing their personal details online, which is clearly not satire, it's harassment, but a confession should be enough
    I grant this is just wrong.

    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    Both promote violence and hatred and it'd be overly simplistic to suggest that killing people immediately makes it far worse.
    Hardly. Spewing hatred and promoting murder are two very different things and cannot be compared. It's far too irrational to do so.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:

    Those anti Roosh protests were far from peaceful in intent. I was monitoring a lot of the facebook groups started by socialists and it was shocking how many people were claiming they were scared of being attacked, in order to justify bringing pen knives and various other hideable weapons to the protest. But of course, it is only violence when the right does it.
    Roosh's comments on women:


    'Women must have their behavior controlled by men
    'The reason that women had their behavior limited was for the simple reason that they are significantly less rational than men, in a way that impaired their ability to make good decisions concerning the future

    'It’s a matter of creating the environment where women are restrained from sleeping around'


    'My goal with the site is to make it more acceptable to shame, bully, and humiliate fat women into thinness'

    How can any man who approaches a girl today see her as more than a *** bucket?

    [Women] are sexus sequior, the inferior second sex in everything

    Women have reduced themselves to sexual commodities


    To name a few...
    Within that his comments on rape seem strongly to suit his beliefs. There is nothing to suggest it was 'satire' and even if it was, simply calling something 'satire' is not a magic wand.

    He firmly sees women as inferior to men, tells us they need to be controlled and have decisions made for them by a men, wants to publically shame and humiliate fat women, sees women as merely '***-buckets'.

    Whether or not his rape article was satire (which I don't believe for a second it was) this man is a disgusting, sexist, misogynistic individual.

    I wouldn't ban him because I believe in free speech but your willingness to defend him to the death says quite a lot about you.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 15, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    How are your GCSEs going so far?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.