Here's the reframe from the usual sources:

Quote:Quote:

The Internet is not an easy place for women, and part of fixing that is recognizing that public shaming is largely a gender-specific issue. Men do it to women all the time, sometimes supposedly without even realizing that they are doing it. When someone screws up on the Internet, we have to take a minute to think about both the way it affects them and about the way it reinforces broader societal injustice, particularly as that injustice relates to women. We’re all on the same playground, but if we keep on knocking down bullies so we can look tall by comparison, then all we are doing is becoming bullies, too.

http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/amy-pasc...s-hygiene/

The article doesn't mention this writer, but it does follow from the 'World Ending, Women and Minorities Hit Hardest' school of journalism. Online ridicule is everywhere. It's part of the internet. Men can shrug it off. Women wilt from it, so they want to claim their female privilege by not having it directed at them. Fuck that.

Quote: (04-22-2015 10:43 AM)aSimpNamedBrokeback Wrote:  

So far the comments are brutal. Its like she posted it on Return of Kings. Not one single " he's a virgin who lives in a basement ".....well done Canada.

Not to mention that this isn't just any website. It's Huffington Post. A website where I'd expect to see SJW comments. I'm surprised to see so many top voted comments that are destroying her that way.

Quote: (04-22-2015 04:19 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  



She poses like she writes: overdramatically and without any trace of style or grace.

Long time players will recognise the tells of selling false goods in that photo. (No innocence in eyes; too studied a facial expression; too sexual a hip thrust; sucking in the stomach; the 'shoulders back / chest out' bust enhancement). This is a Slut trying to affect the appearance of a Lady, and she would arrogantly-think we can't tell.

If I saw a picture like that on a dating profile, I'd know exactly what I was getting, and as such, I'm not surprised that - once again - a female typist like her feels the need to insert herself into her 'article':

Great comments. I'm glad everyone is calling her idiocy out. I like that roosh is not even reacting. Let them crucify themselves.

Quote: (04-22-2015 09:52 AM)aSimpNamedBrokeback Wrote:  

This is one of those moments where I wish I learned how to X-ray on Photoshop.

Quote: (04-22-2015 08:41 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

WB

how recent are these photos? of course would bang. The 'elbows too pointy' argument never holds much water.

edit but that left elbow does look pretty sharp, like it could take down a charging rhino.

First of all, what this bitch is is a fuckable pig. She represents the pig type par excellence, purely and with no admixtures:





She can be used, in fact, as one of the illustrations under PIG in the Book of Female Animal Types.

Now a pig is a superb type in general, and has great uses. This particular bitch is no better than she should be in any way, but she in eminently worth fucking and getting sucked off by, was when she was younger and almost certainly still is at 30.

*****************

As far as her "post", she thinks in exactly the way all females think about political matters, which is basically: get on with the f'ing program OR ELSE. Women, when they bother to think about these matters at all, have absolutely no time for the niceties of "law" or "due process" or "democracy" etc. These concepts are completely meaningless to them. They know what's right, so how is it not being done already?

I remember reading some female blogs after the Newtown school killings in Connecticut and these bitches were like -- how can it be that we haven't confiscated all guns already after this happened? I mean how the actual fuck is it that this wasn't done yesterday? LOL!!

It takes the boring and straightlaced white-knights and manginas, who unfortunately are very necessary for the Google servers to keep humming, to explain to these ladies that well, we can't quite do that, as nice as it would be -- it doesn't quite work like that. If it weren't for the earnestness with which male white-knights and manginas take their legal and ethical "commitments", well, it would be a strange and scary world.

In reality, though, and because the white-knights and manginas are so dreadfully needed to run the show, it's not quite so simple for "important men and women", in this pig's almost touchingly childish phrase, to just spin up "laws" that would oblige guys like Roosh to get with the program or face the consequences. They'll keep trying, that's for sure.

Quote: (04-22-2015 05:34 PM)eradicator Wrote:  

how recent are these photos? of course would bang. The 'elbows too pointy' argument never holds much water.

That staircase photo is eight years old. Ever seen what happens when you leave milk out of the fridge for eight years?

The question is not actually WB or WNB, but WHB (Would Have Banged).

Quote: (04-22-2015 05:50 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

Quote: (04-22-2015 05:34 PM)eradicator Wrote:  

how recent are these photos? of course would bang. The 'elbows too pointy' argument never holds much water.

That staircase photo is eight years old. Ever seen what happens when you leave milk out of the fridge for eight years?

The question is not actually WB or WNB, but WHB (Would Have Banged).

Then why are we posting photos of her from her 20s when she is mid 30s now?

yes she was bangable 8 years ago. but now? who knows.

Quote: (04-22-2015 05:57 PM)eradicator Wrote:  

Then why are we posting photos of her from her 20s when she is mid 30s now?

Because all of her recent photos are from the neck up and feature her fat pig face.

No one wants to drool over those.

Good news! Her elbows probably aren't pointy anymore.

To be fair, the photo in the red dress is from an old MySpace account.

Quote: (04-22-2015 05:57 PM)eradicator Wrote:  

Then why are we posting photos of her from her 20s when she is mid 30s now?

The question you should ask is "Why isn't she posting full body photos from her mid-30's?" and you'll have your WB / WNB answer.

As former sluts age, their photos change along a predictable trajectory: the facial angles get higher, the framing gets narrower and chest-based, the pictures get grainer, and the diffused light in the background gets more intense.

So you go from "I'm a wild, untamed kitten" showing off a passable bod (though I expect the death grip she has on the stair rail in both staircase photos is faking Toned Arms, a common female insecurity in slim-but-not-fit chicks):



To Older Sex Kitten / Cousin It (obscure face with hair to hide crow's feet):



To High Angle Face / Just Cleavage (slims face, looks more feminine, draws attention to breasts from face, note the knowing smirk):



Note the linebacker shoulders that give away a SIF.

To final post-wall Epiphany of Angelic Glow, (Glowing background, shaded face), an affectation of False Girlish Innocence to trap her Post Slut Beta Provider, that has the added bonus of minimising facial blemishes and wrinkles. If there's just one Reformed Former Slut Tell, it's this one: particularly note the deliberate softening of knowledge in the eyes.





As I said before, women think we're not wise to their tricks.

Quote: (04-22-2015 07:23 PM)aSimpNamedBrokeback Wrote:  

To be fair, the photo in the red dress is from an old MySpace account.

I now stand more firmly behind my assumption that she channeled her anger at being rejected from a career as a modlel/fashion/whatever into being a feminist writer.

Quote: (04-22-2015 08:27 PM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

Quote: (04-22-2015 07:23 PM)aSimpNamedBrokeback Wrote:  

To be fair, the photo in the red dress is from an old MySpace account.

I now stand more firmly behind my assumption that she channeled her anger at being rejected from a career as a modlel/fashion/whatever into being a feminist writer.

She seems to be a failed bit-part actress: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1925139/

Name matches up. Date of birth matches up (March 29, 1985). Born in Canada. An Aries, apparently. There was a photo that looked pretty similar, too, but seems to have been removed.

I particularly like her role in Hobo With a Shotgun was "Dancing Prostitute". Other triumphant roles include her characters as Fake Stella, Sexy Woman, Gloria ... and as the ever-so-important 'Bambi' in the blockbusting Vampire Bats.

Quote: (04-22-2015 09:52 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

Quote: (04-22-2015 08:27 PM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

Quote: (04-22-2015 07:23 PM)aSimpNamedBrokeback Wrote:  

To be fair, the photo in the red dress is from an old MySpace account.

I now stand more firmly behind my assumption that she channeled her anger at being rejected from a career as a modlel/fashion/whatever into being a feminist writer.

She seems to be a failed bit-part actress: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1925139/

Name matches up. Date of birth matches up (March 29, 1985). Born in Canada. An Aries, apparently. There was a photo that looked pretty similar, too, but seems to have been removed.

I particularly like her role in Hobo With a Shotgun was "Dancing Prostitute". Other triumphant roles include her characters as Fake Stella, Sexy Woman, Gloria ... and as the ever-so-important 'Bambi' in the blockbusting Vampire Bats.

So she has an entire list of film credits of whore and various cum dumpster roles.

I love how "feminists" in show biz hamsterize this as somehow empowering. I'm sure she could write a few long winded diarrhea packed essays to educate us.

The real question is how many times did she visit the casting couch?

Warner Brothers

She appears in bimbo movie roles, and then wants to arrest some decent guy because he approaches women in public. She is a predatory beast.

Mind boggling that she was allowed to become a writer after failing as a model/actress. Now she's failed at that too.

I think the reason for her sorry state now is that she wasn't able to get a good WB locked down when she looked good.

Also I can't believe those HuffPost comments. Really makes me think the tide is turning.

Quote:Quote:

The percentage of people revolted by this crime is so high that this is one of the main reasons why rape will always be considered a crime. If you're really paying attention, I think you'll find that this crime has never been taken more seriously on a global scale as it is now. Sadly, this point is simply a case of you being HIGHLY outnumbered in your thinking.

But we live in a rape culture.

Gist of article: "I can't believe what a horrible meanie you are."

Translation from Hamsterese: "My interest is piqued. I'm intrigued that for once I'm not confronted by a metrosexual wuss who wants to kiss my ass and humor my insecurities. I want to know more about you, and I can't stop thinking about you, so I will act out my repressed interest in this article, which is in reality a cri-de-coeur."

We need to pass the hat boys. First one to bang with pics wins the pot.

Quote: (04-22-2015 10:47 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

She appears in bimbo movie roles, and then wants to arrest some decent guy because he approaches women in public. She is a predatory beast.

Even worse:

She wrote an anti-porn screed where she said: "..you should probably have sex with real people. Turn off your perception of what you are seeing on screen, find yourself a person with whom you can have a connection..."

Then she wrote another article where she said she considered PUAs going into malls trying to meet women was a form of "sexual harassment."

In other words, men are wrong whether they do or don't try to meet women.

This is a woman who thinks it's her role to tell men what they can and can't do. Let's just be glad she isn't a teacher.

Her Twitter account is back up and running by the way.

Can we actually make a compendium of studies and articles showing how the rape/false accusation/wage gap etc stats are myths? Has anyone collected the ones that have been posted on the forum before? I would like to keep them handy.

Quote: (04-23-2015 12:09 PM)Slim Shady Wrote:  

Can we actually make a compendium of studies and articles showing how the rape/false accusation/wage gap etc stats are myths? Has anyone collected the ones that have been posted on the forum before? I would like to keep them handy.

They aren't interested in facts.

You can mention a fact in a conversation, which I do occasionally, as if 'I read this article a couple weeks ago that had this study that said...'

That line works well, but you aren't changing minds. Women will never understand.

It's like talking to my chic friends about how "heavy, if you approached a girl like this or that, it would totally work". I can't tell them "Yeah, but you're 30. When you were 20 walking over and saying that wouldn't have worked, because you were hot shit and the world was your playground." (note, a great response is, "and how many women have you slept with?", because chics have no idea how to pick up a dude)

*Sometimes* they sorta see what I mean, but rarely.

This is what it's like presenting facts to a feminist.