Mainstream Feminist Outlets Try To Bury Their Association With Hugo Schwyzer

Hugo Schwyzer, buffoon. Hugo Schwyzer, hypocrite. Hugo Schwyzer, self-proclaimed male feminist leader. Hugo Schwyzer, lover of porn stars, seducer of younger coeds, defiler of the matrimonial vow, potential giver of the herpes simplex Types 1 and 2, self-pegging fap-exposing murder-suicide contemplating part-time homosexing beacon of hope to dumbass feminists and their suck-up allies.

Now we can add one more honorific to Schwyzer’s curriculum vitae: Disgraced, womanly pity whore.

And who, besides Schwyzer himself, helped bring Schwyzer to the depths of the most public of public humiliations? Who was the first to mock his phoniness, ridicule his idiotic male feminist musings, turn him over on the spit for the world to poke with pointed sticks, implicate his supporters and advocates for hitching their fortunes to his ass-kissing self-aggrandizing lies?

Who, indeed.

Schwyster knows all this, too, which makes him a phonyfuck of the highest caliber. The guy spent his early years as a professor cashing in his higher status for the pleasure of fucking his 18-21 year old students. Maybe he is wracked with guilt, and his current ultrafeminist stance is his form of atonement. Or maybe (and more likely, in my view) his hypocritical feminist sycophancy is a ruse to get in the panties of the deluded naifs who take his classes.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that. The difference between me and a lickspittle errand boy like Schwyster is that I don’t go around claiming there’s something psychologically wrong with men for desiring the hot bods and feminine charms of young women. I don’t blame a guy like Schwyster for wanting to stick his dick in his peak fertility students, nor do I stroke feminist egos to earn PC brownie points and page views.

If you want to know who got under Hugo’s skin the most, you need only see which of his tormenters goes missing by name from his meltdown Twitter feed and from his confessionals to less sadistic bloggers than CH.

The reason Hugo doesn’t want to credit the source of his everlasting torment is because CH stuck the shiv in his mottled hide hard and deep, and it’s the twist that still pains him. Unlike many more charitable judgers of Hugo Schwyzer, I feel no pity toward him, nor any incipient feeling of charity. He is a liar, a phonyfuck, a charlatan, and a male attention whore with flapping labia where his mouth should be. He is an enabler of the worst of society, a useful tool conveying the rotten propaganda of assorted losers and misfits and degenerates, singing their off-key tune while he happily cashed in his exploitative scheming for the very nubile rewards his mass of followers tune in to hear him rail against. He is utterly repellent, a lizard in human clothing. I hope that he slices lengthwise, and should he do so, I will dance a happy snoopy dance the likes of which the dark side of the internet has never seen.

But there is a bigger story here than Hugo’s personal twilight, and that is the quickness with which mainstream, widely read feminist media outlets are attempting to bury and conveniently forget their association with Schwyzer. Hugo was, for a long time, a well-regarded paid contributor to such popular feminist and feminism-favoring organs as Jezebel, BlogHer, xojaneThe Atlantic, and The Good Men Project. As Chuck noted,

But a few outlets like The Good Men Project, Jezebel, and The Atlantic took a chance on the history and gender studies professor from Pasadena City College who established himself as a male pop feminist by kissing the right asses and having sex with the right people.  Those outlets have avoided addressing their relationship with Hugo.  Jezebel’s editor Jessica Coen wrote a slippery post which was clearly about her former writer, but she wasn’t willing to actually mention Hugo by name. The post was evasive, and many commenters at the site called Coen out for it since Jezebel generally has a confrontational style.  I pitched my conversations with Hugo to The Atlantic as a tale of how two adversaries had spoken about his troubles.  Maybe my low Klout score kept the editor there from accepting the pitch.  And I didn’t go to The Good Men Project with a piece because they’re boring.  Regardless, all of those outlets saw the same person before them that me and many other critics of feminism saw, but they hosted Hugo for years.  Behold the power of telling people what they want to hear.

Funny how that works. You tell an ego-parched fug feminist what she wants to hear, and she opens her legs to your cock and her internet real estate to your cockamamie drivel, believing… oh, so very believing!… .that the male feminist lunacy dripping like honey into her ear palate was the Word of Goddess Herself. Hugo had a niche, and his sneaky fucker strategy netted him the adulation and the blowjobs he craved. Such a niche is not without its merits, but do keep in mind that being a community college professor to dimwits, however lowly in the academia hierarchy, is the lube that greases the coed skids. Playing the male feminist for fun and profit is not likely to work for the man who doesn’t have that hypergamously-grooved prof podium from which to tingle the tangles of thick-bushed queer gender studies acolytes. I don’t fault Hugo for pursuing this snatch-accumulating strategy. But I do shit in his lying face, and I do shit again in the faces of those who took his lies for truth.

So this is a glorious time to be an anti-male feminist. The wails and the rending of pit-stained t-shirts of the manboobs and the scalzied and the Dumb Hams of the world are the dulcet melodies of soaring symphonies, punctuated by the thunderous cymbal crash of lies being smashed. Ahhh, indeed.

But Hugo is an impenetrable pathological narcissist. No amount of soul shivving, however poison-tipped or torturously twisted to tickle vitals, will bring him the event horizon pain he so richly deserves. A shell entity who lives and breathes publicity, bad or good, will only welcome the psy knife that surgically pries his id. No, Hugo will only feel pain, real pain, when something else, something much more threatening to his ego survival, is presented to him. And that something else is Ostracism Total.

The targets of tender CH ministrations, then, are Hugo’s benefactors as much as Hugo himself. Jizzebel, The Atlantic, Good Men Project… you were duped, but only because you wanted to be duped. You wanted to believe in equalist, man-hating lies that caressed your stunted, shriveled, gimpy souls. You bent over and received the tepid diseased injection of a broken freak who knew how to locate and lick your ascended testes. Losers of a feather…

Jizzebel et al., you are served notice. I have you and your lackeys in my sights, and your filth that spews from the fountain of filth which is your whole stillborn existence is the effluvium I will shove back down your throats until you choke on it and recede from public discourse to clear the shit from your veins. The days when you can hire gutter liars like Hugo Schwyzer, and wallow in his fetid stink free of consequence, are over. Your only hope is to drive the Schwyzerian rats from your manicured harridan shelters, so that your circle diddles may continue under the radar of stone cold soul shivvers like yours truly with an eye and a scalpel for finding and dissecting egoistic neediness.

Then, when you — Jizzebel and the rest of the twisted sisters — have cast Hugo and his fellow castrati to the icy wastelands, will the real howls of pain fill the air to the delight of CH guardians of truth and beauty. For nothing will torment the likes of Hugo Schwyzer more profoundly than the torment of solitude.

Hugo, I know you’re reading this. If my words will bring any goodness and light to this world, your days as a lying sack of shit media token shilling for other lying sacks of shit are over. No one will call you, not even your former feminist allies. No one will publish you. No one will admire cross-eyed your throbbing intellect. No one will talk of you. No one will even think of you. When that day comes, and the barrel of the pistol is nestled in your mouth, lazing metallically on your tongue as your thinning, middle-aged lips glide over the shaft like long-ago unshaven feminist coed lovers used to do to your anti-feminist, patriarchal boner, no one, not even your family, will give a shit.

And that will be the lonely solitary pain from which you can’t escape or repurpose to your craven desires. In that moment, that sweet final moment of true and real reflection just before self-deliverance, you will think of my words, and my reminder that you had a choice to turn yourself against the mountain of lies you willingly embraced as your totem and your fate and your salvation. Sweet dreams, eternal darkness.





Comments


  1. He may be a victim of herpes, so show some compassion.

    Like


    • and if GBFM tries to steal my FIRST limelight their shall be blood…

      Like


      • I meam there WILL be blood, for I am an alpha.

        Like


      • Respect to ya, Tio… but first, second, or otherwise… GBFM drinks your milkshake.

        Like


      • on August 15, 2013 at 8:44 am Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

        zlozozzlo

        da gbfm won ana acandmeemy awardz for drinkin d amilkshskeaez of your girlfriendsz boobeizbzbzi bob booobiez milkshakesz zlzzo zlzoozoz

        zlzlzlolzzlzozo

        zlzlolzoz

        Like


      • CH, the Miley Cyrus video that GBFM posted a few days ago warrants its own post. It sums up so much of what you teach here. It’s like 6 lessons rolled into one, including THE CATHEDRAL’S active encouragement of the bad parts of female nature that you teach here. Why do I say that? Google, which has clearly abandoned its “do no evil” mantra from an earlier era, owns youtube. Google decides what videos get seen by the sheeple masses, just as FM radio determined what kids listened to in the 1980s. The home page of youtube, of course, puts Miley’s video as a “trending” video, of course, even from second one when it had zero views. Google causes it to get 200 million views in a week.

        And read the comments. While many people bash the disgusting video, of course, a good 70% of comments are from young girls saying things like “she has a right to grow up” and “it’s all about doing what you want.”

        Of course the actual vid shows lily-white formerly beautiful (when she had long hair) Miley in bed with a black guy, acting black, wearing a “grill,” being a slut, etc.

        Just awful, and the most awful part is not Miley. She’s just a dumb, confused girl. What’s awful is the CATHEDRAL making sure that the female kids today worship Miley (the new version), Beeber, Rihanna, and Britney.

        Meanwhile on the narrower subject of music, it takes a real stroke of luck and greatness to get noticed making real music like Jack White and The Black Keys have done.

        Watch that Miley Cyrus video and read the comments. Lots of good material for you there.

        Like


    • Unless he has herpes of the brain, I have no compassion for him.

      Like


    • Compassion wouldn’t be such a bad thing. Talk about a “meltdown”! What is that screed above?

      I understand the need for catharsis or saying “I told you so,” but the piling on says more about the piler than it does about the pitiable, confused, mentally-ill half-fag at the bottom of this contrived drama queenery. The first question to ask yourself is, Who Gives A Fuck? Who is this guy? If he is such a piece of shit, why are you goosing his attention organ, which is clearly the narcissistic goal of everything he does?

      Second, you are revealing pettiness, small-souledness, twerpitude.

      “In war: resolution.
      In defeat: defiance.
      In victory: magnanimity.
      In peace: good will.

      — Churchill

      When an enemy is forced to publicly admit he was mistaken, he is renouncing his enmity, he is submitting, he is the prodigal returning. This is not a time to say Nyah Nyah like a third grader. This is an opportunity to sell your truth-telling philosophy. It is just dumb as a practical matter to “twist the shiv.”

      Now, this fellow seems to be a exhibitionist-masochist, and you are giving him what he wants in a perverse way, contributing to his ongoing deviance. But still worse, you are making it impossible for enemies to convert to the truth, humiliating them when they (even partially) reject their former dishonest ways, rather than extending the olive branch that creates strong, broad brotherhoods among otherwise disparate men.

      You all need to read Coriolanus.

      There is no leadership in the “manosphere” or whatever you want to call this multiplatform collection of anti-feminist writers. There is no positive mission, there is only the cheap pleasures of “shivving” people who are already patent losers. Leaders don’t join in frenzies, they control them. They speak the harsh truth to their followers too, they present the tough stuff because no one else can, no one else has the credibility. They tell their loyal ‘mirers what they don’t want to hear, because it’s salutary. They speak from calm rationality, they hand the ref the football, no matter how good it feels to do a touchdown dance like some unrefined ghetto kid.

      I see Schwyzer and I pity him. He does not exercise me. I cannot be moved to care about his theatrics. I only see one more poor, deluded victim of a life-destroying ideology that has my generation in its thrall. So you took down a mental case called Hugo. Whoopdy damn do. But instead of squandering this tiny jackpot on penny-ante pleasures, try leveraging it into an asset that contributes to the final victory.

      Matt

      Like


      • on August 15, 2013 at 4:44 pm Imperial Leather

        what’s it like being cassandra matty boy

        Like


      • New handle, huh, sock puppet?

        You are fooling nobody. It’s hard to fathom that you could still be fooling yourself, even. You ought to take a hard look at why you are so obsessed with me.

        Like


      • on August 16, 2013 at 3:16 pm Imperial Leather

        everything has to be about you… doesn’t it cassandra

        Like


      • It would so appear.

        You rich Corinthian fairy.

        Like


      • on August 17, 2013 at 11:11 am Captains Courageous

        CH’s treatment of this treacherous snake is more than justified.

        When Churchill wrote “in victory, magnanimity“ he was referring to the merits of being merciful to ones vanquished enemies.

        However this is no lawful combatant. This is a treacherous piece of scum, who has made a career out of peddling vicious lies about his fellow man. He deliberately traded on the fact that he is a man, in order to ingratiate himself with our enemies and give weight and credibility to their repugnant dogma.

        To characterise Churchill as a man who would advocate pardoning traitors, is to do him a huge disservice.

        Civilized societies have always reserve their severest punishments for traitors. Even the United Kingdom which abolished capital punishment in 1965, still reserves the right to hang traitors.

        But don’t we have an even higher precedent when dealing with someone who betrayers the truth, for personal gain… (I tell you solemnly, there is one among you that will betray me. But woe unto him, for it would be better for him if he had not been born) .

        Leave these matters to CH, he knows what he’s doing.

        Like


      • You exaggerate the power of one sexually confused opportunist/exhibitionist, and in so doing, you dignify him far more than he could himself. He is an object to be pitied, not some villainous mastermind we’d have to mobilize a nation to destroy. He destroyed himself, the pathetic creature.

        Don’t dignify Schwyzer further by comparing him to Judas! Do you not understand how your incongruous attention sates the attention whore? “Leave these matters to CH, he knows what he’s doing.” No way. His whole Jesus Syndrome tells me he has no idea what he’s doing. It betrays his preference for aggrandizement over truth.

        The magnitude of the “victory” notwithstanding, magnanimity or megalopsuchia or great-souledness is always a good option — when combined with the virtue of temperance. CH demonstrates neither generosity nor prudence, not to friends or enemies, big or small. Some Χριστός. I prefer my saviors to be on the impressive side, who don’t err on the side of pettiness and cheesy revenge fixations.

        Matt

        Like


      • @matthew

        Na, sorry cant help you.

        Like


      • on August 19, 2013 at 9:18 am Captains Courageous

        “Villainous mastermind“… No! Traitorous snake.. Yes!

        “Don’t dignify Schwyzer further by comparing him to Judas” Agreed. But that wasn’t my intention. Betrayal being universally considered unforgivable was my point.

        “he is the prodigal returning”… Really? The title character of that parable didn’t actively propagandise against his father ?

        “he has no idea what he’s doing”… You obviously have a problems with CH that I would rather keep out of but for many men on here, he is more a voice in the (feminized) wilderness than a Messiah.

        “I prefer my saviours to be on the impressive side”… For instance? I strongly suspect that with your – penchant for rhetoric – you would have heckled the sermon on the mount. (only half joking)

        That said, I agree too much has been written about this snake in the grass, so lets move on.

        CC

        Like


      • Cogent analysis overall. I would say though, that the burning rage I see from CH is also a bit understandable. The amount of damage this single “man” has done to a generation of men is unfathomable, yet you dismiss him on a whim. This is where again, though we are pointed in the same direction our methods are quite different. You want the high road as dictated to you by faith. CH is taking the low road where he wants to see maximal suffering and persecution inflicted on great enemies. I tend to take the middle path, though I certainly can be compelled to lower morality places quite easily.

        I’d ask yourself in honest self-analysis, in a world that is quickly returning to the mean (barbarism) do you think high minded idealism will truly breed a leader anyone would follow. Hard, brutal, efficient men, are the ones that will be birthed from the rubble of this cancerous society.

        Like


      • on August 17, 2013 at 11:16 am Anonymous Reader

        King A. Matthew King
        When an enemy is forced to publicly admit he was mistaken,

        Where has Hugo admitted that he was mistaken?

        I do not see Hugo walking back any of his feminist screeds. Not even the “older men interested in younger women is creepy” rant in Atlantic,
        and certainly not any of his other “men bad women good” garbage posted to the “Good Mangina Project”.

        “Mistakes were made” is not semantically equivalent to “I was wrong”.

        Self-abasement is not the same thing as admission of error.

        Like


      • Offering an ounce for the weigh-in over an appropriate handling to Schwyzer’s outcome.

        Celeb rocks even in lower browed academia. Mr. Schwyzer was in a position to influence. It wasn’t only the girls who would listen to the de rigueur mind poison. The younger lads, although in smaller numbers, absorbed the confusing negativity. One can only imagine what some of these were being set up to internalize. The results, in whatever shape or form, borne out in later years unimaginable to some extent other than self mistrust and loathing.

        Astute contributors to this forum are long past where younger impressionable minds currently reside – in questioning, reasoning and assembling from what they know or are told. Swaying impressionable minds to deception, regardless of delivered stripe, enables chaos and confusion. Hardly productive and contributes to division – a weakening.

        The invective of our host follows, at least from my observances, a regular course. Strident umbrage expressed. Dealing with the matter secondary. Then one’s humanity shown afterward. Hugo’s clock got cleaned where he could have listened some time back.

        Human kind is good at fighting. Haven’t we all read about and seen enough for ourselves already in our combined lifetimes. The kiss up and grace period usually follows too. We’ve learned to be good at this as well. It’s not over yet. Just a few more humps on the road to overcome. Then we move on. Hopefully to have learned something all the while. Then act on it. (“Let’s not do this again”).

        Like


  2. on August 14, 2013 at 2:35 pm Dr. Murray F. Rottencrotch

    I’m glad you took a different angle on this than just a straight takedown, which is mostly unnecessary–he did the job on himself.

    Like


  3. One may have confused him for an evil genius until now.

    Like


    • that reminds me of Ann Eich ( spelling? ) for a while she was straight then she was a lesbian and then she was straight again

      Schwyzer does not seem to know who he is

      he sounds quite messed up in the head

      Like


      • I think you meant Anne Heche? Ellen DeGeneres GF…

        Like


      • If ever there was a time for one to remove themselves quietly this was it. His admission does nothing for any cause that I know. It is an embarrassment for feminism to confess. So it doesn’t help them. Who is rejoicing? Not only did he betray them; his public confession humiliates them. Its like he is reading aloud, from his little black book, a list of women who wish to keep their image of fidelity. The manosphere could not have genetically engineered a more destructive device of infiltration and destruction. He makes state run counter-intelligence operatives look like they are wearing brown paper bags with eye holes.

        A feminist anti-Christ.

        Like


  4. “Jizzebel et al., you are served notice. I have you and your lackeys in my sights, and your filth that spews from the fountain of filth which is your whole stillborn existence is the effluvium I will shove back down your throats until you choke on it and recede from public discourse to clear the shit from your veins”

    OH hell fucking yeah. This literally gave me chills. Destroy these evil pieces of shit CH.

    for realzz

    Like


    • Somehow, I think manboobs like Hugs are more fragile and easy to take down than teh feminasties.

      So who’s the next manboob in the firing range? Scalzi, maybe?

      Like


    • Destroy these evil pieces of shit CH.

      You’re doing it wrong. Your emotional catharsis is the equivalent of Schwyzer’s various attention disorders.

      Like


  5. Wow, his twitter feed is quite the collapse….. I am not sure why this guy is infamous…. but glad he didn’t take his meds, made for a fun lunch hour.

    Like


  6. Stop being so aloof and evasive. Tell us how you really feel, man.

    Like


  7. self hating faggot. I called it after learning about him (from this site) after spending precisely 9 seconds reading his garbage. that’s all it takes when one has gaydar like I do.

    Like


  8. What did he do? Summary please. He had a meltdown or something?

    Like


  9. I don’t know the entire background, but how can you be sure he was deliberately deceptive in his beliefs vs. just brainwashed and misguided? I don’t see evil, just a sad, self-loathing man in the midst of a severe mental breakdown. He hated himself so much he turned it outward on his gender and sought acceptance from a group that validated his male loathing. Is that evil, or just pathetic? His views were offensive and damaging, but it’s hard not to feel sorry for someone so unstable and relentlessly self-destructive. And at this point he’s been discredited entirely. So I guess I don’t understand all the vitriol and hatred.

    Like


    • Re: Deliberate vs misguided self-deception, there is always a point in one’s life when the choice to embrace lies is a free choice. What happens after that choice is made is just a continuing reaffirmation that soothes the rationalizing ego. Or: It doesn’t matter if at this time Hugo’s lying is self-deceiving so that he may lie more effectively. What matters is that he chose poorly. As do his benefactors and exploiters.

      Like


    • As a woman, you wouldn’t. The lies he aggressively promoted are why literally milions of good (beta) men who work hard and did everything right go to bed every night having not had sex with a woman in 6, 8, 30 months.

      Like


      • I guess I am wondering whether he truly believed those lies himself. If he didn’t, and knowingly lied for personal and commercial gain, I understand the anger. But given his obvious self-loathing I think it’s possible he deluded himself into believing all the feminist theories. It validated and rationalized the twisted way he thought of himself. So I can’t help but have some pity.

        But I understand that you and CH believe it doesn’t matter, because atsome point he chose the lie.

        Like


      • If you read his twitter metldown he admits that he didn’t know or care about feminist ideology, he just repeated what he heard in the hopes that it would gain him acceptance.

        Like


    • Of the plaques of Egypt, is a single frog, locust or fly evil? It doesn’t matter because you slaughter them lustily in droves because the swarm is evil. The misery of his blubbering is turned to glorious lamp light at the Château. He should be juiced to feed the wick until his carcass becomes a dry dung fuel.

      Like


    • on August 14, 2013 at 4:59 pm Imperial Leather

      Take note men, this female “feels sorry” for the “bad boy feminist” which is one way hugssy or his enablers will try to spin it one day in order to bang more pussy. Game Works

      Like


      • Oh please. Just because I feel sorry for him doesn’t mean I’m attracted to him. In fact, it’s the opposite– guys that girls feel sorry for tend to wind up deep in the friendzone. There’s nothing alpha about a crybaby victim.

        Like


      • on August 15, 2013 at 4:45 pm Imperial Leather

        oooohhhh yes it does…. female

        Like


      • No it does not. Think whatever you want about me, but you shouldn’t post bad advice in a game forum that leads guys to believe that being a simpering, suicidal crybaby will get them laid by anything over a barely-HB5 without the use of chloroform and a handful of roofies.

        Like


      • on August 16, 2013 at 3:11 pm Imperial Leather

        you sound a leeetle too familiar with this scenario…female

        is this normal operating procedure for the suicidal cry baby betas you fall for

        betas do get laid too as you would know very well…female

        Like


      • I thought I responded to this but it must be stuck in moderation. Just because I might feel sorry for the guy doesn’t mean I’m attracted to him. You really think game is about making yourself into an object of pity to get chicks? It’s just the opposite. I want to look up to the man I’m with, not view him as a pathetic self-destructive loser. I wouldn’t touch Hugo Schwyzer with a ten foot pole… before and after his meltdown.

        Like


      • on August 15, 2013 at 4:46 pm Imperial Leather

        you don’t know what you think that why your here…to hear men tell you

        Like


      • Why are even the best intentioned of you women so predictable? You want to be broken. Amy you know YOU WANTED to post that sympathetic post about Hugo in a forum that YOU KNOW is dominated by men who don’t have any sympathy for him, and YOU KNOW we are intelligent, so by you and your fellow contrarian females coming onto blogs like these and posting illogical just-to-be-opposite devils advocate brain dead responses, I must conclude that females love to be broken, and you ARE HOPING to hear from strong willed men who will not debate the illogical arguments, but rather laugh you off and treat you like the woman you are, a cute addition to the conversation, a lovely piece of art, making noise, not to be taken seriously but rather to just be heard and acknowledged as a female hanging out with elite intelligent independent sophisticated males.
        And I dare say a lot of fellow males at the CH are letting you girls down by engaging your comments and even formulating logical counterarguments when all you girls are really craving are some validation. So let me help you. Amy you rock. Thanks for joining us at the CH and we lol forward to hearing your lovely voice post more asinine bullshit because you just need to be heard.
        All the best
        Xoxo
        Mob Barley

        Like


      • Thanks for the kisses, Mob, but it sounds like you’re the one who needs a hug.

        I ask questions here to try to understand men better and improve my relationships. I appreciate when the intelligent men on this forum answer my questions honestly and directly. No one panders here and I like that. You obviously have a problem with females posting (and probably females generally) and nothing I say or do will change that. It’s unfortunate for you that you have such a one-dimensional view of women’s motivation, self-awareness, and ability to meaningfully engage, but it’s really not my problem. If you don’t want to talk to me, don’t read my posts. It’s very simple.

        By the way, this is a great illustration of why “contempt game” doesn’t work. Angry and defensive isn’t attractive… which, ironically, is the subject of CH’s social savviness post today. You might want to check that out.

        P.S. There’s an obvious contradiction in your post. Since you’re so much smarter than I am, I know you’ll catch it.

        Like


    • I think anytime someone preens and preaches morally while arrogating to himself privileges that happen to contradict what he preaches, people are going to get upset. As some commenters have noted, well-meaning betas have taken to heart the things that feminists – including Schwyzer – have preached in doomed effort to give women what they want and/or is best for them. Take the Atlantic article about how it is wrong to date and fuck younger women for example – some men read it and (as if they had the choice) believed his argument, probably passing up hitting on younger women at the same time he was purportedly fucking girls decades his junior. Try to imagine yourself in that moment at the same time somewhere many miles away Schwyzer was sucking on a rock solid, light pink nipple.

      Like


    • on August 15, 2013 at 1:52 am Hugh G. Rection

      So you want to be another enabler? You are doing something that’s usually reserved for women, you deny his agency in his actions. He chose to do all the things he did. And now he uses mental illness, just as he used his alleged alcoholism and drug abuse, as a defense. He even faked a suicide attempt. That guy is a sociopath.

      It’s not going to be the last we hear of him, I think he’s just setting up his next move.

      Like


      • I don’t see her “deny[ing] his agency” so much as calling for calibration. Over The Top, y’all.

        If you think Huggs Shyster is some sort of exemplar of evil, you need to get out more. Amy is right. He is a sad little man with an attention disorder. And the pissant ranks are falling all over themselves to validate his transparent ploy.

        CH speculated:

        there is always a point in one’s life when the choice to embrace lies is a free choice.

        Is this true? You don’t have to go all in for Darwinist fatalism (or the leftist weepiness of “To understand everything is to forgive everything”) to call a pathetic man pathetic rather than “evil.” I thought you were a determinist anyway.

        The evil of leftism is the insistence on removing moral agency from the realm of possibility. We are all positivist materialists now — just molecules colliding and synapses firing randomly “as on a darkling plain. / Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight, / Where ignorant armies clash by night.”

        So, yes, we should be wary of this tendency. But even more than our tendencies, we are thinking, rational human beings (hopefully) able to adjudicate a specific case before us. To excuse Schwyzer’s culpability does not negate his foolish deeds, nor does it make us gullible to the next shyster who comes along — though I can’t speak for the scandalmongering gossips who are beginning to influence the “man”-o-sphere. Our disintered discernment allows us to judge a single circumstance singly, rather than as a synecdoche of a personified phantom. The true enemy, the true evil, is the idea itself.

        To call a man evil is to dignify him as a moral agent. What is the point of dignifying Schwyzer as clever and manipulative, ascribing witchcraft powers to a man so obviously in the grips of desperate loserism?

        Besides, is he not finally acknowledging, if not quite yet taking responsibility for, his evil ways? Is this not a positive development? Why are we discouraging others from the first, most difficult step towards epiphany? He is someone seeing past the prettiness of the pretty lie for the first time.

        Keep your powder dry for bigger game. You are nuking a mouse.

        Matt

        Like


      • Keep your powder dry for bigger game. You are nuking a mouse.

        A fair point… there’s been a growing trend over the past decade or so of “killing ants with a hammer” as it were.

        The perhaps-not-so-ironical facet of it all is how they let the truly big game get away, scot-free.

        Perhaps the tendency to dogpile on the small fry is merely a sign of frustration in knowing that (if you’ll excused the mixed metaphor) we’re not getting our hands on the big fish behind the curtain.

        Like


      • on August 15, 2013 at 4:47 pm Imperial Leather

        yes of course cassandra

        Like


      • on August 16, 2013 at 3:57 am Hugh G. Rection

        Besides, is he not finally acknowledging, if not quite yet taking responsibility for, his evil ways?

        That’s kinda my point. He’s not taking responsibility. It’s all bullshit. He’s feigning mental illness to get out of it, and if you read the glpiggy article, he pretty much admitted that it’s his ticket to stay on payroll at his shitty college.

        This is a standard pattern. Whenever there’s some sort of sex scandal the guy responsible frames it as some sort of mental health issue – how often do we hear the “sex addiction” excuse for some philandering guy. Try banging your brothers’ wive and see if that excuse will stick.

        It’s horseshit.

        Keep your powder dry for bigger game. You are nuking a mouse.

        I got enough powder, and the fuse isn’t even lit.

        Like


      • Right. He is “not quite taking responsibility for” his fuck ups But he is acknowledging them as fucked up, which is a necessary action on the path to becoming responsible for them.

        Mostly, I just think it’s undignified and unbecoming a truth-teller to fixate on a single, disturbed individual’s pathologies rather than scrutinizing the culture of lies that essentially lured him into those pathologies. We are hunting down a pawn when we can put the queen in check.

        Matt

        Like


      • on August 18, 2013 at 1:25 pm Hugh G. Rection

        I think you’re overestimating our influence.

        Like


  10. He can’t win , but there are alternatives to fucking.

    Like


    • I see what you did there.

      Like


    • That’s going to be the title of Hugo’s memoir:

      Rutting With A Horse’s Ass

      Like


      • I just read that linked article where Schwyzer suggests that heterosexual men who are comfortable with their sexuality should be open to pegging… because experiencing penetrative sex will make men more understanding and empathetic toward their female partners.

        Lol, that really says it all. Wow.

        Like


  11. Something tells me this psycho will be be recruited by the “manosphere”).

    Like in a week or so he will start attacking the feminists and will be citing CH.

    Like


    • That would be kinda scary and messed up, but actually within the realm of possibility. And he seems like the kind of guy who’s oblivious to the fact that he’s not wanted.

      Like


    • Roosh would be the first to embrace him in.

      Like


    • He does match the general ‘Dark Traid’ criteria many seem to value so much. The disgraced pro-feminist man embracing the crimson arts. Sounds like a movie plot.

      Like


    • Nah, his charm won’t work on manosphere readers as it does with most feminists. Here he’s already known to be full of shit, so nobody will trust what he writes. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he returned to his old stomping grounds (Jezebel, The Atlantic, etc.) in a few months and displayed his recent history as “yet another example of how evil, manipulative and privileged all men are” to an audience of swooning feminists. You know they eat that bad boy game up.

      Like


    • The “manosphere” already has plenty of poseurs of his psychologically disordered ilk. His entry would not be noticed. As long as he adopted the jargon appropriate to the audience before him — one of Schwyzer’s specialties — he would fool you just as easily as he did the feminists. Such are the dangers of ideological cultishness. Don’t flatter yourselves.

      Like the feminists, this community makes symbols of men and force-fits them into categories that will not do damage to the cause. This is good for solidarity — until you realize that no living human being can be wedged perfectly into your just-so idealizations.

      Independent judgment is not prized in the choir to which a true believer is preaching. Any deviation is howled out of the loft for fear of contamination. This paranoia is a sign of an ideology’s weakness, and it’s demonstrated in spades among the dumber students here, while fatally tolerated by those veterans with the ability/sense/reputation to rebuke loud-mouthed children.

      Matt

      [CH: Any “manosphere-ian” who takes on a “reformed” Hugs as a fair weather ally is a fool. Ostracism Total from the public sphere is the only punishment suitable to pathological narcissistic liars like Hugs.]

      Like


      • The “manosphere” already has plenty of poseurs of his psychologically disordered ilk. His entry would not be noticed.

        Just so long as he doesn’t use his real name.

        Like


      • [Any “manosphere-ian” who takes on a “reformed” Hugs as a fair weather ally is a fool.]

        That’s not the point.

        [CH: Yes, it is. Don’t think for a minute a narcissist like Hugo would settle for commenting under a pseudonym for any appreciable length of time. That’s not his style.]

        He can come here under a different name, talk the talk, and “fool” 75% of your audience because they are mirror-image ideologues of the audience he just tricked.

        [You seem to have a problem distinguishing lies from truth. I never took you for a relativist, but hey people surprise.]

        Same cultish behavior, same slavering platitude peddling, if opposite substance.

        [Man those apostles sure were cultish.]

        Matt

        Like


      • [Man those apostles sure were cultish.]

        Yeah, they were. Hiding in the upper room “for fear of the Jêws” (Jn 20:19).

        And then back came their leader, who sent them on their mission to the mainstream (20-21). And then came Pentecost. When illiterate fishermen and assorted rabble were filled with the strength to go boldly out into the world (Acts 2), to “make disciples of all nations” (Matt 28:19).

        You would do well to know about the Man you are attempting to emulate.

        Matt

        Like


  12. Feministx – read the GLPiggy article Heartiste linked (“confessionals to less sadistic bloggers”), and some earlier ones.

    Like


    • Thanks. My God! This is getting crazy. First Mark Minter and barely a month later this. Guys saying something they don’t believe in at all because of their personal issues with women. I guess it’s as old as time.

      Some people construct online persona and pretend to support an ideology to gain popularity.

      Still, Im not sure why insane people do what they do matters. What matters more is the content of what they said. You have to evaluate based on the objective truth or lack thereof of the information presented to you. You can’t believe anything because you trust the narrator.

      Like


      • Clever girl.

        Like


      • Feministx, I don’t think anyone here trusted or believed the narrator; they are angry because others did, despite his fraudulence. The fact that he was a man excoriating other men probably gave him “credibility” that female misogynists don’t have… which widened his audience and gave him much more opportunity to harm.

        Like


      • No one here believed him, but people elsewhere did. And we could laugh at feminists for their naivity, but how many of the people on this side of the fence believed in Mark Minter? Plenty.

        [CH: No author at this blog wrote two words about Mark Minter until the news of his engagement. Stop lying.]

        You can invent an identity that is false. You can claim you believe things that you don’t. You can advance an ideology that actually goes against everything you believe. Personally, I don’t care who any of you are when it comes to assessing perspectives. I wouldn’t care if CH were a virgin. It has nothing to do with the truth or lack thereof of the advice he posts to others.

        If Hugo wants to be a turncoat and come here, I don’t care. I’ll be happy to fairly look at the information he presents if the information appears to contain some sort of interesting truth or insight or even an attempt to find such a truth. I have no need to ostracize him or forgive him. He can say his piece and I can obsess the objective value of it for myself.

        Like


      • Where did I accuse you of believing Mark Minter? Being that I only read this blog, I never heard of him until the engagement, but then I found out others believed in him for what he said. I’m not lying. I’m somewhat at a loss to why you would take that statement about people on this side of the fence as a personal accusation.

        [CH: The way you phrased your comment implicated this blog. Be more careful next time. Or at least be less disingenuous.]

        Like


      • ok. I’m sorry for the miscommunication.

        Like


      • on August 16, 2013 at 4:14 am Hugh G. Rection

        but then I found out others believed in him for what he said.

        That’s a bit of an overstatement. Minter got the facts right, just like a ton of other authors did. He just had a very colorful way of voicing it.

        It’s schadenfreude, not anger.

        [CH: One thing to note about l’affaire Minter: His message and prognosis about the general state of marriage can still be correct despite his being a raging hypocrite.]

        Like


      • THIS is CH’s closest version of an apology to a woman.
        Zolozzololozz this blog is fun

        Like


      • Guys saying something they don’t believe in at all because of their personal issues with women.

        Poor observation. Schwyzer “believe[d] in” it as adamantly as any zealot. Until his first test. His was a fair-weather faith, when he exposed the inconstancy beneath the skin-deep, easy bravado (with sexual benefits). After he stabilizes, he will dive headlong right back into confusion. He is a drunk.

        Too many of you are interpreting the bumbling of anyone engaged in fabrication as the dark, conscious manipulations of a man in possession of all his faculties. It is safe to conclude that Schwyzer is not that skillful. Like feminism itself, he fooled (and continues to fool) only those who wanted to be fooled.

        Matt

        Like


      • Yes, he says he believed what he says, and I bet he still sort of does believe what he says. I get it too because I am the same way. My name is feministx, and in my heart of hearts, I am still a feminist. Though it may seem strange on first glance, for the most part, this corner of the internets actually accepts the same premises that feminists do. Essentially, they both understand that in this society, men seek a dominant position over women primarily and also over other men, and women seek a subordinate position to those dominant men. It’s just that feminists see this as malleable through culture. I don’t even think that feminists vs anti feminists disagree over the morality of the sexual polarity of our species. Whether you are a PUA or a feminist, human sexual nature is just a tragedy. If we were actually designed by a reasonable and benevolent God, we wouldn’t be in this situation where the male sex drive is so much higher than the female sex drive so that straight men inevitably end up inconvenienced and frustrated at some points. We wouldn’t be in this situation where women are human beings with complex emotional lives but must be primarily loved for their physical appearance, which always declines. Feminists will say that it’s wrong to fat shame women and tell them they need to prioritize their appearance so they can be lovable to men (as if they can’t be lovable based on their internal characters). And the PUAs will fat shame women because they don’t care what is right or wrong if it’s unchangeable due to biology.

        Y’all hate Hugo, I know. But I get him. He insisted on what ought instead of what is. But the what is of his nature got to him eventually. Duh.

        [CH: Please, nigress. Hugo didn’t give a shit for ought or is. He lied through his teeth by spending years making up shit about the psychology of the sexes that appealed to the frayed equalist egos of dumbfuck femcunts and mewling manboobs. Get a grip.]

        Like


      • I said that I got the impression that hugo actually did believe in what he was saying. Matt also said he thought Hugo believed what he said. I agree that he was taken by the ideology and not constantly diabolical. If her were the latter, why would he ever have broken down and confessed? He did, which makes me think Hugo is not a sociopath.

        In any case, you didn’t seem to need to call Matt a nasty name when he said he thought Hugo believed in what he was saying. I’m not sure what I can say to give you a reason to stop bullying me as you seem to be choosing me as the latest target of your suspicion and ever present rage. If you know of something I could do to make you not so angry, I’d appreciate it if you’d let me know. Tx.

        Like


      • CH has the difficult task of keeping many in line, and it is generally a thankless job. However, turning on one another is counterproductive, as is harboring ill will. We ought to remember what brings us together rather than what separates us, and not take each other for granted. Sometimes a little shake up can remind us why we cared in the first place.

        Like


      • “Sometimes a little shake up can remind us why we cared in the first place.”

        Thanks for offering me some form of supportive words. I appreciate it. I hope you are well.

        Like


      • It’s just that feminists see this as malleable through culture.

        Why, yes. And “it’s” also “just that” they see this as an injustice to be corrected “though the heavens may fall.”

        Either way, “It’s just that” my aunt would be my uncle if she had a cock. Understanding the limits of the malleability of man combined with a fantastical understanding of justice is not a trivial distinction without a difference. It’s a significant, ideology-defining chasm, rather than a mere “just that.”

        You’re a “feminist” all day in your pajamas. Until daddy comes home from work.

        Matt

        Like


    • on August 14, 2013 at 5:04 pm Imperial Leather

      You are white knighting here Sir. Do it selectively on occasion only after fucking and certainly not on the interwebs

      Like


      • There’s nothing white knighting about helping someone out ffs. White knighting is when you help someone AT GREAT COST TO YOURSELF just because they have a vagina. Such as trying to protect her from a bear which then eats you, or saying “yes I agree with all your dumbass opinions, hence making me too look like a dumbass” or saying “yes I think women should all have free abortions!! I’ll pay for them!!” etc……

        But just helping someone out when it’s no trouble at all? That’s being a decent human being. Some of us actually like helping people, heck, isn’t that the point of this blog? To help people learn game?

        Like


      • on August 15, 2013 at 4:41 pm Imperial Leather

        you would say that wouldn’t you…. Beta

        Like


      • You forgot “mangina” and the undesirable greek letter insult.

        Like


      • Here comes The Black Knight Brigade. Like a LARPer horde over the grassy knoll charging the high school courtyard.

        They don’t save the damsels in distress, you see, like their Arch Nemeses, The Whites. No, they save us from accidentally saving the damsels, selflessly preventing the loss of still yet another Man Card.

        En garde! ye foul saboteur of the testostosphere! Ye quisling and traitor of thine sex!

        Put away the plastic sword, for fucksake.

        Matt

        Like


      • If you are helping her but not putting your penis in her…you might be a white knight.

        The penis is the beacon in the darkness. PUA 1:1

        I didn’t know sticking my shaft into her orifice is the only motivation to help a woman. I wonder how it works if you want to help men?

        Like


  13. “Dirty old man” is a badge to wear with honor. That guy is a douche.

    Like


  14. Epic hate. Strong in CH the dark side is. A Sith Lord he may someday be.

    Like


  15. Giving faggots like Schwyzer any kind of publicity, even caustic takedowns such as this, is ultimately counterproductive. Negative attention is only slightly less desirable than positive attention.

    Schwyzer operated in a very niche corner of the public mindspace. He also taught a bullshit course at some community college. Let him rot in obscurity now.

    Like


  16. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/31/backlash-against-feminism-manosphere-women

    I know I’m a few weeks late here, but certain members of the Cathedral are beginning to freak out.

    The money shot:
    “In popular culture as in politics, as Faludi wrote, this is not an organised and centralised conspiracy. Its workings are “encoded and internalised, diffuse and chameleonic”.”

    Note that she moves past the absurd idea that there is some elite cabal working to “hold women down”, but she still can’t quite let go of the idea of masculinity as a series of dark forces gathering and plotting against her. In this wizened battleaxe’s mind, the very workings of nature – that is, the fundamental existence of gender characteristics – is a decentralized, yet deeply entrenched conspiracy stalking her every move.

    Like


    • Yet another woman who looks like a man…

      Like


    • Ya, it’s tough. There’s definitely a lot in the manosphere that’s bitter and, well, embarrassing.

      But, the key point these pieces miss is that men, by nature, are high variance creatures. This is probably one of the best points I’ve ever seen made — while men are the top 1%, men are also the bottom 20%. Men, if they are to succeed, have to take huge risks and develop special skills — e.g. an omega sailing off to a distant land because, shit, if they stay around in the first tribe they may never get to reproduce.

      As members of the same species, women can develop these skills. They just lack the biological/sexual marketplace motivation to do so.

      Like


    • I’ve always objected to the Faludi thesis that there is a “backlash” against purportedly reasonable feminist changes which occurred in the 1970s and 1980s. The “backlash” consists of modest and perhaps largely inconsequential corrections to the feminist imposition (largely anti-democratic) upon society, government, and culture. For example, she would see the 1973 decision in Roe as a triumph (law imposed by extra-constitutional diktat against the democratic will), while characterizing the democratic reaction to Roe as part of the “backlash.”

      Like


  17. Hugo is simply a man torn between his feminist ideals and his sexual desires.

    Like


  18. Rule #1 about anything.

    The man who supports something so adamantly will always go behind his back to fulfill his desires.

    Christian, homophobe, feminist, man boob, etc.

    Like


    • I find it objectionable that you use the Cultural Marxist misnomer “homophobe” to mean anyone who doesn’t affirmatively endorse sodomy as a healthy and wholesome pastime on par with the conjugal and fruitful love of a man and woman to which we all owe our very existences. The preferred term is “sane.”

      Like


      • I mean the guy that is really hating on teh geys to an unhealthy level…is usually gey himself.

        Like


      • Typical Cathedral shithouse psychology.

        Like


      • I think earl’s pointing to a real phenomenon, not trying to paint our healthy reflexes as signs of hidden perversion.

        Like


      • Exactly.

        Like


      • After explaining himself, sure… the point is, the initial statement sounded too much like Cathedral litany… especially including the jibe at “Christian”… and the tired claim, usually by queers themselves, that anyone who opposes their swinery must be a repressed homo thems.

        Like


      • I don’t think “usually” is accurate. Perhaps rarely there is some effort at misdirection by some men, but the trope is a Leftist mind-control trick designed to make normal, heterosexual men uneasy about criticizing the societal and government embrace of sodomy and thus remove their well-founded objections on the bases of culture, public morals, and the public health. It’s of a piece with what the Left accused McCarthy of doing, only they do it much better and without notice or criticism.

        Like


      • +111… you nailed it.

        Like


      • on August 15, 2013 at 5:00 pm Imperial Leather

        you talk like a public servant

        Like


      • on August 15, 2013 at 1:59 am Hugh G. Rection

        It’s a well crafted word. It reduces any criticism to the level of mental illness.

        Like


      • I’m talking about a person who only hates or has fear of another person because of their sexual preference.

        That’s as dumb as hating a person based on their skin color.

        I look at character as far as how people treat me.

        I don’t agree with their lifestyle…but that doesn’t give me the right to be uncivil to them.

        Like


      • Jeez, swinging right back to the Cathedral’s preferred method of “explaining oneself”.

        As it has been noticed before at the chateau, all-too-many alleged red-pillars don’t realize when they act as keystones in the Cathedral’s arches.

        Like


      • What are they going to do…insult me?

        Insults are what I love…for when I am weak then I am strong.

        Now lets see the leftists explain themselves about anything.

        Like


      • That’s the point… they are never taken to task to explain themselves… only their opponents.

        Like


      • They can’t explain…because all they have is insulting or questioning.

        Their motivation is to ruin the reputation of the person making a statement. Like other people’s thoughts about who they think I am is going to be a big deal in the long run.

        However…what God thinks is much more important.

        Like


      • On that we can agree.

        Like


      • This may be hard to believe, but both sides use propaganda in very similar ways. I know, blasphemy to the truth warriors. Just saying…

        Like


      • No great revelation there… in the same manner we hang spies for the other side, but praise as “patriotic” and “heroic” the stealthy wit of our own.

        Like


  19. unrelated, but a lot of CH maxims confirmed in the Salon piece on Russian men, some quotes..

    While I am all for slow, sensual, Barry White lovemaking, there comes a point with a sweet and simple Westerner when all the “Do you need a pillow?” “Does that hurt” “Would you like a glass of water?” questioning makes me wants to scream This isn’t a dinner party. You’re not writing an essay. Just let go. It is a truth universally acknowledged that a woman wants a man who’s a gentleman at dinner and an animal in bed. You want to completely transcend the cognitive prison and corporeal self in which we are always encased, becoming nothing but senses. This the Russian man understands. He leaves behind any semblance of propriety, responding only to primal urges, losing himself in you entirely. Of course, the major downside of this caveman treatment is that Russian men still follow the egotistical “sex is a favor that women do for men” mentality (i.e., it’s still not customary for Russian men to perform oral sex, although they will expect it), treating female sexuality like it’s something that only afflicts nymphomaniacs.

    http://www.salon.com/2013/08/12/i_love_and_hate_dating_russian_men/

    Like


  20. Ouch.

    CH, man you know how to twist a knife man. It is like you shove the shiv in, and attach a rubber wrench to it and just keep cranking it in full circles.

    That is why I come here, don’t ever change!

    Like


  21. What’s this shit about him screwing a porn star? She’s a cam whore. She’s no more a porn star than a guy who plays pickup hoops in the schoolyard is an NBA all-star.

    Like


  22. Re: Article.

    One who stumbles within the manosphere will be supported and never abandoned.

    Disgrace yourself in the feminist-sphere and narry a friend you will have.

    Sidenote: Guys, stop fucking replying to anyone without a recognizable, male centered handle. If it’s a chick, you’re feeding a troll. Only post stuff like ‘GTFO’ to those broads.

    Like


    • on August 14, 2013 at 8:34 pm Bungo Frontenoy

      Supported? Like that Minter guy who proposed to some chick and the whole manosphere had a synchronized butthurt explosion? Talk about taking dumb shit too seriously.

      Dear manosphere, thanks for the red pill. I’ll always owe you for that. Now grow the fuck up and demonstrate some aloof smirking fucking alpha male indifference already.

      Like


    • I’m of a like-mind with Bungo here. Mark Minter was equally if not more-so disgraced by his respective social than hugo was. But the Manosphere, much like the feminists, has its radicals.

      Like


      • I’d be inclined to say more so as his ex-wife appeared and not only did people believe the things she had to say without any question or investigation (unlike the coal-raking I received when I first appeared here), they willfully abandoned the very kind of man they claim to support. Seems its one thing to stick up for men in theory but another to do so when put to the test.

        Regardless of what happened, if Roosh found himself cast out and alone with no where to go and showed up at our door, he would be brought in and fed and cared for. Because that’s the kind of people we are, and that’s just what you do.

        Like


      • To ideologues, Minter and Schwyzer are symbols, not men.

        So when ideologues attempt to apply their sophistry to real circumstances, they produce only cartoons. Like Roosh’s ongoing menstrual tantrum (“the manosphere is lost” lossssst!) and CH’s obsessive-compulsive overkill above.

        Here is a test for the ideologues and cultists. If the object of such internet ire and betrayal were sitting across the table from you, having a beer, how would you behave? Would you throw chairs and pitch a fit, like a contradicted two-year-old? Or would you immediately recognize the 90% in common, and how crude forms of communication tend to exaggerate the 10% disagreement?

        Trick question. Because most ideologues would not ever accept the invitation to sit down! Because that would put the lie to their finely-crafted self-delusion, and they intuit it.

        If [Mark Minter] were to knock on my [Roosh’s] door, starving, begging for food and drink, I would only place the sustenance on my front step. He would not be permitted to enter my home so that the foul odor of hypocrisy that now trails him does not infect my place of sleep.

        !

        Such drama queens. Thinking a fierce portrayal of integrity is the equivalent of actual integrity, thinking nobody can see through such womanly posturing.

        Matt

        Like


      • Always good to see you sallying forth 🙂 Experience recognizes experience. Love recognizes love. Seems we are in a wasteland of both. The Chateau may be one of the last bastions.

        Like


      • The fuck he would… (Roosh V). He has lost all credibility in my eyes. He is as blue pill as any beta herb about the “One Great Lie” we must continue to propagate lest we be cast out as pariahs. (See: Derb, Richwine, Deen, Cooper, “Rodeo Clown”, etc.) To rip off Derb, who then, will be next month’s assassination target for the Two Minute Hate?

        I was called out on RooshV’s post with some mouth breather sycophant LOL’ing about the declining white fertility rate the world over. I destroyed him utterly with various links from the interwebs with that odd thing “empirical data” saying the exact same thing. Rooshie decided to nuke the post. Fuck that guy, he is a poseur of the highest order. All Red Pill on the Pussy, All Blue Pill on everything else.

        Maybe “Moby w/ a Scary Gun” can go over there and give him props, but that weak shit is NOT for me. RooshV lived 30 min. away from me but I’d send his ass packing w/o even so much as a handshake.

        Like


      • The whole thing was revealing, to say the least.

        Like


    • Singer et al (2006) showed that men are more judicious in their empathy than women. Men will more readily revoke feelings of empathy for a person they judge to have behaved unfairly. Thus disgraced Jezebel authors, much like serial killers and politicians, enjoy a kind of built-in potential to elicit sympathy among women despite the heinousness of their deeds. I’m going to get angry when I find out Schwyzer has taken advantage of this, which means I’m going to get angry. It’s possible our host was too kind.

      Like


    • That Jezebel article is one of the most disgusting pieces of poisonous filth I’ve ever read. I literally felt nauseous reading it, thinking that there are young men who could be internalizing his disingenuous anti-male shaming garbage. What a scumbag. Yeah, I think I’m starting to understand why he’s hated so much.

      Like


  23. on August 14, 2013 at 4:46 pm Michael Maier

    Wow, dude… I despise “men” like this too but… wow.

    Like


    • Most others have stated they have some sympathy for the douche.
      CH is one of a kind and in this case he is right.

      When that day comes, and the barrel of the pistol is nestled in your mouth, lazing metallically on your tongue as your thinning, middle-aged lips glide over the shaft like long-ago unshaven feminist coed lovers used to do to your anti-feminist, patriarchal boner, no one, not even your family, will give a shit.

      This quote gave me chills it is so delicious.

      I was going to say I hope there is pictures but I know there will be. The Shyster’s ego is so over blown he will film it and have it posthumously posted to the web.

      Like


    • on August 14, 2013 at 6:16 pm Antifeminist One

      It’s great, isn’t it. I consider the Chateau like a fundamental force in the universe. The stronger influence that feminism and other degenerate leftism forces exert, so too, must the Chateau exert itself more.

      Like


  24. You know, I may dislike the character “Hugo Schwyzer” played by the actor of the same name as much as anyone, but I wonder if he isn’t more valuable if he can be turned – by which I mean, if he really does have a thing for tight young snatch and that is not itself an act perhaps he can come over to this side if welcomed with open arms and the permission to embrace his true self?

    I just think it would be very satisfying to have one who was formerly trusted and within their collective flabby bosom revealing their lies for what they are.

    Like


    • on August 14, 2013 at 5:51 pm Imperial Leather

      Once a traitor…

      Like


    • on August 14, 2013 at 6:13 pm Carlos Danger

      Is that you Hugo? Did you send dick pix to Huma?

      Like


    • As you can see by your two chump respondents, Alec Leamas, ideological fealty reigns over principle, prudence, and even logic. It’s a least-common-denominator thing.

      Are you a member? Do you know the secret handshake? If not, I can’t even look at you, you disgust me! Fie!

      And what’s this! Girls are present? Among men?? WHAT! The Cause is dooooomed! Mark Minter got married!!!

      Props to you for independent thinking. Imagination is what turns the precious little seed of an idea into a true cultural force. Cultists would rather die than see their cult be taken mainstream (a.k.a. made broadly effective). They are zealot Pythagoreans who will kill to protect The Theorem, an arcane bit of truth having since gone “mainstream,” now taught to every 12-year-old math student across the world. They are satisfied with their regularly-scheduled ritual of stasis, a mystical basement circle-jerk.

      Matt

      Like


    • “I wonder if he isn’t more valuable if he can be turned . . .?”

      No. The narcisistic sociopath is always more of a danger to his “friends” (of which he has none) than he will ever be to his “enemies” ( which will always be whoever isn’t giving him what he wants right now, no matter which “side” they are on).

      He is a social suicide bomber who will always go off while sleeping in his own camp. You don’t want to be his tent mate when it happens.

      Like


  25. on August 14, 2013 at 5:47 pm Full-Fledged Fiasco

    Pure hate. Two thumbs up.

    Like


  26. It’s beautiful if you think of it :

    If a raving feminist tries to convert you to her cause, you just ask her this :

    ” … so that I must emulate Hugo Schwyzer ?”

    If she says no, you just say that she’s not worth the effort … which means she just got negged, and she’s put into a frame where she must qualify herself to you => ‘gina tingles.

    If she says yes, then you you just tell why it’s so much better to be a member of the Manosphere => ‘gina tingles.

    heh.

    Like


  27. Schwyzer practiced a very advanced form of what I call cuttlefish game. In the animal kingdom, beta male cuttlefish mimic female cuttlefish so that they can hang out amongst them without being detected and attacked by the alphas who come by to copulate. When the alphas leave, the beta jumps into to also copulate with the unsuspecting female.

    In humans you typically see this as that pussy your wife works with who’s always there to listen to her unhaaaaapiness over a cup of herbal tea. Schwyzer just took that beta male mating strategy to the utterly ridiculous extreme. At the end of the day though, Hugo passed on his shitty genes while many alphas won’t. Sigh.

    Cuttlefish Game.

    Like


    • I guess my traditional thing has been a kind of cuttlefish game: I like hanging out with women and listening to their unhappiness.

      The difference between me and Schwyzer is that I never bought into feminist garbage, and I specifically try to go for traditional minded or at least semi-traditional girls, the ones who don’t buy into feminism. Oh, also, I’ve never slept with someone I supervise, nor have I tried to murder anyone, or cheated anyone.

      I guess what I’m saying is: not every cuttlefish beta type is a feminist whiner or an enemy of the male gender.

      Like


  28. on August 14, 2013 at 6:28 pm Johnycomelately

    I’d like to think Hugo was a manosphere cointelpro working for none other than Heartiste himself.

    Who else could wreck more havoc upon feminists than a mole on the inside, with the ol’ fake feminist posting lude pictures, cheating on wife, banging young girls and mental breakdown trick.

    Hats off to the KAOS team.

    Now when Susan Walsh admits she is really a man it will be on for young and old.

    Like


  29. Please…. this cruel gloating over the breakdown of a sick person is unworthy of you, ch. The more dignified reaction is to avert one,s eyes and not comment at all.

    Like


    • on August 14, 2013 at 9:01 pm Modern Primitive

      It is absolutely worthy.

      Like


    • concern troll.

      Like


    • please. if there was EVER someone who should have a football spiked on his grave it’s Hugo Schwyzer.

      I’ve said it before, if you start to feel any sympathy for him do a google image search on his revolting grin built on lies.

      now enjoy the fruits of nyc being turned back over to the devices of your neighbors, sans “stop and frisk”

      Like


    • “The more dignified reaction is to avert one,s eyes. . .”

      The modifier being that it is HS himself who aggressively thrust himself before our eyes. There is no courtesy due to a deliberate plague carrier. It is to those whom he infected with which our sympathies must lie.

      Like


  30. Hugo Schwyzer has been hated in equal measure by the manosphere and 99% of online feminists for years on end now. He got a voice for so long simply because a bunch of editors and academics who aren’t really invested in anything to do with gender thought he looked relevant and qualified enough to have him as a rare male feminist commentator, without really checking his background. If feminists are backtracking it is no recent development, as every single article he has posted on jezebel or wherever has been beset by feminist commenters calling him out since he posted about being an admitted rapist and attempted murderer years ago. It’s kind of hard to tell on Jezebel though, due to their hugbox-style commenting system that floats positive comments by established users to the top. The few that remained as supporters were believers in the redemption narrative he constructed.

    Like


  31. “thick-bushed queer gender studies acolytes”….lol

    Like


  32. on August 14, 2013 at 7:55 pm some feminist

    tl;dr but basically, he had sex with 3 women at the same time, one a porn actress and one half his age, so at least he’s better at this whole pickup thing than either of you

    Like


    • Put the claws away, pussycat. Hugey was the one of pwned you; take this up with him.

      We haven’t seen these women, apart from the porn actress, so let’s not credit him with too much. Besides, a porn actress is just like a prostitute, except without the infinitesimal grain of modesty and decency to keep it private.

      Like


    • Ha. Truth. Out of the mouths of babes cunts.

      Unfortunately, the brethren will be unable to process your incontrovertible facts, not because of what truth you speak (logos) but because of who you are (ethos; cf. Aristotle’s Rhetoric). The boys here are too scared to realize that the harshest judgment is often the most accurate, and just such broadsides are more reliably delivered by enemies than by friends — they don’t care if they hurt your feelings (pathos). Ideologues (like you, btw) are unable to distinguish between speech and speaker.

      No, they will scrutinize the username some feminist rather than the content. It’s a defensive crouch, the mark of men whose bottom principles shift like the sand, who entrust the integrity of their thinking to sophists and charlatans for want of independent verification.

      Matt

      Like


      • on August 15, 2013 at 2:09 pm some feminist

        to be honest that’s a lot more words than i’m willing to read on a website such as this one, but i hope this “being really smart” thing works out for you!

        Like


      • I was defending your statement, you impossible fat shrew.

        Next time you’re wondering about getting 70-cents on the dollar “for the same work,” please consider that your inability to handle three brief paragraphs of content may have something to do with it.

        Now, unlike you, and the little boys who engaged you above (who deign to represent my anti-feminist politics), I will continue to take your truthful observation at face value.

        Can you process all that? Or are you as stupid as you are ugly? Are you as intellectually retarded as you are socially retarded, like every single feminist in the history of the planet?

        Shall I break it up into bullet points for you? I’m not sure how your “being really dumb” type receives new information, except through pain.

        So next time you’re wondering about “domestic violence” …

        Matt

        Like


      • on August 15, 2013 at 2:41 pm some feminist

        which part of “tl;dr” was the part you need me to explain to you again

        Like


      • I been served! You’re good at this internet thing. Must have been doing it for a long time.

        Let’s get down to business. Do you have a tight cunt?

        Like


      • Wait. That was too long. Let me cut it down to essentials …

        Like


      • Do you have a tight cunt?

        Like


      • I just love this thread.

        Like


      • Do you have a tight cunt?

        Sounds more like the tightness is in her hindquarters…

        and not the good kind of tight ass, neither. :mad

        Like


    • Better than any of us? how would you know who or how many we bang?

      And how do you know if everything Schwyzer says is true?

      You do not know that anymore than I know what you had for breakfast.

      Like


    • His “pickup” skill seems irrelevant to the dispute. CH seems fine with Hugo’s “prowess,” but dislikes Hugo for being a liar/charlatan/etc. So you could say, ‘well isn’t that alpha? Lying to get chicks, blah blah blah.” Ya, sure I guess under CH’s definition of alpha.

      But, more importantly, CH seems to believe that Hugo’s lies are of the type that hurt the overall movement. The quarrel is about something other than “pickup.”

      [CH: Hugs didn’t just lie to get chicks. He lied to the whole world; to femcunts, to manboobs, to betaboys, to his family, to esteemed media organs. He gave aid and comfort to lying feminists, lying manboobs, and lying losers of all stripes. He is an enemy of truth and beauty, and his immolation is a victory for the forces of light.]

      Like


      • Although it would be funny if Hugo’s only saving grace — which helps him avoid certain ruin and femi-shunning — is CH and the manosphere’s hatred. After all, if all of those people hate him, he must have some sort of redemptive value to them. Could turn out to be kind of ironic….

        Like


    • Better, you say? And here I thought you feminists were against this sort of thing

      See subconsciously we all agree that using women like fuckdolls isn’t really such a bad thing

      Why not drop the female victimhood thing and make this a constant reality?

      Like


  33. on August 14, 2013 at 8:28 pm Bungo Frontenoy

    Dark triad, right. Gets you pussy, gets you paying gigs, gets you page views.

    He’s a p.o.s., by definition. And proud of it. He’s good at it. Nothing you say will make him do anything but smirk with pride.

    This post sounds like a butthurt rant.

    Like


    • “Nothing you say will make him do anything but smirk with pride.”

      Or cry about it on his twitter page.

      Although it may have been simply a means of getting women, he was working to make the world a worse place for men. His articles against older men/younger women relationships, for instance, would have been taken to heart by some, contributing, however minutely, to the stigmatisation of such relationships.

      It may have been alpha of him to trick feminists into spreading their legs, but how un-alpha of us would it be to say “Thanks for making the world a harder place for me to obtain young pussy, dude”?

      Like


      • I think alphas don’t give a shit about the rest of the beta male herd, by definition.

        Like


      • If you lived on a desert island with another man and 2 women, and the other man built a raft and pursuaded the 2 woman to go with him, would you say “man, that guy is such a badass to get those women to go away with him” or “what the fuck! That asshole is taking away the pussy available to me”?.

        BF’s response is the former; mine is the latter.

        Like


    • Did you and I see some other twitter meltdown just now?

      Like


  34. I am getting really sick of hearing about that guy – and the Minter guy – every time I catch up on a game blog.

    Like


  35. Hugo will have to live with the fact, for the rest of his life and maybe beyond, that his kids will know in exact detail just how much of a coward and attention whore he really was.
    Guys with kids generally have an instinctive fear and loathing that their children will see them that way.
    With Hugo, it is already locked-down forever. On the Internet. Where all his kids friends can read it and smirk. Where all his kids future dates can read it. His daughters will be treated like 50 cent whores and his sons like slave catamites.

    Like


    • “Guys with kids generally have an instinctive fear and loathing that their children will see them that way”

      I think you meant to say “men with kids”, but if you had, it would have ruined your argument. Hugo doesn’t give two shits about his children.

      Like


    • Yes, Rum, this is a multi-generational tragedy.

      Like


  36. And do not spend a milli-second of pity for his “mental illness”. Mental illness is when you fail to deposit something to your account. When you fail to repay a lawful debt, that has another name.
    He might fool some folks with his shuck and jive talk. But his Kids will know. The tragedy is that he will never actually off himself. But others around him who lack the armor of stone-cold sociopathy might not.

    Like


  37. […] Mainstream Feminist Outlets Try To Bury Their Association With Hugo Schwyzer […]

    Like


  38. Women who put off marriage find themselves facing a marriage strike from older men:

    http://www.justfourguys.com/women-start-marriage-strike-men-complete-it/

    Like


    • Danielle Crittenden tried to warn about this back in 1999: “The 33-year-old single woman who decides she wants more from life than her career cannot so readily walk into marriage and children; by postponing them, all she has done is to push them ahead to a point in her life when she has less sexual power to attain them.” This of course went over as well as walking into your local SMERSH office and patiently explaining why communism doesn’t work.

      Likewise, what could be easier than snagging a horny 20something bluepill beta into wedlock? By the time he’s 30, however, it’s likely that (1) he’s had the red pill forced down his throat, and (2) his T-level is headed off a cliff. A fatal combination.

      Unfortunately, the death of marriage is but a temporary victory in a society where people get elected on Marxist masturbation fantasies like “The Life of Julia”.

      Like


  39. If women in general did not want a marriage strike why did they decide to all gain 40 lbs of lard-flesh? I will never understand this…

    Like


  40. […] until just today, other than a few tweets over the last two weeks, the heavy hitters of the manosphere seemed […]

    Like


  41. Nobody, but NOBODY, wants to be Hugo right now, or is likely to want to be Hugo in the future.

    And that is the lowest a man can get.

    Like


  42. on August 14, 2013 at 11:58 pm evilwhitemalempire

    a tribute to hugo schwyzer

    Like


  43. As the old saying goes, “He wrote what he liked because they liked what he wrote”. Schwyzer’s relationship to feminism was always mutually exploitive. He successfully milked feminism’s need to put a male face on the women’s movement. Sort of a male Uncle Tom or Quisling. In return he got a few ducats and the attention he craved. He won’t be missed. His work was junk and there will be plenty of other male impostors to fill his spot now that he is gone.

    Like


  44. Hugo is my best friend.

    Like


  45. Two things:

    1. It is highly unlikely Schwyzer’s days are over. The left constantly recycles its leaders, no matter what they do. Anthony Weiner was a frontrunner for mayor of NYC until a second round of sexting did him in, and still has a legit shot at the next election. Eliot Spitzer openly broke the law an he’s going to win comptroller of NYC. Bill Clinton committed perjury and broke every feminist law alive, and he’s a hero to the left. Al Sharpton is a confirmed liar and murderer and yet has a major news organization giving him a show. The crazy PETA lady commits and advocates terrorism, and yet no one in Hollywood disassociates from her. etc….

    Schwyzer will be back, and, so long as he says the right things, all will be forgiven. Credibility means nothing to a leftist.

    2. It’s really sad you’re still buying Piggy’s filth. The guy openly said he’d say whatever needs to be said to become successful, and thinks the Good Men Project is a good idea. If he thought it was a way to fame, he’d have his gf peg him on live TV. He’s basically a tenure position away from being Hugo, or at least David Frum.

    Like


    • So you think he will be waving at the camera from the balcony of the next DNC?

      Like


    • In typical lefty fashion, he will be back. These people have no shame. People used to be ashamed by such behavior a generation or two ago. The left took all shame and embarrassment out of the equation so that people could be free to act like complete idiots, or make total fools of themselves, or be the laughing stock of the entire nation, or embarrass their families, or make sex videos their kids will find out about one day, and not have it affect them. It’s another sign of culture deterioration when people do not get humiliated from their own wrong handiwork. There is no shame and no accountability.

      Meanwhile, this is a useless thread. Been there done that with Hugo Schwyzer. It’s the same nonsense with him. Why waste an entire thread over his antics? And all of these people fuming over him and calling for revenge like little savages in the lion’s arena. Why waste energy? He should be ignored. Making a fool of yourself should be punishment enough, except lefty-minded people don’t seem affected by embarrassing themselves. Unfortunately.

      Like


      • “Meanwhile, this is a useless thread. Been there done that with Hugo Schwyzer. It’s the same nonsense with him. Why waste an entire thread over his antics? And all of these people fuming over him and calling for revenge like little savages in the lion’s arena. Why waste energy? He should be ignored.”

        Sorry, the world doesn’t work like that anymore. These people will shuffle Schwyzer down the memory hole and carry on, like so many times before. Don’t be an enabler.

        Like


      • Savaging Schwyzer is bigger than just him. He is a stinking little shit speck in the scheme of things, but his evisceration by the hands of sadists like yours truly serves a very important purpose: As a warning to the others who would take up his banner of lies.

        Like


      • I don’t take his banner of lies and I have no sympathy for him. I find him completely boring, and his lefty antics are typical of the left. I suppose, I am not an expert on his antics. What I know about him is what I said above. I’ll leave his punishment to you, and guys who know more of him.

        Like


      • “Pour encourager les autres.” Or discourager, as the case may be.

        Like


  46. That was the most APPROPRIATE expression of True Hatred I have ever seen. It was on such a level of perfection that it clearly has it’s source in the Divine Love that guides Creation.

    You are doing the work of the Lord!

    Like


    • No, it was undisciplined and dumb, a screed contrary to his larger purpose.

      States Evidence A is a twerpy little comment urchin like you is so tickled over it, like your first boner.

      Like


  47. Simply great writing. I wonder what mainstream works you have published, because I would be shocked if you haven’t.

    Like


  48. Come on, LOL

    The Repulsive Vanity of the Male Self-Portrait

    http://jezebel.com/5989775/the-repulsive-vanity-of-the-male-self+portrait

    After announcing on Facebook and Twitter that I’d be writing a column on men and selfshot images, I got some version of that question from five different people. It might be a little late to write about Brett Favre or Anthony Weiner, they seemed to think, but perhaps, they thought, I had a new take on why so many dudes love to send photos of their penises to the eager and the horrified alike.

    Like


  49. Dude just went crazy from the cognitive dissonance, trying to be something he wasn’t…rewarded for being something he wasn’t. He’s a fag, an attention whore, and a traitor to other dudes. I’m tired of him.

    Like


    • Precisely. What is the point of adding so much gasoline to the drama queen fire?

      It brings CH down to the level of cheap theatrics, when he should be attempting to dignify the cause to a degree that attracts worthier enemies. Rather than these run-of-the-mill attention whores and transparent nut jobs.

      Like


    • Amazing how the cog dis can drive a person crazy! He literally had a meltdown in his twitter feed but let’s not disregard all the medal he was on the guy is probably loco to some degree

      Like


  50. YaReally,

    No worries, man! I’m definitely going out this weekend. A FR is coming 😉

    Quick notes about what’s been happening:

    I’ve been hanging out with these two guys that pickup girls a lot. They’re OKAY, they have more sex than me and they’re more aggressive. The problem is that they’re Pleasure of Sex type dudes and I’m very clearly a Thrill of the Hunt type of guy. They think I’m using that as an excuse or something. To be honest, they always approach ugly as shit girls, with a decent girl here or there. They’re always trying to push me to get numbers from girls I’m not attracted to AT ALL. Like bottom of the barrel type girls. Okay SOME are okay, but I want the fucking bombshells. It’s not like I’m unwilling to approach the hotties (I do approach them), but the way the guys I go out with see it, since I’ve only had sex once before they think “beggers can’t be choosers” and I should just fuck whoever.

    But honestly, that really repulses me. I did that the first time and I really didn’t enjoy it. So I’m not trying to have sex for the sake of getting off, but I want to feel attracted to the girl.

    I personally don’t give a shit what they think, cuz they’re more “approach from the shadows and take a girl home to fuck her” type of guys, whereas I’m much more social and willing to experiment with social dynamics, like Scray. I even went out alone for the first time in over two months to this bar/club where hotties were EVERYWHERE and I had a good time. Again, I stuck to dancefloor game lol but I experimented a bit with “Sincere Game” that Tyler talks about in his more recent video and it worked pretty well (not well enough to have a one-night stand, I still fuck up cuz I try to illicit reactions from the girls with questions instead of just enjoying myself and making self-amusing statements, but whatever):

    The best part is that I had so much fun going out alone anyway (built up my emotions by dancing, being cool with people instead of clinging to my buddies who honestly aren’t that great at social game. They use a lot of routines and then isolate aggressively, which of course, gets them laid with OKAY chicks, but not so much with the bombshells).

    I know what you’re going to say (“Why do you care what they think?”), but it’s hard making decisions about these things when it feels like I’m alone in what I want. Literally, I’ve been trying to find like-minded people for months and while I have found ONE (we totally mesh and he gets my style of pickup) he lives in a different city and is broke half the time. We went out once before and it was awesome. It feels like the only people who understand my goals are on the internet (which is to BECOME A SOCIAL BADASS IN LIFE AND BE WITH THE HOTTEST WOMEN 8-10s).

    These guys I’m hanging out with, I don’t think want that. I’m thinking of just going out alone now, because I feel like this whole month, I’ve wasted a bunch of time hanging around them only to learn that my standards MIGHT be too high and I should just get my dick wet.

    P.S. Immoralgables that was an awesome pickup and FR. Definitely learned a lot. Great stuff, thanks for sharing.

    Like


    • First, massive props for going out alone. Going out alone can feel like falling into an abyss and bouncing off the wall the entire way down. Much the same as any other adversity though, it will make you strong like bull.

      ‘again, I stuck to dancefloor game’

      You should try to do a night or week where you only talk to girls who are off the dancefloor. Trust me.

      ‘To be honest, they always approach ugly as shit girls, with a decent girl here or there. They’re always trying to push me to get numbers from girls I’m not attracted to AT ALL’

      Yeah, they will push you to do that. You should talk to those girls, though. When you first roll in to a venue, you should just “3 second rule,” speak to the first people you see. Laws of probability dictate that the first people you see will likely be moderate-low value — which is good. You can build social proof with these girls. Even if they’re uggos (it’s weird, but it’s true). Just keep it light and friendly — that’s your home base.

      ‘not well enough to have a one-night stand, I still fuck up cuz I try to illicit reactions from the girls with questions instead of just enjoying myself and making self-amusing statements, but whatever):’

      Get a routine stack so that you can avoid asking questions. In time, you’ll start improvising and saying some hilarious shit in set, but for now just memorize like 10 minutes worth of “material.” If you follow that structure I gave you, filled in with routines for each point along the way, you should find that opening/A2 becomes much smoother.

      ‘They use a lot of routines and then isolate aggressively, which of course, gets them laid with OKAY chicks, but not so much with the bombshells’

      You gotta crawl before you can walk, though. There’s a crucial difference between learning the routines and learning the skill. So yeah, learn some routines, use them on hot girls, use them on okay girls (but never seriously pursue the okay ones if you’re a total TOH guy). The hotter girls will start responding once you start developing the underlying skill.

      ‘it’s hard making decisions about these things when it feels like I’m alone in what I want’

      You kind of are, man. I’ve been doing this for awhile, and I’m lucky to have two friends that are open to discussing red pill stuff. The rest of my friends are insane blue pillers — even the naturals. Plus, people generally have an aversion to their friends/peers improving. They discourage it. Like, for me getting fit I’ve had to endure some bullshit over ordering salads, refusing to drink more than one beer, etc. etc. etc. Self-improvement is difficult; you’re trying to take what you’ve been given and make something better. Most people are content to just leave nature well enough alone. So you’re going to have to accept that yeah, you are on a lonely path in many ways.

      ‘I’ve wasted a bunch of time hanging around them only to learn that my standards MIGHT be too high and I should just get my dick wet.’

      Your standards are your standards. Just be wary about using your standards as an excuse-shield against failure. Who gives a shit what your friends are doing in the club? When you all roll there, let them talk to their uggos, but you focus on the bombshells. Little need to talk to them about it or complain that you failed with the bombshells. If you get blown out by a bombshell, maybe go back to wing one of their sets to pump your state up (they’re just uggos after all).

      Keep these coming, man….good to see you back posting!

      Like


  51. […] their stealth campaign to undermine the credibility of false rape claims. Fortunately, other prominent man-sites are providing cover stories that we all hate Hugo and all those like him, […]

    Like


  52. One of the funnier results of Hugo’s meltdown has been the victim contest that’s ensued. The white feminists are claiming Hugo used his male privilege to get his voice heard. The black feminists are saying the white feminists used their white privilege to silence their objections to Hugo and give him a platform. I would love someone to come forward and say “I’m an obese, disabled, trangendered, lesbian, Aboriginal rape survivor. Everyone shut the fuck up, because I sit atop the victim hierarchy”. What could they say? It would be like a royal flush. The entire left would be in awe of your victimhood. They’d probably build a shrine dedicated to it and worship it.

    Like


  53. When that day comes, and the barrel of the pistol is nestled in your mouth, lazing metallically on your tongue as your thinning, middle-aged lips glide over the shaft like long-ago unshaven feminist coed lovers used to do to your anti-feminist, patriarchal boner, no one, not even your family, will give a shit.

    Ouch.

    Like


  54. Swyzer is just one more person in this f*cked up country who will do or say ANYTHING for an easy paycheck and an easy lay. We seem to have no shortage of psychopathic narcissists in our midst whether they be male or female. Until people wake up, think for themselves, and ask, “Who benefits?” whenever someone tries to teach or convince them of something, we’ll continue on the fast track to hell as a society.

    Like


  55. I had never heard of Hugo Schwyzer prior to this CH posting. So, I read Hugo’s entire ‘tweet meltdown’ (https://mobile.twitter.com/hugoschwyzer).

    This Hugo guy is the embodiment of so much that is wrong with American journalism, values, gender beliefs, manipulation, and greed. He is a rotten person.

    Good thing he melted down to the core, so that the world could see how baseless and fraudulent the he (and his philosohy) actually was. Everything that he represented was rubbish, and ultimately the victims of his deceit were MEN.

    The term for guys like him is: ‘Pussy-beggar’

    Like


    • on August 17, 2013 at 3:33 am Imperial Leather

      Schnytzers carefully controlled and managed “twitter breakdown” and that’s exactly what it is, as it was too well constructed from this sociopath, is nothing more than him maintaining tenure and giving him breathing space to plot some kind of return, wherever it may be. He’s too addicted too the sliver of limelight and its pussy and ego stroking benefits

      Like


  56. I very rarely come to this blog — and that may have to change. I agree 100% with what you have written here.

    One thing to note: while Hugo may have done harm to feminism, ALL of that harm has come at the expense of men, and Hugo, for all his meltdown and apologies and begun to touch on how he screwed men over.

    If feminist theory is so robust, so critical, so astute, how can feminists implementing that theory have failed to see Hugo?

    If feminism truly is a human rights movement, how could feminists not have heard or listened to the many many men telling them that Hugo was manipulating them?

    When I make profound mistakes, I go back and think about what that mistake means. What else did I get wrong? What other things do I need to reconsider? Where made it possible for me to make that mistake?

    WHAR FEMINIST SOUL SEARCHING, WHAR?

    Like


  57. tl;dr — KILL YOURSELF SCHWYZER

    Like


  58. If a man acts like a woman around women,surprise, surprise, he will get treated like a woman: his life will be filled with catty drama, back-biting, emotional rollercoaster bullshit, social in-group/out-group games, and of course, he will be regularly “friend-zoned.”

    Better to be a real man around women, and you can avoid all that shit. The man sets the frame here. Poor Hugo proudly wanted to be just one of the girls and is being treated like it.

    Like


  59. Men can’t be good progressives because men aren’t touchy-feely idiots. There’s always an ulterior motive (nothing wrong with that).

    Let’s just hope Hugo’s infamy becomes associated with all male feminists.

    Like


  60. Coldest, nastiest thing I’ve ever read on here. 8/10, would read again!

    Like


  61. There once was a fella named Hugo
    A closeted fag, maybe — Jew know?
    His life a disaster
    He solicited laughter
    When offing himself — oh boo hoo go.

    Like


  62. […] once. But Firepower’s latest puts it in perspective, at the end of the day being trolled by male feminists is not particularly […]

    Like


  63. The moral? These red pill principles are are always vindicated in the end.

    Like


  64. The people I come from have very,very long memories.
    Some debts will be written-off: Some will not.

    Like


  65. Sorry chaps, I have somehow managed to miss the whole Hugo Schwyzer thing. What in god’s name is this all about? Could someone give me a Wikipedia-type summary of this thing, and why CH is so worked up about it?

    Like


    • so worked up about it?

      This wording is usually a giveaway that the commenter nurses anti-CH hate. OlioOx, are you a hater of Le Chateau?

      Like


      • You need to go back to Detective School and try again to achieve a conditional pass.

        Like


      • It’s a giveaway of more than anti-CH… it’s that telltale snark redolence of Cathedral cogdis.

        Note, too, the “asking for explanations” of the obvious… oldest Chomsky trick in the book.

        Like


  66. HUGO IS MY WINGMAN

    Like


  67. What Amy and some others miss is, that this Schwyster was setting himself up as a teacher, lecturing others on how to behave. That makes his transgression a great deal more serious. To be a moron is one thing; to be a moron and actively campaign for others to join your moronist cult is something quite different.

    Like


  68. … and a male attention whore with flapping labia where his mouth should be.

    Once again, CH has turned a phrase deftly!

    Like


  69. on August 18, 2013 at 2:02 pm Major Harry Wood

    Heard Hugo Schwyzer is starting a PUA boot camp called how to bag & tag feminists, co-eds and pornstars in 5 minutes with zero money down and no monthly payments!

    As a fellow mangina, total bro fist and respect for expert level 9000 emo wolf in sheep clothing game. Feigning emotional distress was the cherry on top.

    Guy is a total G. Should be the poster child for every mangina feminists.

    Like


  70. on August 19, 2013 at 9:11 am RappaccinisDaughter

    Oh, Hugo, Hugo, Hugo. You just keep getting funnier:

    http://getoffmyinternets.net/hugo-schwyzer-will-ghostwrite-your-article-about-hugo-schwyzer/

    Like


  71. […] has an interview with Hugo Schwyzer. Related: CH’s disgust with Hugo really shows through. Related; Rollo on […]

    Like


  72. […] ‘Mainstream Feminist Outlets Try To Bury Their Association With Hugo Schwyzer’ […]

    Like