The repulsive pickup guru and wannabe philosopher of “neomasculinity” Roosh Valizadeh has long made it clear that he has a problem with women making decisions about their own lives, whether that decision is picking a college major — or saying “no” to sex with him.
In one notorious post, he explained to his readers that, as he sees it, a woman’s “no” pretty much never means “no.” Only if she uses the magic word “stop” does he stop. But he doesn’t think she really has a right to use that word, because, in his mind, once a woman “gives” him an erection, she owes it to him to finish the job.
“A man’s nut is sacred,” he wrote, “and for her to impede that should be criminal. I’m serious.”
Given all this, it perhaps should not come as a shock to hear that Roosh thinks women should have their right to make decisions taken away from them altogether, not just when he’s trying to get his “nut.”
In a blog post with the blunt title “Women Must Have Their Behavior And Decisions Controlled By Men,” Roosh sets forth his thesis:
After a long period in society of women having unlimited personal freedom to pursue life as they wish, they have shown to consistently fail in making the right decisions that prevent their own harm and the harm of others. Systems must now be put in place where a woman’s behavior is monitored and her decisions subject to approval of a male relative or guardian who understands what’s in her best interests better than she does herself.
As Roosh sees it, the whole “woman having control over their own lives” experiment has failed, and it is time to return to the good old-fashioned patriarchy that had previously served us so well. In this golden age, he writes, a woman
was not allowed to study any trivial topic she wanted, sleep with any man who caught her fancy, or uproot herself and travel the world because she wanted to “find herself.”
He’s really stuck on this whole women-choosing-their-own-college-majors thing.
And he’s also deeply offended by a woman’s right to take sexy selfies, interact with men in ways he does not approve of, watch TV shoes he doesn’t like, and, of course, with her ability to control what food goes in her mouth.
When a female lacks any urgent demands upon her survival, what behavior does she pursue? Obsessively displaying her half-naked body on the internet, flirting with men solely for attention, becoming addicted to corporate-produced entertainment, and over-indulging in food until her body shape is barely human. …
Once you give a woman personal freedom, like we have in the Western world, she enslaves herself to one of numerous vices and undertakes a rampage of destruction to her body and those who want to be a meaningful part of her life.
Never mind that men do all these things too, and that men in the US are actually more likely than women to be overweight or obese. Maybe men need to have their rights to make decisions about their own lives taken from them as well?
Roosh is also angry that women get to choose when they get pregnant, whom they marry, and whom they vote for — invariably choosing the candidate “who is more handsome and [who] promises unsustainable freebies that accelerate the decline of her country.”
Really? When I look at politicians in this country, “handsome” is not really the first word that comes to mind.
But never mind, because to Roosh this is all proof that a women’s right to make significant decisions about her life and the world should be taken away from her and handed over to the nearest man. Pretty much literally.
Men, on average, make better decisions than women. If you take this to be true, which should be no harder to accept than the claim that lemons are bitter, why is a woman allowed to make decisions at all without first getting approval from a man who is more rational and levelheaded than she is?
Lemons are sour, not bitter. But let’s ignore this little glitch in his logic and continue on,
So which men get to make decisions for women? As Roosh sees it, there are two possible ways his plan could work.
I propose two different options for protecting women from their obviously deficient decision making. The first is to have a designated male guardian give approval on all decisions that affect her well-being. Such a guardian should be her father by default, but in the case a father is absent, another male relative can be appointed or she can be assigned one by charity organizations who groom men for this purpose, in a sort of Boy’s Club for women.
She must seek approval by her guardian concerning diet, education, boyfriends, travel, friends, entertainment, exercise regime, marriage, and appearance, including choice of clothing. A woman must get a green light from her guardian before having sex with any man, before wearing a certain outfit, before coloring her hair green, and before going to a Spanish island for the summer with her female friends.
Roosh’s second “option” is just as flesh-crawlingly creepy.
A second option for monitoring women is a combination of rigid cultural rules and sex-specific laws. Women would not be able to attend university unless the societal need is urgent where an able-minded man could not be found to fill the specific position. Women would not be able to visit establishments that serve alcohol without a man present to supervise her consumption. Parental control software on electronic devices would be modified for women to control and monitor the information they consume. Credit card and banking accounts must have a male co-signer who can monitor her spending. Curfews for female drivers must be enacted so that women are home by a reasonable hour. Abortion for women of all ages must be signed off by her guardian, in addition to prescriptions for birth control.
Welcome to 1984, ladies! Big Brother will be watching you! Or perhaps your own big brother, if dad’s not available.
While Roosh acknowledges that “my proposals are undoubtedly extreme on the surface and hard to imagine implementing,” he thinks they’re necessary to protect Western Culture from the barbarians.
The barbarians, in Roosh’s scenario, are all those brown people from other countries who are entering our country.
Allowing women unlimited personal freedom has so affected birth rates in the West that the elite insists on now allowing importation of millions of third world immigrants from democratically-challenged nations that threaten the survival of the West.
Roosh declares that he’s making “these sincere recommendations not out of anger” but because they would be the best thing for Western Women, including the women in his own family. “They would not like it, surely,” he writes, “but due to the fact that I’m male and they’re not, my analytical decision-making faculty is superior to theirs .. .”
I’m not sure many people are going to be agreeing with you on that, dude. Your “analytical decision-making faculty” is pretty much shit.
Those who like to pretend that Roosh isn’t as terrible a person as he so clearly is may assume that he is being “satirical” here, as they said about his at-least-half-if-not-three-quarters serious proposal to supposedly end rape by making it legal on private property.
But these proposals are entirely consistent with the reactionary, misogynistic worldview Roosh has set forth in countless previous posts. Most of the commenters on his site, last I checked, were taking this post seriously, many of them agreeing with him.
And if that isn’t enough to convince you, Roosh himself states, in the top comment of his own post, that
this article is not satire in any way. I firmly stand behind the recommendations I made.
We can only hope that the increasingly blatant evidence of Roosh’s repugnant extremism ends up alienating his more casual readers, those who’ve somehow convinced themselves that his “teachings” simply offer awkward men “self-improvement” tips to help them navigate the dating world. Because he’s not a self-help guru; he’s a reactionary ideologue and rape-enabler with increasingly obvious neo-Nazi sympathies, pushing his own misogynistic brand of far-right hate.
Let’s do what we can to grease his inevitable slide into irrelevance.
I’m disgusted. Not surprised, no, because this is par for the course.
Emmm… isn’t he one of those brown people? And doesn’t he claim to have engaged in the kind of behavior that could create more of them, especially in allegedly white enclaves like Iceland and Poland?
Not even worth throwing a beer on. He’s that low.
Why is that excuse for a human being “allowed” to crab on the internet? Hint: “Democracy” and “Free speech” have something to do with it. How come that he can’t realize that those also apply to women????
Really Roosh? First you try to claim you invented the Red Pill, now you’re claiming you invented the patriarchy!?
I… He really cant be that stupid right?
Then again his “disguise” was to wear a bad wig so Roosh is probably just that dumb.
Calling other countries “democratically challenged” while advocating complete demolition of democracy in your own country. How’s that analytical decision-making faculty working out for ya?
That isn’t 1984, it is 1784.
Its getting harder and harder to tell the difference between Roosh and an Onion article.
dhag – Because women aren’t really people, obvs. /s
A) Roosh is supposedly Muslim
B) There are certain movements in the Islamic world that posess the same view of gender relations
C) Roosh is from Washington D.C.
Anyone want to start betting on how long before we see an Islamic State, Taliban, or Boko Haram propaganda video with an “al-Washingtoni” railing against degenerate western feminism?
Roosh is so level headed that he gets upset that he has to embrace basic hygiene like wiping his own ass to get laid. He’s so rational that he doesn’t know the difference between bitter and sour and doesn’t know that a regime and a regimen are not the same.
Also, research consistently shows a strong positive correlation between women gaining rights and opportunities and economies growing and industrializing. Wouldn’t a rational and level headed person pay more attention to the numbers than to his own bigotries?
It looks like the only person who is incapable of making their decisions here is Roosh himself.
I have no words strong enough to describe how much of a slimeball Roosh is. Just… Ugh. I hope he steps in all the Legos. And never interacts with another human being again.
He just needs a good dominating woman to show him who’s boss. *Cracks whip*
But in all seriousness, it’s concerning how delusional and deranged he is.
I find it amazing that these gentlemen refer to their philosophy as the red pill. Their world view can actually only be described as naive. People such as Roosh subscribe to these views not because they are hardened realists but rather because the advancement of civilization terrifies them and they find themselves in dire need to grasp onto some sort of comforting fairy tale from centuries past.
In the end as odious as their views are, they can only be seen as very, very VERY amusing.
What if dad disagrees with Roosh about what foods his adult daughter is allowed to eat and what she’s allowed to study?
This is simultaneously the most disgusting and least surprising article I’ve read, well, possibly ever. Pretty much Roosh’s entire life’s work distilled to its pure, putrid essence.
The hatred has rotted his brain. Now I know what galvanized the Montrealer to throw her drink.
> Says that “brown people from democratically-challenged countries” will cause the fall of the West.
> Suggests tactics used by religious extremists from Middle-Eastern countries (who are people of color) use to control women and everything they do, thus robbing them the ability to make their own decisions or vote, and thus, making it so they don’t get a democracy even over themselves.
His irony receptors must be broken.
So, it’s pretty hard to accept then? Because lemons aren’t bitter. They’re sour. (I know David pointed it out, but bad analogy is bad.)
Yes, I’m sure men will be volunteering in droves to micromanage thousands of trivial decisions throughout the day. “Can I eat this apple? Can I watch this TV show? OK for me to put on this sweater? Can I look out the window? Can I stand over here? How about here? Should I part my hair on the left or right? What do I wear when it rains?”
Who has the time and energy to oversee someone else’s life to that degree? That would be so impractical and annoying and exhausting.
Secular sharia law. That’s what this boils down to.
@Ashley
I’ve been convinced he’s an amoral conman who doesn’t even believe his BS, willing to scam any MRA fool for a buck.
His forum is holding forth about the poor oppressed(according to him) Waking Life soon to be ex-coffee shop owners:
rooshvforum.com/thread-50547.html
FYI: this goon has done his best to make reading his forum proxy proof. But it wasn’t enough, heh…..
There is so much wrong with everything Roosh wrote that I can’t get past the cognitive dissonance with how reality even works to formulate any response other than “fuck him sideways with a chainsaw”, which honestly isn’t a reasoned response so much as it is a knee jerk reaction to anyone not employing me trying to tell me what to do.
Huh. That sounds like a really tedious job, monitoring a woman’s every choice. I suppose the guys “groomed” for this purpose would probably be working in some sort of call center, receiving texts, chats, and phone calls from their monitorees every day.
All day every day:
Woman: *selfie, sends to guardian* Is this outfit acceptable?
Guardian: Hm, I’m not sure that belt really goes with those shoes. Try again.
Woman: I’d like to go to the grocery store. Can I leave the apartment?
Guardian: Did you remember to brush your hair and teeth, and feed the cats? Do you have your wallet and keys? Is the stove off?
Woman: Should I get the green apple or the red apple?
Guardian: One minute while I look up the caloric difference on these please…
Woman: I’d like to sleep with this guy *takes picture*
Guardian: Does he even lift, bro?
I mean, even the most tedious of assholes has got to get bored of this sooner or later.