The far right racist douchebag-o-sphere has been warning us for some time that Cultural Marxism works insidiously to destroy Western Culture and make women all frumpy and shit. Well, you’ll never guess just how sneaky these Cultural Marxist plotters really are: apparently they have the power to cause women to repeatedly drop their iPhones.
In a new post on Roosh V’s Return of Kings site, some dude called Theodore Gumbril dissects what he sees as the increasing “Degeneracy Of Londonâs Women.” The four signs of this ongoing Lady-pocalypse?
1) Cracked iPhone screens
Gumbril reports with horror that “London is full of iPhones with broken screens, the majority of them owned by women.” Why? Brace yourself: it’s because these women use their iPhones a lot, and therefore also drop them a lot. No, really — one of them actually ran into Gumbril on the sidewalk, quite literally, as he was walking along minding his own business and pondering just how degenerate London women are becoming.
Even in busy areas of London, British women are walking around intently staring into their iPhones, earphones in, oblivious to all around them as they bathe in Facebook likes and Tinder swipes from thirsty male supplicants online. A girl doing this walked into me on Tottenham Court Road a few weeks ago. I was chastised with an indignant yelp of protestation. It is, of course, menâs duty to move out of the way promptly when this happens.
Yeah, it’s not as if dudes ever march down the sidewalk oblivious to the world around them. Never ever seen that happen. Nope.
Oh, but it gets worse:
2) Women wearing sneakers with business suits on the way home from work
Nothing betrays a Sheryl Sandberg-clone femcunt like sports shoes with business attire. In London, this is the exclusive preserve of Anglo women who have brought into the myth of office-cubicle empowerment. I have yet to see this ghastly mismatch of styles in women from Eastern Europe or Russia.
Huh. I’m pretty sure women in the US started wearing sneakers — known in the UK as “lorries” — on their way home from work way back in the 1980s. You might think they did this because their feet hurt after wearing uncomfortable heels all day, and because they didn’t feel obligated to dress up for random schlubs on the subway. You would be wrong. It was Cultural Marxism all along!
3) Women wearing leggings as pants
“This fashion trend,” Gumbril declares, “is a Chernobyl-level disaster in the field of female attire, and an egregious affront to all decency.” Why? Because this shameless immodesty is a disgrace, an assault on all decent men, at least when the women’s butts are, you know, fat.
4) Increasingly androgynous women (who won’t give Gumbril their phone numbers)
After lamenting “the distinct and often brash lack of femininity” of today’s London women, Gumbril tells this horrifying story of what happened when he tried to pick up one of these women, for some reason:
Over the weekend, I had an unpleasant experience opening an Audrey Hepburn lookalike.
I’m just hoping he means he “opened” her in the pickup artist sense and not in the serial killer sense.
What struck me about this distasteful set, aside from the the snarky disdain and aggressive, relentless shit testing, was the fashionâhigh cut bangs, a formless cream coat, boy trousers, and boy shoes.
The style is an instant erection killer, and (unfortunately) increasingly common.
Er, quick question: if you think the existence of women like these are a sign of the Cultural Marxist apocalypse, and if the sight of them causes your permaboner to shrink, WHY DID YOU TRY TO PICK HER UP? You’re not actually obligated to start a conversation with anyone or anything you can, at least in theory, put your penis into.
Anyhoo, this dire state of affairs, Gumbril tells us, is all the fault of Cultural Marxism and the evil elites promulgating it, who for some reason benefit when women wear sneakers with business suits.
Similar to the Sovietsâ New Socialist Man, the New Feminist Woman is a grotesque pastiche of anti-femininity, Kurzweilian automation, and repugnant narcissism taken to depraved extremes. The men who have to come to terms with these women must deal with androgynous, unfeminine women who are addicted to their iPhones and who live at the centre [of] a CERN-like attention vortex driven by real life and social media validation.
So I guess the only solution is for Gumbril and other dudes who think like him to stop giving these women their attention.
Somehow I suspect this proposal will be acceptable to the women of the world as well.
NOTE: Sneakers are not actually referred to as “lorries” in the U.K. I was just making a joke. They are actually known as “spotted dicks.”
If he’s so pissy about leggings, I’d hate to hear his stance on yoga pants, or heaven forbid, jeans.
For all their obsession with sex, a lot of MRAs and their ilk have this weird, almost Victorian prudishness, retiring to their fainting couches at the sight of a woman not acting in the exact manner they see as appropriate.
Wait, I thought “spotted dicks” referred to PUAs. Now I’m confused!
Why… why could women possibly want to wear clothing that’s comfortable and practical, or use devices that make life more convenient? I just can’t figure it out. It must be something to do with hating men, right?
@Judas Peckerwood
It only refers to the ones who don’t wear condoms.
Do cracked phone screens also kill men’s boners?
So. Confused.
btw, I see lots of guys with cracked screens – what should I think? That they are unattractive?
Ladies, why aren’t you dressing to my arbitrary and unspecified standard?
Also, it would help if you wore giant bows in your hair so I face zero risk of mixing you up with men.
My feminist friend Katie loves the sneakers she bought herself for international women’s day. They make destroying western culture more comfortable, and they match the colour of her leggings.
My husband sometimes wears sneakers or – gasp – hiking boots with his suit (especially if he’s taking the metro) because
(1) nice dress shoes are both expensive and easily fouled and
(2) they generally have shit for traction.
Sooo…is that OK because he’s a guy or does it cement him as hopelessly Nazi-Marxist-Mangina-ized?
It’s difficult to tell the score with all of the constantly shifting goal posts.
I wear Uggs home with my business attire. Why this dude thinks I GAF what he thinks of it has me quite confused.
I kinda agree with the guy that sneakers with business suits are abhorrent. However, I also bet that Sandburg wouldn’t be caught dead in such attire.
lacerta – Taking off your high heeled shoes shoes to walk down a city’s streets OBVIOUSLY shows that you don’t care about how your butt and calves look to all of the helpless male bystanders around AND that you don’t want crippling foot injuries and deformations to sneak up on you WHICH OBVIOUSLY MEANS THAT you wish to simultaneously *er…squints* TORTURE them by forcing them to imagine your outlines of you were wearing heels and FLAUNT how little you care about their attentions compared to your own selfish wish for comfort.
The above serves to MOCK their desire for you (or the desire that they’d have for you if you weren’t so awful and mannish).
So, there you have it:
TORTURE, FLAUNT, MOCK – all bulletpoints in the first chapter of the Misanderists Playbook.
As if you didn’t know.
Sounds to me like the woman he hit on is very sixties stylish. Leggings are retro from the eighties i think. And tennies worn while going back and forth to work are a smart idea.
Sometimes i wonder what these whiny men look like, cuz i want to pick their appearance apart.
I thought Roosh said that all women have to do is “not be fat”. I can’t believe he would have lied about that! Now I’m confused!
That explains why sneakers were so popular in Soviet Russia. They were THE emblem of marxism.
Cultural Marxism is like “I’m not racist, but…” in that you can just ignore whatever comes after it.
I think my employer would like it better if I wore sneakers to work. These are my favorite work shoes: http://www.vegetarian-shoes.co.uk/airseal_footwear/airseal_20_eye_boot_black/10412_p.html
*swoons*
I almost understand the shoe obsession some people have when I look at those boots. <3
I wonder if these are better or worse for the 'cultural marxist conspiracy' than sneakers? Then again I'm not an "Anglo woman who has brought[sic] into the myth of office-cubicle empowerment" as I don't work in a cubicle. I have my own private office with a locking door. But no window đ IT being banished to the basement is not a myth, lol.
You know what; I wear comfy shoes all day long! Poor, poor Husband, woe is he.
Oh no, say it isn’t so! Women are walking around, amusing themselves, wearing comfortable clothes and shoes, and all-around not bothering to be alluring to this dude in particular! TRULY IT IS THE END OF DAYS.
On a related note, I very foolishly left a comment elsewhere on the interwebs, pointing out that, “You look so much prettier without your glasses” is a really crappy compliment for a woman who routinely (or always) wears glasses. Apparently this was grievously offensive to the dudebros who are now dogpiling on my comment.
Honest-to-goodness replies include:
– What if she really doesn’t know that she looks better without them?
– What if he’s just being honest?
– How do you know it wasn’t said nicely? Like if the girl had just taken off her glasses and he was paying a compliment?
– Someone sounds triggered.
– Sounds like you’re a bit of a b****.
DUDES. My face. My glasses. I don’t need your input. It’s not flattering. I’m allowed to say that it’s not flattering. Stop.
I think my favorite part is that this dude supposedly encountered an “Audrey Hepburn look-alike” (I know, but let’s pretend for a second)…and he complained about her “BOY TROUSERS”??? I get that, yeah, even stunningly attractive people look worse in bad outfits (though if she really were an Audrey lookalike, she could pull off anything :P), but PANTS? REALLY?!? What decade are you living in? It’s like the 19th century backlash against the Bloomer costume all over again.
I mean seriously, this would be like if I met an Alain Delon lookalike and decided not to date him because he wasn’t wearing a belt. Though sadly, thanks to assholes stealing the fashion, the classic “Le Samourai” fedora with trenchcoat look might be a legitimate turnoff nowadays. Just one of many things to curse PUAs for.
@lacerta viridis:
This is because a woman should only be allowed to be comfortable or have conveniences after she gets personal, written permission of every single man in the area. Including all the infants and toddlers. And since they can’t write, well….
“You look so much prettier when you can’t see!”
Yeah, that is a lousy compliment.
Wait, how it it that people don’t like sneakers with a nice pants suit?
So here’s a fun thing. The linked post talks about this apparently new evil feminazi term called “manslamming,” which Gumbril describes as “when men don’t move out of the way quick enough.” He links to a post by Matt Forney, who again describes it as “when men don’t move out of the way quick enough.” HE links to a new york magazine article about a woman who tried walking through the streets “like a man,” ie as if she owned the space in front of her and didn’t pay attention to anyone coming toward her.
link
So yeah, another data point that when MRAs talk about anything, your first instinct should be to disbelieve whatever they say.
Women wouldn’t have any safety-related reasons to wear comfortable shoes…noooo. It’s all about making dudebro’s boners cry. Also, I only own 3 types of pants: pj’s, scrubs, and the yoga variety. And I only ever wear comfy shoes. So, double misandry points for me.
… They walk on all fours?
But yeah, just as a reminder to everyone. Roosh, and likely many of his followers, are literally angry that women have autonomy, and don’t have to bow and scrape to him to get enough money to survive. All of his criticisms of cell phone usage, posture, clothing, and makeup come from his belief that if women were only dependent on men for survival, they would be forced to either adopt his beauty standards or die.
The fact that women don’t have to do this infuriates him, probably even more the things he’s criticizing.