It's just so sad and predictable.
Never once does this Reggie Yates ever--once!--focus on the depth or range of ideas that percolate through these parts. Never once did he attempt to go through the doctrinal edifice of neomasculinity. Never once did he even try to ask why what Roosh's neomasculine doctrinal points are, or what they mean.
Not. One. Time.
Why? Of course we know why.
Because doing so would invite excursions into forbidden regions of thought. It would--Heaven help us!--plant dangerous seeds that might grow in impressionable minds.
Instead, we get snark (the glancing at the camera like some smartass prick when Roosh said an "offensive" comment about derelict women), and the absurd focus on the "offensive" things that appeared in some old books.
By refusing to acknowledge what is out there, mainstream media outlets like the BBC only serve to make the inevitable social correction even more convulsive and disturbing, when it finally does come.
And will it come. Like a backlash.
Never once does this Reggie Yates ever--once!--focus on the depth or range of ideas that percolate through these parts. Never once did he attempt to go through the doctrinal edifice of neomasculinity. Never once did he even try to ask why what Roosh's neomasculine doctrinal points are, or what they mean.
Not. One. Time.
Why? Of course we know why.
Because doing so would invite excursions into forbidden regions of thought. It would--Heaven help us!--plant dangerous seeds that might grow in impressionable minds.
Instead, we get snark (the glancing at the camera like some smartass prick when Roosh said an "offensive" comment about derelict women), and the absurd focus on the "offensive" things that appeared in some old books.
By refusing to acknowledge what is out there, mainstream media outlets like the BBC only serve to make the inevitable social correction even more convulsive and disturbing, when it finally does come.
And will it come. Like a backlash.