So apparently domestic violence laws are a crime against nature. Who knew?
Well, the repellent “game” guru and all-around human stain Roosh Valizadeh knows, or thinks he knows, and he devoted a long and strange post yesterday to explaining just why. Oh, and why laws forbidding bees from attacking ants are a bad thing.
We’re going to skip the bugs — they’re the main characters in a bizarre fable Roosh uses to start off his post — and move right on to the part of Roosh’s post that deals directly with human beings.
Here is his thesis, baldly (and badly) stated:
Creating laws to prop up the weak is like playing a game of musical chairs. … Domestic violence laws are a great example of this phenomenon. Assault and battery is already outlawed, but by creating a new class of laws that create privilege for a specific group, a new immunity is formed. The ecosystem is damaged, unprepared to take on the unintended consequences of misguided intervention.
Of course, by this logic, you could argue that pretty much all laws interfere with the “ecosystem.” Interesting that he only applies this argument to female victims of domestic abuse. (He seems unaware that male DV victims even exist.)
In Ukraine, I witnessed a man slap his girlfriend on a crowded pedestrian street. Over 20 men must have witnessed the event, but no one rushed to her aid. She also did nothing, not screaming or running away. With primitive (i.e. rarely prosecuted) domestic violence laws in Ukraine, you’d think that this sort of thing would happen all the time, but it was the first time I had seen it in a country that I had spent 6 months in. Men show surprising restraint when it comes to violence against their women, something that may be a shock to people living in countries with advanced domestic violence laws.
So … a guy hitting his girlfriend in public is proof of the restraint of Ukrainian men?
In the USA, with nearly two decades of such laws on the books, what do you see? Women hitting men and women attacking men they don’t even know. I’m sure you’ve seen many such videos on Youtube and LiveLeak, which make it seem like women are warriors, completely fearless of men.
Really? Argumentum ad YouTube? On YouTube, you can find videos of dudes farting on other dudes’ heads, dudes shooting bottlerockets out of their own asses, women climbing into plastic bags for no reason, and, well, these ingenious masochists.
I’m really not sure you can attribute any of these activities to specific pieces of legislation.
With their elevation as a special victim in need of state protection, there is usually no punishment for hitting men, even if the man hits back only to defend himself. Girl hits man, man pushes girl away, girl calls cops, man goes to jail.
The idea that a mere accusation from a “girl” will send a man to jail is simply not true. Yesterday, George Zimmerman’s estranged wife accused him of threatening her and others with a gun, and punching his father-in-law in the nose. He did not go to jail.
If she’s married, she gets an additional bonus of monthly cash payments once the divorce is settled. Encouraging a man to fight has become financially beneficial for women.
She may get awarded child support, which she’ll be lucky to collect. Very few women get alimony.
Like the ants, women know that the laws give them a pass. They are taking full advantage of it, predictably conforming to their environment. Men are demoted to second class citizens and live in fear of going to jail while women have impunity to act in any way they want. The result? Less marriage, more violent marriages, unhappy relationships, and more single parent households.
Yes, that’s right. Roosh is seriously arguing that domestic violence laws lead to “more violent marriages.” Never mind that, in fact, domestic violence has fallen dramatically in the US in the last two decades, in part because of laws like the Violence Against Women Act (which also protects male DV victims). According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, “the overall rate of intimate partner violence in the United States declined by 64%” from 1994 through 2010.
But Roosh doesn’t let things like facts get in the way of his rant.
Nature, while not perfect, has spend hundreds of thousands of years optimizing sex roles through trial and error to facilitate human reproduction. … Recent utopian schemes to “protect” women have ushered in policies that have no proven effectiveness, whether increasing the happiness of women, protecting the family unit, or advancing society in any form. They might as well have been pulled out of a top hat, an experiment done on the masses by those in power.
Yeah, “no proven effectiveness” — aside from the fact that they actually seem to have cut DV in half in less than 20 years.
Progressives, through their tinkering, are introducing disincentives that destroy even basic relationships instead of stabilizing them. Their policies have helped create men such as myself, who see absolutely no incentive to pursue a relationship in a country where I can go to jail and be robbed blind from a failed relationship or from a woman lying about how I treat her.
I don’t know what creates men such as yourself, but I’m pretty sure it’s not feminism.
Roosh goes on to note that in Ukraine, the kids he sees walking around with their parents “seem quite happy.” Oh, the kids you observe at a distance and know nothing about “seem happy?” That settles it! Top notch social science research work, dude!
Moreover, he adds,
In a place where women are not considered protected, some may even be surprised to never see women with bruises and black eyes, or see them getting beat up every day, screaming for help.
Yep, that’s right, so long as women aren’t walking around with visible bruises and/or getting beaten up in public, all is well and we can assume that domestic violence is not a problem at all.
In fact, as even a quick visit to useful web site known as “Google” will reveal, domestic violence is in fact a huge problem in Ukraine. Indeed, according to one 2009 survey cited here, a staggering 44% of Ukrainians have been victims of DV; 75% of them never sought help for it — not altogether surprising, for while the country does in fact have laws against it, they are generally fairly ineffective.
As Amnesty International noted in a recent report on the subject,
Perpetrators of domestic violence in Ukraine act with impunity. The Law on the Prevention of Violence in the Family does not provide adequate protection to victims of violence and perpetuates the myth that women are to blame for the violence that is perpetrated against them. Police often fail to take action when women report domestic violence and sometimes react inappropriately. Women who attempt to take the perpetrators to court are hampered by widespread corruption or find that the punishments imposed are inadequate.
And while DV in the US is down, government officials in Ukraine warn that DV rates there may be rising.
Roosh, if he knows any of this, doesn’t really give a shit.
There will always be an unfortunate level of violence between man and woman, but any attempt to fix it through random laws and policies, as has been done in America, will only make it worse. Nature, in spite of its flaws, is more often right than wrong.
Forgive me, but I really hope that Roosh is eaten by a bear.
Oh, no, the bear would be certain to get heartburn from all that hot air.
The part that amazes me about this is the idea that we should draw the arbitrary line of what ‘nature’ has developed at some specific point in history, and it’s only the stuff that comes after it (or sometimes, they don’t even stick to pure chronology) that is ‘unnatural’.
For instance, the entire pick-up scene (single people looking for intimate social contact on a short-term basis, and gathering in locales for that express purpose) that Roosh has attached to like a lamprey has only existed for about a century. Sure, you had bawdy houses back another hundred years, but in general, middle-class women didn’t go there, simply because it was a good way to get shoved out of the middle class.
So for some reason, anti-DV laws are unnatural, but nightclubs are perfectly according to Nature’s Plan….
Some days, I read this stuff and laugh at the morons.
And sometimes it just gets to be too much and all becomes depressing.
Those saucy ants! They know the law protects them from my magnifying glass. Look at them, dancing in circles, eating the doritos I store for my own purposes on the bare ground. Mocking me.
One day, ants. One day.
Amanda, yeah, this shit is often too awful to be funny. I’m actively looking for lighter stuff for later in the week.
I’m dropping a couple of very not-light links here. Assume that every Trigger Warning you can think of is encompassed in these two posts:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/09/09/bride-aged-8-dies-internal-sexual-injuries-wedding-night-_n_3892892.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-09-05/jaipur/41800644_1_panchayat-members-kailash-police-complaint
I’ll be over in the corner, retching.
So the other night I had a dream that a co-worker of mine had been flirting with some PUA ideology but wasn’t entirely sold, and Roosh wanted to stay with him for a “mancation” to show him the true ways of PUA so he didn’t give up.
That’s when I decided I needed a bit of a break from here.
“Men show surprising restraint when it comes to violence against their women”
Once again, managing to combine misogyny with a very low opinion of men. Oddly, I am not ” surprised” that most men don’t batter their
propertypartners, because most men try to be decent human beings.Hey hellkell, was wondering where you were. Sorry Roosh invaded your dreams!
These news laws are working very well to help nature along. They’ve kept him out of the breeding pool, haven’t they?
David, I think you forgot to link to Roosh’s blog.
The insect nerd in me couldn’t resist reading his ant and bee fiction.
Wat?
Wat?
Wat?
(I’m choosing to focus on this rather than the awful stuff he’s spewing about DV. Roosh is a horrible human being.)
cloudiah: the fact that “mancation” was a word actually used in the dream kind of made up for the subject matter. It’s totally a word he would use.
Roosh, go fuck yourself with your odd, ugly face. Go fuck yourself with your implication that “restraint” is all that prevents men from beating women. And really lube yourself up when you go fuck yourself with that appeal to nature.
Roosh, go fuck yourself because there isn’t a human being on the planet as disgusting and immoral as you. You deserve yourself you repulsive fuckwit.
Now that’s out of my system, welcome back Hellkell! Your presence has been missed.
augochlorella: Start from the premise that women and men are different species entirely. Then be completely ignorant of actual behavior patterns of synergistic species. Then contort your basic biology through the lens of evo-psych, and get even most of that wrong. Then ram your head against a brick wall for a couple of hours.
At the end of it all, it starts to make some sense.
I can’t even . . . It makes me beyond angry that this asshole actually has a following of dudes that hang on his every word, and that he makes any money from this utter garbage. What’s wrong with the world?
Also, that bee and story makes about the least fucking sense out of anything I’ve ever read. Is this the superior Man Logic that I’m too womanly too grasp?
Is Roosh saying that men hit their wives/girlfriend more because the law tells them not to?
Are men toddlers?
I’m somehow not surprised that he misses the point that human societies aren’t ecosystems because all humans belong to the same species. :/
Is the boy in the story who leaves bread crumbs supposed to represent God or something? What are the worms that suddenly come in at the end suppose to symbolize?
grumpycat, I have been puzzling over the worms too. If this were Heartiste writing the story, the worms would be either Muslims or blacks. But with Roosh I don’t know.
I think that ant/bee/worm parable is just screaming out to be illustrated.
We all know that assault and battery are always exactly like domestic violence. Not.
In addition to being an abysmal human being, he’s also woefully uninformed.
May Roosh step on THESE legos (unwashed):
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/5e/ed/d3/5eedd366041b1a85a8845696d3072855.jpg
Best picture yet, neuroticbeagle!
I guess the boy is not God but more like a welfare government that just inevitably collapses at one point.
It would indeed make an interesting graphic novella.