About these ads

Category Archives: sluts

Pickup guru Roosh V: Unmarried women who don’t live with their parents are sluts

Evil slut in her den of depravity

Evil slut in her den of depravity

I‘ve been trying to avoid reading, much less writing about, the human stain and pickup guru who calls himself Roosh V. But I couldn’t keep myself away from his most recent post, an appalling little exercise called The Most Reliable Way To Tell If A Girl Is A Slut,which turns out to be even more appalling than its title.

Roosh, you see, has figured out a simple one-question test to determine the sluttiness of any woman. Let’s let him explain:

Many girls go to great lengths to hide their slutty past, knowing deep down the low value it conveys for being a suitable long-term partner, but there is one easy indicator that should tell you beyond a reasonable doubt whether she is a slut or not.

Has she lived on her own?

I believe my response to this is best illustrated by the following video of Don Draper saying “what?”

Let me just add:

HAS SHE LIVED ON HER OWN?

Are you exclusively dating high school girls?

If she’s an adult, or at least an adult somewhere in the vicinity of your own age, OF COURSE SHE’S LIVED ON HER OWN.

Yes, yes, I know, given this economy it’s true that some young people – mostly young men – are living at home a little longer these days than in the past, but the overwhelming majority have moved out by their mid-twenties. You’re 35 years old, dude.

Roosh continues:

If she has lived away from her parents for more than a year, she has—at the minimum—slept with many men whose last names she did not know, including one-night stands that did not involve condoms.

Dude, do you even know the first names of the women you sleep with? And haven’t you bragged endlessly about how you “raw dog it” with women? Weren’t you “raw dogging it” even when you were afraid you had AIDS? (Those are rhetorical questions; I already know that the answers are yes, and yes.)

An “independent” girl, removed from the constraints of a nuclear family home and its rules, curfew, and the concern of good parents, will allow the slutty dick gobbler within her to be released.

Women engaging in consensual sex that they enjoy … with someone else? THE END OF THE WORLD. Raping women who are too drunk to consent? According to Roosh himself, it’s “what I do.”

In other words, a natural-born slut who lives on her own will have far more sexual partners than if she lives with parents of average skill who require their daughter to be home by midnight.

Amazing deduction, Sherlock. And if she’s a nun, she’ll probably be having even less sex. The question is: why are you, as 35 year old man, regularly pursuing women young enough to live with their parents?

Give a man leeway in living life and he does great things, but give a woman this same freedom and she fully embraces the whore lifestyle, unable to stop from getting her fill of cock.

Really? Here are some young men who have recently started living on their own; I’m not sure that what they are doing could really be described as a “great thing.” (Content Warning: Drunk dudes hitting each other in the head with boards.)

If you want to estimate a girl’s notch count, simply multiple the number of years she has lived on her own by the number 3. If she has lived on campus in college for four years and then moved to a large city for two more, you can rest assured she’s had over 15 cocks in her vagina, and god knows how many more in her mouth.

Not that anyone’s worth is determined by how many penises they’ve had in their vagina, or anywhere else, but I feel I should note that these figures, clearly pulled from the  Journal of Roosh’s Own Ass, are completely wrong.

According to people who’ve actually studied human sexuality, his number is just a teensy bit high. And by “teensy” I mean they’re off by an order of magnitude. According to one 2005 study, women in their 30s and early 40s report that they’ve had only 4 male sexual partners, on average, not the 36 to 78 that Roosh’s formula would predict for women who move out on their own at the age of 18 to go to college.

There are definite exceptions for girls who are relationship minded and had boyfriends of more than one year in length, but unless she mentions this, you’re interacting with a slut and should proceed accordingly by escorting her home and asking if you can use her bathroom. Then you must fornicate with her like so many other men.

Yeah, that’s really … creepy. You lie to get into her home, then proceed as if, as a slut, she’s already consented to sex?

You may be thinking the following: “Many Western girls live alone, at least 50%. Does that mean that over 50% of American girls are sluts?” That’s exactly what it means. Independence in women drives them to disempowering sexual behaviors that oppose motherly or wife behaviors. You must be skeptical of girls who have lived alone if you want a serious relationship.

At least if you want a relationship with a creepy, judgmental asshole who thinks like Roosh.

[T]here is absolutely no need for a girl to be independent by living alone without a husband unless you want her holes to be used as a real-life enactment of 50 Shades Of Grey by many strange men.

Well, that is, if you assume that 1) all women can magically find men, whether their father or a husband, who will pay all their bills and  2) Roosh’s opinions about any given woman’s sexual life matter more than the opinions of the woman herself.

If you end up having a daughter of your own, I highly recommend you limit her financial independence before she finds a husband. Refrain from giving her Think & Grow Rich advice that would be better suited for your son. Otherwise, she’ll become a slut who gives it up to any man who dances a good clown jig.

So: prepare your daughter to be dependent for her very existence on dudes who think like Roosh.

That may be the worst parenting advice I’ve ever heard. Then again, it’s from Roosh.

About these ads

Quiz: Who said “Sluts are just whores in training?”

MRAs also like to remain anonymous when they make terrible jokes

Misogynists also like to remain anonymous when they make terrible jokes

Time for a little quiz!

Who posted comments online in which he (or she) declared that:

“Sluts are just whores in training.”

“Women look at 2 bulges on a man, one in the front of the pants or second one in the back pocket. Whichever one is bigger, they can do without the other.”

“What’s the most used line in Arkansas: daddy get off me you are crushing my cigarettes.”

Female college students are “sororostutes.”

Women expect special treatment because of their “golden vajay jays”

Khloe Kardashian is “black by injection.”

Your choices are:

Read the rest of this entry

#LiesToldByFemales is the misogynistic cesspool you might expect. Plus giant lizards, and JC Penney

Lying female

Lying female

So Twitter is a bit depressing today. One of the trending hashtags at the moment is #LiesToldByFemales and, yes, it’s the misogynistic cesspool that you might expect, a vast assortment of not-very-original stereotypes about women — sorry, females — and their allegedly lying ways. The female-bashing tweeters — some of them female themselves — aren’t even terribly original in their complaints, and most of the tweets seem to be reworkings on a few very basic themes.

We have the good-old fashioned trope of the female-as-narcissist, forever obsessed with how she looks — and given to lying about how much work she puts into her appearance.

Read the rest of this entry

How slut-shaming transforms dirty cheeseburgers into sex gold

One sexy cheeseburger

One sexy cheeseburger

Longtime readers of Man Boobz will have noticed that most of the pickup artists and “game” gurus I write about here are also vociferous slut-shamers.

This might seem a little odd and, well, counterproductive, in that you might expect that men who enjoy having no-strings-attached sex with a large number of women would in fact be kindly disposed towards women who enjoy having no-strings-attached sex with a large number of men.

Read the rest of this entry

A Pickup Artist Asks the Question: “Is It Possible For Women To Be A Healthy Promiscous Woman?”

Women: It's very confusing up in there.

Women: It’s very confusing up in there.

So I’ve been reading a bit more in the Evo Psych literature — some of the alleged classics in the field that most Manospherians seem to have either read or absorbed by osmosis. I’m learning a lot about the dubious “science” underlying many of the Manosphere’s most cherished beliefs.

But I’m a little worried for my own intellectual safety, because I see so much clear evidence around me that reading too much Evo Psych can turn one’s brain to mush.

Consider the example of rmaxgenactivepua, the Evo-Psych-addled gentleman who writes the blog “Rejecting Modern Women: Pickup & Advanced NLP & Charisma Behaviourial Conversational Strategic Technologies.” Specifically, consider the recent post of his that asks the grammatically confusing question: “Is It Possible For Women To Be A Healthy Promiscous [sic] Woman?”

I’m just going to quote the whole damn thing because, yikes:

To definitively answer that question, is a woman biologically designed or hardwired to be promiscous

Are there any biological co-factors which support a womans ability to be promiscous?

A womans vagina is a massive breeding grounding for std’s, making it highly unsuitable & dangerous for sleeping with multiple men

Women have a highly short period of fertility. only 10 years of fertility, less if theyre in bad shape

Women have a limited amount of eggs

Plus women dont have the emotional blocking abilities of men

The real kicker is, women are only capable of having one mans child at a time

If women were meant to be polygamous, they’d be able to carry multiple children of multiple men

Making it ludicrous to assume women are polygamous, it’s laughably ridiculous to assume women are polygamous when theyre own biology isnt even capable of reproducing polygamously

Men on the other hand are designed from the ground up to impregnate millions of women, they reproduce over millions of sperm a day, & can impregnate 100′s of women

In fact one man, men are so efficient at reproducing with hundreds of women, one man could repopulate an entire civilisation if he wanted to, thanks to his production of millions of sperm

One woman on the other hand, couldnt populate her own ass, let alone a shoe box or a cat litter tray …

Proving a woman isnt anywhere near designed to be a slut, FACT

Well, yeah, I guess if you make up a rule that states women can’t have sex for pleasure with multiple partners unless they’re biologically capable of giving birth simultaneously to children sired by all these different partners, then women aren’t designed to be “sluts.”

Then again if you can simply make up your own rules like this, you can prove pretty much anything. If I decide that men can’t be polygamous unless they are simultaneously holding their breath underwater and on fire, I guess I’ve proved that men can’t be sluts either.

FACT!

Oh, and while it’s true that a cis man with healthy sperm could (in theory) repopulate an entire civilization, there are some women who are giving men a run for their money in this department.

19-kids-and-counting

Slut face, hairy arms and feminism: all signs she’s a slut?

Possible slut.

Possible slut.

Over on Roosh’s Return of Kings blog, a dude who calls himself Tuthmosis has provided a useful list of “24 Signs She’s A Slut” in order to help aspiring PUAs to figure out whether or not the HB 6 they’ve been negging all night is going to eventually succumb to their drunken, er, “charms.”

Much of the list is basically rehashed PUA conventional wisdom: sluts have tattoos and lots of piercings; they dye their hair unnatural colors, wear revealing clothes, and have daddy issues.

PUAs really have a thing about women with tattoos, huh?

Read the rest of this entry

Red Piller: Evil sluts not only want to have sex but actually want people not to hate them for it.

Men can also be sexy hamsters.

Men: Can also engage in hamstering

So the Red Pill subreddit, as you may recall, is a place for dudes to discuss the devious and possibly not altogether ethical or even consensual strategies they’ve come up with to … have sex with anyone they want. But their real goal is not just to have sex, but to control other people’s opinions and thoughts of them doing so. They want to silence all critics, and then even demand praise for their morally reprehensible or at least morally questionable actions.

Woah. It feels like my brain was just taken over for a second. Did I even write that? I don’t think I did. I swear I’ve read most of that paragraph before.

Oh wait.

NakedAndBehindYou 28 points 5 hours ago (33|5)  Feminists always say shit like "I wish I could have sex with anyone I want but I can't because patriarchy!!!"  When in reality, if they live in a first world country, they can already have sex with anyone they want. But their real goal is not just to have sex, but to control other people's opinions and thoughts of them doing so. They want to silence all critics, and then even demand praise for their morally reprehensible or at least morally questionable actions, in an effort to silence their own subconscious condemnation of themselves which results in painful self-inflicted guilt and shame.  That is all it really is: they are narcissistic and want to behave immorally, but cannot escape their own guilty consciences, so they try to block out the conscience via mental gymnastics AKA hamstering.

Oh yeah. That’s where it came from. I must have been possessed.

The Red Pill subreddit, where lying to women to get them into bed is perfectly acceptable but a woman having consensual sex is a reprehensible, narcissistic slattern with a gymnastic hamster for a brain.

NOTE: I found this quote through the always helpful Blue Pill subreddit.

Fidelbogen: Men’s Rights Activists! Forget about DV shelters for men. Focus on the important issue: yelling at feminists

Men's Rights Edmonton doing important human rights work by protesting Slut Walk

Men’s Rights Edmonton doing important human rights work by protesting Slut Walk

Our old nemesis Fidelbogen — the Would-Be Counter-Feminist Philosopher King — has taken on a dire, if altogether hypothetical, threat to the men’s rights movement as we know it today: the danger that actual activism that benefits men in the real world will get in the way of the feminist bashing that he thinks is job #1 for all good MRAs.

As he argues in a recent post:

Doing good things for men – opening DV shelters, men’s centers, passing male-friendly laws, and so on – is all very excellent and fine, but it does not attack the root of the problem.

This is kind of a remarkable statement for him to make, given that the Men’s Rights movement that Fidelbogen has attached himself to — or at least its very vocal online contingent — has so far succeeded in opening precisely zero DV shelters and/or men’s centers and has successfully lobbied for zero “male-friendly” laws.

Indeed, it’s only in recent months that any MRAs active online have managed to raise even a miniscule percentage of the money it will take to open much less operate a single shelter for men.

But apparently Fidey is worried that even these paltry efforts from MRAs will get in the way of the noble task of yelling about feminists. As he puts it, in LARGE BOLD TYPE so you know he’s extra serious:

 

 Anybody who claims to care about men, but doesn't savage feminism pretty harshly on a regular basis, is either a damned liar or a lazy, muddled fool with his head up his ass. There is simply no way you can care about men if you are not attacking feminism in one way or another.   And if I had to make the choice, I would even say that agitation is MORE important than activism. Yes, I would rather have a thousand people loudly slagging off feminism in my town, than to have one men's DV shelter open while nobody makes a squeak about feminism! And you can quote me on that.

 

Fidey, I don’t think you need to worry for a minute that MRAs are going to actually accomplish anything in the real world. And you can quote me on that,

The search for a slut-free college

Don't let the books fool you -- these gals are up to no good!

Don’t let the books fool you — these gals are up to no good!

So the high school freshman who calls himself Bostonian42 is thinking ahead to college. And he’s got questions. Well, actually just one question, which he’s asking people about every college he’s interested in: is this college full of sluts? Because if it is, he wants none of it.

Here he is, inquiring about Dartmouth:

Dartmouth

He’s posted similar comments for eight other colleges.

Sounds like he may want to avoid whatever college it is that Amanda here is going to. (See here for more from this inadvertantly hilarious comic book.)

110

(Thanks to @MaraWritesStuff on Twitter for alerting the world to Boston42’s noble quest.)

(Oh, and I guess I’m back to posting again, though my posts may be a little light for awhile.)

PUA dirtbag on why some women should be treated like “disposable blowup dolls.”

Better than spending an evening with Firepower, I suspect.

Better than spending an evening with Firepower, I suspect.

I’ve heard tell that some Pickup Artists aren’t actually misogynistic pieces of shit. Unfortunately, I keep running across guys like Firepower here, whose blog I discovered only yesterday, and purely by accident (though evidently I’ve quoted him off the Spearhead a couple of times before)

Here he is doing some wonderful PR work for his fellow PUAs, defending them (and himself) against accusations that they treat women like “disposable blow-up dolls.” Not so, says Firepower:

Read the rest of this entry

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 7,489 other followers

%d bloggers like this: