New Material Month
Realize that while most of which feminism and socialism advocates is outlandishly stupid, and certainly deserves a response, the truth is their numbers and stupidity are staggering and incomprehensible. This has resulted in a limitless number of stupid ideas and stupid thoughts flooding the idea marketplace. And while your visceral reaction may be to shoot each and everyone of them down, I fear all it is doing is driving traffic to otherwise unremarkable and irrelevant feminists. Additionally, as you know, I believe the situation in America is unsalvagable, so why bother wasting your time rushing from fire to fire to vainly put them out?
Ergo, I am suggesting something for The Manosphere and all content generators within – a month where not one reactionary article or post is written in response to the latest idiotic antics of western feminists.
Aaron Clarey’s original post here.
If there’s one thing I truly despise about the current state of the Internet, it’s the list-aggregator pseudo-sites. Not the gentlemen I have listed on the side-bar, mind you – but the numbingly stupid click-bait articles that make up two-thirds of my Facebook feed. “Click this link, the 5th photo will blow your mind!” Maddox did an excellent satire of this stuff with his April Fools video, and it’s not the first time he’s commented on this moose-drip. Titles that directly appeal to your curiosity, and articles which are nothing but high-fructose corn syrup; lots of pretty pictures, an opportunity to feel superior to somebody, and the false-sense of having learned something after reading them, without any true thought or effort involved.
It’s amazing, if you think about it; they’ve managed to create something even more worthless and addictive than television. TV allows you to slide into loafing, placidly sitting on the couch and devouring junk food, as the rotten content distorts your sense of culture, and the commercials train you in feed-lot consumerism. Click-bait is worse, in that it actually engages you; it’s crafted to grab your interest, and drives you to invest yourself in its worthless material. It’s an aspect of the modern world known as “edutainment”.
Go to any new mall, and you’ll see this sort of garbage. For instance, the new mall that opened up north of Calgary is chock-full of style choices that blur the lines between art and information. One area has a “paleolithic” theme (meaning: all prehistory, from caveman to dinosaurs), and of particular note is a stylized brass trilobite set into the flooring. I can sense what the intended response is: a burst of pride amongst the mall-goers who know what a trilobite is, the conflation of a useless factoid with erudition. The sating of our thirst for knowledge in the same way that video games sate our thirst for accomplishment.
Click-bait is edutainment, optimized for the social-media environment. I presume that you hate these articles as well; that 9 out of 10 times when you’ve clicked on them, you’ve come away annoyed with the simplified “truth” being sold, and sworn off of them, no matter how tempting the title… but those aren’t the problem. The problem is the 1 out of 10 that I see learned men sharing.
Click-bait is insidious, it drives traffic to itself so well that the rest of the industry feels compelled to imitate it. This isn’t to say that all writing should Tolstoy, or that all news reporting should be Foreign Affairs – this is room in the market for easy-to-read articles, even list-articles which are well done; Roosh embraced this concept when he created Return of Kings and I think that site is doing a fine job of disseminating red-pill truths. The insidious part is when everything starts imitating the click-bait. In particular, I’ve seen a number of mainstream newspaper articles embracing this concept. The core of the article is the catchy-title which drives traffic; the ‘meat’ of the article is formed to support whatever outrage it tried to invoke.
For writers in the Manosphere, denouncing Feminists is the equivalent of click-bait. When somebody like Roosh, Matt Forney, or Aaron Clarey decides to eviscerate one of these Radicals I click over with glee – I enjoy their prose for its own sake, and I love seeing these demonic destroyers getting taken down a peg… but at the end of the day, did I learn anything? Did their writing improve my life? Do I have a new insight on how the world works? Or am I the equivalent of the ignorant Republican, guffawing over the story of Marine Todd?
Writing a post responding to a Feminist/Marxist/Radical is far too easy; they’re utterly insane, and they don’t have a modicum of logic underlying their opinions. Just look at the #CancelColbert nonsense (or better yet, don’t) to see what I mean. It’s a game of whack-a-mole; insanity knows no bounds, and it’s not as if replying to them will change their minds. Shredding them offers some temporary entertainment to one’s readership, but it doesn’t edify them in any way. I know that I am capable of entertaining my readers, while also offering them something of value; I know that most writers in the Manosphere are capable of this; and yet that insidious urge to write click-bait is always there… some of my most popular articles are anti-Feminist click-bait – and yet my most significant articles are not.
It becomes a race to the bottom; the more Manosphere writers who respond to Feminist nonsense, the more tempting it becomes. As readers, we’re all tempted to click on these articles, despite the fact that we get nothing out of reading them. In the long-run this destroys the Manosphere in the same way that an industry which starts cutting-corners destroys its own market. The visceral demands of the marketplace exist on a separate plane from the principles underlying a company – a business must always adhere to the reality of profit and loss, and yet if it forgets it’s raison d’être, it quickly succumbs to irrelevance, out-competed by somebody who puts forth effort, and makes products that are worth buying.
So with that in mind, in April I’m going to ignore Feminists. If I return to my analysis of The Feminine Mystique it will be in May, and I’m not even sure that I will – four chapters is enough to identify that it’s a house built upon sand: you know this, I know this, and the Feminists aren’t going to listen, so why bother? Instead I’m going to focus on writing positive posts, posts where I create new theories and arguments (or – as C.S. Lewis might say – old theories and arguments which few of us remember) which – I hope – are useful to my readership. Feminism, if it appears at all, will be a footnote, not an opponent. I may write about the situation which Feminism has wrought, but with the goal of making a positive and useful description of the state of affairs – not a negative dismissal of Feminist claims.
Allowing Feminists to set the pace transforms us into part of the feedlot; the useful enemy, as blue-pill and irrelevant as the Republican party is to the Democrats. We can do better – in fact, we must do better – else we are but pawns in their game.
I hope that other writers will consider joining us.
Aaron hit that one out of the park and not a minute too soon. He has done some disgraceful work lately and he was beginning to sound like “just another rant” on the internet. He has raised the bar, and restored my faith in him.
And you, Aurini, have raised it yet again. Something even MORE worthless and addictive than television? Bravo! Post Of The Year material, in my scholarly opinion. Sensationalism, bait, and going ‘over the top’ has destroyed the mainstream media and it will do the same to you guys even faster if you let it.
As a bored reader I am starting to gravitate to bloggers that challenge me and make me think. Good luck to you, and keep up the great work.
The smart are outgunned by the stupid, which is why democracy is not just doomed; it is doom itself.
Cheers, Glen; from what I gather, Aaron’s been pretty busy over the past month, ergo the shorter posts than we’ve been accustomed to.
He mentioned that a while back, but with the sheer volume that he tends to put out, it’s easy to miss the occasional post.
And I’m in full agreement, Unca Bob.
I too have gotten tired of reading about the insanity. I usually skim 3 out of 4 posts on ROK because they’re just repeating things I already know.
Looking forward to your April format. Your strength lies more in philosophy than media analysis.
Davis, you’re a better man than me.
I must continue my daily battle against the godless communists. It may all start to sound the same, but mocking and shaming commies is my mission in life.
The majority are persuaded not by arguments, but by strength. They want to maintain their majority status and will go to whichever side holds it. Right now, the click baiters hold the strength so I can understand why some have taken on this way of writing. However, it will grow old to the short attentioned majority and will go by the wayside like Myspace and Facebook. If we continue to show strength, which I think we are still showing, we will keep gathering more. However, I think you are correct, the time to regroup is now and gather our strength and keep it on task.
ROK, Roosh and the others who have been called to mainstream attention have stood their ground unapologetically. That alone will gather more people. Some of the click bait articles have made that happen. But there is a balance that must be maintained to both garner attention and yet still remain strong.
“as C.S. Lewis might say – old theories and arguments which few of us remember”
It’s a timeless theme; Rothbard covered it well for the dismal science in his Economic Thought Before Adam Smith. He described it as dimly trying to regain paradigms lost. I think the more accurate narrative is that we might find in the ashes what was lost in the fire.
When I was at the Academy one of the instructors admonished my writing by telling me to stop going after the person in the intellectual wheelchair and instead engage my intellectual equals or betters. It’s something that’s stuck with me and changed my outlook. On occasion I still indulge my urge to throw intellectual cripples down a flight of stairs but I understand it’s ultimately degrading to myself. I focus my efforts on finding ideas of a high enough caliber to be worth engaging, this is where I prefer to concentrate my attention. I’m glad the manosphere is learning that lesson.
It’s only worth it when you make it go VIRAL and dox and destroy the bitch’s life, such as the Rachel Cassidy false rape accusation incident in Ohio back in October 2013. Yes it was reactionary. But it went VIRAL and literally tens of millions of people on the internet heard about it and thus it served as a warning to future women who may be tempted to make false rape accusations- do this and we, the internet (and 4chan) may very well destroy your life, bitch.
I only see being reactionary if it creates a huge effect and goes ultra-viral. But being reactionary simply for a couple of hundred guys that may read your article? That’s nothing but a waste of time and a circle jerk.
In short, if you are going to spend effort attacking something, then make it count. Better to drop one nuclear bomb than waste thousands of bullets being ineffective.