Integrity and Selling Out: Chuck Rudd

I debated entitling this post “Whore of Week: Chuck Rudd”, but it’s far too depressing, craven, and meaningful to be tossed out like that. In fact, this is the saddest post I’ve made, even in the age of Obama.

Chuck Rudd, the Gucci Little Piggy

For those of you who don’t know who Chuck Rudd is, he is a blogger for his own site, a site called “Gucci Little Piggy.” Chuck began Gucci Little Piggy after being a frequent commentator over at Chateau Heartsie. Chuck was a respectable commentator at Chateau Heartsie, often elucidating and debating ideas and techniques brought up by the blog. He was never a PUA type, more of a guy who recognized the value of the advice there on human behavior and HBD. He was anti-feminist for the most part, and definitely a supporter of men’s rights.

Chuck’s blog began in the same fashion, with posts regarding black versus non-black behavior, crime, women and feminism, and the like. Chuck wasn’t a hardcore angry white male, raging against a system designed to blame whitey and put masculinity down. Rather, he was just a concerned advocate on the anti-left side of the line, pointing out the fallacies and idiocies of the left, and how they are leading us all down the primrose path to destruction. He very eagerly called out leftists for their shoddy logic and idiocy–and, most recently, that man-hating douchebag, Hugo Schweitzer. But he wasn’t completely obsessed; he often blogged about his longtime girlfriend (hence why he’s not a PUA), concerts he was attending, his job as a waiter, or his being a redhead.

Chuck wasn’t a leader in the Manopshere, but a valuable officer, doing battle in the guerrilla-warfare army that is the current Manosphere.

However, he is now lost.

The Good Men Project

A little more background is necessary.

So Chuck’s most recent bugaboo had been Schweitzer. Schweitzer was writing for a website called The Good Men Project. The Good Men Project is a site run by a bunch of limp-wristed, masculinity-hating, faggoty ass half-queer pussies who want to make men subservient to women; merely perusing their “about” page will show you that.

Proof? Read their “about” page. These fags want to dictate to us all what “enlightened masculinity” (i.e. faggy, pussy, left-wing-worshiping betaness) should be. Hell, they even talk like feminazi whores, about how theirs is a “social movement” to “foster a national discussion” on what it means “to be a good man.” For anyone with two eyes to see, they are exactly paralleling the “national discussion” and “social movement” bullshit of the blame whitey niggers and cunts. Oh look, one of their own “blame whitey” writers already talks about “having a national conversation on race.” (The nigger even cites Ward Churchill—-Ward-fucking-Churchill—-as a reputable source!).

Just take a look at their group picture and tell me these guys wouldn’t “forgive” a cheating woman for cuckolding them, would gladly let their wives “stray” to save a marriage, think looking at porn is rape, and would induce chemical castration to satisfy their wives. The kinds of sackless fascist fucks who have Priuses (Prii?) with Obama stickers on them, a desire to be a totalitarian’s bitch, and no testosterone.

The entire site was openly created to destroy masculinity. Anyone contributing to the website—anyone writing articles for them—is contributing to their cause of men getting pegged on the street by women.

The Sellout

And now, former man and now turncoat sellout Chuck Rudd has written for them. Here and here, thus far. And Chuck is proud of this: see here and here.


In this day and and age, integrity is an illusion. In certain but not all times in history, for a person to break his word, cheat a man, cheat on his spouse, rob, steal, murder, or lie, he would be castigated by his community and outcast, forever not to be trusted. People understood that those who show the propensity to break social bonds and go back on their word for personal gain were not trustworthy creatures.

In this day and age, that idea is a joke. The fact that Al “The Liar” Sharpton has his own show on an NBC-owned cable news station makes all credibility for NBC (not to mention MSNBC) fly out the window. What is more, the fact that no other news organization is going apeshit at Al Shaprton’s having a job in a news room shows just how much integrity they all have.

But integrity is important, even if it is as spat upon and ignored as those without integrity should be. It lets you know whom you can trust, who is reliable, who won’t just do anything for fame, money, and power. There will always be liars and sociopaths, manipulators who will try to seem trustworthy while really working for their own ends. But, to take the logic to a point of reductio ad absurdum, there will always be murderers and rapists as well, who will get away with their crimes, but we do not throw up our hands and say that murder and rape aren’t important. And intergrity certainly is.

Chuck’s Response

I got into it with Chuck in this blog post. There, he admits he wrote for The Good Men Project to “further” his writing career; such a blatant admission that he merely did it for his career, and thinking that was enough to support The Good Men Project’s goals, both take us to a surreal plane of existence—-that is all too coldly real. As Chuck argues, his career aspirations alone justifies becoming a Benedict Arnold, and yet somehow, in Chuck’s twisted world view, he still is a trustworthy writer.

You can see later on down the page that Chuck adopts a blase attitude towards my anger at his selling out. That doesn’t surprise me; to a man who has no principles, selling out means getting something—fame, money, power, career advancement—for nothing—for he had no principles to begin with. Even sadder still, Chuck’s regular commentators don’t mind it at all—showing how many fools and knaves inhabit the manosphere.

Let me be clear, children: Anyone who trusts what Chuck Rudd writes from now on, after knowing all this, is a fool.

That is what integrity means, and why it was important at many times in history—and why, during those many times it was forgotten, such ignorance was a sign of the decadence and decay of that society. And why the fact that Chuck’s selling out has had little to no consequence to his readers—because none of them expect or demand integrity from those sources they read and write to—because we live in a world tragically coming to its end.


This entire episode has left me very depressed.

First, Chuck was one of the first blogs I read each day, and I went back to it several times after the first readings, hoping for more posts and writing comments. I was fooled by a conniving guy out not for men, but for himself. But the others who still go there—after he outed himself as a principle-less douchebag, and defend him—fool themselves daily, and this is also disheartening. So many viewers are willingly following a nothing, merely because they don’t want to stop, think, and take a moral stand. A principled stand. A stand for integrity.

I would tell Chuck off here, but his actions show that he doesn’t care about his values or principles or anything like that. It would be like telling a stage magician he’s not really a sorcerer. The whole thing is a pretense that neither really believed in the first place and they believe their audiences will happily play along with for the sake of the show. Bread and circuses. Chuck got his career advanced, and we now know that he will, if paid enough, go about hugging Al Sharpton and claiming the Soviet Union was a misunderstood utopia.

What is more, I would tell the followers of his blog off, but they are, as I said before, fools and knaves, products of their time. To yell at them is merely cursing at the wind—the winds of change, the winds of destruction, the winds of a dying civilization.

It is most depressing to see the symptoms of wrong and yet be powerless to convince anyone of the same—indeed, to see them gleefully double-down on the wrongness of it all. Unfortunately, I have the curse of Cassandra. No wonder she yanked her hair out.

17 Responses to “Integrity and Selling Out: Chuck Rudd”

  1. Chuck Rudd Says:

    What a load of bullshit. Get a grip dude, and blow your nose.

    [[Whorefinder: Didn’t expect you to respond. You needn’t worry; precious few will listen these days.]]

    I had a long response written out for you but I’ve decided how silly this conversation is.

    [[Whorefinder: I know integrity is a joke to you. It isn’t to me, or posterity.]]

    We’re in the internet talking about me selling out.

    [[Whorefinder: Selling out occurs even on the internet.]]

    Yet you don’t actually point to anything I wrote that would indicate where I’ve sold out; you just point to where I’ve posted it.

    [[Whorefinder: Your positioned yourself as an anti-feminist, pro-masculinity and HBD blogger. Then you start writing for and supporting an anti-masculinity, anti-HBD, pro-feminist and blame whitey website. For nothing more, as you admit, than your own writing career. That’s selling out, son. Clear as day.]]

    You’re living in a tree house, and you’re pissed that someone wanted to leave the tree house to go do something else.

    [[Whorefinder: So you admit in metaphor that you’ve “left” the manosphere for the fagosphere, purely for fame purposes. It would bother me less if this were a change because the logic of the fagosphere had convinced you—a la David Brock or Andrew Sullivan. They at least have the excuse of having changes of heart based on events and arguments. You “left” the manosphere to support the fagosphere for your career—or, rather, you’re trying to speak out of both sides of your mouth to the fagosphere and the manosphere. Nothing more.]]

    Don’t know what to tell you. Sorry, I guess.

    [[Whorefinder: Sigh. Sell it to someone buying it. Your words are meaningless because they come from the mouth of a man who will say anything for his own personal advancement. Fool me once, etc. Enjoy backslapping with Al Sharpton and Amanda Marcotte.]]

  2. Agentic Men « Gucci Little Piggy Says:

    […] Heartiste and In Mala Fide were mentioned by Hugo Schwyzer at Jezebel on the topic of women being attracted to assholes.  So I adapted an old post that is now up at Good Men Project (whorefinder cried). […]

  3. Aaronovitch Says:

    Yet you don’t actually point to anything I wrote that would indicate where I’ve sold out; you just point to where I’ve posted it.

    Yeah, point to something he wrote at GMP that goes against his values.

    [[Whorefinder: He writes for a website who’s stated purpose and mission is the de-masculinization of men and feminization of culture. By writing for them, he is supporting their mission. That is going against his values, period. Proof of their mission? Check out their “about” page, including their most popular articles. ]]

    • Firepower Says:

      Am I addressing “mr. sophia?”

      If not, forgive my diagnosis that you’d suck dick for mention in a blogroll.

  4. Firepower Says:

    Chuck is like a chubby little brother to roissy. So, now that I’ve got the jab out of the way – the sword can fall.

    He doesn’t cowardly censor dissent from his blog – like ferdinand, who censors even minor disagreement. That’s to piggy’s credit – and important.

    We must understand the frail, ephemeral value of being mentioned by Hugo Schwyzer at Jezebel.

    In the way, let’s say, John Wayne would value it. Even mention by The Great Roissy will mean jackshit in a decade.

    I’ll do for ya’ll what no one did for me n’ lil’ ferdi: piggster SHOULD care what your (a longtime reader of intelligence) opinion is.

    And YOU, should realize that no writer/blogger can please 100% of the time.

    [[Whorefinder: Thanks. I avoid The Turd’s blog, because I don’t want to give such trash a first thought or a page view—I’ve even refrained from mentioning it here until now. The Turd long ago delved right into straight-up fascism. His crazed support of lunatic-delusional Advocatus Diaboli is prima facie evidence of his mental derangement.

    I don’t expect Chuck to please me all the time; I expect him not to support websites with stated missions and goals precisely the opposite of what he’s been standing for thus far. I expect integrity. Chuck has none.

    Chuck has become like David Brooks, David Frum, Alan Colmes, Ross Douthat, or the token righty that Billy Maher lines up in front of his firing squad for execution—-someone who offers a fig leaf of “balance” to an organization to claim that they are unbiased, when, in reality, he’s just there to be either a whimpering forgotten nothing or a punching bag.

    Except worse. The five I just mentioned at least, in their wee little minds, think they’re convincing a few of their audience that their ideas are worthwhile; they are delusional, but at least honest. Chuck, cynically, does not write at The Good Men Project to change minds; as he has admitted, her writes only to further his career. By Any Means Necessary.]]

  5. Chuck Rudd Says:

    The stated mission of GMP is to create “enlightened masculinity”. I don’t see anything wrong with the term.

    [[Whorefinder: Nice try. The very use of the term bespeaks of left-wing “social engineering” of men—i.e. “fixing” men to feminism’s own whims.]]

    Though I see the value of traditions, I’m not a traditionalist. I think about my own masculinity and the place of men in society. Further, I’m turned off by “unenlightened masculinity” just as I’m turned off by “unenlightened” anything.

    [[Whorefinder: Yawn. Vague terms, and then applying them indiscriminately to justify any position he wants? Check. Chuck’s already a lefty!]]

    So “enlightened masculinity” can mean a lot of things, and I see an opening for me to provide what I think it does mean. So we have a different interpretation of what the site is all about,

    [[Whorefinder: No, I interpret based on its articles, writers, and stated mission. You rationalize these facts away.]]

    and you’re sitting here trying to use your loud voice to compel me to not write for the site because you don’t agree with what you interpret as the site’s mission. But in case you haven’t caught on to this about the internet, websites increasingly feature dissenting viewpoints rather than dogmatic allegiance to stated goals.

    [[Whorefinder: When you support the stated mission of a site, you’re not dissenting. You’re supporting it. And you are, hypocritcally, supporting the fagosphere merely for career purposes.]]

    But you have this strong desire to try to keep people on this very narrow line by impugning their integrity and such.

    [[Whorefinder: You impugned your own credibility by become a flaming hypocrite, son. Trying to pretend integrity doesn’t matter because you don’t care about it won’t work here. ]]

    But my question is: who the fuck are you?

    [[Whorefinder: Someone who can tell a spineless suckup when he blatantly sells out for a little fame.]]

    I’m not a hostage to whatever values and ideals you hold.

    [[Whorefinder: But you are a hostage to your hypocrisy.]]

    Write up your own shit if it means so much to you.

    [[Whorefinder: My writing has nothing to do with your selling out.]]

    But even besides that, I haven’t changed course in anything I’ve written in all of 4 posts over there.

    [[Whorefinder: Except now you’re supporting a blame whitey, blame masculinity, let’s-all-become-fags mission.]]

    3 of the pieces were pretty much verbatim what I’d written at my own blog, and another one was a deeper treatment of something I’d touched on before. I’m surprised you don’t see this for what it is: I’m working within the system; you want to work, radically, outside of the system.

    [[Whorefinder: I love when sellouts use this argument: “No, wait, I’m really just working within the Nazi Party to change it! I’m not a craven opportunist!”]]

    And you continue to say that I’m only trying to further my career: I have thoughts and principles that I am not going to alter, and I hope that people will value those things.

    [[Whorefinder: No, you do not. You have an agenda—-to further your writing career. You don’t really care who you have to shack up with, buddy up with, or support; you want your career. So you’ll support a fagosphere mission if it helps you get some eyeballs. Your own words and actiosn betray you.]]

    In the meantime, I will write them wherever someone is willing to publish them. The content is the content; that’s really all I care about.

    [[Whorefinder: No, you don’t care about content. Otherwise, after 5 minutes of perusing the “most popular” articles there, you’d have run screaming away from putting your “manly” arguments in support of such limp-wristed queerdom.

    And The Good Men Project loved Hugo Schwyzer, your bete noir. They didn’t kick him out; he threw a hissy fit and left because they wouldn’t let him publish a response to one of their other articles. What is more, you have known all along that Schwyzer left them. They loved Schwyzer over there, and would take his mangina ass back in a second and give him back his job as editor.

    Even pretending those fags are anything but fags is an insult to logic.]]

    • Firepower Says:

      Blogging is the manifestation of one’s uncensored thought, to then moderate that thought for “a career” defeats the purpose.

      You haven’t noticed your declining commentariat?

      Blogs die when quantity and quality decline. The latter is a particularly deceptive trap for the host-writer.

      • Chuck Rudd Says:

        Haiku homo,

        [[Whorefinder: Clever.]]

        who is moderating thought? focusing on breaking out of one particular bubble has nothing to do with the moderation of thought. one is does not require the other.

        commentariat is declining while traffic is increasing and while outside linkage is increasing too. quantity has increased which probably explains the commentariat drop while i’m perfectly happy with the quality of content.

        [[Whorefinder: No, you’re perfectly happy with becoming more famous—by any means necessary. And, unsurprisingly, a princple-less writer doesn’t really want to have engagement with his readers, only worshipful masses. ]]

        meanwhile, the number of people paying very close attention to what’s going on at my blog has now increased by at least one flamer.

        [[Whorefinder: lol. Don’t flatter yourself, piggy. You’re a hypocrite and a sellout, exposed plain as day, and now you’re engaged in cheap rationalizations to justify your selling out. Like The Turd, I’ll just avoid your site after today—I had to search your site for the Schwyzer crap I knew you were lying about. Your content has no meaning, because it comes out of the mouth of a man who say anything for a buck, a book deal, or a page hit.]]

  6. Nobody Says:

    WhoreFinder, if you’re so masculine, why are you engaging in these catty little bitchfights on the internet?

    You’re worse than a 13-year-old girl.

    [[Whorefinder: Troll.]]

  7. Firepower Says:

    Once, a Radiohead song-icon served as symbolic combat against the Gucci little piggies of society. A nom de plume facilitating an expressing of uninhibited ideas.

    Now, a name refurbishment seeking entre to The Club justifies your voluntary, self-imposed inhibition to gain public acceptance.

    Putting a leash (on yourself) is not clever; it only makes you the John Cougar Mellencamp of the DC blogosphere.

    Your prickly (and pricky) reaction to even humorous jests proves you take yourself much too seriously. A fatal flaw in those with second string talents. That, of course, means you will be Lofty Hero to the mediocre – the tiresome reactionary hymns of “yeah, that’s right, man!” of the Spearhead’s impotent commenters.

  8. The Southern Poverty Law Center is Creepy « Gucci Little Piggy Says:

    […] Project covering the Southern Poverty Law Center’s attack on the Manosphere.  In other news, whorefinder has been placed on suicide […]

    [[Whorefinder: Note the sellout’s response to pointing out his lack of integrity: mockery. As I noted previously, Piggy never really cared about integrity, and so now considers it a joke worthy of pale insults. And, of course, his commentators see nothing wrong with his lack of integrity, which is worse.

    Unsurprisingly, Piggy has also doubled down on supporting the fagosphere. Like the NPR and David Frum, Piggy is the fagosphere’s fig leaf—and he knows it.

  9. Phalluster Says:

    Chuck refuses to name the jew menace. How boring.

  10. Firepower Says:

    piggy’s lame response to all serious argument/debate is childish insults.

    It’s like some warped compensation mechanism. Such displayed immaturity proves he is incapable of any serious leadership role.

    Just fit enough for the childish mob at his site, yukkin’ it up to the “manosphere” equivalent of The Daily Fart Joke.

    Same thing with ferdi: both appear the “21st Century Brandon” raised by mommy. Eric Cartman with a keyboard. That creepy weirdness of the overly sensitive male. Their multiple feminine traits demand a fitting insult of my own: They are the Ovary-Sensitive males. Their clique, a gossip-addicted Kardashian-Hilton nexus following them around in circles.

    To the blind, the one-eyed are king.

  11. The Lost Art of Kissing in the Porn Age « Gucci Little Piggy Says:

    […] hope whorefinder has re-upped his Prozac prescription because I have another piece up at Good Men […]

    [[Whorefinder: More mockery by one without principles. Yawn.]]

  12. Rivelino Says:

    interesting debate.

  13. Rivelino Says:

    the good men project was dangerous bullshit of the worst kind, but i thought it had gone under new management or something?

    otherwise, chuck, i kinda have to agree with this dude WF, i don’t think you should be writing for a crap organization.

    just like i can’t support susan walsh cause she’s the worst kind of threat to betas trying to become real men — she *pretends* to be “for alpha” but is really just for “better beta” — if the GMP is still pretending to be for “masculinity” but is really for “beta masculinity”, then i don’t think you support it. instead, you should try to sink it.

    just my thoughts.

  14. Ann Althouse: Murdering a Newborn Child is Ok, We Should Have Sympathy for the Murderer « Whores of the Internet Says:

    […] Chuck Rudd must feel right at home, here. Like this:LikeBe the first to like this. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: