4channers: Women being sluts caused the Umpqua Community College shootings

Jack
http://cdn.meme.am/instances/400x/37399862.jpg
I don’t get a-holes like you who complain that society doesn’t care about men and then turn around and say men are biologically hard wired to be violent and murder.

Also stop with this biologically hard wiring garbage there are tons of men who prefer being asked out and women who do the asking out and vise versa, men and boys have everything right to say no to a woman/girl who asked them out and also way to go on ignoring that gay people exist.

Feminism helps women and girls if you want to help men and boys then have you’re own space as one of my friends said “you don’t walk into a homeless shelter and demand they go help polar bears you go find someone who help polar bears.” Why is this hard to understand?

Again stop with the ableism stop throwing innocent mentally ill people under the bus and continue blaming feminism and everyone else for misognists’ and racists’ actions you are not helping anyone.

What I don’t understand is what any of this has to do with anything?

Jack, as someone who has mental illness, and who has had this exact fucking discussion every time this issue pops up: Fuck off, you’re wrong, and I’m not a fucking mass murderer nor am I going to become one because of my mental illness.

One, we don’t know if he had any mental illnesses, and we’ll most likely never know because he’s dead.

Two, even if he did have a mental illness, there’s still a lot of unchecked entitlement in his manifesto and in his actions that “mental illness” will not ‘splain away, but can be attributed to racism, misogyny, and other bigotries, which aren’t mental illnesses.

Three, even if we could (and if we could, we fucking shouldn’t) diagnose him, maybe we should leave it up to actual fucking mental health professionals, instead of Keyboard Diagnosing him via the internet.

So, let’s break some other “points” of yours down, now that that’s been said:

Jack | October 9, 2015 at 4:47 pm
Because there is a stigma around men’s mental health is not taken as seriously as female mental health. In general women are more communicative about difficulties and problems and are therefore more likely to get help for them.

That’s due to Toxic Masculinity, bruh.

Here’s another post on the subject.

And another.

The idea that men are seen as being “weak” if they ask for help, even when they need it, is part of Toxic Masculinity, and men are still perpetuating this idea. And this idea has been studied when it comes to men’s mental health in prisons.

Here’s some more articles on the subject:

Toxic Masculinity is Killing Men: The Roots of Male Trauma
Mental Health Stigma, Toxic Masculinity, and Suicide

Men are more likely to successfully commit suicide than women, and suicide is one of the leading causes of death for men under 35. I would argue this is in part due to the stigmatization of male behavior and the aggressive assault on young men by interest groups such as this one.

I would argue it’s more about how men are dismissed as “weak” if they seek help, and find that suicide is the only way out, because that’s the only way men are taught to deal with their problems, though anger and violence.

On top of that, men and women attempt suicide at almost exactly the same rate, it’s just that men choose ways more likely to succeed, like guns and hanging, whereas women choose quieter ways that are less likely to succeed, like overdosing.

Women are also socialized to be quieter and to not be a bother to anyone, so they also tend to choose methods that aren’t as messy or loud.

Some more about Gender Differences in Suicide, complete with a quote:

Another common explanation relies on the social constructions of hegemonic masculinity and femininity. According to literature on gender and suicide, male suicide rates are explained in terms of traditional gender roles. Male gender roles tend to emphasize greater levels of strength, independence, and risk-taking behavior. [10] Reinforcement of this gender role often prevents males from seeking help for suicidal feelings and depression. [11]

Though, if you’d like to point out how we’re “aggressively assaulting” young men and “stigmatizing” their behavior, I’d be more than happy to debunk that too, considering you’re making a very grave accusation that somehow we’re pushing men to commit suicide.

Because we’re not “stigmatizing male behavior”, we’re stigmatizing misogyny. So, the only way that your statement makes sense is if you either don’t understand what misogyny actually is, or you conflate misogyny with “male behavior”.

Hobbies and entertainment enjoyed by men have to be diversified, men simply being themselves is problematic.

Men cannot claim hobbies and “entertainment” as a male-only space, and attempt to shove everyone else out. Movies, video games, woodworking, sewing, whatever are not specific to gender, and they’re too fucking big to be so.

Men don’t own a right to have any specific hobby or entertainment platform to only include them and no one else.

Also, diversity can also include Men of Color, LGBTQA+ men, ect, so let’s include them too, please.

Men “being men” is only problematic when they’re harming others by doing so by being sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, ect. The male-identifying regulars on this site (particularly David, who runs it) I find to be rather lovely, and they manage to be men without being problematic most of the time, and when they are, it usually has nothing to do with their “maleness”.

All this does beg one question though: Why do you have such a low opinion of men?

Why do you think men “being men” has to be problematic and be sexist or include other forms of toxic masculinity or bigotry?

I don’t mind men as a whole, it’s individual men I take issue with. Not that I don’t take issue sometimes with people of other genders as well.

However, it is also due to the fact that male mental health simply isn’t taken as seriously. If you look into cases like Chris Harper and Elliot Rodgers, it is clear they have been mentally unstable for a long time and have received no help for their issues.

To quote one of our lovely regulars, Scented Fucking Hard Chairs: “Asshole is not a mental illness”.

Chris Harper and Elliot Rodgers left manifestos detailing how they felt they were owed a girlfriend and all the bonuses that go with it such as affection, love, respect, and of course, sex.

They could have had a “mental illness”, but that’s not the root of their misogyny. Misogyny and other bigotries are not mental illnesses. Misogyny has a root in how people are socialized, not in how our brains work.

You can unlearn bigotries. You cannot unlearn a mental illness.

True, women have not gone on shooting sprees such as the ones in recent years due to feelings of being ignored by the opposite sex but that’s because they simply aren’t ignored by the opposite sex. In general, men are the chasers and women are the selectors when it comes to relationships.

“You feeemales don’t know what it’s like to be ignored by people you like!”

Yeah, sure we don’t. [/sarcastic eyeroll]

Dude, and this may come as a shock to you, women are people. As such, we’ve had a lot of similar experiences that people of other genders have had.

Women have been rejected before. We’ve been ignored before. We’ve been shot down. We’ve been told we weren’t “good enough”.

Hell, I was once mocked for simply telling a guy I liked him. He and his friends laughed at me for the rest of the day, and I was too embarrassed to show my face at school, so I faked sick the next day.

I certainly didn’t feel like I was entitled to that guy’s positive attention, nor did I shoot up my school because of it. I cried, I read a book, had some ice cream, and I got over it.

But, please, do continue to mansplain to me about how easy I have it in relationships because I’m a woman.

Women still kill men for rejecting advances and such, they just don’t tend to bring take it out on others as well.

In the meantime, have this citation of men harming women for rejecting their advances from me.

Women have a much lower chance of being alone or unloved because there are a large number of single men out there for them who will do the chasing.

Yeah, but how many of those single men will women get along with? How many of those single men are actually single and not looking for an affair? How many of those single men aren’t out to score a Photoshopped Supermodel? How many of those men aren’t abusers? How many of those men won’t kill a woman for daring to reject him? How many of those men are actually in love with the woman they end up with?

Too many variables are present for you to try to simplify it that much.

You’re looking at the symptom, not the problem. The killer blames women for rejecting him and pushing him to do what he did, but the fact is that he had nobody, female or male, who was there for him.

So, if we feeemales just gave him a girlfriend, he wouldn’t have shot up the school?

And what exactly does that do for that poor hypothetical woman who would be in a relationship with the killer?

Who’s to say he wouldn’t kill her? Or treat her like garbage? Or just abuse her?

You’re essentially blaming women for him going on a shooting spree instead of looking at why he feels entitled to a girlfriend.

You’re looking at the symptom, not the problem.

He also was obsessed with the devil.

What does this have to do with anything? Are you trying to demonize Satanists now?

“‘He had a hatred of black people, women, everyone,’ the source said, adding: ‘The drive and manifesto are being analysed. There is a lot about his hatred of organised religion.”

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3261340/Oregon-college-shooter-angry-didn-t-girlfriend-ranted-crazy-hate-filled-manifesto.html#ixzz3o6rANbpu

Dude, I’m from the United States, and even I know that the Daily Mail is about as good of a source as your cousin’s-friend’s-niece’s-brother’s-dog.

It’s not credible.

He hated everyone. Not women in particular. Stop making this a “feminist” issue and let’s talk about the real problem here, media glorification of killers, assault on male identity, lack of mental health access in the US and gun access in the US.

http://i.imgur.com/kamTD5S.jpg

I don’t see why we can’t discuss his misogyny (you yourself admitted he hated women), his racism, his issues with religion alongside media glorification of killers, lack of mental health access in the US and gun access in the US. Sexism is just a part of his hatred, so why can’t we discuss it as a part of a broader issue?

I mean, we’re obviously people capable of caring about more than one thing at a time, and we can point out that he hated women, and thus had sexist attitudes that led to his shooting (as he stated in his manifesto), so yeah, this is a feminist issue! Surprise!

Though, a side note: I can’t speak for all of us, but most of us are Intersectional Feminists. That means we don’t just care about women’s issues, but also racism, religious issues, LGBTQA+ issues, and a bunch of other things! It’s almost like we’re people with complex brains capable of multitasking!

Though, I did leave out “assault on male identity”, because I did cover this earlier.

Short version: Stop assuming that when we attack Toxic Masculinity, we’re attacking male identity or men as a whole. You’re being ridiculous, and you’re being really shitty to men by telling them that being a sexist asshole is just “being a man”. Men can be men without being sexist, and we should be able to point out sexism without men like you getting hyper-defensive over it and trying to cover your ass by claiming that sexism against women is just “being a man”.

This isn’t the profile of a rational misogynist, it’s the profile of a guy with serious mental health problems. And he viewed his way of getting out of his pit of loneliness as lashing out at others.

Stop Keyboard Diagnosing. You’re not a mental health professional, and even if you were (which I fucking doubt), you have no right to diagnose someone you have never spoken to or was assigned to your care.

Yes, it’s always men that do this. But it’s because they’re ignored by society as a whole when it comes to their issues while feminism forever shouts about how privileged they are and how unfair things are to women.

Men are in charge of pretty much everything, broseph. Just look at how many men run the United States or any other country. Sure, we have women politicians, but the majority of politicians are men, and those men make the decisions.

Yes, some men’s issues are ignored, but let’s face facts: The important people ignoring men’s issues are, for the most part, other men.

Men can also be privileged by being men, but also be oppressed by other means, like race, sexual orientation, mental illnesses, physical disabilities, ect. And women are allowed to care when things are unfair to women, regardless of how much sexist douchebags cry about it.

It’s almost like people have unique circumstances that are different for everyone, and different people care about different things at different times and at different levels, but are still capable of caring about more than one thing at once! Gosh! [/sarcasm]

Jack
“I really don’t get why you think I insult mentally ill people or something.”
http://i.imgur.com/9PqkGxV.jpg

You called misognists/racists who threaten and murdered people (including Christians) mentally ill over and over and over again and instead of them taking responsibility for their actions and seeing them as the bigoted, entitled a-holes terriorists that they are you blame everyone else including feminism.

You don’t care about the mentally ill you just want terriorists to be excused and want people to cuddle them.

Whether Jack’s right or wrong, you’re all going about this the wrong way. Jack is putting his point across politely and while you are arguing back you’re still constantly insulting and belittling. It’s childish and immature and if you want a good debate you could at least show Jack some respect

Fruitloopsie | October 9, 2015 at 7:18 pm
I was turned down and so has my mom. Men and boys have every right to turn down women and girls if they are not interested plus there are gay and asexual men (that jacka** ignored I guess he only meant “no one cares about straight men not getting what they want like getting laid/dates”) and women.

I’m just going to second all of this right here. Nicely done.

Whether Jack’s right or wrong, you’re all going about this the wrong way.

Ooh. Tone policing! Our old friend. Funny how it’s always the people arguing from the marginalized perspective who get this while the people arguing from the privileged perspective never do.

Jack is putting his point across politely and while you are arguing back you’re still constantly insulting and belittling.

Oh really? Let’s take a look back at Jack’s posts and see how polite they are.

Yet more sensationalist nonsense. Everytime something like this happens it’s always straight onto the Misogyny bus where we once again blame male culture and this magic phenomenon known as “toxic masculinity”, shouting over any tragedy that our patriarchal, woman hating society caused this and we should pay more attention to women’s issues.

Not off to a good start. He calls either David’s post, our comments, or both “sensationalist nonsense” and puts toxic masculinity in scare quotes in order to be dismissive and condescending.

you posted an ‘article’ where you plucked some anonymous user’s opinions off a website and said “omg look how mean these people are!!!1!!”. pathetic.

More square quotes and a bonus insult. Is that polite?

This is how he chose to introduce himself to the blog. Now, on to the second post

Congratulations, you threw some buzzwords at me and insulted me. Thank you for the discussion.

A snarky and condescending tone towards Fruitloopsie, who is probably the nicest person who regularly posts here. He dismissed the terms we have to discuss oppression against women as “buzzwords.”

This is your idea of polite? I could go on, but I think I’ve presented enough of Jack’s words to make my point.

It’s childish and immature and if you want a good debate you could at least show Jack some respect

Who says we want a debate? This isn’t a space for debating the merits of feminism. This is a space for mocking misogyny.

Why this has to be pointed out so often is a mystery.

As long as Jack doesn’t violate the commenting policy and as long as David continues to allow him, he can post his arguments here as much as he wants. That doesn’t mean he’s entitled to a polite debate, or our patience, niceness or education.

WWTH
“A snarky and condescending tone towards Fruitloopsie, who is probably the nicest person who regularly posts here.”
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/345/169/bc7.png

PI
“Hell, I was once mocked for simply telling a guy I liked him. He and his friends laughed at me for the rest of the day, and I was too embarrassed to show my face at school, so I faked sick the next day.”

I’m sorry that happened to you, it’s ok for men and boys to turn down women and girls whom they’re not interested in but not like that, what a bunch of a-holes. Hugs!

Pandapool

Whoops, I hit post before I returned Fruitloopsie’s hugs and seconded her bit about the hypocrite Tone Police.

And I just noticed the typo. Fuuuuuuck.

Jack:
(others have responded to other things, I wanted to focus on this because it’s a big pet peeve of mine.)

True, women have not gone on shooting sprees such as the ones in recent years due to feelings of being ignored by the opposite sex but that’s because they simply aren’t ignored by the opposite sex. In general, men are the chasers and women are the selectors when it comes to relationships. Women still kill men for rejecting advances and such, they just don’t tend to bring take it out on others as well. Women have a much lower chance of being alone or unloved because there are a large number of single men out there for them who will do the chasing.

This is very incorrect. Now, you have this idea of “chasers” and “selectors”. But this is all wrong. “Why is it all wrong?” you ask. Well, because men select who to chase. Men get the choice on who to go after. They are not animals that simply react to movement. They get the choice of whether or not to initiate the entire interaction. Women don’t get that choice typically. Women only get to select from the ones who select them first.

Guys like you like to somehow imply this dynamic gives the women power. But nooo, men are the ones who control whether or not the situation is initiated, technically between them and any women they see. Women only have control over whether or not to continue the interaction, and they only have that control in the situations that the finite number of man have started.

Women in this scenario can only reject men who have first chosen them. Men reject all women they have not first chosen.

This premise is why you believe that even with a similarly equal population, a significantly higher number of women can be in relationship than men. Because to you, it’s not men vs women, it’s men vs “women-you-would-chase.”

But of course, this whole dynamic is artificial and enforced on people. In the lesbian community we get by wonderful with personality type and inclination to determine if a person pursues or is pursued, not based on gender.

>>>Whether Jack’s right or wrong, you’re all going about this the wrong way. Jack is putting his point across politely and while you are arguing back you’re still constantly insulting and belittling. It’s childish and immature and if you want a good debate you could at least show Jack some respect

Yeah. It’s not like the guy insulted people and dismissed any evidence that demonstrated that his conclusions are utter nonsense out of his own biasism and hatred toward an entire group of folks he clearly didn’t take the time to understand more. /s

Rather, how many of you are willing to bet Jack is really Felix?