All is not happy in the world of Roosh Valizadeh. The formerly amoral hedonist, who built his online fiefdom on a bunch of books urging men to “bang” women in an assortment of countries, is turning into a moralistic, hectoring scold only a few steps removed from the Taliban.
And some of his old fans are wondering what the hell has happened to him.
Earlier this week, Roosh posted an especially dour and authoritarian post titled “How To Stop The Fall Of Women,” telling his readers that
It is completely your responsibility to create the environment of a good home, a good city, and a good country to prevent the fall of your women. It’s your responsibility to create the right environment where all women remain good instead of succumbing to an evil where within a short amount of time she becomes a useless, tattooed, overweight, and masculine slut. It should be clear to you by now that women absolutely can not save themselves, and have no inherent resistance to the pollution that tempts them in this world. It’s solely up to us men to shield their natural virtue so that they become the wives and mothers that allow you to fulfill your biological destiny while furthering the health of your society.
He continues on in this vein for several hundred more words.
It’s a big change from his older PUA writings, but one thing is consistent: Roosh doesn’t think women have the right to control their own lives.
Still, some of his old fans are having none of it. A reader pointed me to this interesting exchange in the comments to Roosh’s post:
A lot of Roosh’s old fans — like “Former Banger” there — are sympathetic to his new direction. But clearly not all of them. Alexa (an admittedly imperfect cataloguer of web traffic) also suggests that Roosh’s sites are losing steam, and losing readers. He’s still a long way from irrelevant, but he gets closer every day.
No wonder Roosh is so grumpy.
Holy shit, is that a fox with a Dorito in it’s mouth?
In other news: I watched the latest MLP:FiM episode and it actually made me happily tear up a bit because there was some awesome character development that’s been a long-time coming.
@EJ
You can tell me.
I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but the moment he completely discredited Paradoxical Intention’s links was pretty much an admission that they weren’t coming here to argue in good faith.
@Paradoxical Intention
I assumed it was a leaf. I’ve seen a lot of photos with foxes holding leaves in their mouths, for some reason.
Paradoxy and PoM are charitable people who like to see the best in people, and so assumed it wasn’t a troll. I instinctively thought it was, which in this case means that I was right, but I wish I had their good nature.
I probably would’ve fallen for it if it weren’t for his linked website. Seriously, he’s telling us to go fuck ourselves with every post. Like a little kid holding his middle finger up every time the adult grounding him turns around.
(But don’t click it, because again, virus. No, bro, I don’t believe you that it’s not.)
Ad hominem has got to be the most misunderstand term of all time. At the very least, it’s tied with irony and satire.
@Aris Boch
I never said he tells the truth. I said he has admitted to having committed the crime, which he undoubtedly has. Do you even English?
I happen to also see no particular reason to doubt that this actually happened, since we’re talking about something that does definitely happen fairly often in actual reality. It’s not like we’re discussing UFO landings here.
Also, fuck off in general.
….duh, everyone knows foxes put leaves in their mouths because they need their roughage for proper digestion and lady foxes are always on a diet anyway! (kidding, if that wasn’t apparent, since text is kinda hard to interpret for the writer/speaker’s tone sometimes…)
@WWTH
Sometimes it seems people think that saying “look, a fallacy!” means they’ve won all the arguments (whether there is a fallacy or not is irrlevant) and ad hominem seems to be the more popular one – maybe because it’s in Latin.
@RosaDeLava
I think ad hom is popular because the common misconception of what an ad hom is, is very easy to understand. If your opponent insults you in any way, just yell “ad hom”. Many fallacies (including actual ad hom) are more difficult to understand, and especially more difficult to spot in a real life conversation.
@RosaDeLava:
Against such people, you can reply with the words “fallacy fallacy.” It’s the learned term for the fact that just because you made a fallacy doesn’t mean you’re wrong.
All the hottest fallacies are in Latin.
I also have to admit that I am absolutely rolling at The Other EJ’s assessment that I have a good nature. LOL!
I think it’s a popular one because it can be used to tone police. If someone gets sick of your bullshit and addresses you in a less than pleasant tone or insults you, you can shout “ad hominem!” It’s a way to be a complete asshole and still (in their own mind) win the argument by transferring the burden of civility onto the person who’s chosen to not put up with their assholishness.
@dhag85
Yes, probably. Though I think it’s ironic how something that is meant to help people debate properly is now hindering communication. The whole “This person insulted me > Therefore this person committed a fallacy > Therefore I WINZ!” sounds like a fallacy itself.
@EJ
I’ll start using this term from now on. I just had an youtube argument (because I’m dumb like that) with a guy who says “fallacy” as if the word was a bullet. I’ve given up on the matter once he asked me to provide a citation for my own goddamn message (that is, that I wrote what I wrote), but I’ll remember it for future meetings with pseudo-philosophers.
@PoM
Romance languages do that
http://33.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8015sy2YV1qc425ao1_500.gif
@WWTH
Definitely not an angle I had thought of, tought it makes a lot of sense. But I guess these people miss the point that saying someone is wrong because they speak in a certain way is also fallacious.
Aris Boch is an idiot and everything they say is stupid. /ad hominem
Aris Boch was–or perhaps still is–toying with us. This person’s posts were worded e v e r so carefully for the sake of plausible deniability. This individual was aggressive. This poster used the “But you SJWs are supposed to be better than that!” whine, complaining that we were engaged in hazing. And, as has been pointed out in many posts, this person asked for lots and lots and lots of information. ‘Cause this poster was brand new to all this stuff. And we were supposed to educate this individual. And this poster got to argue with us a lot. Everything about this person screamed, Insincere!
Tedious, tedious troll.
Pandapool, I think that’s still just an insult, not a fallacy. How about… pecunium hates mangos and therefore he cannot possibly tell what type of hat this is! (Context: he has Way Too Many Hats)
@Alan Robertshaw
Yes, but people make false confessions even without being tortured. These people might be covering up for a loved one or they might be highly suggestible and so simply believe that the police are correct in accusing them. Or they might be developmentally disabled or experiencing delusional thoughts.
Wikipedia has this to say (“False confession”):
I’m not saying that Roosh is delusional. In the case of Roosh, I can believe that–to make a buck or cause a stir or make a name for himself as a Man’s Man–he would falsely confess to rape. For all I know, the guy is still a virgin.
Doesn’t matter. Roosh’s books are still rape manuals. So when Aris Boch demands proof that Roosh has been accused of or convicted of rape (or even rumored to have committed rape!), this individual is employing a diversionary tactic.
@weirwoodtreehugger | October 11, 2015 at 2:12 pm
I’m getting a strong Dubya-vibe from you “either you’re with us, or you’re with the terrorists rape apologists”.
you know, I used to think like that, and make those kinds of assumptions about people. But then I realized people make those kind of judgement calls exactly because they run up against so many others who do nothing but question them (and seemingly don’t want to listen to answers) so often
for me, it was/is in regards to arguing with creationists/pseudo-scientists rather than feminism, but if you can’t draw the similarities, then…I dunno man. Get out of the house and off the internet more often
I always miss the trolls when they come here. What gives?
@Miss Andry
There’s still Obsidian a-trollin’ in the Majority Report thread.
He tried some of his own advice on a woman from Canada and ended up wearing her pint as a hat!