Here a video that I shot in response to my “legalize rape” proposal:

In the past week I was also interviewed by men’s rights site A Voice For Men. Click to read part 1 and part 2. They treated me fairly and gave me ample space to share my views, but I am disappointed that many commenters think having a healthy sex life is “gynocentric.” I can’t figure out why some in the manopshere have great disdain against men who want to have more than one sexual partner a year. I guess they won’t be embracing game anytime soon.

Watch Next: The Little Coffee Shop In Odessa


  1. Johnny February 27, 2015 at 9:30 am

    This whole issue is eltist Jew central banker antimale and antifreedom Marxist skullduggery on their global economic feudal plantation/animal farm aka we sit at the tables and dine while the goyim/cattle work the fields. Our women are stupid enough for I believe all the skullduggery is the problem in the Weat.

    1. cookipuss February 27, 2015 at 3:51 pm

      Take a wrong turn at InfoWars?

      1. Johnny February 27, 2015 at 4:54 pm

        Says the ADL/SPLC propaganda troll.

      2. AlFromBayShore February 28, 2015 at 7:13 am

        Simplify your commentary. That is my suggestion. I understand and believe the things said in your original post but there is too much on the plate to eat and digest. It sounds like your are saying that government intrusion into society warps relationships between individuals.

        I’ve stopped using the word “liberty”. Instead, I say “the ability of people to make and act on their decisions regarding how to live.”

      3. AlFromBayShore February 28, 2015 at 7:15 am

        It’s a damn shame that Disqus no longer counts the number of “down votes”.

      4. The12thUnknownMan February 28, 2015 at 9:29 pm

        Alex Jones is married to a Jewish woman, is “anti-racist” and accused of being a Zionist. Don’t you know *anything*?

      5. Guest March 5, 2015 at 4:48 pm

        His sponsors are Jewish, and never dares mention their name.

      6. The12thUnknownMan March 5, 2015 at 5:31 pm

        Would you?

      7. Guest March 5, 2015 at 4:45 pm

        Alex Jones is in bed (literally) with the Hebrews.

    2. Jiminy Cricket March 7, 2015 at 11:49 am

      The real men behind the curtain pulling all the strings are the group know most widely (but only partially correctly) as the Illuminati, while credulous stooges like Johnny-on-the-Spot here cloud the scene by gullibly spreading their screed against the Jews as “all powerful and in control”, exactly the same way Western women gullibly spread their screed against white men as “all powerful and in control”.

      They feed you irrefutable “facts” and you belch them back out all over the Internet, exactly like you’re supposed to, and exactly like what happens with the feminists.

      Keep fighting the good fight of distraction, division, and diversion to keep the attention away from and the focus off of the real puppet masters, Pinocchio.

      Gepetto is smiling darkly in his workshop.

  2. Clark Kent February 27, 2015 at 10:11 am

    Its not about justice.
    The ability to lambast a man for any accused wrong has become a consumer good.

    1. Jeb February 27, 2015 at 11:14 pm

      The Patriarchy must’ve paid you say that.

      It’s funny, isn’t it, that we spoof all other kinds of conspiracy theories, yet the world’s biggest conspiracy theory – that men have conspired to hold women down and keep them from their potential – is accepted as common fact without much fanfare.

      It literally must be the biggest conspiracy theory that has ever existed – that men, since the beginning of time, all got together and conspired to stop women from creating a better society, or from composing music, or contemplating philosophy… and so forth and so on.

      Think that 9/11 Truthers are mad with conspiracy?

      What about a theory that claims there is an imaginary Patriarchy clubhouse somewhere, where men meet and conspire to hold back the human beings they love most dearly. And not only do they do it today, but this has been going on for at least 6,000 years.

      I mean… on the one hand, the conspiracy theory DOES explain why women haven’t accomplished anything signficant within recordered history… but on the other hand, doesn’t it seem even more far fetched than ANY other conspiracy theory ever told, that men – by the BILLIONS – have secretly been conspiring behind women’s backs (those who are around such men 24/7), in order to hold them back and keep them under men’s thumbs?

      I mean, in face of this conspiracy theory, almost any other conspiracy theory seems downright plausible.

      Gee… if it isn’t a real conspiracy theory – the most grandest ever claimed in the history of humanity – then what other explanations are we forced to examine.

      Think about it! It ain’t all that rosy for women to admit it wasn’t a big patriarchal conspiracy, is it? What does that say about “the human condition?”

      1. Aryan Jesuite February 28, 2015 at 10:17 pm

        there is one other conspiracy theory even more grandiose than that evil-white-male-patriarchy, one which paved the way for all forms of ignorance and gullibility – but I won’t write it’s name for fear of eternal damnation.

      2. gizzard of oz March 1, 2015 at 11:54 am

        Excellent, excellent contextual comment.

  3. TZ February 27, 2015 at 10:30 am

    New hair is looking good Roosh !

  4. SaltCityPunch February 27, 2015 at 12:15 pm

    The feminist liberal society / government has a target on your back! It’s scary as hell out there for us guys who are single and dating / banging various girls. All it takes is one accusation and you are done for. My advice, button down the hatches and shore up your defenses, and have a fall-out plan to get the hell out of Liberal United States of Victimhood.

  5. Sam February 27, 2015 at 12:20 pm

    Hi Roosh,

    Well, you have a few issues, first among them that your proposal to reduce rape would actually do nothing to reduce rape. This is pretty obvious for all sorts of reasons (and actually is either explicitly or impliedly the subject of many of those angry posts).

    Assuming arguendo that for some reason it did reduce rape, there are still some issues with it. It limits the victims rather than the perpetrators — murder doesn’t become legal just because you enter a dangerous area. It also explicitly allows some truly reprehensible behavior (rape among family, child rape, homosexual rape, rape in locations which are private property but not obviously so — like restaurants, bars, apartment buildings, etc.).

    You also mention how this was intended to show that “rape culture hysteria” was not about reducing rape but about attacking men. I don’t find this a cogent argument.

    As far as I understand, “rape culture” isn’t solely about the existence of rape, but about society’s reaction to it. There are a number of verifiable incidents where clear rape victims have to overcome various obstacles to be heard, including society’s concern about the “victimization” of the rapist. Worries about the potential athletic future of a high school football star when there’s video of him molesting a drunk girl and laughing are quite misplaced, and do suggest to me that a rape culture exists.

    Had your suggestion been one that was purely aimed at reducing the number of false rape claims — a goal which I think feminists should share (but likely don’t) because it would allow more vigorous prosecution of rapes and eventual actual reduction in the number of rapes — and it had been met with the same level of vitriol, I might think you’d be on to something. I suspect you’d get some flack from that sort of proposal, but it would be far less than suggesting something as deliberately inflammatory as legalizing rape.

    1. bendy February 27, 2015 at 1:11 pm

      The problem with your line of thinking is that you can’t really make a false murder accusation due to being dead. Child rape is already rape if any sexual contact takes place forceful or not, on private property or not, children cannot consent to sex. If I make an accusation that roosh assaulted me in a hotel room, but I have no injuries, no witnesses or evidence I wait 2 years to report it, ill be laughed out of court and told to avoid being alone with roosh. If a rape victim does have injuries that is already evidence that an assault has taken place and the rapist can be pursued legally/criminally for that at very least. Some of what roosh has described already has precedence in law, there have been cases where women have been caught on cctv going to a hotel room with a man, and rape cases have been thrown out as it either implies consent or at the least gives the man plausible deniability. Many think that marital rape shouldn’t exist, marital assault or violence is illegal regardless, and if a woman doesn’t want to sex her husband or believes there is either a threat she will be or that she has been raped, she needs to be divorcing/fleeing her husband either before or after the fact of the rape, or else proving some other kind of physical injury/providing witnesses. This is how it used to be, and probably should be, and is in other places now. Roosh is trying to prevent rapes, and false rape accusations not maximise autonomy of accusers.

      1. bendy February 27, 2015 at 1:24 pm

        That said I think the circumstances in all cases should be assessed individually, and reasonable judgements made by all law enforcement, legal and judicial officials involved.

      2. Sam February 27, 2015 at 1:47 pm

        saw this after I posted a reply. I agree, things need to be looked at on a case-by-case basis.

      3. Sam February 27, 2015 at 1:43 pm

        Having cases where a judge or jury weighs the totality of the evidence and decides that the woman consented (or may have consented) is different from having a bright-line rule that says if it’s private property, she’s consented. You’re pointing to the practical difficulties involved in many cases and say we shouldn’t even allow the victim a chance to gather evidence.

        Maybe you didn’t understand the intent of my bringing up murder. It’s not the concern about false accusations (though, I’d add you can still get false accusations in a murder, just not from the victim usually). It’s that you don’t reduce crime by limiting where the potential victims can go.

        You also didn’t address the many cases where two people might be present on private property. Roosh didn’t make a case for legalizing marital rape, or rape when a woman goes into a hotel room late at night — he made an argument for legalizing all rape on private property. Backpedaling into specific situations when you think sex is okay doesn’t work when you’re trying to make a general case.

      4. bendy February 27, 2015 at 1:50 pm

        Read my comment to myself. Like iv’e already said I don’t agree with roosh, i’m just pointing out that what roosh has proposed isn’t actually that revolutionary by the current law. there isn’t really any point disagreeing with me, i’m basically just pointing out all the ways that rape on private property is already legal or unprovable, I’m not telling people where they can and can’t go, just making it clear under what circumstances they can make a rape accusation that will plausibly lead to court, conviction, jail. especially In relation to the cases you mentioned in your comment. The difference i’m pointing out between murder and rape, is that in one case it is always possible to confirm that a crime has taken place regardless if the perp is found, tried and convicted.

      5. Sam February 27, 2015 at 2:15 pm

        Well, yes, and your indication of when it’s “legal” (um, never, actually) or unprovable (which is often) isn’t actually correct. You make a big deal of injuries, but quite clearly RU486 and even just molesting a very drunk girl won’t leave injuries. Proof has been given in some cases as video evidence (often circulated by the perpetrators).

        I think what Roosh has proposed would actually be quite significant, legally speaking. All sorts of crimes have problems with proof, from harassment to insider trading. I don’t see that as a reason to determine that they’re not crimes, which is what Roosh is proposing.

      6. bendy February 27, 2015 at 2:21 pm

        Which is why it is important to understand that whilst roosh’s position is extreme, and he shouldn’t get his way, there is a lesson in there somewhere, which maybe he intentionally is giving us.
        You either legalize rape on private property, or de facto criminalize men being with women on private property and surveil constantly, OR SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT RAPE AND RAPE CULTURE. Because nothing can be done, and it is simply propaganda and a stick to beat men with. You are either interested in solving/preventing rape as a crime or using it as a social issue to criminalize and ostracize men at a womans/womens will. Pick one or the other.

      7. Sam February 28, 2015 at 9:23 am

        Propaganda is legal. Your CAPITAL LETTER protestations about shutting the fuck up are feckless and foolish in a society with free speech.

        If fact, maybe free speech solves your issue. You note that you are for:

        ” simply for it to be known that if evidence for a rape is lacking it won’t be taken seriously”

        You don’t really define what “taken seriously” means. I’ll assume you mean, “by the legal system”, since we can’t legislate what people will believe. I think the justice system isn’t the biggest problem, really — many rape accusations ARE in fact dismissed for lack of evidence. “College courts” probably should be abolished in the case of (especially) felony accusations, but you don’t need to limit this to rape cases. These courts have the function of trying to protect the college, not trying to get any justice for either party.

        As far as the “letting it be known” part — I think for that you just need to publish cases where a rape was alleged without evidence and then ignored, and highlight that it was a mere allegation. I don’t need to judge personally whether a woman’s lying about a rape or not to determine whether she has a reasonable legal case.

      8. bendy February 28, 2015 at 10:04 am

        one again you are preaching to the choir, rather poorly. My whole line of argument is that I have been defending roosh position, which his free speech entitles him to and explaining why actually in your original post your concerns were not really valid. A crucial point I was also making was that it is one thing to attack roosh position because you believe it to be legally absurd, it is another to attack it because you buy into SJWism, anti-male rape culture rhetoricetc. it’s not clear on what side of the line you actually are because you didn’t really make any valid points in your original post. But maybe that is just lack of articulation on your part. Are you concerned about preventing rapes? or are you an SJW? and actually it really isn’t clear cut when it comes to freedom of speech, especially when accusations and propaganda of this nature about unprovable crimes is involved. In my country you can be prosecuted and imprisoned for certain speech alone, and many would argue that severe punishment should be dished out to those making false accusations or even promoting lies/disinformation and prejudice against heterosexual males. Which brings another problem of how you conceivably prove a false rape accusation. It is one thing for a case to be thrown out of court for lack of evidence or a suspect found not guilty, it is another to prove a false accusation. You need to clarify what your position on unprovable crimes is, and how best to prevent them because many would argue it is an infringement on a mans rights, to drag him through police stations, court trial, damage his reputation etc on accusation of “crime” which under other circmstances is a totally legal act. It is never legal to murder a woman. It is possibly legal to insert your penis inside her. I’m merely clarifying what roosh point was, and how he believes the law should work, which is that you either encourage people to take personally responsibility for their own actions, or you promote a culture where normal social and sexual relations between a man and a woman are criminalized/stigmatized at a womans will. If you think that is ok. CLARIFY THAT. Clarify that you are on the side of continueing the rape culture and false accusation culture, rather than actually preventing rapes. But don’t make false arguments against roosh like that he would approve of legalizing murder or paedophilia, and in the process miss his point entirely.

      9. Guest March 5, 2015 at 4:49 pm

        Gun ownership is legal too Sam. What exactly is your point?

        Me thinks you are getting paid.

      10. Sam March 6, 2015 at 8:48 am

        Bendy gives three “options”:

        1) legalize rape on private property
        2) criminalize men being with women on private property
        3) shut up about rape and rape culture

        All three options are ridiculous. That’s my point.

      11. sharp February 27, 2015 at 2:23 pm

        The salient point regarding Roosh’s proposal is that certain incentives desperately need to be shifted around, because the current system is simply insane.

        Women need to start being held accountable for their behavior. Too fucking bad if it hurts their feelings.

      12. Sam February 27, 2015 at 3:51 pm

        His point is wrong, in addition to making it in an exceptionally poor manner.

        “desperately…the current system is insane” is emotional goggledygook of the sort you’d accuse (sometimes correctly) feminists of engaging in. It’s insane because women can falsely accuse men, and do so some percentage of the time? People are falsely accused of any crime, it doesn’t make our entire justice system “insane”.

        The way to “hold women accountable” for false accusations would be to punish false accusations, not make it more difficult to make legitimate accusations.

      13. sharp February 27, 2015 at 5:32 pm

        Rape accusations should in fact be held to an entirely different standard than they are now, largely due to a perfect storm of reasons that have come together in the last decade or two. Namely, the fact that a non-trivial number of women have demonstrated that they’re not above making a false accusation to assuage their guilt, mend their blimp-sized broken egos, or merely out of spite – an ego-driven dynamic that is the exclusive province of the scorned female in sexual assault cases. Namely, the fact that it is the media’s modus operandi to push a narrative that champions the cause of women/demonizes (white) men, and what better way to do that than a story about rape, no matter the legitimacy (eg: UVA)? Namely, the fact that no matter how dubious the accusation, various other actors (overzealous prosecutors, universities in need of funding, to name a couple) have vested reputational/political/financial interests in going along with this circus, justice be damned. By the way, I’d venture to say that the fact that universities now have the unilateral right to ruin a male student’s reputation/future earning potential at the whim of some scorned female, no real trial/investigation required, is indeed pretty fucking insane (or does that not count as part of the system?)

        At least for those with eyes to see and ears to hear, women have long lost any credibility they might have ever had in these matters, to the point that “legitimate rape accusation” sounds rather like an oxymoron.

        Of course, you’d know all this if you weren’t a silly white knight shitlib with a disingenuous agenda to push. Now fuck off back to Gawker, clown shoes.

      14. Sam February 27, 2015 at 7:08 pm

        “The media” is a separate problem than “the justice system”.

        You have given precious little evidence that the male student’s reputation/earning potential is ruined due to the accusation, “no investigation required”.

        Yes, there ARE cases which are egregious, I agree. I’m also aware there are cases that cut completely the other way.

        Demonization of men is wrong. But then, here you go claiming the idea of a legitimate rape accusation is an oxymoron and that “women” have lost all credibility. Do you have any sense of irony when you write this?

        And, calling me names? Hahaha. You give up on any semblance of a real argument pretty fast, don’t you?

      15. Jeb February 27, 2015 at 8:49 pm

        Nobody’s done arguing with you yet, big boy – we’re just waiting for something new that hasn’t already been argued by you “false-rape-accusation-apologists” for the past 20 years.

        Many a man’s reputation has been sullied by false allegations without even the hint of going into a courtroom.

        Further, many of the students you are talking about, are completely railroaded into ADMITTING to crimes they didn’t commit, simply to stay in school, or by the threat that if they don’t cop to the pseudo crime, the police then WILL be brought in.

        I was subject to such a show trial back in the early 90’s when I walked in on my longterm girlfriend fucking my room-mate.

        I got mad – real mad – and let off a string of curse words that would make a farmer hip-deep in the shit pile proud… and after telling my “friend” he was lucky I didn’t kick his head in, I stormed out.

        The little lady, however – with the help of her feminist friends at the university who reminded her that verbal assault is still domestic violence – turned me in to the whole zoo that is the Kollege Kangaroo Kourt.

        They simply stood on their philosophical grounds that “There is no excuse for domestic violence” (which then had only recently included the eye-blackening “verbal assault.”)

        My punishment?

        They told me I had to write a private letter to my girlfriend apologizing for my abusive behaviour and for “frightening her,” and then I had to PUBLICLY write a letter of apology to the Student Newspaper, absolving her of all blame for the incident, PLUS apologizing to the entire student body for my “violence against women.” If I didn’t do so, they said, I would expelled and the police would get involved.

        Well, first of all, I told them to go FUCK THEMSELVES and dropped out – then dared them to call the police on me. Why on EARTH would I, on public record, ADMIT to a crime I didn’t commit and of which no jury had judged me upon? It is complete and utter social, career and political suicide to cop to a crime in a public admission like this.

        Secondly, it is CLEARLY and illegal act of vigilatism on the part of the school – since they believe an actual CRIME (not a wrongdoing, but an actual crime) has occurred, and in their great academic wisdom, believe they are ABOVE the law, rather than subject to it, and thus have the right to dispense their own justice – which definitely crossed the line into trying to coerce a false public confession.

        This is Stalism at its finest. All academics should be drawn and quartered in the nearest public square for this arrogant flouting of the laws of the land.

      16. Sam February 28, 2015 at 9:07 am

        That’s certainly a terrible story, and yes I’d agree that when colleges delve into forming their own justice systems we have problems. If they really thought a crime had occurred, then they shouldn’t have wanted an apology, they should have wanted jail time (and in fact, setting up a separate justice system that lets you off “easy”? — well, the they don’t become vigilantes, they become accessories). If they didn’t think there was a crime, then an apology would be unnecessary. And of course, if there were a crime and you’d apologized, nothing would prevent the girl from then going to the police as well.

        I think it actually would have been better for you had the police been called in immediately. Let yourself be found not guilty, enroll in a different college, and then sue the first college. Frankly, this still would kind have sucked for you, but it’s difficult to create a perfect world. And I know, as a 20-year old college student it’s impossible to have that kind of self-assurance or wisdom. Which is why students accused of rape should have responsible counseling just as much as victims of rape.

        I’ll remind you, Roosh didn’t make any of those arguments. He argued that rape should be legal. That’s a histrionic response resulting from seeing some injustice in some cases, not a reasoned consideration of public policy and its results.

      17. Sam February 28, 2015 at 12:29 pm

        You know, I’ve been considering this further and wondering why you would think legalizing rape in private would alleviate any of it.

        The only reason you can make your claim that the college campus courts are engaging in illegal vigilantism is precisely because rape is illegal. If rape were legal in private locations, it isn’t as though you would be preventing colleges from punishing it. They still could, and they’d still drag peoples names through the mud, and still expel students. Moreover, because it was not done in context of a crime, there could be no claim of false prosecution (you could file a civil suit,I suppose, for slander — but there would be no false police report filed, which means that women may feel even less inhibited about making false accusations. Overall you might end up greatly increasing the rate of both rapes and of false rape accusations on campus, without seeing any benefits at all in terms of greater justice.

      18. Jeb February 27, 2015 at 7:49 pm

        It was about in the late 1990’s that I began automatically disbelieving virtually any claim of abuse a woman made to me – that didn’t just include rape, but also physical abuse, molestation etc. etc.

        You see, this whole crapola started around the mid 1980’s, when AA’s Al-Anon came out in a big way to support the families of alcholics.

        The whole point of Al-Anon was that people who are affected by an alcoholic’s behaiour were too ashamed to talk about it or even admit it. This is where the whole “why would they lie” thing came from – and, given the enabling behaviours of those close to alcholics, the theory had some merit.

        Notice though, that it is actually true in the case of alcoholism – the people you know who were negatively affected by a parent’s or spouse’s drinking really were ashamed of not only the alcholic, but also their association with it.

        After all, you must know someone whose parent or spouse was a raging lush, and I suspect that you and everyone else, cannot recall them regailing you with details about it within the first hour of meeting them! It is something that you share only with those very close to you, after knowing them for a long time.

        Rape and abuse of women was based upon the same principle as al-anon – they were too ashamed of it to WANT to lie about it… so ipso facto, they MUST be believed.

        Except, by the time the late 90’s came around, over 80% of the women you would go out on a date with would immediately regale you with some turgid tale about their abusive boyfriend, or their molesting father, or the time they were gang-raped by the boys behind the school, thus how princess lost her virginity… of course, they never reported it (too ashamed), but they are NOT too ashamed to disclose such shame to near fucking strangers, on a first date, and over time their stories always contradicted eachother.

        Call me a skeptic… and even call me a rape apologist… I just DON’T FUCKING CARE ABOUT RAPE ANYMORE!

        Fool me once, shame on you… fool me 10,000 times, shame on me and everyone in my household.

        They can pass all the fucking laws they want, but nothing on earth will ever be able to make me give a shit about rape again… or did everyone forget the story about the girl who cried wolf?

      19. Sam February 28, 2015 at 8:58 am

        Well, you’re free to disbelieve any rape accusation if you want.

        You mistakenly believe you’re the “customer”. I would suggest that any who want to actually legalize rape are rather an extremist fringe minority.

        I have no problem at all with “justice and decency towards men”. Rather, I agree that there should be. Roosh’s original post wasn’t about that, though. It wasn’t about, “Colleges have a separate and unfair justice system with a lack of standards”, it was, “we should legalize rape on private property”. Those are two extraordinarily different things.

        One favor, I have no idea what some of your terminology, such as “mig-tows” or “frivorce-raped”, mean. Please clarify when you use technical terms.

        If you’ll notice I’ve thrown no insulting labels at all. If I were to call you a misogynist, I’d do it on the basis of words you’ve posted here (for example, indicating a distrust of all women because some women have lied to you would be misogynistic). If you’re fine with the label, okay – it’s not a crime to be a misogynist, after all.

        Laws being passed aren’t actually intended to make you “give a shit about rape”, unless you’re talking about something meaningless like a “Rape Victim Awareness Day” or some such.

        Your whole post here (and I’m talking about the post Jeb made, starting with “It was about the late 1990’s…”) seems to mainly just be about how you personally distrust women, don’t mind being called a misogynist, and don’t like some men. Let me know if I missed anything relevant, but I don’t see anything but your personal feelings. You’re entitled to these, but they don’t suggest anything about public policy.

      20. Guest March 5, 2015 at 4:50 pm

        All of these words – yep, Sam is a paid disinformant.

  6. J February 27, 2015 at 10:13 pm

    We should also legalize murder and assault so fewer people go to the ghetto. Fewer people foolishly putting themselves at risk of injury/murder would save millions!

    This is literally some of the dumbest logic I’ve ever read on the internet. Obviously rape is a form of harm/assault and freedom from assault is the most basic and worthy human right conceivable. Roosh, I want to like you but you clearly don’t think about your arguments more than half the time.

    1. Jeb February 27, 2015 at 10:32 pm

      You mean you don’t believe that encouraging people not to put themselves at risk of injury/murder wouldn’t save lives?


      You’re saying that telling people that walking through Harlem with a sign reading <a href="“I Hate Niggers” wouldn’t save that person’s life?

      I can assure you that it most certainly would!

      Are you fucking stupid?

      If you don’t want to get shot, don’t become a soldier, I would say. If you choose to take the risk, shit will happen – regardless of what is right or wrong.

      What you stunned fucktards are actually arguing for is Heaven on Earth… and wait for it… no seriously, I want you to wait for it and actually THINK for a moment… there is no such thing.

      Do you still look both ways when you cross the street, even though cars are SUPPOSED to stop for you?

      I do!

      How did you cro-magnons make it past the Pleistoscene and on into today?

      It’s amazing how you assholes instantly argue, after a man gets unfairly frivorce-raped, that he should have just “picked a better kind of woman,” but on the other hand, don’t think you have any responsibility for “picking a better neighbourhood” or to “stop dating thugs that abuse you.”

      Maybe all of us rape apologists should just encourage you to “pick better men/neighbourhoods/mini-skirts.

      Same shit, different pile, you SJW moron.

      1. Sam February 28, 2015 at 7:46 am

        Maybe I’m missing the part where I said women shouldn’t be careful?

        The person who gets murdered wearing that sign while in Harlem was still murdered, we’re not going to criminalize wearing signs, and their murderer should still go to jail.

        Shockingly, though, we don’t have to make a law criminalizing the wearing of signs or legalizing murder in the case of a person wearing a sign.   

        If what had been said here was, “Women should be careful when they go out drinking”, or “Women should be cautious accepting drinks from strangers”, I’d be perfectly fine with that advice. I would not be fine with “Once a woman accepts a drink from a stranger, she legally consents to anything done to her after that.”

      2. Jeb February 28, 2015 at 8:54 am

        Who’s putting words into whose mouth here? Who said that once a woman has a drink that she agrees to be raped? I mean, keep your feet on the carpet, dude.

        My argument is no different than that Toronto cop’s comments which started world-wide slut walks.

        Do you see men from the manosphere marching through the streets naked (or thousands of Bruce Willis’s marching through Harlem with I Hate Nigger signs) saying that they can behave however the fuck they want and everyone else must change their behaviour instead of them?

        Technically they are right, of course… but technically, we protect ourselves against millions of illegal activities each and every fucking day. Like I said, I look both ways before crossing the street, even though technically, I shouldn’t have to because other people SHOULD be obeying the law.

        Do you have insurance on your car and house for theft?

        Please, explain to me why YOU should have to PAY, out of your own pocket, to protect yourself with insurance against this clearly illegal act of theft. Why don’t you just grab a sign, whip off your shirt, and march so that you don’t have to lock your doors and pay for insurance ever again?

        Tell me these morons are not advocating for the impossible – which is Heaven on Earth.

      3. Sam February 28, 2015 at 9:34 am

        Jeb, Roosh’s original statement wasn’t even that a woman should be deemed to consented when having a drink, he said she should be deemed to have consented whenever she entered private property.

        I think you’re arguing something different, which is that women should take some precautions.

        You’ve probably gotten response before from feminists saying women shouldn’t be forced to take precautions. And in an ideal world, they’d be right, and in the real world, you’re right.

        Bringing this to the example of theft, yes in an ideal world there shouldn’t be the need for insurance because people wouldn’t steal. And yes, in the practical world you should have the insurance because people do steal. I have no problem with these two ideas simultaneously.

    1. Scottie M. February 28, 2015 at 9:09 am

      Where on earth do you get these images? 4chan /pol/?

    2. Sam February 28, 2015 at 12:32 pm

      I didn’t know a “Sociology by Petulant Teens” class actually existed.

      1. Anti_Femastasis February 28, 2015 at 1:50 pm

        I didn’t know a “Sociology by Petulant Teens” class actually existed.

        It’s called “Gender Studies”

  7. RAdesign February 28, 2015 at 4:47 am

    Your thinking is too much out of the box for western culture.
    Most of readers stop thinking after reading “legalize rape” and go into mindless frenzy.
    The point, that women are as well responsible for sexual intercourses as men, goes missing.

    1. Sam February 28, 2015 at 7:56 am

      Why don’t you tell us of cultures where private rape is legal, and what paragons of justice those places are?

      1. RAdesign February 28, 2015 at 8:05 am

        Why don`t you tell us of that culture.
        Apparently you know “private rape” very well.
        Please, share your experience of rape.

      2. Sam February 28, 2015 at 8:38 am

        I’m a product of western culture. Rape is not legal, private or otherwise. And I wasn’t asking for a personal story, I was asking for an indication of which culture you’re aware of that does not criminalize private rape.

      3. RAdesign March 1, 2015 at 5:22 am

        “I’m a product of western culture.”
        Yes, you are.
        That`s why you are struggling with reading and understanding text.

        But I can explain it to you, please read it twice, if necessary.

        The point is, women need to take responsibility for sexual intercourses and sexual behaviour. That`s it. That`s all.

        There was nothing in my comment referring to “private rape”. You must have thinking of it too much.
        Please, stop thinking that much about raping.

      4. Sam March 1, 2015 at 12:04 pm

        Please read Roosh’s original post. It referred specifically to legalizing rape on private property. Since you referenced “legalizing rape” in your post, I assumed you were aware of the discussion.

        “Women need to take responsibility for their sexual behavior” is not accomplished by telling them they’ll have no recourse if attacked. Legalizing rape in any form would be a foolish move. If you meant something specific other than actually legalizing rape, you did nothing to indicate what that is other than, perhaps, suggesting it would be from a non-western culture.

        I invite you again to tell me what culture or system it is that you think works so much more effectively.

        You need not bother with insults. I will not reciprocate.

      5. Guest March 5, 2015 at 4:53 pm

        From Sam’s disqus feed:

        “Indeed. I rather hate them being called “MRA’s” (i.e., Men’s Rights Activists), because I think there should be legitimate room for those arguing for men’s rights.”

        Sam, shouldn’t you be sucking dick somewhere?

  8. Erik February 28, 2015 at 8:11 am

    “I can’t figure out why some in the manopshere have great disdain against
    men who want to have more than one sexual partner a year”

    Because the ‘manosphere’ is (for the most part) a mirror image of feminism. Bitter and angry people who live by hatred and anger and simply can’t stand it when someone is having a good time, especially if he’s actually NOT hurting anyone else in the process.

    1. Sam T February 28, 2015 at 11:38 pm

      I think my description is more accurate.

  9. Sam T February 28, 2015 at 11:11 am

    Quoat RooshV: “I can’t figure out why some in the manopshere have great disdain against men who want to have more than one sexual partner a year.”
    A: Because they are beta males. AKA. Nice guys. Like “mommy told me to respect women and not treat them like sex objects” but they end up in the mesosphere cause they are disillusioned by why women don’t reward them for being a “Gentleman” with the sex they crave.
    Some of these men will eventually learn. Some however will go to their grave as betas.

  10. Sam T February 28, 2015 at 11:22 am

    I don’t think legalizing “rape” would be the solution to this problem.
    Instead increase the consequences to women who abuse the legal system to cry false rape or to use it as a absolution for “morning after regrets”.
    The problem with our legal system is women who have abused the system are not held accountable and have been told by feminists and lawyers etc. that “If in doubt, it was rape”. So they are encouraged to cry rape by our society.
    We need to put a stop to that. Abuse of the system does a disservice to genuine victims of rape by discrediting this crime as trivial.

    1. Sam February 28, 2015 at 1:13 pm

      you’re right, fraudulent claims hurt not only the victim, but also those who bring real claims. There should be no tolerance of fraud — I would suggest a woman who brings a fraudulent claim of rape should be sentenced as though she herself had committed rape.

      Ideally, that should include recording her as a sex offender and requiring her to abide by Megan’s law. Admittedly the justifications for Megan’s law do not really apply, but then there a number of offenses where the justification would be strained but nevertheless the law applies.

      A claim that’s merely unprovable, though, is not necessarily fraudulent.

  11. Johnny March 1, 2015 at 1:40 am

    Roosh as bad as Poland has become it’s still has to be better than DC, verdad ?

    1. Roosh_V March 1, 2015 at 12:43 pm

      10 times better

      1. Johnny March 1, 2015 at 1:11 pm

        I just read Dead Bat In Paraguay. If you were 25 again and have all the knowledge and information you do now would you just have booked a one way ticket to Poznan or Wroclaw?

  12. roland3337 March 2, 2015 at 12:51 am

    I’m one of those men that straddles both worlds: I’m a student of game. It has helped me more than I could ever imagine in in a LT. And knowing how young males are so vexed by the sexual dynamics of this era, I point out your blog to my male students when I think it is safe to do so. (I am a university professor). Yet I am also an MRA. I don’t know why the divide exists, but it is disappointing. I suspect there are quite a number of males like myself. Maybe we’ll have some kind of detente again in the future. Your interview at AVfM was a step in the right direction. I was pleased to see it.

  13. EricLashnerr March 2, 2015 at 7:56 am

    hey guys im creating an indiegogo campaign to create a website to document false rape accusations. if anyone is interested let me know. ill be launching this week

  14. Guest March 5, 2015 at 4:44 pm

    A bit of a false dichotomy. There is ample room between being an incel and dedicating your life to the pursuit of poon.

  15. We hate u February 8, 2016 at 6:36 am

    Come to vienna u fucking son of a bitch and u will die…… we hate you …. u r not a man ! Where r your friends at saturday ?! U afraid ? You are a litte pussy …. !! Not raping women schould be legalized …. no killing bastards like u should be

    1. Du bist kein mann ! February 9, 2016 at 3:19 am

      Wir hassen dich du kleiner hurensohn….. wenn wir dich erwischen hängen wir dich auf deine eier auf ….

  16. Shame.on.your.parents February 9, 2016 at 3:25 am

    Nur weil ihr bastarde ein problem habt frauen rumzukriegen …. just cause u bastards cant date a women regular… we hate i wish we get you …shame on your parents

  17. Shame.on.your.parents February 9, 2016 at 3:26 am

    Hate u

  18. Shame.on.your.parents February 9, 2016 at 3:28 am

    You look like a gay boy …. just 3min with me … and you never say bullshit like that again …. u and your family burn in hell !

  19. February 9, 2016 at 3:31 am

    U cant have sex with more than one women in the year ??? Regular way ?? Shame on you …. but i already know just ….. maybe u think is your parents rap u