Pickup scuzzball Roosh V’s attempts to rebrand himself as a prophet of “neomasculinity” are not going well.
Several months ago, you may recall, Roosh said an official goodbye to the “red pill,” declaring that, though the term had “served its use in the past five years,” it wasn’t providing deeper answers to aging douchebags like Roosh who are desperately afraid that they’ve turned into the creepy old dude hanging out at the bar. (I’m very loosely paraphrasing here.)
The solution to this dilemma? What Roosh calls the philosophy of “neomasculinity,” which is basically like the red pill, only, like, deeper or something. And totally not open to “homosexuals.”
Trouble is, no one really seems all that interested in taking up the banner of neomasculinity.
Including whoever is writing the headlines at Roosh’s Return of Kings blog.
You see, I noticed something a little odd today on Viva La Manosphere, a website that assembles the RSS feeds of assorted manosphere blogs into a handy and regularly updated set of links. There were two links to the same post at RoK:
Now, Viva La Manosphere posts its headlines newest-to-oldest, so what this indicates is that the headline writer at RoK first posted the article as “Why Christianity Is Not An Enemy Of The Red Pill,” then remembered (or was reminded) that Roosh had officially renounced “the red pill” for “neomasculinity — and quickly updated the title of the post.
It’s almost as though “neomasculinity” is just a warmed-over version of the same crap Roosh and his pals have been peddling for years.