We’ve gotten a lot of hate over the past year from politicians, C list celebrities, and female typists, but not from the direct relative of one of the most influential billionaires in the world. That seal has been broken by Mark Zuckerberg’s sister, who turns out is obsessed with the manosphere. Her most recent attacks against us have generated enough criticism that it has forced the “classics scholar” to respond by whining about non-existent death threats and anti-semitism (she’s Jewish) while safely encamped in her $2.1 million home.

How she wants you to think she looks like:

How she really looks like:

I vaguely remember an article she wrote a year ago about pickup titled Bang Rome, obviously copying the title format of my Pulitzer worthy sex guides. The article, which does not offer an excerpt worth quoting, tried to compare Ovid to modern pickup. One year later, she decided to try a different tact to get noticed: she directly attacked me, the alt right, and many other thought leaders in a Jezebel piece titled Putting The Neo Back In Neo Nazi, which is a likely reference to neomasculinity.

Nobody in their right mind would call Return of Kings a bastion of human decency. But when I became a regular (if resistant) reader of the site, most of its vitriol was reserved for predictable targets—especially Muslims and SJWs (“social justice warriors”). While its writers have dabbled in barely-coded anti-Semitism in the past, others have argued against it—though their gradual shift became clear in July with the article “Is Antisemitism Genuine Bigotry Or A Practical Counterdefense Against A Powerful Tribe?” Roosh V, a “neomasculine” man with a poor imitation of a Duck Dynasty beard, has gone from arguing in February that “The Alt Right Is Worse Than Feminism In Attempting To Control Male Sexual Behavior” to saying in August, “While we are not officially an alt right site, we share much overlap with them in the general alternative sphere.” (He also refuses to denounce Richard Spencer for his recent forays into blatant Nazi rhetoric.)


Only a few weeks ago, Return of Kings published a predictably horrifying article with the title “11 Tips For Raising Your Daughter on the Red Pill” which advises, among other things, that you should hit on waitresses in front of your children so they can see what game looks like.

In another recent article on her blog, she goes after me and Quintus Curtius, who continues to connect hundreds of men with the classics while she perverts it into a grotesque image of social justice.

Predictably, Quintus Curtius has an extremely limited understanding of “how things were like in previous eras.” His stated goal is “to remind readers of the glories of leadership, character, and masculine virtue that can change their lives” — so of course, his understanding of antiquity is of a world inhabited by only a few extremely elite men. He has no sense of or interest in social history, cultural history, women, slaves, children, and broad historical trends. The ancient world is reduced to a textbook model for leadership, character, and masculine virtue.


Next time you hear either of those arguments made, remember: they are also made by a man who tells stories about raping women in his “Bang” series of “game guides,” who believes that “Women Must Have Their Behavior And Decisions Controlled By Men,” who recently rejoiced because the election of Donald Trump “automatically legitimizes masculine behaviors that were previously labeled sexist and misogynist” — a man who was rejected by the Alt-Right for being insufficiently white himself.


So why have so many white, male leaders of communities and websites that used to focus on sex and gender shifted in recent months to anti-Semitism, white nationalism, and complaining about “(((the media)))”? In part, of course, because these men were always grossly bigoted and racist.

For living in a multi-million dollar home in a neighborhood with only a 1.7% black population (the national average is 12.6%), she seems terribly concerned about racism. Do you think she has even met a black person during her residence in one of the most expensive zip codes in the United States? It is peculiar why someone who never sees black people would be so concerned about racism, unless of course she is an intolerable hypocrite who hasn’t yet checked her billionaire privilege.

I wouldn’t want to subject you to any more of her pseudo-intellectual writings, but it’s clear from them that she has a serious obsession with masculine writers who have normal testosterone levels, unlike her potato-faced husband, through her admission that she follows badthink sites daily along with the individual personalities behind them. Attacking Quintus Curtius, a man who takes his work seriously, proved to be her greatest mistake. In an article titled When Education Does Not Mean Knowledge: The Case Of Mark Zuckerberg’s Sister, he evaporates her entire educational career in one go.

Character matters in everything, Ms. Zuckerberg, and it affects everything. And this is why I focus on it in my books. If you had a more expansive soul and were possessed of deeper life experiences you might know this.

And this really is the heart of the matter. I emphasize character, morals, and the education of the young because I know how important it is. I am a forty-eight year old man who has more scars than you will ever have. I have fought more battles than you will ever fight. While you were mincing around the halls of Princeton University, I was leading Marines in Okinawa and East Asia.

While you were bullying people for not adhering to your politically-correct ideology, I was starting a law firm, trying cases in court, fighting for the rights of the common man, and making an honest name for myself. This is the difference between you and me. While you are a spoiled child of privilege, I am a man who has earned his way through life through the sweat of his own brow.

Do you want to know why I write? Because I love the subject matter, and I truly believe in its power to bring back what we have lost from our society. I venerate these classical and Renaissance works because I know how true their lessons are for real life. I use them as a source of moral inspiration, a guide to a better life, and as a vision for the elevation of the human spirit.

You, on the other hand, use them as a punch line. You have no real feel for these works. If you did, you would never be able to miss the role of character and virtue in a great many classical and Renaissance works. In fact, I think that deep down, you despise these books.


Unlike you, I am not a child of privilege. No one ever gave me anything: I made my own way in life as the son of immigrants who did not have the benefit of being royalty like yourself. I earned my love of ancient wisdom with my own effort, and I hold it close to my heart.

Quintus and I also had some laughs at her expense on the latest Kingmaker podcast (starts at 7:30)

Other men have revealed how worthless a PhD from Princeton is these days.

This is a very glaring and instructive example of the penetration of leftist/SJW ideology into every nook and cranny of society. The entire purpose of studying Classics is that the ideas and values of the Greco-Roman tradition are (sometimes literally) written in stone. They are immutable. They are not open to change and interpretation. They are literally foundational. They are the bedrock of Western Civilization. You don’t get to go back and retcon Plato into being an Afro-Caribbean hipster with an interest in women’s issues. These people are literally trying to-write history to suit their modern political agenda. As the commenter astutely pointed out, this is gross cultural appropriation of the worst and most damning type – this is outright cultural theft. They are attempting to steal Classical culture and remake it in the image of social justice (their god).

And it’s clear this Zuckerberg woman is a real piece of work. Her insecurity comes across in her writing (she is desperately in search of an avenue of self-importance to attach her name to). I can’t imagine the sort of psychological strain she must be under. When you’re a neurotic striver of the sort that she is, having to live with the fact that your goofy, Aspergerish brother became a multi-billionaire and culturally significant figure by the age of 25 while you’re reduced to pimping the SJW narrative on some shitty website (which your moneybags brother is no doubt paying for) can’t be good for one’s feeling of self-worth. (Scorpion)


Donna Zuckerberg should be working on her dissertation on Ancient Greek tragedy and comedy, but somehow she always seems to find herself baking scones and then blogging about them. Follow her delicious adventures at sugarmountaintreats.com [her food blog] or on Facebook.

It’s unfortunate that Donna does not feel free to devote even more time to what is clearly her true passion — cooking, and baking in particular — and is instead obliged to finish her “dissertation” and produce these worthless whiny texts on “Eidolon”. It’s an error and a waste of time, and it probably diminishes the quality of the scones (which should have mostly remained unblogged) and prevents them from being as dreamily delicious as they could be. (Lizard Of Oz)


The women’s criticism of groups of men who challenge the orthodoxy of our sociopolitical landscape reads like a projection of their own feminine inadequacies and a craving for the male dominance and validation they claim to hate. Tell me a time when either Return Of Kings or the Roosh V Forum praised women like them.

The supreme irony, too, is that Zuckerberg’s brother created Facebook from an original concept called Facemash, which rated the attractiveness of Harvard girls and got the budding entrepreneur in hot water. This was all really no different to anything Return Of Kings currently does in rating women. (Return Of Kings)

How do you think the “classics scholar” responded? What do you think the product of Princeton wrote to Quintus, a man who gave countless historical rebuttals of her odious revisionism? She cried liked a big baby.


The Ivy Leaguer has no clothes. She is no different than a high school girl on Tumblr who accuses you of harassment after you make fun of her claim that she spiritually identifies as a deer. Her primary response was to write an article—not to refute any of the rebuttals against her—but to explain to her apathetic readership that they need to do a better job of supporting her against the criticisms of evil men that she attacked first when she called them racists and rapists.

Do not say any of these to the person receiving the abuse. In fact, you probably shouldn’t say them at all.

Do not suggest that they should consider not writing about topics that draw this kind of hatred. This response is terrible for many reasons, but I’ll limit myself to two here:

1) Don’t blame the victim. Ever. Nobody is ever “asking” for anti-Semitic death threats, unless they literally tweet “please send me anti-Semitic memes for research purposes!”

2) A tiny voice in the writer’s head is almost certainly saying this exact thing, and that voice doesn’t need to be amplified.

Do not assume you know how the writer feels. “You must be curled up in the fetal position right now!” may seem like a sympathetic thing to say, but death threats can provoke a wide range of emotional responses. Instead of assuming, ask, “How are you holding up?”

Even though not one person has said they’d kill her (a lamp shade meme is not a “death threat”), she expects you to accept that the sister of one of the richest men in the world, who is using her education not to breathe life into the classics but to defame men who understand it better than her, and who lives in the top 1% economic bracket nationwide, is a victim of abuse. Her family does not have enough of the pie, and she needs more, so tread carefully and give her support in the exact manner she demands. Bow down you lowly peasant! Rush to her aid! Or maybe not, since it appears she has practically no supporters. Apparently it’s tough to accumulate social justice victim points when you have the super-mega-bucks and are Jewish, a group that happens to be the most privileged in the United States. What person wants to help a woman who never has to worry about working again for the rest of her entire life and can simply live out her days baking scones for a food blog?

Maybe one day we will encounter an enemy who is our intellectual equal, but today is not that day. Instead we must endure adult children who shriek out in pain as they strike us, whose blows effortlessly slide off us like water from a seal’s fur coat. And if Mark Zuckerberg is reading this right now, and there is a good chance he is because his arrogant sister bit off more than she could chew, I want him to know that she is now our “house ho.”

Mark, we have raped your sister’s mind with our ideas and our vigor. We have so burrowed a hole into her head that not a day goes by without her thinking of our ideology, our arguments, and our words. You can do your worst on Facebook, and hide reality to your heart’s content, but you cannot even begin to stop us from wounding your own family. What goes around comes around—you’ve manipulated the minds of millions people who use Facebook, censoring the truth from them, and now we own the mind of your sister.

And I’d surely click the like button on that.

Read Next: The End Game Of Feminism


    1. White Prowler December 21, 2016 at 8:52 pm

      White male privileged brain ftw

  1. MajorStyles December 20, 2016 at 1:43 pm

    “And if Mark Zuckerberg is reading this right now…I want him to know that she is now our “house ho.”

    I laughed so hard at that line that I spit coffee out onto my keyboard. Ha!!! Roosh’s underappreciated sense of humor rises again. Lol.

    BTW…don’t think she wouldn’t enjoy that position.

    1. Hugo December 23, 2016 at 5:03 pm

      I know that noticing is a hate crime but, the Jew is gonna Jew.

      1. Shmalkandik January 3, 2017 at 8:14 am

        She doesn’t Jew, or she’d be out there making money. Instead, she is a full time princess.

      2. Hugo January 9, 2017 at 10:37 am

        Nah. Take your neocohen posts elsewhere. She is a product of Judaic culture.

      3. Shmalkandik January 16, 2017 at 4:14 am

        I am glad to take them here. Next round? Or are you still proud of supporting the Hillarybeast? How do you hold the two sides of your head together, supporting Trump, and your private war against the Joos? Inquiring minds would like to know. But you aren’t the only person so afflicted. It a potential fracture point of the alt. rihgt, and I shall with interest how you resolve the contradiction.

        Noope, not all Jews are like that. I know making distinctions and recognizing differences is more work, but God is iin the details. Meanwhile, when the IAF fixes the F35, you don’t have to say thanks – they already got paid.

      4. Hugo January 16, 2017 at 8:43 pm

        Old timer, don’t go off your medications. Seriously.

      5. OMGlaucon January 24, 2017 at 8:24 am

        When I was much younger, we had a term for Jewish Bitches, “JAP, Jewish American Princesses” and made jokes about how they acted… “What is a JAP’s favorite thing to make for dinner… reservations” This was in the late 70s and early 80s. Their goal is always to never work, period….

  2. Frank Rook December 20, 2016 at 1:52 pm

    ^^Those last 3 paragraphs. So satisfying. Cathartic.

  3. Libertas December 20, 2016 at 2:12 pm

    Her doing something as regards to Ovid in seduction is basically just a cheap imitation of all the stuff Robert Greene wrote in The Art of Seduction anyway, which is heavily influenced by Ovid’s ideas.

    I suspect that as the Trump era starts and expands, these social justice warriors will not only suffer from “Trump derangement syndrome,” but will also begin to suffer from related derangement syndromes from anyone loosely associated with Trump or whatever you want to call “the alternative” space in general, which is basically now the mainstream anyway.

  4. corvinus December 20, 2016 at 2:15 pm

    Cold. Ice cold. Shiv stuck in and left there cold.

  5. fatherofthree December 20, 2016 at 2:40 pm

    You’re wasting your time engaging with her. It only makes her pussy wetter and she’ll be back for more. If you’re doing it for generating traffic, I doubt she brings a lot of it. Third possibility is you feel flattered she mentions you and you’re just stroking your ego. Anyhow, it’s a waste of time.

    1. Per Desteen December 20, 2016 at 3:02 pm

      No, it’s bringing battle to the enemy, one that is a soft target and will amplify its pain as it shrieks for sympathy. It may even go overboard and make delightfully bad statements that will be meme-worthy.

      1. TheHammer December 26, 2016 at 11:30 pm

        It’s all about the memes!

    2. Burner Prime December 21, 2016 at 3:19 am

      Agree to some degree. Devoting an entire article to a milquetoast plain jane feminist gives her way more attention than she deserves. Hell she may even have been trolling for it. I get a strong sense she craves the masculine cock she isn’t getting at home.
      On the other hand, she is the sister of, not only one of the richest people on the planet, but who is also part of the globalist cabal. It is a sign that ROK is definitely in the cross-hairs of the globalists. The importance of that cannot be understated.

      1. Rudi December 21, 2016 at 7:08 pm

        There are several articles a day. It really isn’t a big deal. Now, having a rebuttal come up with her attacks might be worthwhile. Always got to fight when you’re down.

    3. Doctor Mayhem December 21, 2016 at 12:19 pm

      Yes, because fighting back is always a waste of time…

      1. fatherofthree December 21, 2016 at 1:20 pm

        you call this fighting?

      2. White Prowler December 21, 2016 at 9:24 pm

        The Zuck sure does lol

      3. bob k. mando December 25, 2016 at 11:28 am

        if you don’t think this is fighting, why don’t YOU demonstrate the proper technique?

        or is the technique you’re demonstrating yet more reflexive Cuckservative abasement before the Left?

        *yawn* never have seen that before.

      4. PresenceLOVE December 28, 2016 at 4:58 am

        Your right… it’s was a merciless slaughter. But hey, sometimes it’s gotta be done to make an example!!!

    4. per ramen cent December 22, 2016 at 12:34 am

      I think it’s a good idea. She seems really interested in red pill.

  6. Thursday1 December 20, 2016 at 2:48 pm

    Extremely privileged person discovers that in the real world not everyone will praise you if you write stupid shit.

  7. Thursday1 December 20, 2016 at 2:51 pm

    Ovid’s Art of Love is actually a terrible pick up manual. Very beta male: lots of flattery and gifts.

    1. Jonny-O December 20, 2016 at 7:35 pm

      Ars amatoria a subversive poem that undermines Augustus’ artificial and disingenuous “return” to imaginary traditional values, Roman virtues, and family purity ideas. Additionally it ridicules the beta male whiney lover found in Roman elegy, like propertius or ovids persona in his amores. Its a funny, ironic, and subversive poem about Roman politics and culture as well as literary genre.

      1. Thursday1 December 21, 2016 at 1:48 am

        Nah, Ovid seems to really believe the flattery and gifts bullshit.

      2. Jonny-O December 21, 2016 at 9:31 am

        Lol, then you need to read more Ovid. There’s not a lot he seems to take seriously.

      3. Thursday1 December 21, 2016 at 9:55 am

        I’ve read more than you.

      4. Jonny-O December 21, 2016 at 10:11 am

        I doubt that highly. I also have a classics PhD, so I’ve read everything by Ovid in the original Latin. Not only that but I’ve taught classes on Ovid and even published on him. I’m not a fan though of politicizing classics in this way, neither as a means of teaching traditional virtues or to support sjw causes.

      5. Thursday1 December 21, 2016 at 11:34 am

        I’ve read all of Ovid as well. You seem to be one of those professors who, whenever their favourite author says something stupid, blames it all on irony. Sorry, but there is no indication in the Art of Love, or anywhere else, that Ovid secretly believed that flattery and gifts were ineffective.

      6. Jonny-O December 21, 2016 at 12:23 pm

        The issue I am talking about is how the genre of didactic poetry is understood in antiquity and practiced by most poets. The genre is not designed to be a factual or accurate or express an author’s personal beliefs on a subject. If people wanted factual information, on farming say, they would read Columella or Varro, not Vergil’s Georgics or Hesiod’s Works and Days; if someone wanted to know about snakes, they’d read Aristotle or Theophrastus or Hippocrates or Galen, not Nicander’s Theriaca and Alexipharmaka. Even Aratus makes several mistakes in the Astronomica, a poem permeated by praise for monarchy and Hellenistic rulership. Most scholarship has shown, and I agree, that ancient didactic poems are not really about conveying facts and information, but rather about discussing more abstract concepts, like human society, politics, or culture under the guise of a seemingly benign subject. Such an approach to the genre as not entirely serious about its stated subject or intention as a source of facts or beliefs is shown by both Servius’ commentary on the Georgics as it relates to human society and politics, rhetorical works that are didactic but designed not to teach but serve as a showpiece for ability in rhetoric, and someone like Lucian’s interrogation of Hesiod and criticism of Hesiod’s factuality altogether in ancient authors. Thus, given the generic concept of didactic poetry (and I do indeed except Lucretius as philosophical didactic) it is unlikely that the original audience would have read Ovid’s Ars Amatoria as a serious poem about its stated subject that was meant to convey Ovid’s honest and serious thoughts about erotic culture, especially given the irony found throughout his other elegiac works like the Amores. Rather, it’s designed, like most other didactic poetry, to serve as a commentary on contemporary culture and Augustan politics, a strain of thought that runs throughout Ovid’s Fasti, Metamorphoses, Heroides, and Tristia. Even the Ibis, an invective, is so hedged in by conflicting mythological paradigms and modeled on Hellenistic precedents is likely to be more a showpiece rather than a serious invective against a foe.

        But let’s consider Ovid’s other didactic works to see his view of didactic poetics. We have, for instance, the Medicamina Faciei, a poem which is clearly not meant to be a celebration of cosmetics but rather a showpiece, much like orators were asked to praise difficult or weird subjects, like Lucian’s praise of the fly or Dio’s praise of baldness. It demonstrates Ovid’s versatility and ability. How about the Pythagorean didacticism in Met. 15? In reading Pythagoras’ praise of vegetarianism, concepts of the evolution and instability of the cosmos, it would be, I think, mistaken to assume that Ovid included it because he was religiously or philosophically Pythagorean. Rather, the constant cosmic instability reflects the theme of change and metamorphosis and provides a bookend that answers Ovid’s cosmic philosophical opening to the poem. Additionally, it undermines the celebration of the permanence of Augustus and Rome with which he closes the Met. Additionally, let’s consider how the Ars finds its way into the Met, in the story of Byblis and Nisus, where love advice advocated in the Ars proves to be disastrous mythologically. Ovid’s irony reflected in his use of the didactic mode elsewhere undermines the seriousness of the Ars.

        But even within the Ars, it’s clear that Ovid has ironic intentions, is not entirely fixated on his subject, and discusses things that he may not enitrely believe. In the opening, Ovid disavows divine inspiration, that characterizes most didatic. For ancient readers, not making a pretense to the Muses, Apollo, or the gods’ help already undermines a claim of poetic authority. That in itself marks the poem as not “serious” didactic, since the gods are conveyors of truth, while experience in the generic constraints of poetry is not authority-making. These lines as well “I sing of safe love, permissible intrigue/ and there’ll be nothing sinful in my song.” in itself is ironic, as Augustus’ marriage and family legislation, as well as his ideals of Roman purity, would make Ovid’s seduction techniques, especially the affair at the banquet, inappropriate and illegal. What about his discussion of the triumph of Augustus in Book 1? He spends dozens of lines departing from his theme to “praise” Augustus’ victories, but then portrays the lover as someone who doesn’t care about Augustus or the empire, who makes up random information. What about lines like “Whoever you are, lovers everywhere, attend, with humble minds,/ and you, masses, show you support me: use your thumbs.” that demonstrate a lack of faith in his own veracity as determined by the viewers and not himself or the gods? Consider the mythological exempla he uses in 1 for the girl you’re going after, Byblis, Myrrha, Pasiphae, all crazy women. Is that the kind of girl Ovid’s lover is seeking? It’s supposed to be funny, to be an undermining of his theme. What about the exempla for male beauty, Theseus, Hippolytus, and Adonis? In every one of those circumstances, the men either were killed or abandoned their lovers. Should the Ars’ lover want to emulate Hippolytus who was killed? Again, irony. Again, when he talks about the pale sickliness a lover should portray, he uses Daphnis as an example (who btw committed suicide over love). Daphnis is a prime poetic example of the lover in Roman elegy, whose conventions celebrate the sickly, obsessive beta lover, as in Propertius. Ovid by advising his tutees to behave like the elegists who always lose their girl and are surrounded with failure is making fun of the whole genre of elegiac poetry as over the top and ineffective.

        Thus, given this information, I feel quite justified in taking the Ars as a non-serious poem. Rather, it’s comedic and ironic because the poet as teacher in it is giving advice for failure and keeps undermining his own points with his mythological exempla, which form his “evidence”. Additionally, it engages clearly with Augustan politics in a subversive way, as Ovid does in other poems and in didactic passages elsewhere. Finally it’s a showpiece, a capstone to Ovid’s elegiac poetry, the Amores and Heroides.

      7. Thursday1 December 21, 2016 at 12:56 pm

        Ovid regards seduction as fun and naughty, but also ridiculous and sometimes dangerous. None of this has anything to do with whether he thinks gifts and flattery do or do not work. One can mock the whole enterprise of seduction, as well as contemporary mores, while at the same time thinking that the advice in the poem works.

        At best what you’ve shown is that classical didactic poems don’t necessarily represent the considered views of their author. But there is still absolutely nothing in your analysis to show that Ovid’s advice in the poem is ironic.

        Your analysis of Ovid’s disavowal of the gods doesn’t impress me. Ovid, following Lucretius, is skeptical of religion and the gods, so a his disavowal is not something of grave import. If you’re not a believer, why would you bloody expect the gods to certify your poem? Similarly, most hot women are crazy and dangerous, but that doesn’t mean we don’t genuinely want to fuck them. Finally, the lover in The Art of Love, for all his emphasis on gifts and flattery, is rather cool and cynical. Despite his beta technique, he is not mooning over his lovers.

        As I have said, professors will use “irony” to justify anything. Fuck this is stupid.

      8. Jonny-O December 21, 2016 at 1:13 pm

        Ah, well, read divorced from its context as an abstract text where you simply analyze the advice for its functionality from a modern philosophical and mores-based perspective, I can accept a reading such as yours. I tend to read with a far more focused historicist and generic-conscious perspective, but I am fine with alternative readings, should the frameworks be identified and acknowledged. I would say that you should avoid claiming authorial intention in such a reading, though, if you are going to avoid historical and literary contextualization.

        I do think your approach to Ovid’s religiosity is a problem. Keep in mind there is no orthodoxy or even belief standards in Roman religion, no creeds or rules about what people personally think and most importantly, following Paul Veyne, ancient people rarely seem to show a consistency or even a drive toward resolving intellectual and belief contradictions into a coherent system. Rather belief in ancient thought seems much less consistent and to be based on context and even whim rather than some inner drive toward a uniform consistency of thought or values. Even Seneca constantly reverses his positions and beliefs depending on his topic. Since we do not have anything with which to judge Ovid’s beliefs beyond his works, I’d say we cannot with any certainty claim that Ovid had an Epicurean scepticism or not. Besides, if Ovid truly did not believe in the gods at all, then why claim their inspiration in the Met. or Fasti? Clearly his abandonment of divine inspiration serves a specific function here beyond a statement of Ovid’s personal scepticism. Rather, we can only judge the various authorial personae he presents. In taking on the didactic persona, which is supposed to be inspired by the gods, as Hesiod was, disavowing the gods or any authority really beyond his experience is undermining and ironic because the persona, well established in the didactic genre, he has assumed does not act in that way. Consider, even Lucretius, though he condemns divine authority, still paints Epicurus as an alternate poetic inspiration. There are not many works in antiquity of poetry that disavow the gods or some authority figure as a basis of inspiration, source of knowledge, and authority. Read Plato’s Ion or the Republic and you can see how ancients conceptualized the gods as an authority making device in poetry, even if it is disingenuous and does not reflect personal belief. It’s part of poetic expectation and convention. Not doing so has the effect of making a poem non-serious and non-authoritative in an ancient perspective.

      9. Thursday1 December 21, 2016 at 1:24 pm

        More bullshit.

        I tend to read with a far more focused historicist and generic-conscious perspective

        You’re using this as an excuse to ignore the actual text.

        no orthodoxy or even belief standards in Roman religion, no creeds or rules

        Irrelevant. Orthodoxy was not important to pagans, but piety sure as hell was. And Ovid sure ain’t pious.

        (Piety, of course, requires some level of belief, as you have to truly believe in the gods existence to respect them: it just does not require the kind of detailed knowledge claimed by religions like Christianity or Islam.)

        Consider, even Lucretius, though he condemns divine authority, still paints Epicurus as an alternate poetic inspiration. There are not many works in antiquity of poetry that disavow the gods or some authority figure as a basis of inspiration, source of knowledge, and authority.

        “Some authority figure.” This collapses some really crucial distinctions. Lucretius does not treat Epicurus as a god.


        You sure can pile up the verbiage. Helps when you’re trying to defend an untenable position.

      10. Jonny-O December 21, 2016 at 1:41 pm

        Tell me then, if Ovid has no pietas, do you think he would have done things ancient pagans would have considered impious themselves? It’s not impious to be critical of the gods, portray them in funny, ridiculous, or subversive ways. It’s not impious to use the gods as your personal mouthpiece. Every ancient author does that, and it’s not considered blasphemy, which is a much more Christian/Jewish idea. I feel like you’re treating paganism through a Christian lens. What would be impious to pagans would be refusing to sacrifice, misperforming a ritual, defiling a sanctuary, destroying a statue, or violating taboos, like incest, suppliants, or xenia. We don’t know that Ovid did any of those impious acts. I see little in Ovid that would conform to ancient ideas of impiety or outrage to the gods.

        Lucretius uses the language of epic poetry that is used for gods and applies it to Epicurus. In doing so, he signals to the reader that Epicurus holds a place within the DRN analogous to the gods in epic poetry. Thus, he elevates Epicurus, though not a claimed god, into the authority of the gods. Besides, neither Epicurus nor Lucretius claim that the gods do not exist. The opening of DRN is dedicated to Venus. Rather they believe the gods exist but do not care about humans because they have attained ataraxia, or the Epicurean ideal of dispassion. They exist but do not interfere with humans and the problem is the human conception of them is perverted by religion, so their true existence is not well known.

        From De Rerum Natura Book II:
        “For all the gods must of themselves enjoy
        Immortal aeons and supreme repose,
        Withdrawn from our affairs, detached, afar:
        Immune from peril and immune from pain,
        Themselves abounding in riches of their own,
        Needing not us, they are not touched by wrath
        They are not taken by service or by gift.
        Truly is earth insensate for all time;
        But, by obtaining germs of many things,
        In many a way she brings the many forth
        Into the light of sun. And here, whoso
        Decides to call the ocean Neptune, or
        The grain-crop Ceres, and prefers to abuse
        The name of Bacchus rather than pronounce
        The liquor’s proper designation, him
        Let us permit to go on calling earth
        Mother of Gods, if only he will spare
        To taint his soul with foul religion.”

      11. Jonny-O December 21, 2016 at 2:02 pm

        And again, if Ovid has no belief in the gods, why does he claim their inspiration in the opening of the Metmorphoses and throughout the Fasti?

        As to your critique of using history and genre to understand a text, you are free to explore a text as a New Critic, looking at a text alone without any other information to inform your reading. I simply think that leads to somewhat superficial understandings.

        Note, I’m actually impressed by your abilities as well as the amount you have read. Don’t take what I say as a direct criticism of you or disrespect. It’s always nice to speak to someone who has intelligence and a familiarity with literature.

      12. OMGlaucon January 24, 2017 at 8:37 am

        One hell of an argument guys…

    2. Jesse White December 31, 2016 at 11:21 am

      Ovid was clearly self confident, though. One of the earliest books on game, regardless of any flaws it might have had.

  8. Clark Kent December 20, 2016 at 2:59 pm

    “Instead we must endure adult children who shriek out in pain as they strike us”

  9. Hubert Cumberdale December 20, 2016 at 3:00 pm

    Donna Zuckerberg. Another extremely white person… it’s always an extremely white person.

    1. corvinus December 20, 2016 at 4:15 pm

      Extremely (((white person))), in her case.

    2. Farm Clarity December 21, 2016 at 1:16 am

      Uhm , no offense , but jewish aint white .
      white is causcasian , slav etc .
      Even khassar jews ain’t white nor sephardic .

      1. PresenceLOVE December 28, 2016 at 5:00 am

        No, there is a difference between Jew’s and Jewish. That’s why they say JEW’ISH… because they are not really jews. They just play at being Hebrew. Jewish peeps are usually caucasians.

    3. Burner Prime December 21, 2016 at 3:20 am

      No, her name is: “Mark Zuckerberg’s Sister”, a.k.a. ‘house ho’.

  10. Samseau December 20, 2016 at 3:15 pm

    “What goes around comes around—you’ve manipulated the minds of millions people who use Facebook, censoring the truth from them, and now we own the mind of your sister.”

    Ahahahahahaha, bravo.

  11. Thursday1 December 20, 2016 at 3:38 pm

    I like how she isn’t even really a person in her own right. Her whole identity is being the sister of the world’s goofiest billiionaire.

    1. spro23 December 20, 2016 at 4:58 pm

      Both her and Sheryl sandberg are jew women who attached themselves to an intelligent man. Not surprising. Their wealth and place in this world is due to being around the right man.

    2. Ravi Macho December 27, 2016 at 11:03 pm

      Well said. Ironically, that’s almost ALWAYS been the case with majority of cunts (through out the history) but they will NEVER accept & acknowledge the reality and superiority of MASCULINITY.

    3. disqus_2015ScorpioWater January 20, 2017 at 10:40 am

      And even more ironic about this is that Mark Zuckerberg is a male feminist.

    1. Roosh December 20, 2016 at 4:13 pm

      Our house ho behaves in a way that is completely framed by our work.

      1. [email protected] December 20, 2016 at 9:12 pm

        It’s always satisfying when they accept the rules we’ve laid out for them. Even when they “break” the rules, they’re still following them. Love it.

        Donna, you keep being oh so rebellious. It’s adorable.

      2. Burner Prime December 21, 2016 at 3:23 am

        You nailed it. Rollo needs to psychoanalyze her.

      3. [email protected] December 21, 2016 at 10:46 am

        Shoot the suggestion over to him. I’m sure he would love to. It sounds right up his alley.

      4. Burner Prime December 21, 2016 at 3:22 am

        Totally in her head.

      5. White Prowler December 21, 2016 at 9:27 pm

        Rent free. Living there.

      6. Shmalkandik December 27, 2016 at 7:06 pm

        “the Cambridge ladies who live in furnished souls
        are unbeautiful and have comfortable minds”

      7. percent asian December 22, 2016 at 12:41 am

        She just likes saying “manosphere”, because no one else knows what a manosphere is. She “discovered it”. It’s edgy and hip.

    2. Burner Prime December 21, 2016 at 3:22 am

      Is that a real tweet? Wow she really is obsessed w/ROK. I think when she mentioned Roosh’s beard, that was a tell she is swooning over him.

      1. [email protected] December 21, 2016 at 1:05 pm

        SJW’s always project so I imagine you’re correct.

    3. TheLastConservative December 22, 2016 at 9:50 pm

      I guess when you’re that ugly, might as well complete the picture….

    4. disqus_2015ScorpioWater January 20, 2017 at 10:41 am

      Imagine waking up to that in the morning? Whoever her boyfriend is, must be a complete cuck.

  12. Thursday1 December 20, 2016 at 3:48 pm

    The “hotter” pics* seem to be from when she was young, and, at her best, she seems to have been in the 6-7 range most thin women under 25 occupy. However, she seems to have been eating a lot of those scones. That and getting old have been extremely unkind to her. The wall is nigh.

  13. phluff127 December 20, 2016 at 3:58 pm

    I enjoyed this very, very much. The shiv runs deep. P.S. Hi, Mark!

    1. Roosh December 20, 2016 at 4:12 pm

      She married an economically successful Jewish man. Her babies will certainly not be mixed-race or multicultural.

      1. Andrew Phillip December 20, 2016 at 10:01 pm

        I was just going to say, why did she not get knocked up with some chocolate? I mean, come on! Let us see the elites follow their own rules and edicts for the rest of society.

      2. White Prowler December 21, 2016 at 9:28 pm

        Inbred af

    2. SOL December 20, 2016 at 8:20 pm

      This is the plan good enough for everyone else…

  14. spro23 December 20, 2016 at 4:56 pm

    Look at those fat arms. Quit eating bitch!

    Standing next to Jessica Alba only accentuates her hideous body.

  15. temmy9 . December 20, 2016 at 7:18 pm

    All this woman had to do was simply ignore us. Instead she chose to engage and now can played like a puppet. Our own little controlled opposition. I’ll bet we could get her to put on clownshoes if we framed it properly.

    1. [email protected] December 21, 2016 at 1:07 pm

      Just hide it in the list of stereotypical feminist traits and they just might.
      Fat, ugly, blue-haired, clown shoe wearing, tattooed/pierced, shrieking feminists.

  16. AntiDem December 20, 2016 at 7:21 pm

    Between this and that bitch who went after Richard Spencer’s mom, it’s been a bad week for pushy Jewish broads who thought that starting a fight with the alt-right was a good idea.

    1. disqus_2015ScorpioWater January 20, 2017 at 10:32 am

      White privilege died decades ago and was replaced with White Jewish privilege as Jews are predominantly white in the US but not in Israel are the dominant and most privileged group of people in America. White middle class America has been screwed for the past 9 years, starting with the global financial crisis, but white America was in decline well before that. Jews pushed diversity and feminism, its interesting how they avoid this in their own communities. For Orthodox Jews, a woman needs special permission to divorce their husbands, which is extremely difficult. A white Christian woman just has to serve her husband papers, and its over, as well as the courts working against men and forcing them to hand over their assets, children, and dignity
      I ran into a blogger who was bitching about blacks, Muslims, and Hispanics ruining his once white neighborhood. I mentioned that Jews are a big part of forcing multiculturalism on Western countries, and encouraging minorities not to integrate into society. He quickly rebuffed me, but he was clearly an idiot, focusing on the wrong people. Minorities are mostly pawns.

  17. Graft December 20, 2016 at 10:23 pm

    Oh great, a fight with ((Zuckerberg?)) The guy who has our data? Us younger guys have been on Facebook since we were in high school and college, so we have considerable amounts of data and messages on there. We should try to delete it.

    1. [email protected] December 21, 2016 at 1:07 pm

      Cancel your Facebook or, like you say, at the very least remove all personal data from your account.

  18. pabo December 20, 2016 at 10:48 pm

    “While you were mincing around the halls of Princeton University, I was leading Marines in Okinawa and East Asia.”

    So they were both serving the elites….to the detriment of liberty, so what?
    The military is beta.

    Major General Smedley Butler of the United States Marine Corps says…

    “Like all members of the military profession I never had an original thought until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of the higher- ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service”

    “I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during
    that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big
    Business, for Wall Street and the bankers.

    In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico
    safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a
    decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I
    helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the
    benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International
    Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the
    Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped
    make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested.”

    1. $101572105 December 29, 2016 at 12:05 pm

      Men can gain valuable personal skills and qualities in the military, regardless of the debatable ‘serving the elites’ line. Medieval knights served the king, yes?

      1. pabo December 30, 2016 at 4:01 pm

        True. A few military men learn valuable skills in military. However, as the good Major General said, in so many words, he is still a beta cuck who makes money off of working taxpayer men and who cucks his life and limb to make money for General Dynamics and boys. All the while cuckvincing himself that is “fighting for our freedom”.

  19. Snowden December 21, 2016 at 12:29 am

    Jesus Christ would someone please tell that girl to lose some God damn weight.

  20. Chance Boudreaux December 21, 2016 at 2:35 am

    I’ve been a reader since the DC bachelor days and I must say I am pleased and impressed with the direction Roosh took.

  21. Burner Prime December 21, 2016 at 3:06 am

    It’s pretty clear the ‘house ho’ has a big clit boner over ‘ground zero’ for masculine men: ROK. Her pedo-faced man-child husband is definitely not giving her the pimp hand and L.D. she craves.
    I mean what feminist is addicted to ROK? I never read Jizzabel or Oprah or other feminist sites. I don’t even know which ones are out there.
    We’ve seen time and again when low SMV womerns are summarily rejected by the alphas they crave, they go into attack mode spouting the same tired and worn name-calling. She’s (literally) a year late to the party and 1000 words short, copy/pasting tired accusations.
    The ‘house ho’ should go over to Rational Male and read all about herself in scientific detail; we’ve already figured out her simple mind and it was found wanting boring.
    Looking at her body shot photo, I rate her a 4/10. That chunky fat body is just repulsive.

    1. PresenceLOVE December 28, 2016 at 5:05 am

      Your being way to generous mate…that’s a 3/10 at best. I suppose if you consider how much she is worth $$$ we could bump it up a notch.

    2. OMGlaucon January 24, 2017 at 8:49 am

      Keeping the Greek theme going, “sour grapes” as the fable goes for the women that troll ROK.

  22. Burner Prime December 21, 2016 at 3:28 am

    Dude can’t even GROW a beard. Now I see what all the fuss is about. Has his nuts even dropped?

    1. [email protected] December 21, 2016 at 1:10 pm

      While not a necessarily a horrendously ugly guy, he IS one of those fellas that you look at and think, “Nah, can’t ever imagine him getting any tail.” Think it’s more of the Low-T characteristics he’s displaying as opposed to plain old ugliness.

      1. White Prowler December 21, 2016 at 9:31 pm


      2. $101572105 December 29, 2016 at 12:14 pm

        This guy vs. Spencer: Reminds me of that Star Trek ep. where Kirk got split into the dominant one and the weak, indecisive ‘nice’ one.

  23. Fokker TISM December 21, 2016 at 3:56 am

    The funny thing is that that article on how to introduce your daughters to the red pill was written by an Israeli.

    1. TheMaleBrain December 21, 2016 at 4:14 pm

      Thank you for noticing

      1. Fokker TISM December 27, 2016 at 12:07 am

        I’m only mentioning that because of Donna Zuckerberg banging on about “anti-Semitism” in the Manosphere.

    2. disqus_2015ScorpioWater January 20, 2017 at 10:42 am

      Nothing funny about it, Jews have a set of rules for them and a set of rules for people who are not Jewish.

  24. BRAIN DEAD December 21, 2016 at 3:56 am

    Her husband is as weak as shit, he should keep he chained at home with no internet, she should STFU, and be a housewife, and do some charity work.

    WTF is going on in the organ between her ears, lay low, live a life of luxury and be content and not a troll, she has it made yet is a loud mouth fool.

    GO AWAY and grow up!

  25. TheMaleBrain December 21, 2016 at 6:26 am

    I’m honored to mentioned so many times lately. I should write another piece on ROK.
    The one about raising daughters on the red pill seems to be a good one.

    1. [email protected] December 21, 2016 at 1:11 pm

      I have 3 daughters and have been wanting to see more content focused towards raising daughters on ROK. Most of the stuff has been geared towards raising sons (a worthwhile endeavor but it leaves us with daughters high and dry).

      1. [email protected] December 21, 2016 at 4:12 pm

        I read it when it was originally posted. Had some good pointers in there. Much appreciated. Need more articles along the lines of raising the next generation.

      2. Nigel McPhearson December 23, 2016 at 7:56 am

        This is a topic worthy of an entire blog. In fact it could be argued it’s the logical next step for the manosphere the way most game blogs slowly transitioned into some kind of nationalism.
        2024 the year Don Jr ascends the cherry blossom throne “Heartiste Parenting” becomes the most influential alt-right blog. Haha

      3. Nigel McPhearson December 23, 2016 at 7:50 am

        I agree. Particularly since its women that set much of the terms in the sexual marketplace. A young lady raised to be virtuous will be surrounded by Instagram girls getting all that much desired attention. Hence lowering the market price for women in general. We can mansplain all day about good men wanting a good woman but those temporal feelz are strong. Giving young women the tools to restrain those emotions as she matures is a fathers greatest task.

  26. Jonny-O December 21, 2016 at 10:44 am

    If like to sound off here as someone with a classics PhD who has met the party involved. From my perspective, when you come to ancient societies with a preconceived agenda you’re bound to be disappointed. If you only believe there are virtuous models of masculine values and leadership, sure in Seneca or cato or Aristotle or juvenal you may find your examples. But how does the dionysiac experience in the bacchae, or Plato and vergils approval of m-m intimate relations, or lucians ridicule of philosophies, or lucans critique of Roman republican heroes play into that? Conversely if you approach antiquity hoping to confirm some sjw values, how does hippolytus or Ovid or catullus or archilochus fit into that agenda? Antiquity is not unidimensional or univocal. It has lots of perspectives, lots of contrasting opinions. You will always find ancient works that may support your agenda as well as many that do not. That’s why I disagree both with treating classics as a literary world that only teaches virtue as well as one that suppotts social justice. Both require you to edit the fullness of antiquity, its good and bad, its virtues and vices, its various ideas. I say lets not place the ancient world on a lofty pedestal but deal with it as a complex society with admirable and contemptible aspects. Lets let antiquity be as complex as it was and not reduce it to one facet or another. And lets not use antiquity in reductive political arguments and debates. It’s too complex of a culture to ever perfectly perform the function you insist it perform.

    1. Quintus Curtius December 21, 2016 at 12:21 pm

      No one ever said the ancient world was one-dimensional. No one ever said that it just all about one thing. Like any “world” it had countless facets.
      But one person cannot write about the entire universe. People have to specialize, select things that interest them, and achieve some kind of rational focus. Doing so does not imply that one discounts other things. The inclusion of one thing does not imply the exclusion of others. Do you see my point?
      If I choose to write about certain subjects, it is because those things interest me, or I feel that they have been neglected. It doesn’t mean that I don’t acknowledge other things. It just means that one human being can’t bloody do everything.
      Having said all that, it is undeniable that the best ancient writers did spend a lot of time talking about character, moral development, and virtue. Those are what have been lost today. Talking about them does not mean that I don’t acknowledge the importance of economics, social history, and everything else.

      1. Jonny-O December 21, 2016 at 12:52 pm

        Don’t get me wrong QCR, I’m not condemning people finding inspiration in classical texts or interesting expositions of their values in a lay setting, and I don’t dispute that you can certainly focus on what you enjoy in ancient literature. But I, as a scholar, do consider it my job to present all of antiquity to students. That means I don’t teach one facet that confirms virtues and holds up people as moral exemplars, but rather I let antiquity speak for itself, whether that confirms someone’s values or contradicts them, whether people may find things praiseworthy or blameworthy. I do not consider myself someone whose role is to use classics to enforce or support some moral or political agenda; to do so I would have to be very anachronistic in my readings. I simply believe it’s important to acknowledge that the characters and values in antiquity don’t necessarily align well with conceptions of “good” character and values today, if we read statements in historical context, that they sometimes agree and sometimes do not. All I seek is that people who write moralizing pieces that use antiquity acknowledge their own bias and editing when using ancient sources. I am simply trying to prevent unthinking anachronism when considering ancient values and societies, which I am sure you would not find problematic.

        I will agree that we have a lot of ancient texts that discuss character and virtues, though I dispute your idea of the “best” writers, basically canonicity. The modern canon of the best authors does not actually line up perfectly with the ancient canon at all. Someone like Aratus in antiquity was considered one of the best writers, so well known that Paul in the NT could quote him as common knowledge, though no one reads him today, same for Hesiod or Nicander or Isocrates or Theophrastus or Xenophon or Dio Chrysostom. More mystical authors like Porphyry and Plotinus were central to the ancient canon, but mostly unread now. So also keep in mind, when you use “best” you are likely referring to the Renaissance canon as reflected through the 18th and 19th century canon, rather than the ancient canon that lined up more closely with ancient values rather than later beliefs.

        I suppose that for me, I don’t see a lot of ancient literature as really of much positive use for today. Consider Homer, a source from which antiquity self-awarely derives its moral foundations. In the Iliad, the primary goal of all heroes is kleos, basically being famous and finding a place within poetic song traditions and time, the gifts and material wealth given to you for doing impressive deeds. That’s the primary motivation of Achilles, Hector, Sarpedon as they explicitly state. Given that, I’d consider much of the moral development and character in Homer to be awfully suspect from a modern moral perspective. I don’t think that most people today believe that doing things with the intention of becoming famous and acquiring unnecessary wealth through killing others because of their material wealth is a particularly praiseworthy value. Even Philostratus in his Heroicus takes Homer to task for this, as presenting the heroes as venal, shallow, and fame-hungry. However, I have been in many a class where I’ve seen students read Homer through an anachronistic values prism, seeing in him a sort of morality that they misinterpret outside of historical context as jibing with their own ideas of character and morals. While they certainly can do so if they want, I cannot simply allow them to ignore context and anachronistically read a text without understanding the way Homer was understood in antiquity. My job is to present a complete perspective and historical context for a text. Does that make sense?

      2. Quintus Curtius December 24, 2016 at 3:47 am

        I certainly agree that a person studying any work of literature (not just ancient) should try to learn as much about the author and the period as possible. Of course. It adds to the reader’s understanding and knowledge of the text.
        So yes, you’re right, you can’t separate the author from his historical and intellectual context. So yes, I would think a student of Homer would need to know that it was the product of a “Heroic” age where violence and chicanery were common.

        But so what? Human nature hasn’t changed since Homer’s day. Human nature hasn’t changed since Shakespeare’s day. We still read these guys not because we want to throw a javelin or put on a pair of hose, but because these works teach us about human nature, passions, relations, leadership, and all else that comes from human nature. Wrath is at the core of the Iliad; is this not a timeless emotion and motivation?

        And yes, I agree that some ancient authors were more valued in their day than they are now. Almost nothing survives now of Posidonius; almost nothing is left of Epicurus except a few fragments. (By the way, I have read Plotinus and love Neoplatonism). But so what?
        Literary styles come and go. Writers wax and wane in popularity. It was like that in ancient times and it is like that today. Hardly anyone reads “Pilgrim’s Progress” today although it was very popular in its day.

        All I’m saying is that people are going to read literature and draw their own conclusions from it. That’s a good thing, to some extent. What you may consider irrelevant and dull may be exciting and inspiring to someone else.

    2. White Prowler December 24, 2016 at 7:57 am

      I wonder how someone with your background of knowledge thinks about the political tactics of Donald Trump in comparison to other ancient leaders.

      1. $101572105 December 29, 2016 at 12:20 pm

        He does seems to embody a bit of the ‘kleos’. ‘Finding a place within poetic song traditions’ = memes?

  27. Imperator82 December 21, 2016 at 2:01 pm


  28. Myopia December 21, 2016 at 3:10 pm

    She’s right, she is the victim here and it’s about genetics. Her looks are the polar opposite of someone like say, Doutzen Kroes. No amount of money, fame or accomplishment can satisfy that primal desire of the golden uterus to have access to the very best. Donna has neither supermodel looks nor even her own money, her own fame or her own accomplishments. She’s a plain-Jane who’s brother put a spotlight onto the family. Now she feels the need to perform when she’s not even qualified to be on stage. What she doesn’t understand it that a well prepared scone (with a spread of clotted cream) is enough to make a lot of men happy. She can’t even respect that let alone recognize it.

    1. Ravi Macho December 27, 2016 at 11:18 pm

      “No amount of money, fame or accomplishment can satisfy that primal desire of the golden uterus to have access to the very best.”

      *** Bless You ! ***

      “Donna has neither supermodel looks nor even her own money, her own fame or her own accomplishments. She’s a plain-Jane who’s brother put a spotlight onto the family.”

      *** You teared apart ! ***

      “Now she feels the need to perform when she’s not even qualified to be on stage.”

      *** You nailed it ! ***

    2. J1234 December 29, 2016 at 6:05 am

      “what she doesn’t understand is that a well prepared scone (with a spread of clotted cream) is enough to make a lot of men happy”.

      Awesome comeback. That is how you defeat SJW’s and bitchfaces like Berg. When reacting, and replying, I have noticed thats its all about smiling and laughing. Not getting flusted etc. That guy Tucker on fox is a master at it.

  29. spro23 December 21, 2016 at 5:42 pm

    One of us needs to seduce her and get picks with a load on her face. Then post them on facebook

  30. White Prowler December 21, 2016 at 8:52 pm

    Oh this is hilarious. Does it get any better than this?

  31. White Prowler December 21, 2016 at 8:58 pm

    Interesting how she hates elite men when at the same time her own brother is in fact an elite male.

  32. JohnnySmoggins December 21, 2016 at 11:23 pm

    A Jew has no more right to lecture Whites about our classics than we do to lecture her (and them) about the Talmud. Fuck off to Israel and take your creepy brother and all your friends and family with you.

    1. Jonny-O December 22, 2016 at 1:03 pm

      Hmmm. Perhaps if we take that line of logic, only Italians should be able to teach on Roman classics, only Greeks on Greek works, only the English on English, only Chinese on Chinese literature, because, you know, a German has no more right to lecture on Vergil than an Italian has a right to lecture on the Niebelugenlied.

      1. White Prowler December 22, 2016 at 3:58 pm

        No but an idealistic avowed nazi teaching Jewish grammar is a little weird.

      2. Jonny-O December 22, 2016 at 5:24 pm

        It would be weird. But so long as they did their job and behaved according to the professional standards of their workplace I’d have no objections.

  33. point something percent asian December 22, 2016 at 12:16 am

    She’s certainly curious about Red Pill. My bet is she’s thirsty to talk about it intellectually with people in her group, but that’s not the academic agenda of her social class, and no one will. I actually think she’s done everyone more than a favor by bringing up the topic in a collegiate setting. It’s probably blacklisted.

    Here she’s read every book on the classics list. She *loves* to read. That’s her thing. Then she starts reading these really weird, controversial books that no one else has ever heard of. It is against everything she was ever taught, but just reading something isn’t a crime, is it? In fact, it helps her affirm her feminism more. And that’s the excuse she gives herself.

    My other thought is that she seems interested in Roosh. In a oneitis-y way. To her, Roosh is an incarnation of the patriarchy of ancient civilizations. He thinks as an ancient Greek or Roman. He reminds her of her favorite philosopher, newly incarnate. And he’s hot. And totally her type, although she’d never marry an Arab guy, because she’s Jewish.

    What she would like to do is discuss philosophy with Roosh over coffee. What she would love to do is probably something sexual.

  34. J1234 December 22, 2016 at 4:02 pm

    haha amazing. Thanks for the publicity Berg. The facebook empire is falling. She claims she is a semite but a semite she is not. Berg is a german name. The true ancestry of these so called jews is from a tribe called the khazars. The khazars were proselytes to the faith of the torah. “ye are not jews” is a factual statement. She can claim anti-semitism all she wants but its a lie. The real semites are arabs. The khazars are indo-europeans. Does anyone honestly think the israelites had ginger hair? Delusional.

    1. White Prowler December 27, 2016 at 12:13 am

      They were called Edomites in the OT of the Bible. King David did everything he could to kill as many as he could. It took months to bury the dead. One Jewish researcher estimated that only 10% of the so called Jews are real Jews. Remember how much emphasis the Bible put on lineage and keeping the line pure from King David to Jesus? Jesus called the fake Jews The Seed Of Satan and there are numerous verses regarding them in the End Times.

  35. Ben Sanderson December 22, 2016 at 8:30 pm

    “You don’t get to go back and retcon Plato into being an Afro-Caribbean hipster with an interest in women’s issues…”

    wait… you mean the Classics isn’t all about equality, diversity and tolerance?

  36. Brock Robinson December 23, 2016 at 10:46 pm

    Never even knew Zuckerberg had a sister. But I’m delighted to know she likely read my ROK post “5 Reasons You Should Stop Using Facebook”

  37. OceanSon December 24, 2016 at 3:44 am

    24:00 on the Podcast — New York Times and its PC-peddling garbage, completely divorced from reality. Roosh and Quintus, on point. I canceled my subscription a while back…used to read that paper (especially on Sundays) since I was 9 years old and it has gone straight down the shithole with the SJW agenda. NYTimes totally lost their marbles, and shot themselves right in the foot.

    It’s like Old Media NYTimes met New Media “Viceland” halfway, had a bastard child, and is in the process of ensuring its own future irrelevance and obsolescence.

    BTW I think Roosh & Quintus ought to do a deconstruction of Viceland and its NYC-style liberal narrative sometime.

  38. feminism is idiotic December 26, 2016 at 7:05 am

    For those feminist idiots who say that ‘it is more difficult for women’, here is an example of no one giving a shit because you are a boy and not a girl: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-37999316

  39. Zyzz December 26, 2016 at 1:11 pm

    She is so ugly and plain looking!

  40. Jonathan David Farley December 26, 2016 at 2:15 pm

    Was there a war in Japan that a 48 year-old could have fought in, or did I slip into an alternate universe?

  41. peace December 26, 2016 at 6:08 pm

    what a waste of time this girl is … go MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way)
    it’s easier
    more peaceful
    more time freedom
    more financial freedom
    and yes, I still get laid, a lot more in fact, since I’m doing my own thing and girls and women, curious as they are, are attracted to that
    my happiness does not depend on them
    and they like that

  42. peace December 26, 2016 at 6:09 pm

    Roosh you are wasting your time even discussing this
    you’re too smart to be wasting your time doing this
    keep traveling and writing about places to go where girls and women are friendly
    the United States is over anyway

  43. TSK December 26, 2016 at 6:45 pm

    I never seen any hot Jewish girls. Do they even exist?

    1. bob k. mando December 28, 2016 at 4:58 pm

      Carrie Fisher didn’t look bad in a slave girl outfit.

      the new Wonder Woman actress is bangable.

      Barbara Streisand? oh HELL no.

      1. TSK December 28, 2016 at 9:10 pm

        Usually The Jewish girls who have some European mixed in their DNA happen to look better than the pure bred Jewish girls.

        The obviously Jew looking girls tend to have some unattractive features about them. The ones who have stereotypical hooked, enlarged nose, wrinkled skin, curly oily looking hair, square jaw, etc.

    2. Doppelganger December 31, 2016 at 1:17 am

      Bar Refaeli

      1. TSK December 31, 2016 at 12:56 pm

        She is below average at best. Not hot.

  44. superfreak January 1, 2017 at 9:59 pm

    Glad that gender reassignment has come a long way and she looks less of a monster now, but yeah like others have said, waste of time.

  45. dude January 19, 2017 at 3:07 pm

    Yeesh…the strength of the syphilis in Roosh’s brain is directly proportional to the strength of his bizarre cult. You think a syphilis-free billionaire is gonna read this crap >D? It’s a shame so many young white men can’t see that this is all a way for him to work out his mid-life crisis issues while he makes money from them. But then again, every fool deserves what’s coming to him…Another thing, if you’re not white but still seriously read content from sites like these, you’re an idiot. There is no ” manosphere “. It’s a ” whitosphere”.

  46. disqus_2015ScorpioWater January 19, 2017 at 3:13 pm

    Mark Zuckerberg publicly admonished Trump for his plans to build a wall, deport illegal immigrants, and prevent Muslims from entering the United States. The same Zuckerberg filed a lawsuit against 100s of Native Hawaiians because he wants to build a wall around his private estate worth over $100 million. So the guy who wants everyone to celebrate diversity and inclusion for the rest of America, wants to keep everyone out of his own private residence, at the same time he is taking legal action against the Native people of the island who take issue with his construction. This is the typical left wing hypocrite who claims to work for social justice, but its all a show, these people only care about themselves.

    1. dude January 20, 2017 at 7:38 am

      Everybody only cares about themselves, friend. Just ask the native American Indians or any other aboriginal people. The invading Europeans certainly didn’t care about them as they took their land and destroyed their sacred Traditions that spanned thousands of years.

      1. disqus_2015ScorpioWater January 20, 2017 at 10:27 am

        You are not my friend. Mark Zuckerberg is typical of his kind, the Jews, they all vouch for social justice when living outside of Israel, but these two face people preach a racist dogma for their own country. Its also seen how they push progressivism on others but rarely practice it in their own lives. That is the definition of a hypocrite. Silicon Valley is also one of the most racially biased places to work in America, despite it being dominated by people who call themselves liberals.

      2. disqus_2015ScorpioWater January 20, 2017 at 10:51 am

        Zuckerberg is one of the biggest social justice warriors out there, he regularly uses Facebook to shut out any kind of conservative discussion. Have any kind of conservative view? Facebook will ban you. Have a left wing view? Facebook will love you. He uses his public profile to enable other SJWs, I am pointing out the fact he is nothing more than a self serving hypocrite. Seems like he believes in a different set of rules for himself and for the masses.
        I am totally for a fair society, but SJWs are not for creating a fair society, they use it to get attention to themselves.