Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The War Room' started by Higus, Dec 5, 2017.
This is a good video on this issue
I will never take anything from Roosh seriously. I didn't even like him during his PUA days. I'm genuinely surprised to find that he founded that site you linked but it seems like a natural evolution for him (not PUA's or alt-right supporters in general, just him).
Kind of like how trannies "feeeeeellll" like something they never were....
Wait....do you think that a guy who is attracted to kids by no choice of his own but actively fights his feelings and refuses to engage in them is a "monster"? You don't feel bad for that guy in the slightest that he has to live with that pathology and cannot even talk about it or try to seek treatment without being ostracized?
Yet you are willing to deflect in support of Republican candidates who are attracted to kids and do act on it.
God, you right wingers are the worst. It's one thing for you to do as you typically do and completely reject nuance to speak in absolutes. But it's another thing to do so in blatant contradiction of your partisan affiliations.
I actually like the current version of Roosh more now that he does not to the PUA stuff or at least emphasize it. Now his focus seems to be on societal decay.
I like his current analysis of where feminism and secularism is taking society. On the other hand some of his views on women are to extreme for me and seem to be more of a caricature of a subset of cosmopolitanism women put on women as a whole. You've seen pictures of me I am a pretty average looking guy and I've successfully dated many women and my approach is pretty much smiling and saying hi. The PUA stuff is to cynical for me. It presupposes you need to con women somehow. I frankly don't want anything to do with those types of women.
I studied PUA's, hypnosis and NLP back when I thought I'd be doing more trial work with juries. I think there are valuable principles that can be applied to our profession. Although Ross Jefferies isn't the type of PUA that anyone should find supportable, his focus on language and scripts can certainly play a role in drafting opening and closing statements or in structuring your cross examination line of questions.
That said, my issue with Roosh was always that he seemed bitter and angry even as a PUA. If his analysis of feminism and secularism stems from the same place that his energy in his PUA days came from, it's like asking someone who hates cows to wax philosophical on ice cream and cheese. You're not going to get genuine analysis, you're going to get anaylsis that presupposes the negative.