Anton LaVey impersonator Davis Aurini makes a “film,” and it’s worse than you could possibly imagine
[NOTE: The original video on Davis Aurini's YouTube channel was taken down shortly after the post went up. So I've embedded the version that is, as of this moment, up on the director's YouTube channel. I''d recommend that you download this for your permanent collection.]
Ok, so I’ve been working on a post about the latest ridiculous doings of our friends Davis Aurini and JordanOwen42 — the not-so-dynamic duo who’ve been desperately begging for money to make their Totally Serious documentary about how evil Anita Sarkeesian is. But then I watched this, and it’s too good not to post on its own.
This is Lust in the Time of Heartache, a short “philosophical” film written and produced, and just posted on teh Interwebs, by Mr. Aurini. I’m pretty sure it’s not supposed to be a comedy, but I was laughing at it from beginning to end.
There’s nothing about this film that’s not terrible and ridiculous, from the choice of fonts in the title sequence to the names of the characters as revealed in the closing credits.
Where even to start in criticizing this mess? The, er, “acting?” The pretentious, pseudo-philosophical voiceover, delivered by Mr. Aurini himself? The shrill, frantic — yet somehow also meandering — music that plays almost continuously from beginning to end? The ludicrously unconvincing fight choreography? The ill-fitting suits? The evo psych? The dawning recognition that this whole thing is meant to depict how Aurini sees himself in our “fallen” world?
The fact that this ten minute film credits a “parkour consultant?”
I’m going to borrow a couple of lines from Pauline Kael’s famous review of the legendarily stinky 1970 film Song of Norway because they offer a pretty fair assessment of this one as well:
The movie is of an unbelievable badness. … You can’t get angry at something this stupefying; it seems to have been made by trolls.
She means “under the bridge”-style trolls, not the modern kind.
Oh, and the sound is awful, too. NOTE: Dialogue is supposed to be louder than the background noises.
Anyway, just watch it. It’s only ten minutes long. And definitely stay for the final credits. You’ll see why.
But hey, don’t take my word for it. Read this glowing review, from some dude on YouTube:
Excellent writing that encompasses the transitions from one cinematic style to the next. At first I was concentrating on the technical problems and lackluster performances, however, after about 5 mins in, the pacing kicked up a notch. Well done, sir.
“If women didn’t have vaginas, they would be hunted for sport,” and other brilliant insights from “Red Pill” Redditors
The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive continues! If you haven’t already, please consider sending some bucks my way. (And don’t worry that the PayPal page says Man Boobz.) Thanks!
After a day spent going through hundreds of pages of violent misogyny posted in that notorious 4channer IRC chat log, I thought I’d cleanse my palate by taking another peek into Reddit’s favorite gathering hole for Red Pill Redditors. The Red Pill subreddit, after all, is all about self-improvement, and helping men navigate the sexual marketplace in “a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.”
So let’s see what sort of self-improvement tips I can find there today! Here’s one!
Oh, dear. We’re off to a really bad start here. I mean, some people might consider these comments to be just an eensy-weensy bit, you know, sexist.
But these are just a couple of comments. Let’s back up a moment to look at the post these comments were responding to. Here it is, a (presumably) very thoughtful treatise on the expectations men and women have going into relationships, by a fellow with the unusual name Gay Lube-Oil. (Presumably his parents, Mr. and Mrs. Lube-Oil, named him after “new journalism” legend Gay Talese.) It’s got literally hundreds of upvotes, so it must be pretty good.
So let’s take a look at the younger Mr. Lube-Oil’s thoughts on this fascinating topic.
What you’re going to find is that western and western influenced women expect a lot more from men than they’re willing to give in return. Women shouldn’t be judged for their bodies but that fat dude is a creep. I needed time to find myself but men without a good income are losers. My husband needs to be there for me, but if I sense any emotional weakness ill be gone faster than Jose Canseco during a piss test.
Huh. I see no citations for any of this, but I guess I’ll take his word for it.
Why are all women like this?
Ah, a variation on Freud’s famous question: “women — what’s their fucking problem?”
Because all her life, the only thing that was expected of her was for her to bring her vagina. It got her into parties and clubs. It got her drugs. It might have even helped her get a job that she was less qualified for. The corporate media taught her that as a vagina operator, men owed her tons of free shit. The movies and shows that she defines herself by depict women as passive objects to be showered in male affection. Diamonds are a girls best friend (because women are incapable of real friendship).
Huh. I thought maybe I’d ask my best friend about this, but as it turns out she’s a woman, and therefore not my best friend at all.
Its foolish to expect any equality in a relationship because society conditions women to be selfish assholes. When a women says that she will be there for her boyfriend. She means in the literal physical sense. Depressed men are unattractive and women have no interest being anywhere near them. Ultimately, most women only bring to relationships what they bring to the club: vagina.
There are two ways to respond to this Red Pill truth. You can use women for their vaginas and nothing else. Or you can teach her to cook, workout and whatever else you expect out of a LTR. In the end all you get by default is vagina, unless she stops being attracted to you. If that’s the case she has a headache.
It’s like that old joke: “Boy, the vaginas at this place are really stinky. And such small portions!”
(Thanks, Blue Pill Subreddit, for pointing me to these wondrous bits of Red Pill Wisdom.)
The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive continues! If you haven’t already, please consider sending some bucks my way. (And don’t worry that the PayPal page says Man Boobz.)
Thanks! (And thanks again to all who’ve already donated.)
By now you’ve probably seen the latest set of creepy PMs that’s making the rounds of the internet — you know, that series of sour-grapey insults some random finance asshole sent to a woman on Tinder who had gently rejected his crude sexual come-on. If you haven’t, I’ve pasted them in below.
Well, it turns out that this would-be Romeo is not only an asshole, but a wholly unoriginal asshole at that. Thinking that more than a few of his angry negs sounded vaguely familiar I did a bit of Googling and discovered that a couple of his more, er, polished insults came straight out of the pickup artist playbook. Quite literally.
That bit where he tells the woman he messaged that she’s “not hot enough to be acting like this?” An old PUA neg he literally may have discovered by cruising the message boards at VenusianArts.com, the website of everyone’s favorite PUA peacock Mystery, where one commenter described it as his favorite line to use with “highly egotistical women” he met in the club:
You won’t believe what Reddit’s Red Pill ALPHA DOGS are saying about the stolen JLaw nudes. Or maybe you will.
Well, the denizens of Reddit’s TOTALLY ALPHA Red Pill subreddit have weighed in on the stolen celebrity nude pics that have so many Redditors — and other skeezballs — so excited. And they have some, well, intriguing explanations for why feminists are troubled by the widespread dissemination of stolen nude pictures that were never supposed to be seen by the general public.
In a thread with the lovely title Why are the feminazis so buttdevastated about the leaked nude pics?, a RedPill dude with the lovely handle trpmdsrfggts explains that said feminazis are angry because the pics — some of which show the celebrity women looking like, you know, actual women — are driving down the “price of pussy.”
I’ll let him explain, because his logic is obviously more sophisticated than anything I learned in my pussy economics classes in college:
The saga of that still-just-hypothetical “documentary” about Anita Sarkeesian and other evil Social Justice Warriors just got a little stranger.
The dogmatic duo behind the project — lady hating YouTube blabbers jordanowen42 and Davis Aurini — are still having a bit of trouble raising the necessary funds (so much so that Aurini wrote an angry, rambling blog post aimed at those who think he and his pal are too inept and biased to make a decent film).
But a new video — put together by Kav P and a friend, and posted above — reveals that the dogmatic duo has found some surprising new allies.
One of the odder folk beliefs of the pickup artist subculture is that women become worn down and used up and even a bit addled if they have sex with too many men. Men, by contrast, are said to be able to handle an equal number of female lovers with grace and aplomb.
In a recent post, our old friend Heartiste offers what he sees as decisive photographic evidence illustrating the different effects of promiscuity on men and women. One bit of this evidence: a picture of a young woman used to advertise some sort of singles event. Reflections from the photographer’s lights obscure her pupils, an offputting effect that gives her a slightly deranged look.
I don’t usually bother to read the comments on Chateau Heartiste; making it through Heartiste’s own florid yet turgid prose is exhausting enough. But after skimming a recent post of his on the increasing historical fatness of British women, I happened to glance down at the comments, only to see a discussion of the comparative anatomy of female humans and deer that was so odd and creepy I felt obligated to bring it to you all.
Brace yourself, because the following might just ruin your breakfast:
I’m pretty sure that guy’s hunting license should be taken away from him. And if there were sex licenses for human beings, well, all three of these guys should lose those as well.
Vox Day: Reporting a rape you were too incapacitated to fully remember is like calling the cops when you can’t remember where you parked your car [UPDATED: Vox attacks anti-racists as child abuse enablers]
In the world of fantasy writer and all-around hateful shithead Vox Day, women who are raped when they’re too drunk to consent should just suck it up, because reporting their rapes would be akin to someone calling police when they can’t remember where they’ve parked their car.
In a blog post today, Vox approvingly quotes a retiring British judge under fire for telling a newspaper that “the rape conviction statistics will not improve until women stop getting so drunk.” (This is the same judge who recently gave a teacher convicted of possessing a massive library of child porn a suspended sentence, saying that she couldn’t “criticise you for being a teacher who’s attracted to children.”)
Vox offers his take: