|
I think it shouldn't be ignored that not only were more men than women killed in this, but that his diatribes also targeted "hedonistic" "successful" "brutes" I.E. men. If you actually look into alot of the things he writes about, you'll see he has kind of a problem with Men of Color associating with "blonde" women, highlighting the racist tendencies present in the Asian-American community to this day. Rodger was also a member of an anti-PUA group and overall he comes off more as a  SEXHAVERS type than anything else. His extreme narcissism manifested itself in hatred of the very women he desired and the men who he saw as being successful with them.
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 12:09 |
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:The killer was a product of our culture. Dominant cultural institutions teach young boys that a woman's sexuality exists only to be owned and controlled by men, and that worthy white males with money are entitled to their pick of the most desirable women because they are the most deserving. When Rodger's experience did not match what he had been taught to expect as his birthright, this was perceived by him as an extreme injustice which had to be redressed. Unfortunately Rodgers is a Hapa/Asian-American and as one myself I would appreciate you not whitewashing his experience/silencing our voices and claiming his identity for whiteness, thank you. EasternBronze fucked around with this message at 20:38 on May 27, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:He killed 2 women and 4 guys what does 'misogeny' have to do with it? Because in his rambling manifesto of delusions it seems he hates women somewhat more than he hates men or at least theoretically hates them for a different, totally incoherent reason. Plus, he COULD have killed more women.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
WarEternal posted:He didn't just hate women "somewhat more" than he hated men, he hated women and the result was that he hated men because he believed women caused him to hate men. He didn't hate men as a fundamental concept, he did hate women as a fundamental concept. He literally thought that men would be fine if women didn't exist, and that women caused all the evils in men. Afterall, he was a man and he was "good", therefore his explanation was that men must be corrupted by women. This was his view according to his writings. It's a subtle but important difference. Not important enough to him it seems to cause him to actually kill more women than men. Please though, let's really deeply analyze everything this guy wrote, it would be dangerous to just dismiss it as the product of a diseased mind. Have we thoroughly investigated to the point where we can rule out that he had accomplices in the MRA community?
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Not for lack of trying, though. Or did you miss the part where he didn't get to attack his intended target? Didn't miss that at all. If he had instead wrote his manifesto about Martian infiltration of California should we take that anymore seriously? The guy hated men and women for irrational reasons and than went out and killed a bunch of people. Why the fact he hated women more "fundamentally" than men should vindicate feminism as a righteous cause fighting the many-headed fedora wearing MRA hydra is anyone's guess. If this guy had claimed he was striking a blow against the patriarchy for women everywhere I wouldn't consider that relevant either. He wasn't connected with reality in a serious way. A man channeling anger at rejection in an extremely unhealthy way isn't evidence of anything more than his own mental illness.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
I wonder if this board would be so eager to lay bare the thought processes behind this attack if the killer had been Muslim and his manifesto had included some long winded exhortations about honour? Whats the correlation between being an MRA and violence vs. being Muslim and violence? I would argue that neither are relevant because the violence is just a symptom of mental illness and whatever rhetoric this guy uses is just white noise to justify his actions in his own broken mind. He wouldn't be killing people if he was mentally healthy, its as simple as that. Browsing Reddit or reading the Koran doesn't change that fact.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
Evil Sagan posted:The reason Elliot Rodger's hateful motivation matters is because it's the natural next step to the sort of cultural male entitlement that begets the sort of harassment and threats that many (all?) women experience. Linking it to MRAs in particular is too small. Not every person that threatened Anita Sarkeesian or encouraged her to kill herself for having the temerity to criticize video games was an MRA. For some reason people are angry... violently angry... about women and the rights of women. Whether or not you agree that particular examples of misogyny in television or books or video games or whatever are relevant or accurate, you can't deny that we are creating a culture that sees the every-day oppression of women, for being women, as being generally an okay or encouraged thing. When it "gets out of hand" like with Elliot Rodgers it is somehow seen as occurring in a vacuum, or being credited to some other politicized issue of choice such as guns. That sounds great but men are far more likely to be the victim of homicide than women. If we want a more equal society than we should be trying to prevent more men from being killed. Complaining about being threatened online (which is hardly unique to women, although certainly more severe) strikes me as being extremely myopic.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 22:02
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:I don't think anyone here has a problem laying the deaths of thousands killed in terrorist attacks around the world squarely at the feet of the Wahhabi sect of Islam while knowing that all of Islam is not to blame. In the same way that Elliot Rodger is a unique MRA extremist? Can we not say that Wahhabi Islam is the "the natural evolution of Islamic attitudes towards western society"?
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
Let's remember thought if someone claiming to represent a group that we like lashes out like this, its not representative of us in anyway, unlike THOSE PEOPLE.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
Obviously, sexual dynamics are an unknowable magic that springs out of a well of consent and European-style education, the idea that some people are more attractive than others and leverage that in certain ways is complete bunk.quote:At the time of print, he said it’s unclear if the incident was related to the victim’s involvement with the opposition group. Well that's conclusive proof isn't it! quote:Elliot Rodger just had a higher kill count. I'm quite certain Islam can be linked to more deaths in America than Elliot Rodger, I just want to confirm with you before we go down that road. EasternBronze fucked around with this message at 22:23 on May 27, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
Real hurthling! posted:He identified as being of the snootiest white nobility. His whiteness was what entitled him to blond women. Whiteness was a huge deal for him in his own words. Well than he's wrong. Just as I'd be wrong if I identified with the snootiest Scottish clans and demanded a gorgeous red-headed girlfriend. Its almost as if he wasn't fully there in his head! Makes you think...
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:The unemployed just need to accept being unemployed! Welfare is good enough for them! Young men who have been marginalized by society aren't victims because of their privilege. Its as simple as that.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:Let's get real. We're all nerds. Who here has male friends that are involuntary virgins well into their 20s? I do. Are they happy? No. MRA spotted.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Hmm, if only there was some sort of societal explanation for that. Lonely men would be happier if they had feminism?
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
Men being unhappy about not being able to find a sex partner is a social construct it seems.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
agarjogger posted:I think sexual competition is the last place you're going to eliminate bell-curve, feast-or-famine hierarchy. Even if everyone were happy and well-adjusted, women would still want to give most of the sex to the best among them. I wish I could make MRA understand that feminism is the only force which is actually resisting this and making sexual connection easier to come by, by normalizing female sexual expression. Take note men, feminism will get you laid. I'm sold.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:I think you misquoted, but I think traditional feminist views are off-the-mark here. They essentially just direct Elliot Rodgers-types and equivalent women (?) to deal with the fact that no one will ever date them. This doesn't seem like a long term solution in a society that is increasingly filled with single people. No but you see feminism will make him not unhappy about noone dating him. Instead of becoming angry (which is a socially constructed emotion based on, you guessed it, Patriarchy!) feminism will show him that its wrong to hurt other people just because he is unhappy. Thats the kind of education this society lacks.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:#KillAllMen Ah but you see that's justified because middle class whites who post on Tumblr are just lashing out at their oppressors.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:If someone who is violently anti-men and posts on the internet about wanting to kill all men, and goes and shoots up a football team I'm gonna bet their ideology plays a part in it. Which than will lead to drawing the proper conclusions about feminism, namely that shooting a football teamis the logical evolution of feminist ideology?
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Except that it isn't, because feminist ideology is for the equality of both sexes, not man-hating. Just because your cause is just doesn't mean everything under its umbrella is automatically correct. Its almost as if these "ideologies" are just broad definitions and actually encompass alot of different beliefs and ideas, some of which contradictory!
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:All of them, unless you are a divorced male with no chance for custody of your child who has to pay alimony, or you want to be a school teacher, or a nurse. You sound like one of those extremists. Bad things effecting men in society are caused by the Patriarchy and Feminism is the answer. We know this because the Patriarchy is the bad things that effect people in society.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
I no-joke agree with probably 80% of what would be considered a mainline feminist platform. Probably more. I just think the way in which they make most of their conclusions are horribly flawed. Reflexively invoking the Patriarchy for anything bad in society is incredibly intellectually lazy.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:What is the patriarchy? Define it, very specifically, please. Its the thing which prevented women from voting, made more men die in combat, encourages rape culture, kink-shaming and changing lanes without signalling properly.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 00:21
|
|
|
natetimm posted:Educated and respected feminists aren't that simplistic in their arguments. What you're probably seeing and experiencing is the sort of uneducated rabble surrounding the cause. If you read some of the better literature it would become more apparent to you that the people just parroting patriarchy aren't the crux of the culture. Oh most definitely. Pretty much any kind of political or social movement
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:Because feminism is primarily about things that directly impact women. That there are men's concerns should be noted but what's way more important is things like pervasive violence against women, a culture of objectification, unequal pay, etc. So is Feminism the movement that is going to solve problems like violence directed against men, or are you saying that people concerned about violence that impacts mostly men should make its own movement? Hopefully composed of not just bitter internet males. It kind of sounds like you're shooting for the latter here.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:He didn't have anything against white people nor did he try to exclude them, and lots of white people supported him, you might even say that the civil rights movement earned broad and national support, so much in fact, that a series of federal laws was ratified in response to that movement. No in fact I think "Its not my job to educate you, shitlord" is a direct MLK quote.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 00:39
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:And most of the violent crimes against men are perpetrated by women, correct? Due to the way our society systematically teaches women to oppress and assault men? Those roommates can rest easy knowing that since their killer had a penis, it was less unjust. Can we at least be open about how Feminism is about women? Just come out and say, that female victims of violence are important to the movement and men are not. EasternBronze fucked around with this message at 14:34 on May 28, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 14:31
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:I can rest easy, because I don't have to be constantly worried that some rear end in a top hat is going to flip out and murder me for refusing to gently caress them. Women, on the other hand, do not have that luxury. While the reasons for the killing are different, the basic fact is you have a higher chance of dying violently, as a man, point blank. I don't know why you need to handwave this away as being irrelevant simply because more men are killers. Certainly if the numbers were reversed, that would be considered extremely relevant to feminism. quote:
It's perfectly fine to have a "political issue that doesn't revolve around men" but it seems a bit hypocritical to try and appropriate violent deaths as being a woman's problem when in fact men are much more likely to be victimized by it. EasternBronze fucked around with this message at 14:57 on May 28, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 14:54
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:Actually, I correctly pointed out that your MRA talking point is laughable because there is no societal oppression of men or normalization of violence against them specifically. I would be willing to show some normalized violence against men, if you really want to go down that road.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
Lid posted:More women are murdered than men worldwide, not to mention genocide by rape. You are so incredibly wrong. quote:Of all homicides worldwide, 82% of the victims were male and 18% were female; of the female victims, 40 to 70% were linked to partner- or family-related violence. - See more at: http://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/criminal-justice/un-2011-global-study-homicide#sthash.LzLpm1lV.dpuf I guess someone should tell the U.N. to get off /R/Mensrights 
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
Lid posted:True, MensRights should be told to fear other men rather than women, which that shows are in no way comparatively dangerous. Men are to be feared. So you're going to admit that you were totally wrong about the number of homicide victims by gender? Not even wrong by a little bit, off by a massive margin, to the point where I can't imagine where you got that number from.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 15:06
|
|
|
Lid posted:Sure, statistics do not lie. Men are systematically oppressing men. MensRights is focusing its energy on trying to push back against the wrong gender. MensRights is a mostly dumb movement based on the internet, I don't know why you're moving the goalposts here. Yeah, I was totally wrong about who the main victims of catastrophic violence are and who its most normalized against, but some losers on the internet said some dumb poo poo! If you just come out and say you consider female victims more important than men, I'll accept that. Heck, I'll even respect it because Feminism is about advancing the cause of women. Just don't make poo poo up.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 15:18
|
|
|
Lid posted:You mean the three he explains directly why he is going to kill them in his manifesto? Are we going to concede that you are incredibly wrong about a very basic fact which is an important part of your beliefs or are we just going to admit that women victims are far more important than male victims of violence? The latter is ok. If feminism is about women, thats fine. Just please don't insist that it is and yet it isn't at the same time.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
Women are by far more likely to be murdered than men.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
tezcat posted:No one cares. Maybe after a few more incidents like this, society will stand up and finally make assaulting women a crime. If you think you've found the solution to violence being encouraged by frustrated, often marginalized men in society than I would love to hear it because we've kind of been grappling with it for the whole of civilization's existence. Eldragon posted:Since I can't tell if you're trying to be ironic or something, lets just say [Citation Needed] (Hint, you're way off). I am being ironic. Lid ditched the thread after I showed him around 80% of worldwide homicide victims are men. Of course, maybe those men weren't killed because of misandry so they probably don't count or something. EasternBronze fucked around with this message at 21:03 on May 28, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:Oh My God, I never made a judgment on whether he was primarily motivated to kill by misogyny. My contention has always been with the supposed motivation behind the men he targeted. You keep talking as if I haven't acknowledged the relevance of misogyny in the killing spree or in who Rodger was as a person is so loving disingenuous. That or you don't read half of what I write. It's not about the men Pubbie. Those men who were killed are just using their privilege to block some very relevant points about how society encourages violence against women and definitely not against men. There is no way you could go to a feminist board and find similar absurd, hateful statements.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Patriarchal culture also damages men, even though this seems counterintutitive at first. Well that and he was completely wrong about the chance of dying violently in terms of gender. Almost as if he was basing his opinion on some erroneous information! quote:How does it feel to be a fanboy of a spree killer? I'm not sure what you're basing this on, maybe the fact that I think a mentally ill man latching on the some absurd fantasies and than killing a bunch of people doesn't really say anything important about our society?
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 21:17
|
|
|
quote:Protip: just like how people can be homophobic without being literally afraid of gay people, you are being misogynistic by downplaying the role of gender in what happened and pretending that men are the ones who actually have it worse if you think about it because you think women don't care if they die. Women certainly have it worse in some ways but in terms of violent death, they most certainly do not.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
Lemming posted:What percentage of the murderers do you think are men? Because the problem is that men are murdering people, not that men are being unfairly targeted for getting murdered because of misandry, which is what you're asserting. I'm not asserting that at all. Most murderers are men. If someone comes into my home and murders me and my family, should people be any less outraged if the murderer has a penis? It seems like your conclusion is that somehow a murder is more just if the perpetrator and victim both have the same genitals. I personally disagree with that.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 12:09 |
|
|
copper rose petal posted:Maybe it's not the genitals of the perpetrator, but whether or not the genitals of the victim were a motivating factor. Tell me, how many male homicides are equal in your eyes to a female one (due to misogyny.) Lemming posted:You just sarcastically implied that it was. Sexism is real but that doesn't mean that in every single possible scenario women are worse off. Society is pushing men to their death at a far higher rate than women, whatever you want to call that, patriarchy, murder culture or whatever, thats a basic fact. I don't see what is so hard about this. Will your Feminist card get revoked if you admit that, yes, men are far more likely to be victim of fatal violence than women? EasternBronze fucked around with this message at 21:34 on May 28, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 21:31
|
|
