The war of short-haired women against dudes and their pants feelings continues. Indeed, it’s gotten so bad that pickup artist/rape legalization proponent Roosh V is calling for state intervention.
In a blog post today, Mr. V cites a passage in an Evo Psych textbook suggesting that men tend to prefer long hair on women because healthy hair is an indication of good health and diet, and therefore of “higher reproductive value” in women.
And if cutting off this hair is displeasing to the boners of dudes like Roosh, well, it must mean that women who wear their hair short are, quite literally, mentally ill. No, really; that’s what he thinks. (Emphasis mine.)
If a woman cuts her hair to a short length, or shaves it outright in a Skrillex haircut, we can now confidently say that she is making herself appear less fertile, less beautiful, and less healthy. A woman cutting off healthy hair is one step away from literal cutting of her skin with a sharp object, because both behaviors denote a likely mental illness where the woman presents herself to society as more damaged than her genetic condition would indicate, suggesting that she has suffered environmental damage that has reduced her overall fitness.
Or maybe she prefers short hair because it’s easier to manage? Or because she thinks short hair looks cute? Nah, couldn’t be. She’s clearly a danger , not only to Roosh’s boner but to herself!
She must be monitored by state authorities so she doesn’t continue to hurt herself.
Roosh posts pictures of women he thinks have committed “self-harm” by cutting their hair short, thus transforming themselves from sexy ladies to hideous short-haired monsters.
Really? I’m pretty sure that all this proves is that Roosh has such a hard-on for long hair that he’s unable to see straight. To my eyes, and I suspect a lot of others, these two women — actresses Ginnifer Goodwin and Keira Knightly — look fine with long hair, and fine with short hair. (I actually prefer their short-haired looks, but, you know what? It’s really none of my business.)
But Roosh not only sees short-haired women as an affront to his manhood; he also sees them as a threat to Western Civilization itself.
What should we think when deluded women are actively encouraged by society to harm themselves by cutting their hair instead of growing it out and looking beautiful? One that doesn’t care about the fertility of its women and, in turn, the needs of men who want to mate with fertile women. Unless there is something within a society that promotes beauty in the form of long hair, we have little choice but to conclude that it is sick, grotesque, and sterile.
Roosh goes on to argue that art should reject such cultural sickness and celebrate the fertility of young women.
Oh, wait, that was Hitler.
Setting aside Roosh’s creepy, quasi-fascist obsession with female fertility, I do have a couple of questions for Roosh and the Evo Psych crowd in general:
What about infertile women with long hair? There are lots of women, cis and trans, who can’t do that whole pregnancy thing; many of them have long hair. Would Roosh lock them up for false advertising? (Actually, never mind; I’m sure he would, though probably not without hitting on them first.)
And what about short-haired men? Like Roosh and his pals, many evolutionary psychologists find it difficult to think beyond conventional gender stereotypes. All the studies listed in the Evo Psych textbook Roosh sites revolve around women and their hair, never men and their hair, even though the same reproductive logic would apply to them as well. Poor diet can reduce sperm count and cause infertility.
So why isn’t long hair on men “preferred across cultures” the way that long hair on women tends to be? Why isn’t Roosh calling for short-haired men (like himself) to be confined to the psych ward?
Could it be — possibly, maybe, sort of? — that there’s more to love and lust than what’s in our genes, or in Roosh’s jeans?
Yeah, this is some real long-hair-fetisch he’s got there. Because seriously, it’s not even like men overall care that much about hair length. I’ve had long hair (the longest was down to my waist) and short hair… I’ve been oscillating between these two styles for my entire adult life, since my mental health problems are sometimes better and sometimes worse… Just kidding, I’ve been oscillating between long and short because I like the look of short but dislike that it’s so high maintenance. My hair grows so rapidly (hey! does that mean I’m super-fertile?) that I have to go to the hairdresser and cut it, like, all the time when it’s short. When I wear it long, Husband can just take a pair of scissors and trim off a bit like every second month or so – much easier.
For two periods of time I’ve also had most of my hair completely shaved off, with just a little bit saved at the top of my head (and I mean shaved, with a razor, not just a short cut). When I shaved my head (really nice and cool in the summer, but talk about high maintenance if you got rapidly growing hair!) I got some comments about it, and generally it seems to me (no surprise there) that lots of people think that it’s a weird look, and less attractive than having hair. But I’ve seriously never noticed any difference in the behaviour of people, or men in particular, toward me based on whether I have a short haircut or long hair. It’s almost like most people don’t really care…
Let’s call the long hair thing what it is, a fetish. It’s actually the most common fetish men have, and no, not all men have it. Preference for short hair is also a fetish. And the reason why long hair is preferred is because women have had long hair since the dawn of time (or at least since the bible has been popular) A fetish is when something non sexual subconsciously reminds you of something sexual. In many cases, long hair on a woman subconsciously reminds men of other women they find attractive who more than likely had long hair, since it’s so popular.
Explains a lot of comic-book covers.
Poor old Roosh, he really is an idiotic knobhead. My wife had long hair then none (total shinehead like my male pattern baldness) because if post mastectomy chemo (she was and is beautiful before, during and after), guess what Roosh, there no difference except a bit of less shampoo in the house,guess what Roosh it grows back and Roosh may I add that in a committed, consensual, non-conditional monogamous relationship of 11 years, my boner gets more action on a weekly basis than I bet yours does IN A quarter (actually I suspect a decade is more apt), that maybe a bit if a shock to his world view, although his self centredness will not be able to comprehend that.
I know a lot of guys with the Roosh mindset and they are not happy people in the slightest.
BTW there are many many religions where head covering is the norm, koffi’s and kippers are used to cover the hair by men do as not to be an affront to their deity so stating its a Frum thing (my wife being former ultra orthodox) could be seen as a tad antisemitic as it singles out one group, especially as I see a fair amount of eastern orthodox catholic married women with headscarfs too.
Evolution will eventually replace the hands of men with machine guns, and women will have one eggbeater hand and one spatula hand.
@autosoma
I think there’s several studies that show people in committed relationships (like marriage) actually get more sex on average a month or so than single people.
So, yeah, you’re getting more than most PUA, let alone Roosh.
The sad thing is @Banana Jackie Cake, is the stuff that Roosh harps on about is the least important thing, I wonder how that nugget of info would fit into his Evo Psych world view? That a committed, consensual, loving relationship gives you more boner time than what he gets out of life. He must be extraordinarily dim (well I think everyone knows that) as well as offensive.
Going off on a tangent about PUA’s, David’s writting lead me to the Real Social Dymanics website, where they have forums for PUA’s to be “wingmen” for each other in different cities and the best places to do their PUA thing. The London one is hilarious all it does is make me go to them to do PUA spotting and then cramp their style. My favourite trick is to put on a basso profundo voice and say “Young Man, I would be disgusted if you spoke and acted to my daughters like that”, it’s their reactions I like to me stepping in.
Its probably not the right way to go about things on my part as I guess I’m doing more harm overall.
http://i.imgur.com/4zJFyNB.gif
Nah. No. Niet. Nien. Non.
I’ve donated my hair a couple of times now (but I’ll never be donating it to Locks of Love again, I tell you what), and this only makes me want to do it again. Except I’d totally donate it to Pantene Beautiful Lengths this time. Pissing off Rooshie and his minons? And doing a good deed? Yes please.
And then go put on a fuck-ton of makeup just to keep Roosh and his ilk far away from me. And because it makes me happy.
Also, have this:
http://images.sodahead.com/polls/002853489/5824166454_ChrisRuffalo4_answer_1_xlarge.jpeg
Lookit Roosh! Lookit this pretty, pretty man and his long hair! Lookit how healthy and fertile he must be!
Does this bother you Roosh? Does it?
Because rustle my jimmies it does not.
Reblogged this on arsenicsister.
Thor seems happy that his team won that hockey game.
Wow… Locking up women in mental institutions for refusing to perform femininity in an “acceptable” way? Where have I heard that before…? Oh, right – all those horror stories from the Dark Ages of Psychiatric Medicine. The ones we tell to remind ourselves how far we’ve come from that crude, oppressive and harmful state of affairs.
Roosh is so full of shit- does he even hear himself?
Incidentally, maintaining one’s appearance by getting hair-cuts, etc is a sign of *good* mental health. Maybe it’s Roosh who needs a therapist to help him wipe his ass and stop blaming all of society’s “problems” on women.
Also, I think I heard that the under-cut (long hair with the side of the head shaved) is popular amongst Queer ladies to signify being part of the LBGTQIA alphabet. So, they’re especially not interested in pleasing Doosh’s boner. MISANDRY!
Trigger warning: Rape
This is unrelated, but I’ll tie it into Roosh by saying that I guess he’d say that they should have stayed at home (alluding back to his public/private space rape argument):
http://m.newser.com/story/205521/3rd-man-arrested-in-alleged-spring-break-gang-rape.html
And I say “they” in reference to the fact that the police have said that they’ve been given several other videos of seperate but similar incidents that took place during this past spring break in and around Panama City.
@friday jones
LOL. Keep the jokes coming I like them. 🙂
@AltoFronto
Roosh will be prescribing hysterectomies next. :/ For women he deems too unfuckable to be of use, I guess. Seriously I wouldn’t put it past him. I agree with you that hair cuts are a sign of ‘ good mental health’ due to personal care, but then we are talking about a (very hairy) man who is resentful of having to perform basic hygiene. My hair is thick and wavy and I HAVE to get it cut short and layered in order for me to not look like a mess. Or does Roosh think that all women have naturally straight, manageable hair? If he does, he’s not only an idiot, but he is completely ignoring the existence of WoC. Again.
Also, I know it’s not what he’s really saying but it sounds like he thinks there is a direct link between hair length and ovaries. Like women are Samson, and if they cut their hair they lose all their fertility.
If anyone should be “monitored by state authorities”, it’s self-confessed rapists who post a series of increasingly deranged proposals for legally controlling women. Roosh is a far bigger menace to society than a pair of hair clippers.
I get annoyed with evo psych when dudebros (and it always seems to be dudebros) use it to propagate the naturalistic fallacy. Even if evo psych accurately describes behavior that some humans engage in, that doesn’t mean we all ought to do those things. Roosh likes to reverse-engineer gender roles. He takes the sexual behaviors and traits he prefers, assumes that humans have been behaving that same way without exception across all cultures for hundreds of years, then uses that as a cudgel to beat on the modern world for being degenerate and unnatural.
Funny how the “Just So Stories” crowd never stops to think that the behaviors they deplore (short hair, sensible shoes, makeup) might be beneficial adaptations to the modern environment.
@Buttercup
Just another reason for why Roosh and his fanboys should leave civilisation and live on an uninhabited island. If they want to live like animals, so be it. Just don’t demand that everyone else do it too.
@Vivien @Tessa
Evo Psych is just a new name for a discipline that’s been around a lot longer – sociobiology. Same stuff pretty much, justifying contemporary gender equalities by arguing for some kind of evolutionary advantage. There are a few people doing interesting things in it though, like Amy Parrish:
https://www.eeb.ucla.edu/speaker_series.php?l=3
re: Evo Psych / Sociobiology: It can be terribly, terribly interesting and can offer up some interesting AND plausible theories (especially on more context-neutral stuff like food preferences, etc), but even when I was actually studying it @Uni I had the nagging suspicion that much of it amounted to “just-so” stories.
Quadruple that tendency when you have people going in apparently blind of their own cultural biases and blast it into the stratosphere when idgits who’ve read an article and a handful of blog posts about it then use it to generate assfax and start bloviating.
tl;dr: The whole field shouldn’t be dismissed out-of-hand, but it is ripe for abuse (both unintentional and willful).
re: Evo Psych / Sociobiology: It can be terribly, terribly interesting and can offer up some interesting AND plausible theories (especially on more context-neutral stuff like food preferences, etc), but even when I was actually studying it @Uni I had the nagging suspicion that much of it amounted to “just-so” stories.
Quadruple that tendency when you have people going in apparently blind of their own cultural biases and blast it into the stratosphere when idgits who’ve read an article and a handful of blog posts about it then use it to generate assfax and start bloviating.
tl;dr: The whole field shouldn’t be dismissed out-of-hand, but it is ripe for abuse (both unintentional and willful).
Apologize for the doublepost.
I have no idea how it happened save for the fact that my phone’s been twitchy ever since the last update.
I thought I cut my hair too short…..I’m thinking not short enough. What a creep.
Women, you need to look extremely sexually attractive, have beautiful hair, wear make up, have perfect bodies. You also need to not look or seem like a slut.
We want you to be beautiful for us and when you are, we will hate you because you are, because you’re teasing and not providing pussy. If you aren’t beautiful, we will hate you because you’re not making effort for us.
And it is so common that these men like to brag how rational or logical they are.
So a woman’s physical and mental health is connected to conventional feminine beauty, eh?
This makes me want to belatedly plus-one a prediction a saw on a old thread (I think Arctic Ape was the prognosticator in question?). I, too, think that Roosh is ripe for a Damascus-road style of religious conversion. It’s the perfect cynical next step for a disillusioned and washed-up PUA guru. He’ll have a new crowd to titillate with his terrible “sinning days” stories (though he’ll have to edit his language like heck), a bunch of people who agree with his patriarchal views, and a pool of sheltered, traditionally feminine young women to pursue. I think he’ll do well on everything but the courtship front.
I’m with you, Lids – my hair does the same thing when it’s shorter than shoulder-length. I’ve been coveting a Louise Brooks bob for close to a year now, but I know in my heart of hearts that will be a disaster of flat irons, gallons of spilled magic hair serums, and tears.
Even if there was something more to evopsych than just-so stories, a lot of these guys have a… limited understanding of evolution at best. They ignore all the behaviors that are the result of groups adapting dynamically to a changing environment, and focus solely on the individual and zir choices (not surprisingly, their politics reflect this very well). It’s like they read the words “sexual selection” and decided they know all there is to know about biology.
Sir, my armpit hair is lush, silky and beautiful *WINK WINK*
Side issue that never occurred to Roosh because he doesn’t actually mean anything he said other than “bitches be crazy, amirite?”
Where does he plan on governments getting the extra money to build new mental institutions for tens of millions of women and also provide constant monitoring of hundreds of millions of others to make sure they aren’t a danger to anyone?