[Roosh]

I did a video:

[Nineteen84]

The authors:

[/url]

-



Coordinated attack from 'Huffpost' underway..

[url=https://twitter.com/letsgomathias/status/1039325914910339072]

[Roosh]

^^^ A tell they are not responsible is how hard they are trying to push that they are responsible. This seems to be a case of the Huffpost trying to stay relevant. I've had far bigger outlets shit on me and have nothing happen.

[CynicalContrarian]

Not to mention. Now your book is "naughty" & folk have a tendency to be drawn to things that are "naughty"...

[Castelnau]

Well I'm glad I pre-ordered it and not procrastinated like I usually do. I really like reading on Kindle but I'm not going to buy kindle books anymore. Game will be my last kindle purchase.

[Bienvenuto]

(09-10-2018 08:09 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(09-10-2018 07:42 PM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

(09-10-2018 07:24 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(09-10-2018 06:46 PM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

(09-10-2018 06:40 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

I just got off the phone with Amazon. They said that there were two complaints from verified customers, which put the book into automatic limbo (doesn't explain the other 8 titles). Told them that I'd be boycotting them if the book doesn't return and pulling my novel from their service as well. The supervisor said he'd pass this on to the marketing team.

So if you and I reported 50 Shades of Gay....they'd pull it off too? I know their excuse is BS because I'm sure they received more than 2 reports from the Baptist cuckoos about 50 shades.

Good point. Why don't some of us complain that it violates The Violence Against Women Act?

We should get 5-6 people to do this and see if they pull it out of their site.

But then that means we'd have to buy the book since Amazon considered the opinions from "verified customers".

Good observation. OK, then. Change of plan. Find something you bought -- anything -- and find something offensive about it. Then complain, asking how come Roosh is offensive and that product isn't.

Example: I just went through my old orders and found I'd bought a CD by obscure artist Connie Converse. She supposedly committed suicide. Isn't selling her CD glorifying that and encouraging others to do the same?

Then there's the vintage Gallery magazines I bought from my youth (ban porn!), the German-language Peggy March CDs (Nazi music?), and some early Beach Boys stuff (sexism, American imperialism, non-inclusive, classist, probably racist too).

As you can see, ANYTHING can be offensive. I'll be more than happy to send them a message for EVERY order I ever bought, asking them to explain how it's not offensive.

I'll give you one.

I Will Fucking Give You One.

Get hold of a copy of "In the Realm of the Diamond Queen" by Anna Lowenhaupt Tsing. (Anthropology book that is on the reading list of nearly ever anthropology/ social sciences department -and uncritically celebrated- in nearly every campus in the US and UK etc.)

I am in Vietnam and broke so I can't get hold of a copy myself.

Go to the index and look up Neo-nate. Not 'baby', not 'child' - Neo-nate. obscure term.

The pages referenced describe how when Tsing was doing fieldwork in an Indonesian Dayak community the men were away working.
Just a few women, including Tsing present.
The young wife of one of the local men gave birth. But the woman wasn't interested in the baby.
The baby was exposed on the ground outside and the grandmother told Tsing
that the baby was 'too soon'. She thought premature? But it wasn't premature.
Then she realised that the majority young women didn't want the baby, the mother of the baby felt the pregnancy was too soon in her young life.

At one point -while the younger women made fun of the baby's appearance and dared each other to touch it- Tsing picked it up and began tending to it. She says (paraphrasing) "I was suddenly struck that I might become responsible for the upkeep and well being going forward of a child that no one one else present wanted."
So she put the baby down.
The other women felt guilt tripped and took a bit more interest.
Then they lost interest.
She was making a difference to how they treated the baby.
A guy turned up and helped for a bit then went away, Tsing backed off helping - afraid of the responsibility of a baby's care it seems - and eventually, sadly, 'inexplicably' an otherwise healthy baby died.

Lowenhaupt-Tsing then goes off in the book on a long ramble about how everything is different from everything else and you never know just how every different person feels.
She then asks when does a human being become a human being anyway. Was the human being that died in their hands really a human being?
Maybe it was just a 'Neo-nate'.
She then documents known cases where African American women have tried to dispose of babies >cough< Neo-nates in garbage cans etc. Who is the state to classify what these beings are or intervene in the conduct of mothers with their offspring?
She ends up blaming the 'patriarchy' for women, including herself, neglect-killing new born babies.

When I first read the book she was an assistant professor. She is now a professor at University of California Santa Cruz UCSC.

https://www.amazon.com/Realm-Diamond-Que...dpSrc=srch

( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Tsing )

[CH-Toronto]

Roosh isn't part of the "club" and rising on the best sellers list definitely invoked this ban. As much as I'm a fan, and starting to disagree with what he has to say, imagine if Jordan Peterson spoke about the book. This book getting banned is pretty big. When people who hate Roosh are starting to defend him- there is clearly shift starting to happen. A few years ago it was a lot "easier" to call Roosh a 'rapist', but in the era of "#metoo" - it doesn't work when there are ACTUAL predators (like Weinstein and Spacey).

[N°6]

Just used a UK Audible credit to purchase the audiobook to preempt a UK ban.

[ms224]

Roosh, how is this not similar to a SLAAP suit?

Some entity pretends to be defamed, then uses its position to silence you via a third part
I'm not even remotely pretending to be a lawyer but this smells very shaky legal ground. Furthermore, you
have a means to show financial damages.

Call someone like marc radanzaa and see what they say.

Discovery between amazon and huffpost should be interesting, to say the least. If it turns out they are in fact cordinating
i think this would have major implications.

Again, if your livestream and youtube stuff falls into consitutionally protected speech, and youtube is a public place, how is this not a
test case to expand Marshal to the online sphere?

Beinvineto, thats just fucked up in all possible respects. When the president says shitholes, I think this is what he means.

[RedPillUK]

(09-10-2018 08:42 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

^^^ A tell they are not responsible is how hard they are trying to push that they are responsible. This seems to be a case of the Huffpost trying to stay relevant. I've had far bigger outlets shit on me and have nothing happen.

Really? I think it's the sort of thing that they spend 100% of their time doing. They are all warriors for the left not actual journalists and maybe they are still mad at you for publically calling them out in that press conference.

However, it's nice of them to alert us exactly who is responsible for this.

A girl with a weird foreheard called Jesselyn Cook, and a soyboy guy who looks like a Starbucks Barista named Sebastian Murdock, and an honourable mention to Chris Mathias and the whole HuffPost team.

[Thrill Jackson]

I am so sick of this shit. Sick and tired. I literally do not see Amazon stopping this at all unless Trump intervenes in some way. If we protest in person we get doxxed and our careers are over. I literally feel like I'm in a prison cell when shit likes this happpens because if I complain, I'm seen as "pro rape" or a "rape apologist". It's so damn awful.

[Thrill Jackson]

(09-10-2018 09:47 PM)CH-Toronto Wrote:  

Roosh isn't part of the "club" and rising on the best sellers list definitely invoked this ban. As much as I'm a fan, and starting to disagree with what he has to say, imagine if Jordan Peterson spoke about the book. This book getting banned is pretty big. When people who hate Roosh are starting to defend him- there is clearly shift starting to happen. A few years ago it was a lot "easier" to call Roosh a 'rapist', but in the era of "#metoo" - it doesn't work when there are ACTUAL predators (like Weinstein and Spacey).

Who's defending Roosh? The only guy I see doing that is MikeCF

[MidJack]

Tomorrow, I will figure out how to send 35USD of my BTC for the collection. I can't make it happen right now.

I won't buy anything from Amazon again. 3 months ago, cancelled Prime. This is the straw.

[RedPillUK]

I agree talking with a legal expert like Randazza is the first thing to do in this situation.

(09-10-2018 09:47 PM)CH-Toronto Wrote:  

Roosh isn't part of the "club" and rising on the best sellers list definitely invoked this ban. As much as I'm a fan, and starting to disagree with what he has to say, imagine if Jordan Peterson spoke about the book. This book getting banned is pretty big. When people who hate Roosh are starting to defend him- there is clearly shift starting to happen. A few years ago it was a lot "easier" to call Roosh a 'rapist', but in the era of "#metoo" - it doesn't work when there are ACTUAL predators (like Weinstein and Spacey).

That would be great, but probably unlikely he's a bit blue pill. Cernovich has come out in support. Maybe you can speak to Infowars or Rebel Media, or anyone for extra publicity. You could even pressure HuffPost on twitter for an interview, doubt they would give it to you but it would only go to show that they are not interested in actually speaking or listening to you.

[CH-Toronto]

(09-10-2018 10:12 PM)Thrill Jackson Wrote:  

Who's defending Roosh? The only guy I see doing that is MikeCF

People are literally saying, "I don't like Roosh, BUT this is wrong". Maybe it's not so much "defending" Roosh, but people are understanding the gravity of the situation and see it a step beyond normal boundaries.

[Bienvenuto]

(09-10-2018 10:02 PM)ms224 Wrote:  

Roosh, how is this not similar to a SLAAP suit?

Some entity pretends to be defamed, then uses its position to silence you via a third part
I'm not even remotely pretending to be a lawyer but this smells very shaky legal ground. Furthermore, you
have a means to show financial damages.

Call someone like marc radanzaa and see what they say.

Discovery between amazon and huffpost should be interesting, to say the least. If it turns out they are in fact cordinating
i think this would have major implications.

Again, if your livestream and youtube stuff falls into consitutionally protected speech, and youtube is a public place, how is this not a
test case to expand Marshal to the online sphere?

Beinvineto, thats just fucked up in all possible respects. When the president says shitholes, I think this is what he means.

Whats fucked up is that this left wing Californian feminist professor took part and all she ever got from it was academic promotion, fellowship and acclaim whilst Amazon uncritically continue to sell the book.

(Personally, I think she should be allowed to sell the book but then so should Roosh be able to sell his comparatively mild tome. This is the same Amazon that sells Mein Kampf after all)

Roosh, to go with everything else, this is another stick to beat Amazon with.

[Axel99]

How can I buy the audiobook?

[trippin_squares]

Even Trump won't be able to stop this. Amazon would take ANY federal gov't intervention to the Supreme Court, who will in all likelihood rule in Amazon's favor because FREE MARKET RULES or something.

[ms224]

Wouldn't this be considered accessory to a murder in the USA, even if it happened abroad?

Someone has to sue the shit out of these fucks who are dividing up the net, and step one is to have standing. TOS is not a get out of constitutionality card that SV thinks it is.

Here in the CO, for those unfamiliar with it, we have our own Civil Rights commission and the resultant Master Piece Cake Shop vs commie rats supreme court case. One of the major aspects of it was the different treatment of the owner vs others who had similar cases. That seems relevant there.

Whats the Google PHD guys lawsuit doing at the moment? Perhaps we should ask GoogleBro to weigh in on this.

TrippinSquares, monopoly positions have been quite consistently slapped down over the last 100years by the supreme court. Plenty of precedent for that and if.

(09-10-2018 10:19 PM)Bienvenuto Wrote:  

(09-10-2018 10:02 PM)ms224 Wrote:  

Roosh, how is this not similar to a SLAAP suit?

Some entity pretends to be defamed, then uses its position to silence you via a third part
I'm not even remotely pretending to be a lawyer but this smells very shaky legal ground. Furthermore, you
have a means to show financial damages.

Call someone like marc radanzaa and see what they say.

Discovery between amazon and huffpost should be interesting, to say the least. If it turns out they are in fact cordinating
i think this would have major implications.

Again, if your livestream and youtube stuff falls into consitutionally protected speech, and youtube is a public place, how is this not a
test case to expand Marshal to the online sphere?

Beinvineto, thats just fucked up in all possible respects. When the president says shitholes, I think this is what he means.

Whats fucked up is that this left wing Californian feminist professor took part and all she ever got from it was academic promotion, fellowship and acclaim whilst Amazon uncritically continue to sell the book.

(Personally, I think she should be allowed to sell the book but then so should Roosh be able to sell his comparatively mild tome. This is the same Amazon that sells Mein Kampf after all)

Roosh, to go with everything else, this is another stick to beat Amazon with.

[Thrill Jackson]

(09-10-2018 10:15 PM)CH-Toronto Wrote:  

(09-10-2018 10:12 PM)Thrill Jackson Wrote:  

Who's defending Roosh? The only guy I see doing that is MikeCF

People are literally saying, "I don't like Roosh, BUT this is wrong". Maybe it's not so much "defending" Roosh, but people are understanding the gravity of the situation and see it a step beyond normal boundaries.

Who? Specifically

[Le Patriarche]

[Gmac]

I have a hunch the book will only sell more now. Going to draw way more attention to it and expand your audience. Time to plug the other webstore like mad.

[El Pistolero]

1) Has any book ever been removed from Amazon? Some sites say that only holocaust denying books have.

2) Roosh recently criticized (((them))) on YouTube.

3) Roosh is on the SPLC hate list.

4) Democrats were pressing Amazon to ban "hate speech" as defined by the SPLC, reported the NYPost.

5) It doesn't make sense to ban Game based on content and leave the other books (from Roosh or even other authors) there.

6) Huffington Post vendetta also doesn't make much sense. If the "rape" on Bang Iceland is the issue, Amazon should either ban only this book, or ban Roosh completely.

7) Why ban the old books now?

[JoSuado]

Roosh,

1) Congratulations, now you are officially a thought criminal.

2) Not trying to teach you marketing, but now you must say everywhere that you are a censored author, selling a censored book, because you have censored ideas. Information is antifragile, they are helping to publicize your book.

3) This reaffirms my idea that you should write a book on the history of game (or in the history of neomasculinity). How did we come to this point that teaching game became a crime? There is a whole history to tell.

[louiebeans]

Damn Roosh, this is a dark rabbit hole that will only get deeper as YT and Amazon ban content they deem "hate speech". Yet many videos, books, and content on both sites are still available. I was planning on buying Game on paperback when I got my next paycheck, but wow... I will not support their fuckery and will buy be it through your site...