The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive is on! Please consider donating through the PayPal button below. Thanks!

On his forum today, Roosh V posted this rather chilling assessment of his fans:

With so many mass shootings in the States these days, it’s just a matter of time until one of them happens to follow me on Twitter, read ROK, or like a handful of my Youtube videos.

What!?

There have been, according to one informal survey, 247 mass shootings in the United States so far this year (that is, shootings with more tha four victims, including the shooter). That’s a lot, but there are 245 million people over the age of 18 in the US. So we’re talking about one mass shooting per year per million people.

According to TwitterAudit, Roosh has about 13,000 real Twitter followers, and about 16,000 YouTube subscribers, many of them presumably the same people. His websites draw tens of thousands of unique visitors a day (including a number of his Twitter and Youtube followers) . But only about 30% of them are from the US, at least according to Alexa. So let’s say that he’s got maybe ten thousand real fans in the US, only a portion of whom could be tied to Roosh with a comment on his site or a “like” on one of his videos.

If Roosh thinks it’s “statistically likely” that one of these people literally goes out and shoots a bunch of people, either he can’t do math or he thinks his followers are much more violent and unstable and angry than your average Joe.

I mean, I think that a significant portion of his followers are ticking time bombs, but it’s strange to see that Roosh agrees with me on this.

So what does Roosh intend to do? Will he try to rachet down the hateful rhetoric? Will he ask his regular commenters to be on the lookout for anyone who shows up in the Return of Kings comments or on the Roosh V Forum who seems like he might be another Elliot Rodger in the making?

Nope. He’s not really interested in trying to stop a shooting. He’s more worried that a shooting will make him look bad.

Existing reporters who hate me in the media will take this casual association and try to say that I must have caused the murderer to go violent, even though my work does not promote violence. They will do this to incite a mob to come down upon us, hoping I will shut down my “hate speech” sites in the same way PUAHate shut down after Elliot Rodgers [sic] went on his killing spree.

His solution? An emergency “protocol” to try to make him look better. He tells his followers that he expects them to:

1. Strongly denounce the violent act. There will be no public sympathy or empathy for a man who decides to take the road of violence. Denounce the murderer and his crime on the relevant forum thread. I will also make a public statement condemning the violence. 2. No jokes or sarcasm, especially towards the victim. Absolutely do not make jokes about the victim or try to justify their harm, even if the victim turned out to have wronged the murderer (e.g. false rape accusation, bad divorce). Anyone who does this will be immediately banned without warning. Also tone down your use of animated gifs during this time. Consider that the world will be watching us during the media accusation and we have to be direct and sincere with our communication.

That’s right: “tone down your use of animated gifs.”

3. Comment on media articles distancing our community from the killer. Leave comments that condemn the violence and distance our teachings of game and masculinity to the criminal act. You can also do this on Twitter. Call out the trolls that say “I’m a Roosh follower and I support this act” as liars and provocateurs. And that’s it.

So not only does he expect one of his followers to be a future murderer; he also expects that some of his followers would — unless specifically forbidden — react to a killing by one of their own by offering the killer support, or posting crass, jokey animated gifs.

I think he’s probably right about this as well; it’s just odd to see him admit in public what utter shits his commenters are.

One Roosh V Forum regular who calls himself Basil Ransom wonders if there’s some “hypocrisy” in Roosh’s emergency protocol. Because, after all, a lot of the guys on the forum do actually sympathize with mass killers.

Whenever a man goes and commits violence against women in the name of being oppressed or vilified as a man, or being sexually worthless, there have been posters here who publicly sympathize with him, often along the lines of “bitches/feminists had it coming for being bitches/feminists.” … The distinction here is merely a tactical one – show no support for violence when the media limelight is on the forum. But what about when it isn’t? If it’s the right thing to do, condemning violence, shouldn’t you do it when no one is looking? If condemning violence isn’t the right thing to do, wouldn’t it be a lie to suddenly condemn it in the face of media attention?

Roosh responds:

Unlike you, Basil, some of us here care about the long-term longevity of the forum, and understand emergency situations that require us to modify our behavior when the world is examining our every word. No one here embraces or encourages violence during peace time, though sometimes we try to empathize with frustrated males who believe they have nothing to lose. During emergencies, you can share any empathy with such killers through private message.

In other words, in Roosh’s mind, it’s fine to feel sympathy with someone who goes out and shoots a bunch of women for some perceived wrong they’ve done to him. Just not publicly, in his forum, when the media is watching.

Apparently Roosh learned his ethics from GamerGate.

Like Loading...