[Glock]

Vox has a post ranking the game blogs by traffic. ROK is number 1. Roosh's blog is in the top 5.

Much growth has occured:

http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2013/1...3.html?m=1

[Roosh]

I wouldn't call ROK a "game" blog, but we'll take number 1.

[Glock]

That's what Vox calls it.

What's astounding is how dominant it is. Its traffic towers over all the others. Once you get to Rollo's blog the drop in rank is enormous.

[aphelion]

[Suits]

(11-01-2013 06:56 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

I wouldn't call ROK a "game" blog, but we'll take number 1.

Neither is A Voice For Men, but it's on the list now.

[Glock]

Here is the Alexa chart showing ROK's climbing rank. Pretty stunning considering how new it is. Looks like fat shaming week increased the rank by about 9,000 spots and it's come back down a bit.

[Wadsworth]

[speakeasy]

(11-01-2013 08:00 PM)Consul Wrote:  

Here is the Alexa chart showing ROK's climbing rank. Pretty stunning considering how new it is. Looks like fat shaming week increased the rank by about 9,000 spots and it's come back down a bit.

I'm sure Roosh is doing quite well, but at the same time can Alexa stats even be relied upon?


http://www.warriorforum.com/main-interne...nking.html

Quote:

All it can ever measure is visitors to the site who happen to have the Alexa toolbar installed in their browser. And those people are almost all internet marketers. It can't tell you anything at all about any other kind of traffic.

[Menace]

They woke up. They rebelled. There are many like minded men. And they have a plan.

[Dusty]

[Kingsley Davis]

   

[Quintus Curtius]

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Wow, I would have never expected RoK to have such rapid growth. Congratulations!

[Statsi]

Rok is bigger than avfm? That's crazy. In a single year rok has surpassed the flagship Mra site? God damn, keep up the good work!

[Roosh]

(11-02-2013 06:13 AM)Statsi Wrote:  

Rok is bigger than avfm? That's crazy. In a single year rok has surpassed the flagship Mra site? God damn, keep up the good work!

AVFM has a small audience by design, mostly divorced fathers who have been screwed over. I'm surprised they even have a viewership of college students.

[Tuthmosis]

When you fuck with the ROK, you fuck with the best.

[GameTheory]

[Basil Ransom]

I could be wrong. But men's rights sells a message of victimhood that will never appeal to the masses of men. Certainly not the masculine men that ROK targets.

[Therapsid]

(11-02-2013 02:25 PM)basilransom Wrote:  

I could be wrong. But men's rights sells a message of victimhood that will never appeal to the masses of men. Certainly not the masculine men that ROK targets.

What's interesting is that guys often are willing to wage political campaigns based on victimhood.

Minority guys will on behalf of their race. They'll play the race card, that is pose as victims.

White southerners and rednecks will pose as victims of Washington and northern liberals.

But guys aren't willing to accept the role of victim specifically for just being men. The two concepts - manhood and victimhood - are in inherent conflict.

But the alternate way of framing these issues - by talking about in terms of explicitly denying women certain rights - won't sell either. Not anywhere in the West anyway.

So the feminist onslaught continues.

[Glock]

(11-02-2013 02:25 PM)basilransom Wrote:  

I could be wrong. But men's rights sells a message of victimhood that will never appeal to the masses of men. Certainly not the masculine men that ROK targets.

You have put your finger on the defining difference between A Voice for Men and ROK. ROK is about self-improvement and making wise decisions that enable men to reach their potential and avoid ruinous risk.

A Voice for Men is an attempt to parallel the feminist pressure groups. Unfortunately, this is a self-limiting strategy because of gender differences. Men understand that it is inherently weak and emasculating to whine that you are a "victim" in need of rescue by the government or anyone else. This is why "men's rights" groups cannot attract support from masculine men the way that "women's rights" groups can attract women. Women not only have no discomfort posing as victims in need of rescue, many of them thrive on it.

[Dusty]

[Samseau]

And yet dispute us being number one, they only will interview people from lesser blogs. They are afraid.

[Glock]

(11-02-2013 06:18 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

And yet dispute us being number one, they only will interview people from lesser blogs. They are afraid.

I think they did interview Roosh for the ABC story. I really wish he would post a synopsis of the interview on his blog or at ROK, or maybe here at the forum. But I certainly don't have the pull around here to make that kind of request to him. I think a post in which Roosh describes his interview would get a lot of traffic and be interesting. It would also safeguard against later selective editing if they decide the run the story later.

The reason the mainstream media won't interview ROK authors is that most of them are anonymous. For example, the mainstream media has no idea who Tuthmosis or Samseau is.

[Wadsworth]

(11-02-2013 02:25 PM)basilransom Wrote:  

I could be wrong. But men's rights sells a message of victimhood that will never appeal to the masses of men. Certainly not the masculine men that ROK targets.

I'll quote you Basil, but I'm responding to the last few comments, and these are just my own thoughts on the matter, I'm not really directing this at anyone in particular.

It's not that I disagree with you guys, but there's a difference between acknowledging legitimate victimization, and building an identity as a victim. The former is functional, the latter is dysfunctional.

The fact is that I am not a victim, I lead a very comfortable life, but I'm acutely aware of how easily I can get completely fucked over by women and the Canadian legal system. As such I navigate those boundaries. I'm sure it's much the same for you. That doesn't mean I can't also complain about those boundaries.

And frankly, some guys aren't so lucky. Some dude who had plans for his life but has instead been reduced to living in a Ford Pinto down by the river when he isn't in jail because of ludicrous child support/alimony payments is a victim.

He is a victim.

And his victimization is made more severe by the total indifference he finds. Women don't give a shit about him, you can be sure of that; as far as they're concerned he's just an ATM. And other men? Well, if they're more interested in proving that they're masculine, then I can't really say that they give much of a shit either.

I understand this drive among men to redefine what is masculine without giving a shit what feminists and manginas think. And I'm 100% behind it, believe me.

But as far as I'm concerned, there is a major qualification for owning your own masculine identity, and that is being able to define it on your own terms without requiring that someone else validate it.

If you're constructing a masculine identity that precludes you from being able to admit that men are victimized in this society, or being able to admit that you personally have been victimized by this society, then is your identity therefore not constrained by someone else's definition of what is masculine? If so, you don't really own your masculine identity, somebody else does, and you're just borrowing it.

Having said that, I agree with Consul that MRAs have a limited strategy. I also think it's a vitally important strategy. It's just that they're appealing to a societal masculine identity that's far too tied up with sexual validation to be heard. Consider Athlone's last post on RoK. Those "men" will do anything for female validation, literally anything. They'll throw MRAs under the bus no matter how unjust the system is, just like a parched man in the desert will do anything for water.

If there is a goal in the manosphere, it must be to change the culture, and the place to start is by addressing the problems with masculine identity (specifically the mangina problem). This is why I think game culture and MGTOW are so important (in addition to what MRAs are doing).

In effect, they're just different platforms for guys to start listening to what is essentially the same message.

[Samseau]

(11-02-2013 06:22 PM)Consul Wrote:  

The reason the mainstream media won't interview ROK authors is that most of them are anonymous. For example, the mainstream media has no idea who Tuthmosis or Samseau is.

False. They have our emails and Tuth has been contacted by a few alt-mainstream publications for interviews.