Apparently hoping to gin up another flood of hate-traffic to his blog, the attention-seeking human stain whose name rhymes with Batt Gorney has posted what is essentially a how-to guide for would-be abusive boyfriends under the charming title “How to Crush a Girl’s Self-Esteem.”
“Gorney” has conveniently arranged his suggestions into a numbered list, so let’s proceed through them one by one. (If you’re triggered by explicit discussions of psychological and physical abuse, please stop reading now.)
Step one, in “Gorney’s” not-so-unique 6-step-plan: “Constantly make her feel inadequate.”
And how do you do that? Easy as pie.
Every time she does something for you, find out what she did wrong and remind her of it. If you can’t find any problems, make some up.
And try some mild gaslighting while you’re at it.
[Y]ou should always sound calm and collected, like you’re talking about the weather. Denigrating her in a neutral-but-firm fashion will trip her submissiveness circuitry, making her think about how she can better serve you. And every time she reaches the goalposts, you move them, forcing her to play an eternal game of catch-up.
Like the salesmen in Glengarry Glen Ross, you should Always Be Criticizing:
The concept is that if you criticize girls for minor mistakes, they’ll be less likely to commit major ones, as their mental energy is expended on dealing with your every complaint. For example, if you constantly critique the way she dresses, you won’t be arguing with her over whether she should get a tattoo or nose piercing to express her “individuality.”
In step 2, “Dominate her physically and sexually,”“Gorney” encourages his readers to violate their girlfriend’s personal and sexual boundaries at every chance.
Repeatedly violate her boundaries in small, petty ways, small enough that she’ll feel petty for complaining to you.
That’s right: abuse her strategically, and in such a way that she feels crazy for complaining about your abuse. “Gorney” is thinking like a true abuser.
For example, if you’re into anal sex and she’s not thrilled about it, the next time you take her from behind, stick your finger into her asshole. If she doesn’t like facials, cum in her hair instead. Lightly clasp your hand around her throat during sex like you’re going to choke her. (Do not actually choke her. That is dangerous.) Smack her on the behind when you’re out in public. The possibilities are endless.
The message you want to send her is simple: it’s not her body anymore.
This is all textbook abusive behavior.
“Gorney” follows this with a lovely bit of rationalization:
Most girls want you to dominate them anyway, but the rationalization hamster and their conscious minds prevent them from articulating this desire.
And then it’s back to more strategic abuse:
[I]f she lets you get away with minor violations of her boundaries, she’ll accede to your bigger demands later on, letting you mold her into the perfect plaything. If she doesn’t violently resist getting her anus fingered, a little more pressure and you’ll be full-on sodomizing her, grinning as she whimpers between each thrust.
Apparently the only sexual pleasure “Gorney” can imagine from anal sex is the pleasure he evidently gets from forcing women into it against their will.
Oh, and make sure you never give her the chance to say “no.”
Never ask her for anything, because asking is begging, and begging is contemptible.
Yep. Avoid the thorny issue of consent by never asking, and assuming that anything other than violent resistance is a “yes.”
Step 3 in “Gorney’s” program takes the creepiness into overdrive: “Isolate her from her friends and family.”
I don’t have much to say about this one; there’s a reason this is a favorite technique of cults and domestic abusers alike. Here’s Gorney’s take on it:
You need to be the primary emotional influence in her life, and you can’t do that if she’s leaning on anyone else for support. Gradually wean her from contact with anyone other than you.
What’s in it for you?
Not only will this increase her emotional dependence on you, it will make her more willing to please you; she’ll be less likely to wreck the relationship if she knows she’ll be all alone if it goes south.
For step 4, “Gorney” puts away the stick for a moment and pulls out a carrot, urging his readers to “Reward her at random intervals.”
But his emphasis is as much on the random as on the rewards; this is yet another gaslighting trick.
If you reward her every time she does good, she’ll see the pattern and use it to manipulate you. But if you reward her at random, her little hamster brain will run itself ragged trying to figure out your endgame.
Step 5 carries the slightly misleading title “Give her an emotional release.” In fact, what he suggests is that you physically “discipline” your girlfriend when she does “wrong” in your eyes.
By spanking a girl until she starts crying and sobbing, you give her an emotional release, turning her into a soppy puddle of goo and making her more inclined to serve you. As a friend of mine put it, all girls crave spankings; it’s their way of making up for Eve’s sin.
“Gorney” seems to be confusing consensual BDSM — which can bring bottoms or submissives intensely emotional releases — with domestic violence.
In step 6, “Gorney” tries to convince his readers — and himself — that it’s an abuser’s incredible sexual prowess, and not his manipulative abuse, that allows him to keep control over an abusive relationship.
You absolutely must have good cocksmanship if you want to ruin a girl’s self-esteem. Girls are enslaved to their vaginas as much as men are to their penises … Girls will do anything for a man who can fuck them good … .
Your dick is heroin, she’s the junkie and you’re the dealer.
Yeah, keep telling yourself that.
If you can make her cum on a regular basis, she’ll side with you over her parents, her friends, everyone.
Really? I hate to break it to you, dude, but “[m]aking her cum on a regular basis” is not really an extraordinary achievement, dude. It’s not a sign that you’re some sort of exceptional “cocksman” with a dick of pure heroin. It’s actually kind of, you know, basic? Expected? Also, most women can give themselves orgasms on a regular basis.
Additionally, don’t make her cum every time you have sex. Think like a dealer: you give the customer the pure stuff when you want to get them hooked, and when they’re addicted, you sell them shit that’s been cut with rat poison to increase your bottom line.
Somehow I don’t doubt that sex with guys like this would be a lot like taking drugs laced with rat poison.
[R]ationing out her orgasms at random will keep her on her toes trying to satisfy you.
Or send her off in search of someone who’s not such a complete asshole in bed?
“Gorney’s” advice is so over-the-top awful — it sometimes reads like he’s literally copied it from some textbook on domestic abuse — that it’s hard not to wonder if he just trolling. And to some degree, I’m sure he is. But he also clearly believes a lot of the shit he posts, and so I can only assume he believes, and possibly follows, at least some of his “advice” here.
This is a guy, after all, who admitted plainly to hitting a previous girlfriend, in a post in which he also declared that
Women should be terrorized by their men; it’s the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.
Actually, that’s not true. In fact, there’s some research that suggests male chimps terrorize female chimps — and beat them with branches — to punish them for mating with other males. So men who abuse women are in fact the ones behaving like chimps.
Every time I think that the manosphere can’t sink any lower, something comes along and proves me wrong.
NOTE: I don’t want to give “Gorney” any traffic for his terrible post. But I also feel obligated to link to my source. So I have. I’ve just hidden the link randomly in the middle of the post.
And my little history lesson above forgot about ‘Negro’ which was the favored term after Colored, if I recall correctly. Given that these terms were changing faster than once a generation, it’s not surprising, though, that there’s a lot of blurring.
For once, I agree with Buttboy. You can’t shame someone for being fat or ugly without throwing all fat or ugly people under the same bus.
Re shaming people for being “fat” (by whose standards) or “ugly” (ditto) is also unethical from the perspective that many can’t (easily) change that attribute. It’s as offensive and cruel as shaming people for their skin colour, or height, etc.
Shaming people for having revolting attitudes, OTOH, is perfectly okay because *those people choose to have those revolting attitudes*.
Kiwi Girl — problem is that shaming for hypocrisy is definitely okay, but when it’s over beauty standards it gets messy. Like, shaming Roosh for demanding super clean women while cultivating hair grease is one thing, called Forney ugly is another. I guess the difference is that Roosh could TAKE A FUCKING SHOWER.
No, we’re not, you disingenuous dink.
I realize I may in the minority here. But Forney has shown himself to be ugly inside, and I think that’s coloring my perspective of his outsides.
Argenti – good point. I personally am against shaming Roosh for his hair, because there are various cultural attitudes towards things like personal hygiene and so I don’t know that there is an objective standard of “how clean hair should be” that can be invoked, as a for instance. Also, greasy hair = not really harming anyone.
While attitudes towards females differ across cultures, there is real harm that occurs when females are treated worse than males. So bad treatment of females = real harm follows.
So, maybe I’m taking a cultural/harm matrix approach. I’ve never thought this through before, so this is a useful exercise for me. Manboobz = making me think more! 🙂
Adding here for clarity (clearly I needed my second cup of tea!): I have no issues with people being called out for hypocrisy. So, I’m completely comfortable with people saying stuff like “hey Roosh, how come you hold women to a higher standard than yourself”, or any words to that effect. It can be objectively proved* that Roosh is a hypocrite in this area, so no issues for me there.
The problem area for me is the shaming bit, which goes further than merely identifying hypocrisy.
*not meant in the way as objectivism is, in science.
Nope, women aren’t visual at all. I have no idea why anyone would pinterest this:
http://www.pinterest.com/pin/154881674656939205/
@skybison
This is probably just me and my weird chimp-hate/fear, but ‘chimp related brain bleach’ sounds like an oxymoron to me 😉
@house mouse queen
::offers free internet hugs, and a dose of brain bleach.::
@paradoxy
have we been reading different manospherians? O_o
@femisandry
That fucking sucks 🙁 Internet hugs from me, if you want them.
@argenti
You like bats! 😀 THEN I FINALLY HAVE AN EXCUSE TO POST THIS!! HAHAHA MY LIFE IS COMPLETE!!
/sugar rush.
@cassandra
I object on cockroaches behalf. I mean, they may be creepy and nasty, but they aren’t hurting anyone.
Small thread nitpick: So much ‘women aren’t visual’ and links to hot guys. Cuz um, not all women like dudes :/
/feeling ignored.
I think people are just linking to images they personally find appealing. Feel free to post some hot non-men!
@Marie – and what cosmic force is preventing you from posting a link to some attractive women for the women who are not into dudes?
Ninjaed by emilygoddess, dammit.
Something we can all agree on, PUPPIES:
http://youtu.be/E675Q81OkUc
In a parallel universe where I knew Forney personally and he was a good guy, I would probably like him just fine. Looks are not relevant to people’s moral worth.
But I probably would not have sex with him, either. Looks are relevant to how sexually and romantically appealing a person is to me, and probably to most people. (No, not the only factor, but not a thing that can be handwaved away, either, just because it’s messy and amoral and basically unfair. I can’t be the only person on earth who’s ever tolerated way too much crap out of a partner because he/she is heartbreakingly beautiful! I am also probably not the only person who’s ever dished out way too much crap because my partner thought I was beautiful.)
Basically, I think a lot of manosphereans see those kinds of pretty-boy-treats-girl-like-crap-and-she-sticks-around situations, and manage to conclude it’s the being treated like crap angle that women are into, not that pretty people sometimes get away with really bad behavior because humans are really into prettiness.
That said, there is probably someone out there who finds his look appealing and if he were a good guy, I would wish him nothing but success and happiness.
I… don’t think that’s throwing anyone under the bus. I am trying to be real. Beauty may be culturally constucted, but so what? so is language, and music, and cuisine, and politics and religion and ethics and the economy. The “rules” can change but it does seem to me like there are always rules.
Anyway, OMG Cumberbatch!!! I just started watching Sherlock. (yeah, four years late) The masses of wavy dark hair, the flawless skin, the seaglass eyes!
Eyeball catnip
@Marie :
Kiwi Girl, “Black” (often capitalised) is the preferred term in the UK, although Afro-Caribbean is also sometimes used.
What term is preferred in NZ?
titanblue:
Wow. Wish I could move like that. That’s impressive.
@emilygoddess
That makes sense. I just tend to feel left out during these kinds of conversations. Idk why. My brain’s just weird like that.
@titanblue
That video is awesome 😀
@jefrir: it depends on what ethnic group one is talking about. Maori are referred to as Maori (or NZ Maori, to distinguish them from Cook Islands Maori). We also have Pacific peoples (next subgroup down is based on geographical location, e.g. Samoan, then down from that are the sub-geographical ethnic groups I think). We have NZ European/Pakeha to refer to people like me (pakeha with a small p is also acceptable usage, depends on how the word is being used), but European is the top level category. Asian is another main category (which includes people from the Indian subcontinent, but next level down starts the geographic grouping), then “Middle Eastern/Latin American/African” and “Other”. If a person answered our census as “African American” (53116) then they would get coded to Middle Eastern/Latin American/African (5). But if they just answered “American” (12943) then they would get coded to European (1).
Structure outlined here: http://www.stats.govt.nz/methods/classifications-and-standards/classification-related-stats-standards/ethnicity.aspx
I have pointed out in the past (to Stats NZ) that their ethnicity constructions bear little resemblance either to how people think about themselves and also to how a nation state hits a level of “maturity” where people’s ethnicity can be considered as based on the culture of that nation state. I certainly don’t think of myself as “European”, for example I have never lived there, but the ethnicity system assumes that this construct == my identity.
I also /headdesk at the usage of “ethnicity” to substitute for “race” (as in, can’t talk about the latter so we’ll use the former as a direct substitution) as the two are not equivalent. But the NZ government acts like they are, and so people continue to be confused between the two.
titianblue – WHOA!
Damn, I wish I could persuade Mr K to wear a kilt, but he just won’t go there, the spoilsport.
But yeah, women are totes not visual, which is why I didn’t get stuck staring at a picture of an unknown man over thirty years ago and didn’t end up finding every picture of him I could and didn’t go to France twice to see them for real and haven’t done hundreds of photo composites of him since then. Nope, not visual at all.
MARIE THOSE BABY BATS ARE THE CUTEST EVER ::dies::
Nothing weird about feeling left out when it’s women who appeal to you; these conversations focus on women being visually attracted to men because it’s the dirtbag scrotospherians who insist that 1) women aren’t visual and 2) therefore it doesn’t matter what men look like (even though they whiiiiiiiine about women being attracted to beautiful men and not to them).
Post pics of women you like to look at, be nice to see them!
ceebarks – agreed about beauty, people tolerating more from the beautiful, and so on. If Mr K were still the troubled and bloody difficult man he was during his earthly days, I suspect I’d take more shit from him than I should. Mind you, he took a lot of shit from people he was in love with back then, too.
“It’s not like Forney is deformed, though. He’s just conventionally unattractive. ”
So, you’re saying it’s okay to shame deformed people if they’re ugly enough? Fuck you. The point is that Forney is lacking in the conventional attractiveness he demands of women. His personal appearance doesn’t matter, his hypocrisy does.
Regarding orgasms, I am reminded of the old old joke.
Husband: Dear, why don’t you tell me when you have an orgasm?
Wife: I would, darling, but you’re never there when it happens.
Oh, and Ally is safe. Huzzah!
You know, when I was really young and kind of stupid I had a guy who tried to be nasty and manipulative like this Fatt Morney. I can’t really say it crushed my self esteem but I picked up a bad whiskey habit for a little while so that he didn’t come in so clear. Turns out it was a great idea, I got really drunk one night, got tossed out of one bar with my buddy and decided we weren’t done drinking yet. I took my guy’s car to look for a better place and ended up flipping it into the bayou off Highway 82. It’s okay, my friend and I were just fine. Most spectacular breakup I’ve ever been through.
I’m happy that abuse is a well-understood topic now, not like it was then. I could have saved a lot of liver abuse and that clown’s car, but, memories.
Marie,
I don’t know what ladies do it for you. So, here’s a sampler. Don’t feel left out. There is enough eye candy for the whole class.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1065664/resumephotos?v=me8065711401
http://images6.fanpop.com/image/photos/33200000/River-river-song-33238205-492-275.jpg
http://shirletteammons.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/1284680742_5335-1.jpeg
http://img2.timeinc.net/people/i/2007/stylewatch/gallery/red_lips/dita_vonteese.jpg
http://21stcenturyburlesque.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/DIRTY-THUMB-402×250.jpg
@kittehs
Oh, yeah, I get the logic behind it, since the dudes who do that stuff usually are pretty heteronormative too, I’ve just got a case of weird-brain today.
@leatapp
Aw, thanks for links :3 And I didn’t mean to make this such a big deal, sorry guys, like I said, I’ve just been feeling off today. Idk why.