A couple of days ago, A Voice for Men posted the first half of what will evidently be a nine-zillion-word interview with none other than Roosh Valizadeh — you know, the far-right racist shithead who just semi-seriously proposed legalizing rape as a way, he says, to end it. Oh, and he also once admitted to raping a woman.
While AVFM is pretty hateful itself, some MRAs were a bit nonplussed to see a post on the most influential Men’s Rights site on the internet describing Roosh, who’s also repeatedly attacked the Men’s Rights movement, as “a layered, tempered and earnest guy, who truly wants to help other men in their most basic and primal of life goals; a deep thinker, a powerful communicator … I got nothing but respect for the guy.”
Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, a couple of commenters raked AVFM and its Maximum Leader over the coals for opening his site up to a dude whose ideology is hard to distinguish from actual fascism. Lauzon, a feminism-hating subreddit regular, wrote:
Even as MRA’s take pains explaining to critics that the Men’s Rights Movement has nothing to do with Pick Up Artists, A Voice for Men has just published a fawning interview with Roosh V. …
For those unawares, Roosh is a far (FAR) right wing ideologue who considers gays “deviants,” rejects female suffrage, publishes articles advocating a return to monarchy, and is more or less openly misogynist.
I think it’s safe to say that the incompetent leadership at AVFM has just screwed the pooch. I defended Elam when he became the target of a smear campaign based on his personal life, but this is beyond the pale.
In a followup comment, he added:
I certainly won’t be donating to them again.
Well, that got Elam’s attention! Never one to take a threat to the flow of donations to him lightly, Elam posted a response on AVFM today.
Ignoring Roosh’s racism, homophobia, transphobia and open misogyny, Elam assured his readers that he, Paul Elam, knows how to make the ladies tingle without any of that PUA bullshit.
No, really.
As Elam tells it, his life became what Roosh might call a “Poosy Paradise” after he stopped being a “nice guy” to women.
The minute I figured out that my problem was not having a set of personal values strongly enough held that no woman could make me budge from them was the same minute I found a path to attract women, cull out the trash without drama or expense and to maintain a relationship with no pussy passes or princess bullshit. It is not that I never have to deal with that stuff from time to time, but I never, ever let it slide. My dick has not been the worse for it.
That’s right, folks: we’re getting an update live and direct from the ultimate authority on all things heterosexual: Paul Elam’s dick.
When I got to the point that I could look at woman in the eye and tell her I was not interested in being anyone’s knight in shining armor and that dinner with me meant finding your purse when the check came — and not give a single fuck about the women who could not handle it — I cleared the way for one who could.
Yep. Paul Elam would like the world to know that he has actually done the sex with a lady. And possibly even seen her naked.
This isn’t the first time Elam has celebrated his amazing ability to have sex with women without paying for dinner (or much of anything, apparently).
In a debate, of sorts, with a PUA going by the name Frost several years ago, Elam boasted that his non-dinner-buying approach to the ladies had “yielded a glut of butt” for him.
No, that’s a real quote. As is this
[D]oing what I did resulted in a whole slew of women lining up for summa dis. It was as easy as not giving a shit. I didn’t need lines or come on’s or a fucking book of tactics. All I needed to do was choose one if I liked her.
I’m apologize if any of you were reading this over breakfast.
But rest assured: Paul Elam’s penis is doing a-ok!
I’ve generally practiced a rule of “the inviter pays for the meal” as well.
The question that I ask myself is “If you’re arranging a meeting with someone who has kids, do you offer to pay for part of the babysitting fees?”
Obviously, if a person says “No, I sorry, I can’t make it out, I can’t afford a sitter right now.” it sounds more like a “I have no interest in going out with you, but you’re less likely to get mad if I have some other excuse.” but assuming that isn’t the case, what’s the etiquette on that?
Yes, it’s kind of like being called a Nazi by a teabagger.
@baroncognito: I would either suggest that we go to a family-friendly place where I would pay for the kids to eat too, or I would cover the babysitting fees, or I would invite them over to my place where I can cook for all of us, or some combination of the last two.
If they still say no, then you should back down. I figure it would be polite to offer alternatives, but that could also depend on the person. If it’s someone you don’t know that well, I’d say let it be after “I can’t afford a sitter.” if it’s someone you know a little better, offer alternatives.
But I’m just guessing at this point.
Not quite, they don’t seem to make the “Nazi = Disgusting racist” connection and call everyone from Obama to me a Nazi every chance they get. Being called a disgusting racist by a Teabagger, though, absolutely.
ParadoxicalIntention:
At the moment it’s entirely hypothetical. Just something I’ve idly wondered about while reading profiles at OKCupid (I might message one or two people in a year, but I read more profiles than that). I see people with kids and I know from TV that not everyone wants to introduce kids to a person that they may only see the once. I mean, a person who doesn’t have to pay for a babysitter, you only have to worry about the food being good. As long as the food is good, they aren’t wasting money. I mean, sure, they might have had better company, but I’m confident enough that I won’t ruin a person’s meal. But you throw the cost of a baby sitter on the date, and then I’m worried, “Well, sure, I’m not ruining her meal, but am I worth 10 dollars an hour to spend time with? I wouldn’t pay that much to spend time with me.”
Before I read the article and comments, I must say that this is THE BEST graphic I have ever seen, and I humbly request all images of Paulie from here on out are this one. Or at least include the happy dancing kitty and the cool zone.
I think that unless you know someone pretty well, it’s kind of weird to get involved in their childcare arrangements.
I hear you on the ten dollars an hour thing… it’s a lot of pressure to HAVE FUN DAMMIT. lol When my husband and I go out it’s like, uh, sure, we like bowling and all, but do we like it $10/hr+fees-much? AREN’T WE HAVING FUN AND ISN’T THIS GREAT FOR OUR RELATIONSHIP?! eek
(at any rate, most of the single parents I know seem to have some arrangement with the kids’ other parent or relatives, or a reciprocal deal with friends in similar circumstances, which is mostly when they do any kind of social stuff. though I’m sure this is all very circumstance-dependent.)
Speaking as a parent, remember, a good part of what they get out of going on a date is: Guilt free time away from kid/s where maybe everyone can be happier, which is good for them AND me.
I haven’t been able to justify a movie in years, but hells, trust me, some decompression-adult-time even if it leads nowhere is VALUABLE.
Paul elam…
Has no shame….
Basically, most of Paul’s issues with women seem to stem from being skinflint. Doesn’t wanna pay child support, doesn’t wanna pay rent for years on end, doesn’t wanna help pay for dinner, even letting his daughter with young children pay his phone bills– which is FINE, women should be able to help men out financially, but the point of feminism is to make it okay, socially, for them to do so.
He doesn’t outright say that he’s engaging in these behaviors he blames women for, I doubt he even realizes it, and the fact that these acerbic doods in the comments don’t point it out for the sake of dickishness, at least, is rather astounding.
All I can picture is Paulie as Travis Bickle (Taxi Driver), standing in front of his mirror and pointing at his crotch.
“You want summa dis? YOU want summa DIS?”
*turns away, then whirls back around*
“I said do YOU.” *points at self* “Want summa DIS?” *points at crotch*
Hilarious!
You owe me a keyboard and about $5 worth of craft beer.
Also my cat is now glaring at me. That’s the worst part.
Tracy,
I’m also now picturing Elam as Jame Gumb from Silence of the Lambs when he’s dancing around asking “would you fuck me? I’d fuck me” Or, better yet the hilarious TV edit “would you have me? I’d have me”
Or the Kill Bill TV edit: “My name’s Buck. And I’m here to…party.”
Oh God, it’s frightening how easy it is to picture him as Buck.
“Yippee-yai kai-ai, mon frere.”
*shudder* I’m going to have to take NyQuil in order to sleep now 😉
Someone needs to warn Elam not to meet Roosh for the interview at a privately owned building.
I can feel Elam’s insecurity about his sex life from across the pond.
He looks like those children who has to tell everybody in the class that they went to Disneyland as if it was some kind of privilege given to them and despite everybody else in the room has been at least two time in this amusement park.
So, I normally don’t read a lot of manosphere sources myself. While on the theme of “manospherians saying surprising true things that seem incompatible with the company they keep and their life choices generally,” Roosh says
“I’m not a big fan of evolutionary psychologists. They start with the end result and then back rationalize a logical reason which can’t really be proved or disproved.”
Roosh also says: “That said, I have noticed that black men tend to be more detached to the manosphere because of the presence of pro-white sentiments that they see as anti-black or even racist. Many manopshere bloggers are sympathetic to white nationalist causes and sometimes make openly hostile sentiments towards minorities, especially when it comes to inter-racial relationships involving white women.”
@ Orion – My jaw just dropped so hard it almost hurt.
I can get that Roosh wouldn’t quite click all the way to realising that white nationalism = racist scumbaggery (i.e. that the perceptions of the movement is 100% accurate), because being racist requires a lot of cognitive dissonance already.
. But he’s skeptical of Evo-Psych?? That one surprised me more.
Starting with the end result and rationalising the rest is exactly what he does in every piece of writing I’ve ever seen him vomit up.
Then again, he always seems just self-aware enough to be just a shade too extreme in order to rationalise his shit as “satire”, or just “entertainment”. Maybe he needs another nudge with the Clue-by-four, or is it too much to hope that he comes to the mind-shattering realisation of the full extent of his douchebaggery?
When I go out to eat with my friends, we usually each pay for our own meals and drinks. When I go out with my partner, we usually end up splitting the cost.
Alto,
No, I’d say there was more chance for reform if he *did* go in for bizarre theories. The reason he doesn’t is because he doesn’t see any of the horrible things he does as even needing that kind of justification.
Well, he is well below the bottom of the barrel.
I see future drama in the He-Man Woman Hater’s Club. Paulie wants to invite Roosh into his treehouse (or is it the other way around, he wants into Roosh’es little den? better have taken all your shots, then, Paulie… and you might want to bring a chaperone… just sayin’.)
Regardless of who’s moving in with who; this… could be genuinely interesting to observe. It is impossible for Paulie to embrace Roosh’es PuA brand of chauvinism and misogyny – without shafting many of the current AVFM followers.
Racism, bigotry, solid entrenchement in traditional male roles, genuine opposition to rights for women… there are many MRA’s who will be put off by this. And FeMRAs will get the shaft by default – no matter how “different they are from those other girls”.
Will AVFM finally make the transition to AVFMWCM – A Voice For Manly White Cis Men – spoken only BY Manly White Cis Men?
Stay tuned, stay tuned.