Men Are Portrayed As The Biggest Danger In The Modern Risk Society

The Lion is said to be the king of the beasts. With its lustrous mane, muscular frame, and general readiness for a scrap it has a reputation for both looking good and being the bad boy of the animal kingdom. But what of man? Isn’t there a sense in which man is the true king of the beasts? As Shakespeare’s Hamlet considers:

What a piece of work is a man, how noble in reason, how
infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and
admirable, in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like
a god! the beauty of the world, the paragon of animals

Hamlet Act 2, scene 2,

But while there may have been a time when this distinction would have been a cause for a beating of chests, that time is long over. In the leftist dominant paradigm of our times man is not the “the paragon of animals,” but rather a dangerous beast, a predator who rapes, kills and destroys.

Just as white imperialists oppress native peoples and rapey men oppress women, the male science that created civilization and culture rapes mother earth itself. To the question posed “what is the most dangerous animal of all” the most votes went to the statement “yeah, man is definatly (sic) the most dangerous thing on this earth. Mankind is going to destroy this world”.

How you want to be seen

How you want to be seen

The Risk Society

This pessimism about man’s role in destroying everything he touches is at the heart of Ulrich Beck’s theory of the Risk Society. Concerned by environmental catastrophes such as Chernobyl, Beck, who died in January , considered that reining in post-industrial society was a losing battle.

While once the main dangers we faced were from external threats like lion attacks, increasingly what threatens us today are the unintended consequences of our own actions in pursuit of industrial and technological progress. Such unintended consequences threaten society itself. Society no longer produces just “social goods,” but in acting upon itself reflexively produces both goods and unintended “social bads.” In this way society’s main output is now risk itself.

When on 9/11 terrorists crashed planes into the twin towers, some thought Beck’s theory proven. Beck thought that risk society became “visible where societies are exposed to risks which are no longer covered by any kind of insurance” and notably 9/11 cost the insurance industry $40 billion with respect to a kind of danger it had never been exposed to before.

Some commentators think that the insurance industry’s response to 9/11 redefined the meaning of terrorism as a reality to be risk managed rather than merely countered.

Men In The Risk Society

As men we occupy a prominent place within the risk society, not least because the feminist left sees all of us as potential terrorists. In a society that is newly re-organized around the management of risk, any individual or group that can be presented as posing an unacceptable level of risk can expect to become the target of “robust” risk management.

After 9/11 young radicalized Muslim men are an obvious object of concern for the administrators of the risk society, but young men generally are also in the spotlight simply because they are men. Consider the pressure universities are now under to manage a non-existent “rape culture” on campus. Both their reputations and finances are at stake.

Over 50 US institutions now have ongoing Title IX sexual violence investigations in progress. Existing liability insurance may or may not cover claims and some are now taking out special insurance to cover campus rape scandals. The threat of civil suits must achieve what appeal to criminal law cannot.

It is clear then that the risk society can be manipulated for financial and political gain. Some have noticed the way in which the media have begun to use the words “terrorism” and “extremism” interchangeably. Given that organizations such as the SPLC tie extremism to anything they label “hate speech,” it is easy to see how blurring the distinction between terrorism and extremism can be used to construct political opponents as representing a risk to society.

One feminist group, for instance, produced a report commissioned by the Nordic Council that recommended banning criticism of feminism as a form of extremism citing the Breivik massacre as evidence.

How feminists see you

How feminists see you

Constructing Risk

The operative word here is “construct.” One of the main goals of academic feminism has been the re-construction of our culture through discourse. The feminist gaze constructs and positions men as predators. The identification of a “war on women” now takes the specific form of “rape culture.”

By this reading male heterosexuality represents an uncontrolled level of risk. It does not matter what goods we produce in making the world a better place if a feminist-dominated risk society sees men primarily in terms of risk. Will we soon need “rape insurance” to interact with women and need to provide proof of our no claims bonus?

But the logic of the risk society requires progressivism in its turn to acknowledge its own effect on society, not least as it is arguably the hegemonic discourse in the west today. And while events like Chernobyl and de-forestation remain real problems, arguably progressivism itself, as a dominant force for change in post-industrial society, also needs to be robustly “risk managed.”

The Dominant Philosophy Produces The “Social Bads”

From the birth of communism onward, nothing has de-stabilized societies more than attempts to strong-arm social change in pursuit of abstract notions of social justice. Even if we ignore the legions of the dead and murdered, and the fact that jihadist terror itself could easily be seen as an unintended side effect of “spreading democracy” at the point of a sword, within the west “social justice” has produced tens of millions of broken families, innumerable damaged children with an impoverished sense of self, destroyed trust between men and women and arguably now serves as a dead weight around the neck of a buckling debt-ridden western economy.

Yet currently it is men who are constructed as “objects of concern” within the risk society. It is men whose natural sexuality is increasingly pathologised or criminalized, and who compared to women are imprisoned at a rate of over 20 to 1 in UK (and at 10 to 1 in US) even while feminists argue that in the name of equality fewer women should be jailed.

Risk society is not a good thing. It is a product of a sick, neurotic modernity that sees danger around every corner, and which when it doesn’t find danger it simply manufactures it. It’s a society where children don’t get to climb trees or speak to strangers and where neurotic rape-obsessed feminists encourage women to protest more the cushier and more cosseted their lives become.

But, unfortunately, we do live in a risk society. Given that fact, perhaps it’s time to think about re-directing the focus of its concern, shining a spotlight on the Social Bads that progressivism is producing. Maybe it’s not so much a question of the huntress becoming the hunted, but just of nailing shut the cat-flap.

 Read More: The Reign of Useful Idiots

134 thoughts on “Men Are Portrayed As The Biggest Danger In The Modern Risk Society”

  1. Women talk out both sides of their mouths. Women are “strong” one moment, and then “victims” who lack agency the next. The most crazy kind of irrational hamstering are the ones who say women should not be sent to prison, and claim it’s “equality.” They use anecdotes and appeals to emotion to make their case. They claim women lack political power, despite the fact that women make up the majority of the voting public. Always remember the goal of women is to manipulate resources out of gullible men. Always. It’s what they evolved to do.

    1. A girl I know from work posted this video on the Facebook feed today. Its about gender privilege. I tried to give it an honest listen because even now I’m trying to understand both sides of these issues.
      I listened to 80% of this video and I honestly have no idea wtf he is saying.
      I could not figure out what the point was. Or what his argument was. Trust me I can read and write… But I honestly cannot figure out how he is arguing his central thesis…
      Either I am mentally retarded… Or feminist philosophy just does not require rational thinking at all…

      1. (Men are) Safer in public spaces. That’s a privilege?
        Why did I get my ass kicked by bullies and my sister didn’t?
        Shit, a 9mm Glock with a conceal carry permit evens everything.

        1. Me too. In my freshman year of high school. That’s when I started to hit the weights. It never happened again. Not because no one could kick my ass. Lots of men could then and lots more today. Because I divorced myself from victimhood and became a credible opponent in the minds of the bad asses.

      2. Bear with me as this may take a while. I’ll try to translate “manginese”.
        His first error is to start with a dichotomy, separating women privilege from male privilege. He then brings in typical arguments of voting pull and safety at night. A gun, knife, rape, mugging, stalking, can happen to both sexes equally. If you look like prey someone will test you.
        So we both have all been exposed to a privilege checklist yet only a few of us use them to limit women. Shot to the mouth number one as if only a few people are oppressors, you can’t really claim to be oppressed as the majority now can you?
        Privilege is institutional so the argument isn’t with people but legislation. He suggests it has personal implications although it isn’t personal. Jump the shark moment to needle his feelings into the discussion to create a swaying argument. So he claims culturally privilege places women at a disadvantage to men and girls. Spoken like someone lacking logic, my feelings are hurt, you’re wrong and evil.
        Men up here and all the other genders somewhere down here. When your forefathers and fathers fought for the right for you to live free and create a noble life and you fight for the right so that one half of the sex can control your existence as you fear you have controlled their’s because of the sex you were born under, not by the actions you have done, you know there is a toxic level of self hatred being instilled.
        He does far too many hand gestures and circularly states the same thing without creating an argument at all. He is so nasal you can easily stop caring and think he stated something but in truth he mainly relies on his bland tone to drone out that he brings no argument other than this a dichotomy and I say this is dichotomy.
        So the poor logically challenged ape then argues sexist benevolence on behalf of women not realizing the same argument can be made for men. Why does a larger man command space? Why does a handsome man get women to pay for his drinks? Why does a man have the ability to assert authority in spaces he has no ties to simply by raising his voice in an aggressive tone? Sexist benevolence.
        He argues statements are forms of sexist violence. Innocuously as his voice drones on, you begin to think, what? In truth you should be glad he spoke. If I were a lawyer I would eat this little fucker for breakfast, lunch, or dinner. Then toss him to the feminist wolves whom he adores.
        Chivalry and the draft reinforce sexist institutions. So real men shouldn’t have to live up to the idea of being strong and capable. While women are weak and incapable. He states that it is more than he can address. The reason being is he thinks he sounds smart and has more to say and is ego tripping on his own tongue.
        By not going against the status quo females gain, female privilege. He is trying to state female privilege is a misnomer and they lose powers. He doesn’t actually state what powers do they use. He mainly tries to state that men have more power. Chivalry is a male power. Institutional draft is a male power. He must not know a chivalrous act typically places the man in the path to die, such as when a man stands on the outside of a curb while crossing with a lady. So a man’s privilege in this instance is both to be a powerful protector and dually to die for the female. Oddly enough this is the same position most kings of old stood behind, his pawns and knights did the fighting while he issued the commands or used their zeal to will them to fight his battles. Would you call a king helpless?
        He states we are granted powers. Notice he never states what those powers are. Nurturing, warm, at the service of others. (female traits) suiting them for domestic roles. These place a person in a subordinate less powerful position. Men get competence and high status positions. Independent, ambitious, competitive. Those positive traits reinforce women’s lower status. It can be tied in to the larger system of sexism and why feminism is needed to destroy the patriarchy so women can be in power. So in all he stated that the patriarchy is sexist. He must not have looked at truly matriarchal societies and see they barely spread beyond baseline living. Eating, sleeping, procreating.
        However, in regards to what he says, sexism means prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex. Typically isn’t always. He advocated that ambitious, competency, independence, signing up for the draft, and chivalry are all male privilege. Why are men ambitious? Because as boys we are hard-wired to love creativity and seeing how things work. No one gave us this program. Any male who doesn’t have this built in usually suffers massive self hatred and will come back to this imperative in one way or another. The governments are not designed to support men as we are typically ambitious and cannon fodder anyway. Chivalry is designed to look pretty at the front but in truth sets us up as servile beasts who pleasantly cater to women. Women at work will get softer treatment, fewer harsh words if any, more social approval for her actions ( unless if she is governed by other women, go figure), and likely to be promoted for supplying 2/3 of the effort of any man in her given position. Depending on the field she might even be promoted over the man. Is this the privilege he speaks of?
        Don’t worry about this nonsense Clark, as he never said a thing.

        1. I feel bad that you watched that because of me lol.
          But thank you… I was worried I was mentally retarded… I listened to most of it and couldn’t even agree or disagree… I was just completely confused…
          I read your post and I think that was a solid attempt at making sense of what he was saying 😛

        2. I had to inject some of my own logic in there. I don’t know how you sat through it as I had to pause the video every 20 or so seconds. He was the the epitome of an intellectual idiot. All he did was spout rhetoric, unproven statements, and simplistic clues to show what he believes. He never proves why what he believes is correct or what benefits or alternatives might exist that aren’t focused on women. Well aside from a man being accepted for being lazy and weak potentially. If he learns to fuck his own mouth, he’ll have enough pussy to last a life time.

        3. Really? All I heard him say was this: “I am a cunt.”
          But maybe that was just the subtext…..

        4. That’s the exact reason why I couldn’t listen to the whole thing in one go. He did his best to voice his argument in a thorough sense of narcissism but just couldn’t quite pull it off like a true feminist. I think his video some how got to over a thousand views on youtube. Text book mangina if I ever saw one. The red pill would have to rape him to bring his masculine nature back.

        5. “Oddly enough this is the same position most kings of old stood behind, his pawns and knights did the fighting while he issued the commands or used their zeal to will them to fight his battles. Would you call a king helpless?”
          Those pawns and knights were obviously benefiting from “cannon fodder” privilege

        1. How much money do you think he spent on his gender studies degree to come up with that thesis?

      3. Lmao I got 2.00 minutes in before wanting to beat this fag with one of those books he clearly hasn’t read…

      4. Onward to this reality;
        Things aren’t right until women have all the privileges of both genders with the responsibility of neither.
        That is the best definition of feminism that I’ve ever heard. It’s not mine, meaning I didn’t originate it.

      5. Here’s his major slip;
        “Men up here…(hand gesture up high)…all the other genders down here (hand gesture down low)”
        All the ‘other genders’? Did he mean brown, black, yellow men, LGBT and women? I think he did. In other words, he’s broken it into ‘White men up here…Everyone else down here..’ Which is where he really wants to go with all of this. Another deeply racist and sexist progressive. He simultaneously overcompensates, projects and elevates himself to a superior place through his own racist and sexist prisms. Blaming white men the whole way until he can claim his supreme place and score hollow emotional payoffs throughout. SO typical. I can hardly believe I’m responding to something so frickin’ tired out as this dude. When will this line of thinking finally get boring? When will progressives actually be who they are supposed to be and engage in their irony, forward-thinking, originality-at-all expenses thinking and start to move on from these cliches?

      6. Don’t even need to listen to him. Just looking at him highlights him as a softcock mangina/whiteknight. Look at that smug selfrighteous smirk.

      7. Man, the Mexican’s really dropped the ball with that whole 12/21/12 end of the world thing. I wish they could have gotten their shit together and just put the effort in. It is way past time for a crash and burn anyway.

      8. I am going to start watching this video as a pre-work out. Having just watched it, I want to rip down a brick wall with my hands. Beats even DMAA

    2. it’s ok, because the more they fuck things up, the worse it gets, the faster and harder it will all collapse…. Soviet communism could have last 1000 years if they’d been a little more moderate with it…. instead it lasted only 70….

      1. Exactly what feminism was designed to do. Wrest control of society out of the hands of men, that is to say “non-Marxist” men of course.
        The endgame? Destruction of the nuclear family, the dissolution of social mores and personal responsibility, population replacement decline, multicultural balkanization of the populace and PRESTO!!
        A new land formed form the old, just ripe for the social engineers to pluck. Enter totalitarian government to maintain “order” among the natives and The Soviet States of America shall be born. Who knows, maybe the test case for a North American government? Perhaps a Western world govt? (no coincidence this same insanity is going on in nearly every western country)
        Either way, feminism was the first Jenga piece pulled out from the bottom to get this game off to its inevitable conclusion.
        We’re all frogs sitting in a pot of water. The burner is being turned up every day. Degree by degree. I lost faith in my fellow frogs long ago. Their inability to see the hand turning the burner dial confounds me to no end….so here I sit…..stockpiling the ole’ essentials…..

        1. Even when you flat out tell your fellow frogs what is going on, they just agree with you and go back to their TVs.
          Then they complain that nothing good is on TV.

        2. “A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude.”
          -Aldous Huxley
          These are the worst kind of frogs. The ones who love their pot and its warming water…
          (aka your male SJW.) He is beneath contempt

      2. Soviet communism could never have lasted 1000 years because it’s completely in opposition to human nature. If you remove social hierarchies then you destroy ambition, because a man can not improve his situation by working harder. They tried to give out medals to workers who actually did their jobs, haha. Obviously it wasn’t enough, and sooner or later the takers overwhelmed the makers. Economically, Communism will always be a disaster because people are naturally selfish and lazy.

      3. It never would’ve lasted because it stifled human nature. Feminism is going totally down the same path – it is stifling and supressing human nature. Not to mention that in both cases the leaders are hypocrites.

      1. I have to amend that Mistral;
        Women: Proud, Strong…Independent!*
        *Until they can gain resources, political clout or emotional capital by playing the victim.
        That’s why they can go from female supremacist ruler to victim and back to triumphant ruler mode in less than thirty seconds of a conversation. The fact that they can’t recognize this in themselves and that they make up 65% of higher ed is just so fricking dire.

    3. Wow. I think I need to clean my browsing history after reading that article on women not being sent to prison. Also, wash my eyes with lye and probably kill myself.
      (that last part is a joke…i am not a woman using suicide threats to garner sympathy…….the cleaning of browser history was serious though and i am still on the fence about the lye.)

    4. they shouldn’t have been allowed to vote in the first place. That’s from where it all started. Voting yields political power. Damned be the white knights and beta men of old!

  2. If men are so horrible why aren’t the women thanking them for refusing to “man up” and marry, thus sparing women all that “danger“?

    1. Women don’t see men as one big homogeneous group, but rather they view us in a dichotomous manner: a small sexually desirable caste and the unwanted caste. Women want the first, the uncommittables, to “man up”. The latter is viewed by them as “horrible” and useful only for their utility.

      1. Wild wolves and tame lapdogs. Technically, both are canines, one is welcome in households, one is not.

      2. Yes. I read a study that concluded that 80% of the females are only looking to fuck/date 20% of the males. This stat in itself is red pill

      3. The uncommittables are already men, which is why the women want them.
        “Man up” is womanese for “be utile.”
        They are banging the uncommittables, often in conscious harems. There is no problem there. Everyone is happy with the arrangement. It is the men they can’t stand that they are trying to shame into marrying. The men they have no respect for, the men that can be turned into doormats that they are seeking to bind into providing for them.
        While they have their alpha on the side.

  3. Its funny we are seen as this or, better yet in my opinion certain men are seen as this. I had a thought that, Feminism isn’t for ALL men but, more so SOME men. See, lets cute straight to the guts and heart of the matter, women who, NATURALLY feel the vibe from the alpha like guy that is hitting the right notes don’t want him the follow the rules of Feminism no. By him doing that he will be just another guy that jumps when she says jump. The moment he breaks frame and does what he is told, she will see him as just another dude afraid to see past the BS and does what FEELS right.
    I truly just believe that the rules and ideology of Feminism are for CERTAIN men. Granted I may need to throw a late pass out there as this may seem obvious to most but, if I am being honest and not bullshitting you I truly came to that understanding this week. Feminism is for certain men that don’t met the requirements to unlock her self perceived mythical vagina.
    They don’t want all men coming at them so, what is the best solution? Weed them out and sees who obeys and who don’t. They ones that do can be easily placed in the back bummer waiting with a towel and fresh pair of panties after they have been smutted out and tosses to the other section of wolves before being thrown over to the “Well behaved and nice gentlemen” that waited their turn. They can help them recharge their batteries before they become bored and not “FEEEEEEELING’ it anymore and push away the guys that behaved for the ones that didn’t, with a upgrade in money and support system behind them just in case they get tossed away like shredded meat again. Aka, the kids.
    Seeing men as the threat is what can be seen here on sites like this by us responding back to their BS. By us showing we are not going to stand for this BS we are seen as “Barbaric”, “Animals”, “Little boys”, and not “GROWN men”. This is what they want. I truly believe this is a trap. The moment we give them attention, the second they can shout and say “See! See! See! They are really like that I told you. ANIMALS! UGH!” When it reality we as men are just living out our right to free speech and over liberty to do as we please within reason. We are not doing anything wrong. We are just tired as being seen as modern day Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees. Some guys really do want the fairy tale of just being with one woman, a couple kids, and living a peaceful life but, its just not that kind of party anymore. Women have more fincial gain and less restrition from society these days. Had they had all of this before, the BS would of been started a lot sooner than it has already. Were women ever really humble, nice, and submissive, or, was it because they had rules to follow? Have they always been like this? It really does make you think.
    Point is we are not a threat. We are just men that want to not be seen as animals and beasts. The best thing to do is to ignore the feminsit crap and move towards remaining having a balance of the inner animal in us that represents pure and natuarl masculity, and teh develop human side of righetoues that has been created since we stepped out of the caves and expolred the world. Both are needed not just for men but women as well. Feminism is one big trap and test for men. Ignore the pitfalls and do what these sites and many others in the Manosphere are telling you. To follow this equality BS will have you raising another man’s child and seen as captain dumbass from both hers, and your side of the family. Do you really want to be remember as the fool, or the guy that didn’t fall victim to become just another brick in the wall that wont be remembered?.
    Learn game and go beyond your limits. Don’t just stick to one genre of music. Find many other outlets and become the best version of your own Superman as quick as you can. Don’t let this world tell you what you can’t and can do, while the other men laugh it off and get to reap the benefits of you being steps to walk over and grab the bitch you really want. Instead of fucking fat Sally again for the 5th time this summer, switch your style from just Rock or Rap and place it on shuffle. Have many ways to break through the BS and start having some fun of your own so you wont be another good slave for society and Feminism.
    Another great post. ROK is on their 90’s Michael Jordan shit for 2015 I see. Ha

    1. “I truly just believe that the rules and ideology of Feminism are for CERTAIN men. ”
      Said in a nuanced fashion but proof you have swallowed the red pill, nonetheless.

  4. It is not men that are the biggest danger in society.
    If anything, it is women who are the real danger and threat in our society.
    Women have now banded together to obliterate and destroy men and masculinity by any means necessary, but especially through the evil power of feminism. Everytime we try to talk about how dangerous feminism is, we will be branded as radicals.
    On the contrary. If anything, it is feminism and political correctness, that is radical and products of liberal bigotry. There is no way on Earth anyone will be able to convince me that feminism and political correctness is about justice and rightousness. These very elements of radical liberalism, has destroyed and terminated men to be able to think freely and constructively.
    We now live in a society where everytime a man speaks with logic and truth, he will be accused of being a misogynist, a sexist, a racist and every other “isms” and “ists” that the radical liberal feminists can pull out of their ass.
    Men need to make sure that they are not afraid to display their masculinity in the dark times ahead. The ruthless power of feminists and politcal correctness idealists, are resulting in the concept of masculinity to become extinct. Real men are fading away and it is imperative, that men choose to fight back against the feminists and protect their identities, honor and self respect.

    1. “Real men are fading away and it is imperative, that men choose to fight back against the feminists and protect their identities, honor and self respect.”
      This. I’ve seen too many men lose their identity to trying to impress a bitch.

    2. Feminists and the state are making it very clear that they hate men and wish they’d just fuck off and die.
      My response is increasingly becoming to just say “Ok fine” and walk away. To ‘go Galt’ as it were. The problem is that they aren’t going to let men just walk away with their resources. Those men that choose to simply live peacefully for themselves will be the perfect targets for their manic witch-hunts.

  5. Walk away from bitches who pull the “I’ve been raped” card. Don’t be rude, don’t question it out loud, but just sweep them under the rug. They aren’t worth your time and energy and Allah only knows what other bullshit nonsense they can spew and invent on the fly and possibly be scheming to hang YOU with with. Don’t play with fire if you don’t want to get burned!

    1. Once that card has been pulled, you’re going to lose unless you walk away.
      She’s either lying, or she really was genuinely raped. In that case, she’s gonna have a lot of baggage from that. Some women really can work through their issues, but most people in general gravitate toward self-destructive coping mechanisms. No sense in you taking on her psychological mess.

      1. Oh and cancer is the new rape now, so if she looks perfectly healthy, is getting drunk constantly, being token shady then pulls the “I have cancer” stunt, hightail it away from that one as well!

  6. I think this attitude is best exemplified on the micro level. The attitude itself is distributed to the impressionable masses through educational systems and mass media. It manifests itself in several ways in daily life, including:
    – the rise of the word “creepy” to apply to any male who is in public without a female or a baby stroller in tow, who has hobbies that don’t fall into the narrow spectrum of acceptable behavior for his demographic, or fails to meet the lofty standards of “tall, dark, and handsome” as defined by the culture controllers of NYC and LA
    – the rise of the word “loser” to apply to any male who is seen in public without an entourage, who is unemployed or vastly underemployed despite being in a country where 1/3 of the population is such, largely due to any and all available jobs being thrown hand over fist at females, minorities, othersexuals, and illegal immigrants, or any man who refuses to go heavily into debt to create a facade of having attained higher status
    – the artificial and largely impermeable barriers of social media being erected as a firewall to nearly every normal social interaction which would have been commonplace even ten years ago, and the constant need to be constantly vetted and judged online to even be permitted to participate in endless rounds of electronic messaging, at detriment to the actual surroundings of the physical realm
    – the assumption that every male is a potential rapist of serial killer, the belief that the burden is on the male to prove that this is not the case through vast amounts of supplication techniques or the extension of personal space surrounding a woman from a reasonable standard applied to all people to a new standard which includes as much of the public domain as she demands
    All these are trends which really didn’t exist not all that long ago and are only accelerating at an increasing rate. If these trends continue, in a few years the social insanity that is 2015 might be considered “the good old days.”

    1. I truly feel sorry for you americans, you are the test subjects cultural marxist laws, emasculating indoctrination and the propaganda machine. Whatever works in the USA is quickly adopted in western Europe and then soon, the rest of the world. When I was blue pill, I was completely enamoured by the american culture. Now that I have seen behind the curtain, I’m wondering if bringing a child into this world would be an act of cruelty. How can one(a millenial) raise a child child on red pill ideology nawadays?

      1. The biggest mistake you can make is turning a child over to the state run indoctrination system for 12-16 years and then expect them not to end up as confused as our generation was. Private school is a somewhat better alternative, and homeschooling better still, but these are usually unrealistic for the average man and will probably be outlawed or de facto outlawed in the near future. In that case, you must serve as an active counterweight to the daily propaganda served by the “education” system, especially in the areas of history, economics, and the soft sciences. This can be hard to do because after working all day you may not have the energy to deprogram you child from the day’s lessons, but is essential nonetheless. As you do this you must also awaken your children to the dangers of living under a totalitarian regime so your children understand the dangers of speaking too much truth in school, as it can result in forced drugging or intervention by various agencies. They need to understand to play along as much as possible to get by. The classic dystopian novels are great introductions to the dangers that are now present in our daily lives.

        1. Private school; Add about 200,000 to that already extraordinary tab for ONE child. Up to 700k if you want to send them to college which you likely would if you bother to private school them. 700k. That’s AFTER you pay for the upbringing of other people’s children (which you are)

      2. Did you see where the maker of this film AND his family (including his daughter) were recently found dead in their home of an apparent “murder-suicide?”
        When you read the synopsis of the film, it raises questions.
        “The world reels with the turmoil of war, geological disaster, and economic collapse, while Americans continue to submerge themselves in illusions of safety and immunity. While rights are sold for security, the federal government, swollen with power, begins a systematic takeover of liberty in order to bring about a New World Order.
        Americans, quarantined to militarized districts, become a population ripe for tyrannical control.
        Fearmongering, terrorism, police state, martial law, war, arrest, internment, hunger, oppression, violence, resistance – these are the terms by which Americans define their existence. Neighbor is turned against neighbor as the value of the dollar plunges to zero, food supplies are depleted, and everyone becomes a terror suspect. There are arrests. Disappearances. Bio attacks. Public executions of those even suspected of dissent. Even rumors of concentration camps on American soil.
        This is the backdrop to an unfolding story of resistance. American militias prepare for guerilla warfare. There are mass defections from the military as true Patriots attempt to rally around the Constitution and defend liberty, preparing a national insurgency against federal forces, knowing full well this will be the last time in history the oppressed will be capable of organized resistance.
        It is a time of transition, of shifting alliance, of mass awakening and mass execution. It is an impending storm, an iron-gray morning that puts into effect decades of over-comfort and complacency, and Americans wake up to an occupied homeland. It is a time of lists. Black list, white list, and those still caught in the middle, those who risk physical death for their free will and those who sell their souls to maintain
        their idle thoughts and easy comforts. It is in this Gray State that the perpetuation of human freedom will be contested, or crushed.
        Is it the near future, or is it the present? The Gray State is coming – by consent or conquest. This is battlefield USA.”
        All I know is, with all the things you mentioned going on Psquare, I’ve moved up my plans to GTFO of here. I see very, very bad omens on the horizon.

    2. “the assumption that every male is a potential rapist of serial killer, the belief that the burden is on the male to prove that this is not the case”
      good point. What this is designed to produce is a system where men learn to police themselves by always having to seek female approval. Women act as society’s ‘judges’, as arbiters of what is or isn’t acceptable (or creepy, rapey etc). Increasingly they seem to have the full backing of the law in behaving thus – particularly with regard to establishing what is or isn’t a sexual offence or sex crime

  7. We need some sort of Zionism for feminists. Set aside some land for them to build their man free utopia and we’ll see who they have to blame for their problems.

  8. The modern potrayal of men, the emergence of social justice douchebags, the rise in emasculated men, marxism/feminism is the workings of men. Men who are at the apex of civilisation(the top of the food chain) all funded and indirectly supported this movement for a number of reasons.
    1. Divide and conquer- By pitting man vs woman/ LGBT vs heterosexuals/ whites vs coloured(blacks, hispanics, indians, arabs etc)/ Whiteknights vs alpha males, Natives vs foreigners. It nullifies the chances of the populace to make any real advancements in civil/ armed revolutions. The Apartheid regime did it( Zulu’s vs Xhosa’s) The Rwandans did it(Hutu vs Tsutsi) and every other fascist regime has done it. By creating internal and external enemies from thin air, the established regime is allowed to act and implement any laws and social orders it wants.
    2. To nuetralize alpha males/ubermensch who have been disillusioned by the established social order and have the will to change it. This is done through hollywood(the emasculation of men in movies, tv series etc), a form of psychological warfare. The promotion and funding of feminism which emasculates the alpha male in the context of marriage and relationships.(which used to part of the alpha males’ pillar of support). The beta male is never a threat to the established regime. Decades of demonizing men has allowed western governments to enact anti-male laws with extreme impunity.
    TL;DR? Every cog in the system that we currently live in has been, directly and indirectly been implemented by the aristocracy and whoever benefits financially. ROK gives women way too much responsibility. These social ills are monitored and created by the men who look to keep their socio-economic power.

  9. Lions are usually called the king of the Jungle.
    They certainly aren’t the king of Beasts. A Bear for example is bigger, stronger faster, fiercer than a Lion, and would doubtless in in a fight. Hell, last year there was a story of a Tiger who kept killing lions in an Indian preserve.
    Lions also don’t live in the Jungle.
    So why are Lions the king when they aren’t the top and they don’t live in the jungle? A: Because of SEX. Lions don’t live in the jungle, but human’s ancestors do. An humans see the male lion, living and fucking every female in the pride with no other men around and say “that’s the king.”
    But only one male lion gets to be the king. The rest of the lions are kicked out of society by women, where they scavenge or starve. Male lions, bred to fight and fuck, aren’t particularly good hunters.
    Even the king lion doesn’t get such a great role. Sure, he gets to fuck all the women, but veterarians have prove that alpha lions have near lethal levels of stress hormones. See, one day, when the females grow tired of him, they will invite another male in from the wilderness to kill him.
    Men are dogs, women are cats. And the fate of lions shows what happens when women are in charge. One man gets to be king, all others shunned, and even being king turns out to not be so great.

    1. “Even the king lion doesn’t get such a great role. Sure, he gets to fuck all the women, but veterarians have prove that alpha lions have near lethal levels of stress hormones.”
      Interesting perspective. In some senses it reminds me of the idea of ‘sacred kingship’ (as in Robert Graves / Fraser’s Golden Bough etc) where kingship is tied to seasonal cycles of fertility / harvest etc and ends in the kings sacrifice. There is a strong matriarchal element to what is effectively a hypergamous system

  10. Feminists want society to exist for their benefit. If you’re a male who questions the compliant beta role then you’re a threat to the matriarchy.

  11. I do mind, the Dude minds. This will not stand, ya know, this aggression will not stand, man.

  12. It’s reaching an absurd level down in the school systems. Boys are apparently extremely dangerous, especially when armed with their imaginations…
    A nine-year-old Texas schoolboy was suspended from his elementary school for posession of a “magic ring.”
    The nine year old was accused of “terrorizing” his classmates because he said that he would make them “disappear” with his Hobbit prop.

    1. I was suspended for 2 weeks in 9th grade for bringing a small box cutter to school. I didn’t think anything of it, I was bored in class and just playing with it, clicking it in and out. Teacher heard it and took it from me, no big deal I thought.
      Next day I get called to the principal’s office, my parents are called to come over, and they discuss what I did and why I’m getting suspended. My parents thought it was fucking ridiculous that the school was making such a big deal over a tiny box cutter. It was a nice 2 week vacation from school though.

      1. IO was threatened with jail time for joking about “pencils and sharpeners”. A girl overheard….
        I was in 4’th grade and I was threatened with sexual harassment and expulsion. All I kept thinking was “Why wasn’t she minding her business?”

    2. He was a bully who made some girl cry. Its not the girl’s fault for failing to manage her own emotional responses. (sarcasm)

  13. I can play that game too. Next time some slut says that a man not committing to her is just insecure, I’m going to reply: “It’s not insecurity, it’s risk management”.

  14. “Leftist” are basically weak pathetic men and ugly nasty women. The genetically inferior in other words. Hence there entire ideology is based around their supposed victimhood when in in reality it is actually just a bunch of losers complaining about their superiors (ex… the rich, the strong, the beautiful,ect,ect…..). Combine this with extreme narcissism and what you end up with is an “Social Justice Warrior” faggot.

    1. Indeed. They are fundamentally weak, and not in the “good” way (i.e. the submission of a feminine woman to a masculine man). They are weak in the hateful, cowardly way and they cannot wait to hemorrhage the power of Western nations, so that they might submit to a “higher authority” — *any* higher authority…the EU, the UN, anybody…if martians showed up, the Leftoids would willingly kneel before them….

      1. Warrior: Killing an equally or greater equipped enemy IMHO.
        I’m a former army officer. I’m a racist and White Supremacist by the very definitions of the terms. I hate muslims. I believe darkies are sub-human. And still I believe that the Taliban are among the finest warriors on the planet. A Haji is willing to pick up a $200, 20 year old rifle and a homemade bomb and battle with the 2 greatest super powers that the world has ever seen: The US and the USSR.
        “Bababut the Navy SEALs iz bad ass.” Take away the technological advantage– their air insertion and extraction, as well as their long range artillery and bombardment capability– and the SEALs, Rangers, Delta and the like are nothing more than tough guys with a rifles– like the Taliban or Vietcong.

        1. “Killing an equally or greater equipped enemy IMHO.”
          Warrior is a noun. You wrote a verbal phrase.
          Lastly, your Haji doesn’t have ROEs written by Obama.

        2. Great. And “single malt” must be synonymous is with school marm. Oh fuckzz did I do it again by not using quotations?

        3. I give credit to the Haji who was shooting RPG’s at us in flip flops. The rest of them are pussies. They needed us to rid them of Uday and Qusay. They still cant do shit about the ISIS guys stealing and raping their daughters. Fuck them.

        4. OK, you don’t know what makes a man or warrior either. You are simply a “doer of deeds”.
          When someone asks you about a restaurant’s food, I can see you reply by saying “fork”.

        1. Unless its a Congressional Medal of Honor, the Combat V is all that matters. 1sg Moerk proved medals are worthless. The E-7 and above deployment bronze star arent even as valuable as a Chuck E Cheese token.

    1. Eh, I’m gonna ignore the Nigger part cause it’s irrelevant. But I agree. There was a guy working a preserve and he was mauled by lions. he only had a knife and he fought them off.
      That guy is a man. And he still uses a bicycle to do his rounds.

  15. Wow, yet another misandrist English legacy, kept alive via Game of Thrones.
    I previously stated last year in another article that an entertainment piece of fiction is a direct reflection of the social norms. I wish I could really make it up but canNOT.
    Really, this seems to me a classic case of ingratitude by Englishwomen. The gall of them, blaming ALL men even though they instigated the very drama especially men are suffering.
    This is why I much rather carry a mirror the size of Emma Sulkowicz’s mattress, just to make a point how baseless the accusations they’ve been making about men.
    As for the whole “white men are conquerors” fantasy, newsflash: they’re just sexually thirsty at home.
    As for the part about “sparing women from prison” is a BLATANT form of “spare us from accountability, O NOBLE white knight”. Newsflash: what Gwenhwyfar DID to the English legacy ONLY led to antisemitism and scores of Englishwomen, ‘surrendering’ to the Vikings. In addition, that SHIT got my granduncle LYNCHED by an American WF back in 1938, and he’s Filipino!

  16. This is tiring. Okay, I’ll admit that guys tend to be violent. It’s kind of a human trait. We gravitate towards killing each other in ingenious ways. However, we tend to kill men a lot more than women.
    If women are to be afraid of men, then men should be deathly afraid of other men. I am talking paranoia, crossing the street when you see another guy, calling the cops if a guy rings your doorbell scared. Why? Cause guys get killed by guys a LOT.
    But somehow in this society where my biggest fear is losing my freedom, my wealth and my reputation and my kids and all possessions to a woman…she should fear me?
    A guy stabs me, he goes to prison. A woman stabs me and I go to prison. Explain to me who i should fear more?

    1. 2/3 of all violence is directed at men. 66.67% of it.
      While violence statistics try to relate this as “male on male violence”, this is not true.
      Much of this violence is initiated at the hands of females – ie. “Let’s you and him fight.”
      When a woman hires a hitman to kill her spouse, it is STILL classified as “male on male violence.”
      If we just took into account that women work “by proxy” (ie. through others), we would quickly see that women are as violent as men, it’s just that they’re smarter and use men as their tools, rather than bloody their own fists.
      If we took this simple fact seriously, we would quite easily see that the majority of violence is actually caused by females indirectly.

  17. Ironically, liberal women are the primary force behind the anti-vaccination stupidity that is putting American children at risk of measles, rubella, etc.

  18. The author is a known associate of terrorists (JDF) who represent a
    country that has conducted attacks and is currently engaged is the
    subversion of western civilization, and is in denial of this.
    The only reason why he was approved by the editorial board is that Roosh is still reading “Culture of Critique”.
    Get him out of here – the enemy is within our midst.

    1. JIDF? With reference to the ‘culture of critique’ please advise how anything I’ve ever said serves jewish “ethno-centric interests”. Is this because I warned about playing into the SPLC’s hands? For the record I’d also point out that I’m non-practising Lutheran
      edit: just checked: you made your account specifically to make this comment. I’ve been posting on ROK for over a year. Where do you post, and as whom? What do you think is going to aid ‘the enemy’ about this article? Look forward to your second ever comment in reply

  19. females fear males. They accuse men espically young ones as being destructive, but they fail to realize we are constructive as well.
    destruction and construction are 2 sides of the same coin. Yin and Yang. Females only can complain since they know they cant do any of that. We can build a civilaztion and we can burn it to the ground at a wim. They should be lucky they get to be apart of it despite doing anything. We control destiny when we are motivated, be it aggrassive warriors like vikings and mongols of the past to gangs and rebel groups today….be it moral or not.
    We men are like wolves we maybe brutal, but we show more love and loyalty. Ever heard of a woman dying to save someone or to fight for their family nation or clan….nope never unless its her kid and even then shell call for help.
    to comment on the Brevik deal, this goes to show What George Caralin said, they dont give a fuck about ethnic people,these feminists.
    They claim they love multicultralism, but really they are unknowning illiterates that are just their tools to do the crap jobs,their be descendents wouldve had if they werent sluts. The proof is that they banned denouncing feminsm but all else is fine. From there it should be obvious whos got the power. Not Ahmed the somali, but Daisy McDyke the homo feminist.

  20. Men are portrayed as the Biggest Danger to Modern Society because we *ARE* the biggest danger to modern society, in all of its sickness.
    Imagine, for a moment, if we stopped doing what we do. Stopped protecting the weak. Stopped feeding people who cannot support themselves. Stopped being fathers (or father figures) to boys. Stopped building. Stopped…doing. Where would the SJW feminists/marxists be?
    They’d be well and truly fucked, that’s where they’d be.
    So thank God/Nature/your parents that you were born a man. Walk proudly, upright, shoulders thrown back. Do not waste your time arguing with weakling mangina douche bags. Do not bother with women who are not feminine and do not offer you the respect that they should accord to a man. Do not help them in any way.
    Do not apologize for being masculine. Do not explain–you owe no explanation to your enemies. Go about your business and keep your eyes fixed on the horizon. Shake off the sniveling quislings and betrayers. Cultivate your allies. Have each other’s backs. Too often, the truth will be shouted down by the mob. Do not let this stop you from speaking it — the truth weakens your enemies and strengthens your allies. Feminine women who hear it will be heartened by it; living in the PC anti-sex police state is more difficult for them because they do not have the natural strength of men. Ever hear of WGTOW? There’s a reason for that.
    In every one of you beats the heart of a King.
    End Transmission.

    1. ,,Do not apologize for being masculine. Do not explain–you owe not explanation to your enemies. Go about your business and keep your eyes fixed on the horizon. Shake off the sniveling quislings and betrayers. Cultivate your allies. Have each other’s backs. Too often, the truth will be shouted down by the mob. Do not let this stop you from speaking it — the truth weakens your enemies and strengthens your allies. Feminine women who hear it will be heartened by it;
      In every one of you beats the heart of a King. ”
      Thank you, dad !

  21. The Lion is said to be the king of the beasts. With its lustrous mane, muscular frame, and general readiness for a scrap it has a reputation for both looking good and being the bad boy of the animal kingdom. But what of man?

  22. Men need to learn how to remain united upon a principle.
    Ice Cube calls it ,, The Gangsta’ Nation” , we call it MGTOW, animals call it fact:

    1. Men need to learn how to remain united upon a principle.

      Never gonna happen. Men are too different to form a united force. It only works with lower life forms, e.g. women. Two women are more similar to each other than two men are to each other.
      That’s one of the reasons why feminism is so successful: Two women from two different groups — even across party lines — instantly can agree on things like “Women should get more help/money/power” instantly.
      MGTOW is your best bet.

  23. You guys are a bunch of butthurt women hating losers who don’t get laid. Talk all that shit but out in the street YOU are the thirsty beta males, chasing after anything that moves and has a vagina. All this talk about “cock carousels”, why do you think cock carousels exist? Because you losers are trying to fuck as many women as you can. You go around fucking and dumping then you wonder why every woman on this planet has been fucked so many times. Pathetic.

    1. You guys are a bunch of butthurt women hating losers who don’t get laid.

      …and then you write …

      why do you think cock carousels exist? Because you losers are trying to fuck as many women as you can. You go around fucking and dumping


        1. he was around just before you and was zealous in his production of material. I’m still trying to work out whether you’re the real deal just as someone else on this board asked the question of me.

        2. he was around just before you and was zealous in his production of material.

          Do you mean:

          Are you serious? My posts are nothing like that, neither stylewise, nor contentwise nor picturewise.

          I’m still trying to work out whether you’re the real deal

          Yes, I am the real deal.

        3. There’s a lot of smoke on the internet. A lot of posturing. One person here says that I’m some sort of zionist activist although I’m unclear how or why they would draw such a conclusion. If I may be blunt: did you make that comment because of what I said about the SPLC in relation to your comments the day before?

        4. Further below by Hooter. I’ll take that as a no but you’ll appreciate how I might make the connexion. You know i just clicked on your disqus to see if you’d responded and someone else has just accused you of being a “a leftist plant”. We live in a world of sock puppets with agendas and it isn’t always easy to see where someone is coming from, which is why it sometimes best to consider the possible effects of what someone says rather than to take them at face value . For example even as we speak the UK is suggesting further censorship of (anti-semitic) speech. Maybe your rights are protected under the US constitution. That may not be the case everywhere

        5. someone else has just accused you of being a “a leftist plant”.

          I get accused of being everything, from “liberal troll” to “conservative woman hater”, from “kike” to “Islamist jihadist”.
          That’s what you get for attacking women. And why? Because women are protected by each and every group. Hence attacking women among the conservatives results in being branded “Leftist plant”. Attacking women among Nazis results in being branded “Kike”.
          I have a few macros that address this issue (i.e. that you get called a shill for attacking women), for example the Homer Simpson macro or the following ones. Obviously this happens to a lot of people.

        6. I appreciate that its easy, and often false, to call someone out as an agent provocateur, shill, spy, crypto-zionist or whatever. But I’m really not concerned to look into your heart, or that of anyone – although obviously everyone likes to know who they’re dealing with. My concern is mainly with the fact that very legitimate material – in some ways the very core material that makes the manosphere’s ‘case’ is getting mixed into the very stuff that could be used to undermine the same case which is apparently being made. It may not be intentional but you have a tendency to mix in material that is eloquent and persuasive – the sort of thing that could actually persuade people – with material which any day now (at least in UK, europe etc. where there is no first amendment) – could result in political intervention to restrict freedom of speech, something which as mention is being considered right now with respect to an apparent rise in anti-semitism. However even if that does not happen, those who wish to cry = manosphere = misogyny = hate speech can link the more extreme material with all men’s rights / red pill material. Indeed this is the very essence of the case against the manosphere – that any legitimate concerns it might raise actually disguises ‘misogyny’ and that consequently any resultant claims that may be made can be dismissed. Further more the anti-hate zealots don’t really care about who gets ‘blamed’ because they want to link all extremism together. Legislation, interventions etc designed to ‘protect’ (i.e. shut down criticism of) one group will serve to ‘protect’ (and shut down criticism of) every group. The US might not be that bad, but I assure you in UK/europe the powers that be need barely a pretext to make the case against ‘extremism’. Even now they’re trying to ban ‘extremism’ (not just muslim extremism) from universities in UK. Feminists and jewish groups in particular seem to be agitating for further restrictions on free speech

    2. the article isn’t really about the cock carousel, its about the discursive construction by leftists of men as violent predators who need to be controlled and kept in order, when its the left that is doing all the real violence in the world

  24. Just discovered one of the most epic movies ever made that completely capture the aspect of masculinity, about implementing order, rules & judgement into society.
    Movie is ,,Dredd 2012”. I recommend watching it at least twice.
    Learn the rules !

Comments are closed.