"Kick her Out," where does this concept come from?

[ArchibaultNew]

Hey guys,

This is something I don't understand about American culture and perhaps it comes from some Protestant denomination like Evangelism and others. However, it seems that some many Manosphere writers online talk about this and write about it as well.

They will say something along the lines of, I hooked up with this and she's a slut for hooking up with me. Therefore, I kicked her out of my apartment. I "pumped and dumped her." This would be what Roosh's audience and other writers would talk about.

However, to me it's perplexing since, shouldn't you be "thankful" that a girl hooked up with you? Similar to if someone buys your products you thank them for their support. I never understood why this feeling of "degrading" people who support you. Also the "judgmental language" that is used.

This underlying "Cruelty" towards others. Since absent in Traditional Catholicism due to, "Do unto others what you wish others do to you." Hence, you don't want to "exert" cruelty towards others. Instead, in many Manosphere groups and others there seems to be a sense of "satisfaction" towards "punishing" sinners.

[Cornfed]

[Outcast9428]

They will say something along the lines of, I hooked up with this and she's a slut for hooking up with me. Therefore, I kicked her out of my apartment. I "pumped and dumped her." This would be what Roosh's audience and other writers would talk about.

However, to me it's perplexing since, shouldn't you be "thankful" that a girl hooked up with you? Similar to if someone buys your products you thank them for their support. I never understood why this feeling of "degrading" people who support you. Also the "judgmental language" that is used.

I think it's pretty much just some popular culture trope of girls sleeping with a guy, getting clingy and not leaving and the guy wouldn't "get anything done" or whatever. Personally, I don't mind it too much when a girl is clingy after we had sex; think its rather cute, as a matter of fact. Plus if she sticks around after you f**k and sleep together, that means you can have morning sex. Shower sex. Before-breakfast sex. After-breakfast sex. A little "goodbye quickie" and then you, politely of course, send her on her way. No need to be rude about it.

I'm not sure if "pump and dump" means one HAS to be rude, though... a guy may brag about "kicking out a girl" but what he really means is he told her he was a bit busy and politely ushered her out. It just sounds more 'cool' to them to pretend he kicked her out like some useless slut. Truth is, less than 1% of men would do so, because what about a round two? You couldn't really call her again if you rudely dismiss her. Dimishes your chances of another night together, and if you don't have them exactly lined up around the corner, why blow your chances on purpose?

It's a braggart's trope and not much else. Nobody really does this.

You’d be surprised, I had roommates in college who were frat boys and given how many of them there were on my campus I ended up doing a lot of group projects with them and this is pretty much exactly what they did. My roommates didn’t even wait until morning actually, the girl they found that night would literally go in for like 20 minutes or so and then leave.

That flabbergasted me as a freshman when my roommate did that. When he first started bringing girls over, I left the room for like an hour. Eventually he came out of the room and said “what the f**k are you still doing out here?” And I’d say “I’m giving you time, is she still in there?” And he’d say “no dude she left like a half an hour ago, how long do you think it takes?”

The mentality of trying to rush sex has never made sense to me. My girlfriend and I will just lay in bed making out for hours. One hour of making out passes by like it was 15 minutes for me and I can really easily lose track of time. I just don’t understand the rush to the finish line that so many guys seem to have.

Also at my college, guys absolutely did do the rude “pump and dump” thing. Nobody stuck around for anything. I’d even hear people, both guys and girls, say things while we were in the library doing a project like “I hate it when you’re on campus and see the person you hooked up with.”

I think one of my roommates called a few of his girls for a second round but that was pretty much it. The hookup culture at my college was just as cold, rude, superficial, shallow, and heartless as every stereotype you’ve ever heard makes it out to be. It was disturbingly common for people to sleep with 20-30 different people every year. One of my roommates slept with 50 girls. And I know he is not lying because I saw every one of them come through the apartment and enter his room (the door to which he usually didn’t even close). One guy I knew described an apartment of four girls who literally had a whiteboard in their apartment keeping track of how many guys they had hooked up with over the course of the semester. He said all of them were in the 20-30 range. And that’s one f***ing semester.

Nobody dated at my college, you never saw couples holding hands, hugging each other or kissing. I never once in all four years of being there saw a couple kiss each other on campus. Not even a small kiss. Because nobody was having relationships. Everything was a f***ing competition to pump and dump as many people as possible. It was such a goddamn sickening culture. I didn’t know a single person who met a girl at my college and dated her. Not one. Every person who was in a relationship met her outside of college.

There’s a reason why I have such incredible disdain for hookup culture. People who have never experienced living in a true hookup culture have no idea just how destructive it really is to basically everything that is good in life. It’s a big reason why I think conservatives who rail about how great the 70s and 80s were are cucks. From what I’ve heard the hookup culture back then, especially in the 70s, was absolutely horrible. Why the f**k would I ever want to return to that time? I’d prefer to just stick to the modern US South where we don’t have to deal with woke bullshit like the rest of the country is and simultaneously get to enjoy a culture where the only people really engaged in hookup culture are the ghetto/white trash people.

You’re not a real conservative unless you want to return to the 1950s. The 1950s was real conservatism. The 70s and 80s was just right leaning liberalism.

[gsjackson]

You’re not a real conservative unless you want to return to the 1950s.

"A true conservative genuinely mourns the passing of the 13th century." George F. Will (product of the 1950s and deep state propagandist)

[Cornfed]

You’re not a real conservative unless you want to return to the 1950s. The 1950s was real conservatism.

Eh, that was when people abandoned their tribal, ethnic, familial and religious alliances to live in isolated households in suburbs and work in whorporate jobs. They will go down as the darkest days in modernity.

[Outcast9428]

@gsjackson and @Cornfed

There is truth to that as well. I mean, I personally fancy the 15th and 16th centuries more then the 13th century because I feel like people were more romantic at that time period and it was also more developed/wealthier. But yeah, my true ideal would be the 15th/16th century. That being said, culturally going back to the 1950s would make me very happy. And I would say its ridiculous to state that someone who wants to return to the 1950s, and stay there, is not a true conservative.

I would agree, however, that if you actually are living in the 1950s, that you couldn't call yourself truly right-wing or conservative unless you wanted to return to the Medieval/Renaissance era culturally. If you were what we think of as a 1950s conservative, then by the standards of that time period, you would just be a centrist or center-right... Given that conservatism was just the default back then.

Calling the 50s the darkest days of modernity I think its pretty ridiculous. I mean, you could certainly argue that it got the ball rolling as far as liberalism is concerned. But actually living in that era would have been really nice (well, except for the lack of Asian girls, I might prefer the modern era just for the cute Asian girls alone ).

[Cornfed]

There is truth to that as well. I mean, I personally fancy the 15th and 16th centuries more then the 13th century because I feel like people were more romantic at that time period and it was also more developed/wealthier. But yeah, my true ideal would be the 15th/16th century.

I'm pretty sure the average person was more prosperous in the 13th century. Certainly less disease ridden.

Calling the 50s the darkest days of modernity I think its pretty ridiculous. I mean, you could certainly argue that it got the ball rolling as far as liberalism is concerned

What happened in the 50s - suburbia, TV addiction, crass consumerism, housing as a speculative vehicle etc. made what happened later inevitable.

[Outcast9428]

There is truth to that as well. I mean, I personally fancy the 15th and 16th centuries more then the 13th century because I feel like people were more romantic at that time period and it was also more developed/wealthier. But yeah, my true ideal would be the 15th/16th century.

I'm pretty sure the average person was more prosperous in the 13th century. Certainly less disease ridden.

Calling the 50s the darkest days of modernity I think its pretty ridiculous. I mean, you could certainly argue that it got the ball rolling as far as liberalism is concerned

What happened in the 50s - suburbia, TV addiction, crass consumerism, housing as a speculative vehicle etc. made what happened later inevitable.

You must be thinking about the 14th century. Europe became very prosperous in the aftermath of the Black Death as peasants no longer had to live on the lords’ lands.

Suburbs are nice though, I like suburbs.

[Cornfed]

You must be thinking about the 14th century. Europe became very prosperous in the aftermath of the Black Death as peasants no longer had to live on the lords’ lands.

The 14th century was probably the end of the medieval warm period where populations exceeded their limits of expansion (at least in England), so that was the end of the good times and in 1325 they had the Great Famine. That set the stage for the Black Death in 1349. Things may have improved a little with the death of the surplus population for a few decades, but they then settled into poverty in the colder climate, lost a few inches in average height and generally lived shitty lives until the 20th century, when, after perhaps a few good years, life turned to shit again. The good times really did end in about 1300.

[Outcast9428]

You must be thinking about the 14th century. Europe became very prosperous in the aftermath of the Black Death as peasants no longer had to live on the lords’ lands.

The 14th century was probably the end of the medieval warm period where populations exceeded their limits of expansion (at least in England), so that was the end of the good times and in 1325 they had the Great Famine. That set the stage for the Black Death in 1349. Things may have improved a little with the death of the surplus population for a few decades, but they then settled into poverty in the colder climate, lost a few inches in average height and generally lived shitty lives until the 20th century, when, after perhaps a few good years, life turned to shit again. The good times really did end in about 1300.

That’s not true though, things immediately after the Black Death had not improved much but between 1350 to 1450, wages for average peasants doubled. Their wages increased and the wealth of the lords decreased so they abandoned many of the dozens of homes they once inhabited and instead started focusing on creating one particularly nice house we now think of as Medieval manor homes while the peasants who had a lot more disposable income now could move into the lords’ old houses. The middle class in the latter half of the 1400s was so wealthy they had to make laws against peasants wearing certain clothing because they could actually afford the same clothes that only lords once wore…

A peasant dad in 1460 could feed a family of six on only 120 days worth of labor. 75% of peasants owned their own home and did not live on lords’ land. If you didn’t live on the lords’ land then the only taxes you needed to pay was a 10% tithe to the church. Basically, 132 days worth of labor was enough to cover pretty much all living expenses (clothing would’ve been knitted by the wife). Most peasants back then only worked about 1300 hours a year.

Don’t get me wrong, the 13th century as far as the Middle Ages go would’ve definitely been one of the better centuries but the 15th and 16th centuries were still better. The 14th century was obviously the worst one.

[Outcast9428]

There is truth to that as well. I mean, I personally fancy the 15th and 16th centuries more then the 13th century because I feel like people were more romantic at that time period and it was also more developed/wealthier. But yeah, my true ideal would be the 15th/16th century.

I'm pretty sure the average person was more prosperous in the 13th century. Certainly less disease ridden.

Calling the 50s the darkest days of modernity I think its pretty ridiculous. I mean, you could certainly argue that it got the ball rolling as far as liberalism is concerned

What happened in the 50s - suburbia, TV addiction, crass consumerism, housing as a speculative vehicle etc. made what happened later inevitable.

You must be thinking about the 14th century. Europe became very prosperous in the aftermath of the Black Death as peasants no longer had to live on the lords’ lands.

Suburbs are nice though, I like suburbs.

Suburbs, especially where you live in the south, are filled with trashy goyim like these people in Texas:

https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout ... s_it_used/

Even when you take goyim out of the trailer parks and put them in nice suburban neighborhoods like this they still act like trash.

lol says the guy who has never been here.

[MrMan]

Hey guys,

This is something I don't understand about American culture and perhaps it comes from some Protestant denomination like Evangelism and others. However, it seems that some many Manosphere writers online talk about this and write about it as well.

They will say something along the lines of, I hooked up with this and she's a slut for hooking up with me. Therefore, I kicked her out of my apartment. I "pumped and dumped her." This would be what Roosh's audience and other writers would talk about.

However, to me it's perplexing since, shouldn't you be "thankful" that a girl hooked up with you? Similar to if someone buys your products you thank them for their support. I never understood why this feeling of "degrading" people who support you. Also the "judgmental language" that is used.

This underlying "Cruelty" towards others. Since absent in Traditional Catholicism due to, "Do unto others what you wish others do to you." Hence, you don't want to "exert" cruelty towards others. Instead, in many Manosphere groups and others there seems to be a sense of "satisfaction" towards "punishing" sinners.

Evangelicals and Protestants in general teach the golden rule and 'love thy neighbor'. Historical Roman Catholicism and Protestantism both teach against fornicating-- so pumping and dumping not allowed. Roman Catholicism historically was more tolerant of prostitution existing in society, though it doesn't condone of individual church members engaging in it.

From what I have seen of the manosphere, it can have a mean edge to it when it comes to the topic of women.

[ArchibaultNew]

Hey guys,

This is something I don't understand about American culture and perhaps it comes from some Protestant denomination like Evangelism and others. However, it seems that some many Manosphere writers online talk about this and write about it as well.

They will say something along the lines of, I hooked up with this and she's a slut for hooking up with me. Therefore, I kicked her out of my apartment. I "pumped and dumped her." This would be what Roosh's audience and other writers would talk about.

However, to me it's perplexing since, shouldn't you be "thankful" that a girl hooked up with you? Similar to if someone buys your products you thank them for their support. I never understood why this feeling of "degrading" people who support you. Also the "judgmental language" that is used.

This underlying "Cruelty" towards others. Since absent in Traditional Catholicism due to, "Do unto others what you wish others do to you." Hence, you don't want to "exert" cruelty towards others. Instead, in many Manosphere groups and others there seems to be a sense of "satisfaction" towards "punishing" sinners.

Evangelicals and Protestants in general teach the golden rule and 'love thy neighbor'. Historical Roman Catholicism and Protestantism both teach against fornicating-- so pumping and dumping not allowed. Roman Catholicism historically was more tolerant of prostitution existing in society, though it doesn't condone of individual church members engaging in it.

From what I have seen of the manosphere, it can have a mean edge to it when it comes to the topic of women.

Its tricky. Since some thinkers where saying "Calvinism" proposes for the community to be "Watchdogs" for the rest of the community.

[MrMan]

Hey guys,

This is something I don't understand about American culture and perhaps it comes from some Protestant denomination like Evangelism and others. However, it seems that some many Manosphere writers online talk about this and write about it as well.

They will say something along the lines of, I hooked up with this and she's a slut for hooking up with me. Therefore, I kicked her out of my apartment. I "pumped and dumped her." This would be what Roosh's audience and other writers would talk about.

However, to me it's perplexing since, shouldn't you be "thankful" that a girl hooked up with you? Similar to if someone buys your products you thank them for their support. I never understood why this feeling of "degrading" people who support you. Also the "judgmental language" that is used.

This underlying "Cruelty" towards others. Since absent in Traditional Catholicism due to, "Do unto others what you wish others do to you." Hence, you don't want to "exert" cruelty towards others. Instead, in many Manosphere groups and others there seems to be a sense of "satisfaction" towards "punishing" sinners.

Evangelicals and Protestants in general teach the golden rule and 'love thy neighbor'. Historical Roman Catholicism and Protestantism both teach against fornicating-- so pumping and dumping not allowed. Roman Catholicism historically was more tolerant of prostitution existing in society, though it doesn't condone of individual church members engaging in it.

From what I have seen of the manosphere, it can have a mean edge to it when it comes to the topic of women.

Its tricky. Since some thinkers where saying "Calvinism" proposes for the community to be "Watchdogs" for the rest of the community.

Among Christians, or within the church, that is a Biblical concept. But God judges those who are without. Keeping an eye out on each other and judging within the church-- that varies quite a bit among different groups of Christians, and IMO, is universally taken too lightly.

There are varying theories, opinions, and theological positions on the intersection between Christians and government when there are Christian rulers, or how to interact with politics in a democracy, etc. It also varies based on how one interprets scripture when it comes to the end times.

[ArchibaultNew]

I would like to add that it seems in the UK this culture is somewhat similar. For instance, during the Hacienda concerts in Manchesters. It appears the cops where told that people where playing "loud music" nearby and they went to shut it down. Anyone who doesn't follow the rules are seen as "troublemakers" and "delinquents." I think the whole, 'Common Good" and it needs to be explored further.