Home / This Month Popular / Why You Should Not Go See “Mad Max: Feminist Road”

Why You Should Not Go See “Mad Max: Feminist Road”

charlize theoron
Aaron Clarey
Captain Capitalism is the resident economist of the mano/androsphere. He is a misanthropic, hedonist, nihilistic, cynical type, but he keeps getting proved right every day. He is the author of "Enjoy the Decline," "Worthless," and "Bachelor Pad Economics" He also runs the advisory "Asshole Consulting." You can read his daily rantings at his blog Captain Capitalism.
May 11, 2015 Culture
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
Not to get all “Reaxxiony” on you, but the geek inside of me was excited when I saw the previews and marketing material for “1886: The Order.” Great period in Western Civilization history. An environment that one could get lost in. And technology (supported by Nikola Tesla) that promised those new, fun, fantastic weapons you’d need to take on an undead horde.
It flopped worse than Operation Market Garden.
The-Order-1886-Taipei-Game-Show-Screenshot-1
Of course, this just reiterated a lesson that my hope (1886 would be a good video game) made me temporarily forget: Rarely does a game, book, or a movie live up to the hype surrounding it. And sadly the same thing can be said for “Mad Max: Fury Road.”
If you were like me, the explosions, fire tornadoes, even the symphonic score surrounding “Fury Road’s” first trailer made your attendance a foregone conclusion. It looked like a straight-up guy flick. No fucking around.  Perhaps even a little, hidden acknowledgement from the director that when the shit hits the fan, it will be men like Jack Donovan Mad Max who will be in charge.
But then my spidey senses started noticing a couple things.
Charlize Theron kept showing up a lot in the trailers, while Tom Hardy (Mad Max) seemed to have cameo appearances. Charlize Theron sure talked a lot during the trailers, while I don’t think I’ve heard one line from Tom Hardy. And finally, Charlize Theron’s character barked orders to Mad Max.
Nobody barks orders to Mad Max.
Sure enough, what I suspected (but desperately wanted NOT to be true) was confirmed with two articles in the past week. One, Eve Ensler, author of “The Vagina Monologues” was consulted by the director to consult the female actresses in Fury Road about what it’s like being sex slaves. Her presumed expertise in this area was based on work she claimed to have done in the Congo. Work I investigated and deemed “fishy” in a recent podcast (around the 1hr 6 min mark).
Two, of all the outdated, obsolete, Baby Boomer leftist rags, TIME MAGAZINE just comes outright and says it.
“Here’s a surprise: Tom Hardy, a.k.a. Mad Max, isn’t the star of Mad Max: Fury Road. Charlize Theron is. An even bigger surprise? Vagina Monologues author Eve Ensler consulted on what turns out to be a very feminist film….Theron, not Hardy, leads the charge; she also does the majority of the fighting.”
Alas, I was forced to accept reality.  Fury Road was not going to be a movie made for men. It was going to be a feminist piece of propaganda posing as a guy flick. And like “1886: The Order” I would be let down, and would have to pin my hopes on something else.
The real issue is not whether feminism has infiltrated and co-opted Hollywood, ruining nearly every potentially-good action flick with a forced female character or an unnecessary romance sub-plot to eek out that extra 3 million in female attendees.
It has.
And the real issue is not whether Hollywood has the audacity to remove the name sake of a movie franchise called MAD FREAKING MAX, and replace it with an impossible female character in an effort to kowtow to feminism.
It has.
It’s whether men in America and around the world are going to be duped by explosions, fire tornadoes, and desert raiders into seeing what is guaranteed to be nothing more than feminist propaganda, while at the same time being insulted AND tricked into viewing a piece of American culture ruined and rewritten right in front of their very eyes.
Mad-Max
The truth is I’m angry about the extents Hollywood and the director of Fury Road went to trick me and other men into seeing this movie. Everything VISUALLY looks amazing. It looks like that action guy flick we’ve desperately been waiting for where it is one man with principles, standing against many with none.
But let us be clear. This is the vehicle by which they are guaranteed to force a lecture on feminism down your throat. This is the Trojan Horse feminists and Hollywood leftists will use to (vainly) insist on the trope women are equal to men in all things, including physique, strength, and logic. And this is the subterfuge they will use to blur the lines between masculinity and femininity, further ruining women for men, and men for women.
So do yourself and all men across the world a favor. Not only REFUSE to see the movie, but spread the word to as many men as possible. Not all of them have the keen eye we do here at ROK. And most will be taken in by fire tornadoes and explosions. Because if they sheepishly attend and Fury Road is a blockbuster, then you, me, and all the other men (and real women) in the world will never be able to see a real action movie ever again that doesn’t contain some damn political lecture or moray about feminism, SJW-ing, and socialism.
That and you can expect Hollywood to further condition young women to be like “Imperator Furiosa” and not Sophia Loren. In the meantime, if you want to watch a real action flick I recommend watching “Kelly’s Heroes” instead.
UPDATE: Our Call To Boycott Mad Max Movie Spurs Avalanche Of Mainstream Media Anger
UPDATE 2: See the author’s podcast response to the media here
Aaron Clarey
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Roosh World Tour 2015
Starting this summer, Roosh is holding a private 4-hour event called "The State Of Man" in the cities of Berlin, London, Washington DC, New York City, Montreal, and Toronto. It will be composed of a lecture, Q&A, and meet & greet. Click here to learn more.
We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.
Avatar
Join the discussion…

  • in this conversation
⬇ Drag and drop your images here to upload them.
        Media preview placeholder
        Log in with
        or sign up with Disqus or pick a name
        ?

        Disqus is a discussion network

        • Disqus never moderates or censors. The rules on this community are its own.
        • Your email is safe with us. It's only used for moderation and optional notifications.
        • Don't be a jerk or do anything illegal. Everything is easier that way.
        By signing up, you agree to the Disqus Basic Rules, Terms of Service, and Privacy Policy.
        By posting, you agree to the Disqus Basic Rules, Terms of Service, and Privacy Policy.
        • Avatar
          This comment was deleted.
          • yup > Guest 11 days ago
            Yeah, whoever thought women would be leading Men in Post-Apocalyptic/WROL is Dead Wrong, and they Probably have never heard of the Middle East.
              see more
                  • jakee308 > chrisk 9 days ago
                    Which is fictional. As are ALL STORIES of Female Societies.
                    Everyone of them is a legend created by men for amusement of other men.
                      see more
                      • PavePusher > jakee308 9 days ago
                        Some of the Queens of England have a tower room awaiting you....
                          see more
                        • Vixxin > jakee308 8 days ago
                          Untrue, there are societies in Africa and South America that are predominantly female run tribes.
                          Cue the racism you're immediately thinking because I said Africa and South America.
                          "Of course it would only be there, those niggers are too stupid and let their women walk all over them. They should put them in their place by fucking them and then sticking their head on spikes to lure some delicious sharks with which we can wrestle with our bare hands"
                          Was that pretty close? I think I did a good impression of the general consensus around here.
                            see more
                            • Sailor25 > Vixxin 7 days ago
                              The fact that none of these female dominated societies that you mention have any significant cultural achievements speaks volumes.
                              Can you give me one comparatively advanced culture that was run primarily by women? Can you even give me one where they just had the ability to write?
                              The thing about men running societies is that they tend to create societies that are not only successful but also tend to revolve around keeping women and children safe. Hence so many men get killed at work and so few women get killed at work.
                              Men running societies is actually in the best interests of men and women.
                                see more
                                • acidpop5 > Sailor25 7 days ago
                                  We clearly have a very different definition of a successful society. After all, the Nazis were established by men, Africa, the middle east, Rome, Stalin's Russia, Mussolini's Italy, and this country that currently leads the world In incarceration and not much else. the truth is much simpler... power corrupts, and corruption is equal opportunity.
                                    see more
                                  • Avatar
                                    This comment was deleted.
                                  • missron80 > Sailor25 7 days ago
                                    Actually, Jewish culture was Matriacal for much of its history and only recently, history-wise, became dominated by men.
                                      see more
                                    • Vixxin > Sailor25 7 days ago
                                      Actually, the fact that they tend to live longer in smaller communities and have a huge focus on family speaks volumes.
                                      It's less about being female or male and more about the theory of monkey mind. Meaning humans only have much of a capacity to care of up to 150 people. People we are not seeing face to face or don't have names like the phrase "millions dying" we see as 2D and not real. The internet has a similar effect.
                                      Of course not, because it wasn't their place to do so. Wasn't the commoners place either. There are plenty of cultures that thought of women as less then equal. I don't understand how people can ignore that information and use it as proof.
                                      Show me a society where neither sex was thought of as better or worse and see what happened there. If males ended up taking over anyway, with out the females complaining, then males are probably geared more towards being leaders, and I don't have a doubt about that personally, but it's not a rule, it's a general observation.
                                      Given the other comments here, it would seem more that men here would run societies on what is best for their personal biases. Clearly if plenty of women disagree, get killed and "rebel" that's not what's best for them. Most of the men here seem to care about women birthing children and the ability for them to fuck them. That's not caring about women or children, it's just getting them born either through manipulation or force to propagate a species that has more then enough children ... and more then enough terrible parents stuck in crystalline thinking instead of fluid. Humans don't need more people and we certainly don't need men or women working dangerous jobs anymore once technology takes those jobs.
                                      Something I really don't understand is that I celebrate all the people in history and right now working to make things better for everyone, from doctors, to scientists to the local garbage person, people who make a difference and keep things running. Be they male or female, I really don't care. From Madam Curie to Albert Einstein. But the guys here and possibly women who agree with them seem to think that by virtue of being male that they'll do something great. That's clearly not the case.
                                      There are plenty of women out there who have no issue being subservient to a guy, not minding being a stay at home wife or trophy wife as they're more interested in protection then love. Why doesn't everyone here go after them? Or is it that they think all women should be that way?
                                        see more
                                        • Sailor25 > Vixxin 7 days ago
                                          On one thing we can agree, there are plenty of morons on here commenting. I'm detecting a distinct tang of frustrated Beta Male.
                                          However you are wrong that small "equal" as you put it groups live long lives. Among traditional hunter-gatherers, the average life expectancy at birth varies from 21 to 37 years. Even if quietly ignore the massive infant mortality of those cultures we end up with a modal age of mortality in hunter-gatherers that can range from 68 in the Hiwi to 78 in the Tsimane. Which is still about a decade behind developed societies like the US.
                                          I still hold that men are natural leaders and by their competitive nature insert themselves into industries that run the society. That's not to say women don't perform an essential role or that they should be side-lined. As I already said men run societies to suit women not to suit men. Take a little while to check how much economic output is produced by men and how much is consumed by men. Another interesting thing you could check would be how much money is directed by the government to benefit women in healthcare or social programmes compared to that which is directed purely at men's programs. Homelessness amongst women and men is another example.
                                          If you take even a cursory look at the way that men have organized society (it's largely men doing this although it's largely women telling them to do it). You will see society has been organized to provide a disproportionate amount of resources to women and children to the detriment of men (particularly single men).
                                            see more
                                            • PolyEsta Wyldesage > Sailor25 5 days ago
                                              Why is it that the guys who always throw around Beta male and call themselves Alpha males, are usually unsuccessful professionally, physically, and can't usually find a woman who isn't methed out?
                                              The fact you have to keep insisting men are better leaders, and freak out over a bald tough chick in a movie, proves that your a bigger pussy than my grandma's vagina.
                                                see more
                                                • zaxtervid > Sailor25 6 days ago
                                                  Probably because traditionally, they've needed the help more. What with men hoarding over 90 percent of the wealth, calling all the shots economically and politically, forbidding them to work or vote…gee, wonder why things were set up that way….
                                                    see more
                                                    • Cortez > zaxtervid 6 days ago
                                                      So you're saying women haven't been able to reach their full potential because they've been oppressed by men? Why have men been able to oppress them? Surely if women were equal to men they would have been able to prevent their own oppression. So why haven't they? It's not like there are so many more men in the world than women. It's not a numbers game. Their populations are around the same. What is it then? Why have men in virtually every society been able to rise to dominance at the expense of women? Maybe, just maybe, it's because the two sexes just aren't equal.
                                                        see more
                                                        • Cpt_Justice > Cortez 5 days ago
                                                          "Surely if women were equal to men they would have been able to prevent their own oppression."
                                                          I guess blacks are inferior to whites because white people were able to enslave them for so long.
                                                          SMH...
                                                            see more
                                                            • RobertParker14 > Cortez 5 days ago
                                                              Lol no its not that they aren't equal, it's that they aren't identical.
                                                              Men and women have different strengths. This doesn't mean that they aren't "equal", when everything is balanced out. It DEFINITELY doesn't mean that they should't be treated as equals in society, and given equal rights - which is what people mean when they talk about equality in society.
                                                              Men took the powerful positions in society throughout history because for a huge, huge majority of human's existence on this planet, from caveman times until at least the dawn of civilization (which is like 50,000 years) rule was entirely imposed by those who could take it - the physically strongest, who of course happened to be men.
                                                              Now I don't think anyone these days, even the most extreme MRA/feminist, would claim that is the best way to run a society. Most of us these days agree that intelligence, moral fiber, logical reasoning ability, communications skills etc are FAR more reliable indicators of whether or not someone is likely to be a good leader than whether they can pick up a club and beat their political rivals to death.
                                                              Throughout human history, society has relentlessly moved away from the "might is right" paradigm. A Mad Max scenario becoming reality might change that of course, but that's purely baseless speculation - such a situation may never come about, or if it does it may swiftly resolve itself and the world will resume its ongoing progress. There's no way to know and its pointless speculation.
                                                              But the fact is that men did not historically hold power and run societies, because they were somehow superior. It was because the cards were stacked in their favor when it came to physical strength. Those days are gone.
                                                                see more
                                                                • zaxtervid > Cortez 5 days ago
                                                                  Because they're not as greedy as men, usually. And there are biological reasons for that, one being that they bear children, so greed isn't beneficial to sustaining human population expansion. Studies show that when a woman gets money, the people around her benefit and their lives improve. When it goes to the man, HIS life improves only. They also tend to be more compassionate and giving in general. So yeah, it's only partially their fault they aren't "equal". They actually care about others, not just themselves. UNLIKE YOU. Maybe you could learn something from women.
                                                                    see more
                                                                  • Sailor25 > zaxtervid 6 days ago
                                                                    So your theory is that men have been hoarding 90% of the wealth and power and not letting women get a look in, let’s have a closer look at that. Like all good lies it starts with truth, men certainly control the vast majority of the visible power and wealth but how/why did they get it and what are they doing with it. So let’s look at what men do with all that money and power to try to get a real picture of what’s happening.
                                                                    Let’s first look at the household finances of the ordinary man in the street. Japan is a Male dominated culture right, well 74% of
                                                                    Japanese household budgets are controlled by women. The same happens in the UK
                                                                    where Fifty-one per cent of females said they maintained complete control over
                                                                    the family purse strings compared with only 36 per cent of males. So after going out and making that money these men come back and literally just give the money to their wives. You will also note that in Japan which is perceived as more patriarchal than the UK the women are more likely to be given control of the family budget. Being given control of money I didn’t earn is the kind of discrimination I could handle.
                                                                    Now let’s look at politics. Men dominate politics that is without a doubt a fact but what do they do with that power. Women make up the majority of the electorate (there are more women of voting age than men) so
                                                                    they have actually had more say in choosing that government than the men have.
                                                                    Women also have a disproportionately large amount of government money spent on
                                                                    them in almost every sphere that the government controls, this is particularly
                                                                    the case in the crucial sphere of healthcare. In the UK women were allowed to retire 5 years earlier than men even though men were expected to die younger. So you have a situation where the group that has provided significantly less of the tax money has significantly more of the government spending. Having more money spent on me by the government than gets taken away from me in tax is the kind of discrimination I could handle.
                                                                    What about women’s place in politics historically, they got the vote much later than men right? In the UK Men got universal suffrage through the Representation of the
                                                                    People Act in 1918 (as a direct result of WW1) Women got the right in 1928 a mere decade later (and they didn’t have to stand knee deep in French mud being shot at to get it.) Considering the UK/English parliament has a history of around 1000 years a 10 year gap suddenly doesn’t seem such a massive hardship.
                                                                    What about in disasters and emergencies? The captain officers and crew of the Titanic where all men (at least all the ones who
                                                                    counted where). Yet although they had total power over the vessel they actively
                                                                    chose to save the women and children first. When the chips where down they chose a course of action which they knew would significantly increase their own chance of dying in order to save a group of people who were selected simple because they had vaginas. I imagine that if you had gone round the deck of that vessel and asked the women whether they would swap their place in the lifeboat for the right to vote you wouldn’t have had many takers.
                                                                    I could go on and on. I could literally write a dissertation on the vast number of areas where men have been and still are discriminated against in favour of women but I won’t bother. All I ask is that next time you hear some feminist version of history you question it with an open mind. The
                                                                    feminist view of history is one of grievance, they highlight the negative things women had to endure while ignoring the areas where women had advantages or areas where men had/have a worse time of it.
                                                                    As for me, I think men have more power and wealth because they are more likely to seek out power and wealth than women. This is because men are attracted to women and women are attracted to power and wealth. Most women on the other hand much prefer to be married to the CEO of a company than be the CEO of a company, they would much rather be married to the Prime Minister than be the Prime Minister. For very valid biological reasons that
                                                                    will continue to be the case and as such men will continue to be thrown into
                                                                    the economic meat grinder to service the needs of women.
                                                                      see more
                                                                      • thornsoftristan > Sailor25 5 days ago
                                                                        Wow.
                                                                        "Women make up the majority of the electorate (there are more women of voting age than men) so they have actually had more say in choosing that government than the men have."
                                                                        More nonsense. When you go shopping for shampoo: and the only "choice" you have is anti-dandruff or dry formulas...do you consider yourself having a "say" in your shopping choices, b/c you happen to choose "dry" over "dandruff?" (esp. if your hair is "normal?"). No, of course not. The same goes for "women making choices," in an arena dictated and dominated by men.
                                                                        "Women got the right in 1928 a mere decade later (and they didn’t have to
                                                                        stand knee deep in French mud being shot at to get it.)"
                                                                        No, they had to stand in the cold and the rain; be ignored or laughed at; and finally get the vote a "mere decade" later, over the protests of a lot of men.
                                                                        "I could literally write a dissertation on the vast number of areas where
                                                                        men have been and still are discriminated against in favour of women
                                                                        but I won’t bother."
                                                                        Thank gods, b/c while your post was an interesting meditation on "men's lack of rights," it's also a mighty load of...well, apples and oranges comparisons.
                                                                        You cite saving women and children first as somehow "indicative" that "women have the power." Unless you think that instinctive imperatives equate to a power-structure that cuts across political, social and cultural lines...that's kinda nuts.
                                                                        Just b/c some men will stop to open a door for a woman or defend her life at his expense: doesn't equate to a "power over" relationship. A man might ALSO defend his house from invaders...is his house in a position of power over him, too? Or, what about his dog? If a man strove to put a dog in a lifeboat before himself...does that mean that the dog has "rulership" over the man??
                                                                        No, clearly it doesn't. Merely b/c a person risks his life to save or give deference to someone/something, is not an indication of the power structure.
                                                                        Women can be valued...as objects, even treasure. This "placing on a pedestal" doesn't clarify the power-structures in the slightest.
                                                                          see more
                                                                          • Sailor25 > thornsoftristan 5 days ago
                                                                            Ok you raise quite a few points here a few good but mostly bad so here is my rebuttal on a case by case basis.
                                                                            1.
                                                                            While I agree whole heartedly that politics is rather like being told you can buy any shampoo you like as long as its brand X or Y. However you have framed that as purely a woman’s problem, we just had an
                                                                            election in the UK and I can tell you that David Cameron and Ed Milliband have nothing to do with my life. They have no knowledge of it and no experience of it beyond what some focus groups have told them. Just because David Cameron has a penis and I also have a penis in no way means I have a greater say in the
                                                                            political process than my wife does.
                                                                            Like I already said about feminists “they highlight the negative things women had to endure while ignoring the areas where women had advantages or areas where men had/have a worse time of it.” In this case the 99.999% of men who aren’t politicians are in exactly the same boat as women and just as disenfranchised. It’s also rather telling that you don’t try to refute the undeniable fact that although most politicians are men they have organized government to ensure that the resources of the state are disproportionately directed towards women. Women obviously subconsciously know this because they tend to vote for statist parties that want to increase state spending and send even more resources towards women.
                                                                            2.
                                                                            In WW1 700,000 British soldiers were killed. That's around 11.5% of the total mobilized. That’s 700,000 men smashed to bits, rent to pieces torn apart by machine guns and shellfire. On top of that there is the innumerable others that had to carry the horrors of what they saw or the physical disabilities of injury for the rest of their life. They did that ostensibly to safeguard British Society and as such where granted a greater say in that society through voting rights. If you think that is analogous with standing in the rain being laughed then let’s just shut this debate down now because in order to have a conversation we both need to be on the same planet.
                                                                            One decade in the historical context of an institution that has existed for a millennia is an insignificant fraction of time. So I agree
                                                                            with your word choice when you say they obtained the vote a “mere decade later”
                                                                            3.
                                                                            The woman and children first is only one example I cited that shows women have the power I accept your point that saving your dog does not mean the dog has power over you. However it certainly means that the dog has soft power. Women of that period did not have the direct power to demand what they wanted instead they had (and still have) the ability attract and co-opt rather than coerce. If you force somebody at the point of a gun they will always be looking for a way to get out of what they have been ordered to do, if you make somebody believe that actually they want to do what you want them to do or that they have a responsibility to do what you want them to do then you have real power.
                                                                            Think about it, throughout history men have been led to believe that it is their duty to put women before themselves in a whole myriad of different situations. On the Titanic a group of people who had one particular set of genitals chose to allow themselves to die in order to save a group of people who had a different kind of genitals. And you know what it probably didn’t occur to them for a second that it was in any way unfair. If that doesn’t count as power in your book then we have a different idea of what constitutes power.
                                                                            (Your references about saving houses and other inanimate objects is irrelevant. A man defends his house to benefit himself because it is his house, nor is there a significant social obligation to defend your house. A man saving a woman at the expense of his own life is benefiting the women. If there is a social obligation to defend the woman at his own expense then that woman is in a position of power over him.)
                                                                            4.
                                                                            Yes I believe that instinctive imperatives equate to a power-structure that cuts across political, social and cultural lines. Anyone who doesn’t believe that has obviously not spent much time studying humanity because it is obviously evident throughout all human cultures. For example people instinctively obey those that they consider to be of a higher position of social authority than themselves. If a police man ran at you shouting “clear the area” your reaction will be a lot different than if a toddler shouted the same thing. You would instinctively be more inclined to obey the policeman than
                                                                            the toddler just as people are instinctively more likely to jump to the defence
                                                                            of a woman than a man. When that is spread out across a whole of society so
                                                                            that one group is offered greater rights than another then yes that is power. (Before you point out I recognize the flip side is true in some areas where men are
                                                                            more likely to be listened to or get their way but by and large society is set
                                                                            up to serve women not men.)
                                                                            5.
                                                                            I agree that women are valued as objects, even treasure but again this is a pretty similar position that men are in. Women are valued based on factors such as beauty and charm men are valued on utility, please refer to point 2. for a moment. What about those 700,000 men, how did society view them? Where they viewed as beautiful objects to be treasured and put in the lifeboat first or where they a blunt instrument that British society used to bludgeon another society that threatened our way of life? If I am going to be
                                                                            objectified I would rather be a treasure on a pedestal than a hammer which can be used and discarded as soon as it is of no more value.
                                                                            I’m not saying inequality doesn’t exist, there are areas where women have disadvantages and areas where men have disadvantages. Having opened my eyes to how society is organized it is clear to me that the average man in the street suffers more inequality than the average women we just don’t have a professional group of academics whose sole job is to highlight the areas we are oppressed. When a structural issue causes men to have a disadvantage it is blamed on male behaviour when structural issues cause a woman to have a disadvantage it is seen as an example of male oppression that needs an international movement and legislation to stop it.
                                                                            Men are dying on average several years younger we are 15 times more likely to be killed at work. Men are statistically going to be jailed for longer than a woman for exactly the same crime, we are more likely to commit suicide, more likely to be homeless. By some estimates about a 3rd
                                                                            of men in the world have undergone genital mutilation and this is not only
                                                                            legal in pretty much every country in the world but very few people even recognize
                                                                            cutting of part of a child’s penis as a problem. We can talk about disadvantages all day if you like, I guarantee you will run out of examples before I do.
                                                                            I fully agree that the small clique at the top of society that are calling the shots are men but don’t let that fool you, it isn’t a man’s world and it never has been.
                                                                              see more
                                                                            • AlbinoWino > Sailor25 5 days ago
                                                                              Oh man, when examining the history of men and women throughout the ages let's bring up the Titanic when suffered their worst heartache....gloss over the parts of how many women have been raped over the centuries and not given any rights. But ya know....priorities.
                                                                                see more
                                                          Disqus helps you find new and interesting content, discussions and products. Some sponsors and ecommerce sites may pay us for these recommendations and links. Learn more or give us feedback.

                                                          Also on Return Of Kings

                                                          Aaron Clarey
                                                          Captain Capitalism is the resident economist of the mano/androsphere. He is a misanthropic, hedonist, nihilistic, cynical type, but he keeps getting proved right every day. He is the author of "Enjoy the Decline," "Worthless," and "Bachelor Pad Economics" He also runs the advisory "Asshole Consulting." You can read his daily rantings at his blog Captain Capitalism.
                                                          May 11, 2015 Culture
                                                          Roosh World Tour 2015

                                                          Starting this June, Roosh is holding events in Berlin, London, Washington DC, New York City, Montreal, and Toronto. Visit RooshWorldTour.com to learn more.
                                                          Weekly Newsletter
                                                          Free Text Messaging Guide

                                                          Arrange dates with our easy copy/paste method. Enter your first name and email below to grab the 9-page PDF guide and receive twice monthly updates highlighting our best articles and dating advice...
                                                          We guarantee 100% privacy. Your information will not be shared.
                                                          All Topics
                                                          Tip Jar
                                                          Do you enjoy the content on ROK? If so, please consider making a donation. Click here to learn more.
                                                          close
                                                          loading...

                                                          7.3k
                                                          Shares
                                                          1.6k527114
                                                          0%
                                                          10%
                                                          20%
                                                          30%
                                                          40%
                                                          50%
                                                          60%
                                                          70%
                                                          80%
                                                          90%
                                                          100%