Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik, who killed more than 90 people in attacks on Friday, was motivated by a toxic mélange of far-right ideology largely revolving around his intense hatred of Islam. The 1500 page “manifesto” he posted to the internet – what appears to be a grab-bag of his own writing and material cut and pasted from assorted right-wing sites and even the Unabomber’s manifesto – crackles with denunciations of Muslims, “Marxists” and the assorted other bogeymen that haunt right-wing dreams.
And it’s also filled with denunciations of feminism that could easily have come from the posts and comments of Men’s Rights and misogynist “manosphere” blogs like The Spearhead, In Mala Fide, and, well, quite a few other sites I write about regularly on this blog. (Not to mention a few of this blog’s misogynist trolls.) In passage after passage, the ideology is the same, the language is the same, even the specific obsessions are the same – from no-fault divorce to the evils of “Sex and the City.” (Download the entire thing from the links here.)
I haven’t had time to go through the manifesto in great detail yet, but I wanted to share with you some selections from it that I think will strike most readers of this blog as strangely familiar.
The following selections, denouncing, among other things, the “’Sex and the City’ lifestyle,”appear to have been written by Breivik himself:
It’s the destructive and suicidal “Sex and the City” lifestyle (modern feminism, sexual revolution) which we are taught to revere as the truth. In that setting, men are not men anymore, but metro sexual and emotional beings that are there to serve the purpose as a never-criticising soul mate to the new age feminist woman goddess. The perfect matriarchy has now been fulfilled and complete equality has finally been achieved. The fact that mankind will seize to exist within three generations with this type of regime is irrelevant. Long live cultural Marxism! …
Isolated, “sex and the city lifestyle” is relatively harmless, but if you glorify it and ram it down the throat of mainstream society like we see today it becomes a lethal and destructive societal force as we are witnessing which eventually leads to a complete breakdown of moral/ethics, the nuclear family model and a sustainable fertility rate which again is leading us to the extinction of Europeans.
Breivik goes on to rant about STDs and no-fault divorce, before moving on to another favorite obsession of manosphere misogynists, the supposed sexual “capital” of manipulative women:
Females have a significantly higher proportion of erotic capital than males due to biological differences (men have significantly more prevalent sexual urges than females and are thus easily manipulated). The female manipulation of males has been institutionalised during the last decades and is a partial cause of the feminisation of men in Europe. This highly underestimated factor has contributed to the creation and rise of the matriarchal systems which are now dominating Western European countries. …
He also blames women for the spread of what he considers evil “cultural Marxism” and multiculturalism:
Fact: 60-70% of all cultural Marxists/multiculturalists are women. This partly explains why the gradual feminist revolution is directly linked to the implementation of multiculturalist doctrines. These feminist cultural Marxists do not only want more benefits and rights for themselves. They want it all, and have more or less been awarded with everything they could ever dream of achieving. They now have complete matriarchal supremacy domestically and exercise substantial influence in politics. …
Obsessed with the purported danger that Islam will outbreed the West, Breivik offers an assortment of creepy solutions to increase the fertility of Western whites. (It’s not altogether clear to me if these are all his own views, but they certainly are consistent with what he says elsewhere in the manifesto.) After suggesting limiting contraception and banning abortion, Breivik offers this “solution”:
Discourage women in general to strive for full time careers. This will involve certain sexist and discriminating policies but should increase the fertility rate by up to 0,1-0,2 points.
Women should not be encouraged by society/media to take anything above a bachelor’s degree but should not be prevented from taking a master or PhD. Males on the other hand should obviously continue to be encouraged to take higher education – bachelor, master and PhD. …
And then he’s back on his “Sex and the City” hobbyhorse:
Discourage women in general to strive for “sex and the city/Madonna” lifestyles. The mass media are currently actively glorifying/encouraging “sex and the city/Madonna” lifestyles which involves the glorification of casual sex, multiple sex partners and generally an extremely liberal individualistic lifestyle hostile to the traditional nuclear family values. As such, the non-restrictions of the mass media is the main cause for our unsustainable fertility rate of 1,5.
The indirect media/government glorification campaigns through individual artists, various series, movies and media coverage in general should reflect this new shift (no more glorification of “sex and the city lifestyles” or equivalent portrayals. No longer should women be pressured to have equal success regarding their career as males.
Womens “new role” should be actively illustrated and glorified through series, movies and commercials. This will involve significant restrictions in media freedoms and rights. These restrictions and reforms will result in an increased fertility rate of approximately 0,2-0,3 points.
The end result for implementing the above reforms would be an increase in the fertility rate up from 1,5 to approximately 2,1-2,4 which would be sustainable.
However, this will also involve significant restrictions in women’s rights and media rights.
And, like many in the manosphere, he also holds out hope for “artificial wombs,” which would of course reduce the inconvenience of relying on women to cooperate with his plans.
Large chunks of the manifesto consist of cut-and-pasted blog posts from an anonymous far-right Norwegian blogger known as Fjordman, whose now defunct blog can be found here. (According to Andrew Brown in the Guardian article linked to above, Breivik and Fjordman are not the same person.)
Here are some selections from the Fjordman posts that Breivik includes in his manifesto. Again, much of this will seem very familiar to many of you, I am sure.
For all the talk about “girl power” and “women kicking ass” which you see on movies these days, if the men of your “tribe” are too weak or demoralised to protect you, you will be enslaved and crushed by the men from other “tribes” before you can say “Vagina Monologues”. Which means that if you break down men’s masculinity, their willingness and ability to defend themselves and their families, you destroy the country. That’s exactly what Western women have done for the last forty years. ….
The male protective instinct doesn’t take action because Scandinavian women have worked tirelessly to eradicate it, together with everything else that smacks of traditional masculinity. Because of this, feminism has greatly weakened Scandinavia, and perhaps Western civilisation as whole. …
Didn’t feminists always claim that the world would be a better place with women in the driver’s seat, because they wouldn’t sacrifice their own children? Well, isn’t that exactly what they are doing now? Smiling and voting for parties that keep the doors open to Muslim immigration, the same Muslims who will be attacking their children tomorrow? …
Misandry, the hatred of men, isn’t necessarily less prevalent than misogyny, the hatred of women. The difference is that the former is much more socially acceptable.
If all oppression comes from Western men, it becomes logical to try weakening them as much as possible. If you do, a paradise of peace and equality awaits us at the other side of the rainbow. Well congratulations to Western European women. You’ve succeeded in harassing and ridiculing your own sons into suppressing many of their masculine instincts. To your surprise, you didn’t enter a feminist Nirvana, but paved the way for an unfolding Islamic hell. ….
Feminists claim that the reason why women haven’t been as numerous in politics and science as men is due to male oppression of women. Some of this is true. But it is not the whole story. Being male means having to prove something, to achieve something, in a greater way than it does for women. In addition to this, the responsibility for child rearing will always fall more heavily on women than on men. ….
it was in fact the women who started this whole “single is best” culture that now permeates much of the West. Since women initiate most divorces and a divorce can potentially mean financial ruin for a man, it shouldn’t really be too surprising that many men hesitate to get involved at all. … At the same time, women during the past few decades have made it a lot easier to have a girlfriend without getting married. So women make it riskier to get married and easier to stay unmarried, and then they wonder why men “won’t commit?” Maybe too many women didn’t think all this feminism stuff quite through before jumping on the bandwagon? …..
The elaborate welfare state model in Western Europe is frequently labelled as “the nanny state,” but perhaps it could also be named “the husband state.” Why? Well, in a traditional society, the role of men and husbands is to physically protect and financially provide for their women. In our modern society, part of this task has simply been “outsourced” to the state, which helps explain why women in general give a disproportionate support to high taxation and pro-welfare state parties. The state has simply become a substitute husband, upheld by taxation of their ex-husbands. ….
Radical feminism has bred suspicion and hostility, not cooperation. And what’s more, it has no in any way eradicated the basic sexual attraction between feminine women and masculine men. If people do not find this in their own country, they travel to another country or culture to find it, which in our age of globalisation is easier than ever. A striking number of Scandinavian men find their wives in East Asia, Latin America or other nations with a more traditional view of femininity, and a number of women find partners from more conservative countries. …
radical feminism has been one of the most important causes of the current weakness of Western civilisation, both culturally and demographically. Feminists, often with a Marxist world view, have been a crucial component in establishing the suffocating public censorship of Political Correctness in Western nations. They have also severely weakened the Western family structure, and contributed to making the West too soft and self-loathing to deal with aggression from Muslims. …
Well, after two generations of Second Wave Feminism, Ms. Willis and Ms. Beauvoir have had their way: The West has skyrocketing divorce rates and plummeting birth rates, leading to a cultural and demographic vacuum that makes us vulnerable to a take-over by… Islam. And feminists still aren’t satisfied. ….
Feminists claim that women have been victims of men, that men have oppressed women for centuries and that the sexes are equal. Denying this will result in the smears “misogynist” and “male chauvinist pig”. But equalising the sexes has led to a crippling feminisation of Western society … portraying women as oppressed victims and the equals of males is one example of how the pursuit of equality is being used to destroy our society and undermine – and therefore be in conflict with – Mother nature. ….
I’ll continue going through the manifesto to see what else I can find. If any of you decide to do the same thing, and find other selections in it that you find telling, please post them in the comments below.
I would also like to find specific writings on manosphere blogs – posts or comments – that directly parallel these selections from Breivik’s manifesto. If any of you are willing to help, again, please post your findings in the comments below, along with URLs to the sources of the manosphere quotes.
Ideas have consequences. Vile, hateful ideas have vile, hateful consequences.
For more on Breivik’s misogyny, see this post on Red Light Politics.
PZ Myers has more on Breivik’s noxious ideology, including his hatred of atheists, here.
* I meant a guy set himself on fire after being screwed up by the family court.
its getting late here… need to proof what I type
Setting yourself on fire is a horrible, terrible way to go. Was his troubled mind a direct result of the law court, though? I mean, was he going fine before the court case, would he have been hunky-dory if he had never been to court?
@YOHAMI:
“But its the same if I get to compare one religion to another when talking to religious people. See, I get I offended you for comparing Feminism to the MRA. Sorry for hurting you, I never expected that would happen. Lack of tact. Cool?”
No, not cool at all. I am offended for a reason, I’m not running on auto-pilot here. I’m not just reacting to you because I don’t like you, I’m responding to what you are saying. If I’m reading you wrong, fine, point it out. But I’ve explained exactly why saying Feminism and the MRM are identical is nonsense, and your response seems to be “Hey, sorry I offended you.” -__- Way to be patronizing buddy.
“When I read feminist stuff I find it full of anti-men stuff. But it is probably invisible to you, since you are inside of it.”
Yeah, I’ve read a bunch of anti-men stuff in radical feminist writings myself. Guess what? I and a good majority of other feminists don’t agree with them. They are by no means “invisible,” just irrelevant. This ties into the long-standing challenge David has had to self-described “moderate” MRAs. Name one MRA/MRM blog out there that isn’t explicitly anti-woman (and a couple other criteria as well). Not many people seem to be up for the challenge.
On the other side, plenty of feminist blogs are demonstrably not anti-man, and some feminists have even started up pro-men websites (like NSWATM). The two movements are not equal. If you disagree, alright. Lets find a website you say is full of anti-men and is actually representative of feminism, and go from there. The manboobz forums are a great way to do this.
Here’s what irritates me the most. It is very simple to say “both sides make the same claims.” The problem is when you completely ignore which side actually backs up their claims, and which simply makes assertions. Its not a case of two religions bickering, its more like comparing Christianity and Atheism. “Both make claims about a God, right? Both are a religion!” No. Just no.
I know you meant family court. It’s only half past two in the afternoon here, I sometimes forget how late it is for other people. 😉
“I wonder what most MRAs will think when they realise that a mass murderer agrees with their words? Anti-moslem and anti-jew people might not give a damn, but I like to think ordinary MRA men would stop and think.”
People have killed for every cause under the sun. A belief is not about who preaches lip service to it but whether it aligns with reality and will better the world. I do not think blaming all of the world’s problems on masculinity will result in any good, but that’s just me.
Put a human being in a cage, you will see survival behaviour. Survival behaviour is ugly.
– eilish
Yohami, do you think that the Men’s Rights Movement actively pursues the promotion of men’s rights? And if so, in what ways? What are the valid issues presented by the MRM that are ignored by feminists and society as a whole?*
*Bear in mind that I do think that there are valid issues. I just don’t think that MRM, in its current iteration, is working productively to define those issues and strategize a viable method of address.
magpie,
I doubt it, I think his mind was screwed up beforehand, and he thought it was a good idea to kill himself and make everyone feel bad for what the world did to him. This is a classic disorder, thats why people leave suicidal notes too.
Thing is, the MRA adopted the guy as a martyr. Some feminist bloggers hated the guy and denounced him as an “abuser” for making his family suffer trough his suicide. Obviously, if it was the wife who set herself on fire, the feminist blogs would still blame “the guy” for making her commit suicide? so whatever the case is, the guy is the bad guy, and the woman the good person.
I have no insight nor a clue of what are the facts. I just know everyone picks a side and keeps repeating whatever is convenient for their own agenda. While the real people´s problems remain intact.
Well said Nobinayamu.
Factfinder, I may have misunderstood you. Are you saying the murderer blames all the world’s problems on masculinity?
YOHAMI – I’m not sure what you identify as feminism, and how you think it has power. I agree that feminism has a certain amount of power, and that hence we should try to be self-conscious and reflexive about the kinds of ideas we perpetuate. However, patriarchy (which is not the same as the MRM) is still alive and kicking…going strong. I do think that father’s rights are important (for example) – but I would also argue that the reason why women tend to get custody of their children is because of patriarchy and sexism which assumes that women should be the primary caretakers of children.
The state, as you call it, and society gives plenty of support to men. That’s why they get paid more, get promoted more readily in most occupations – indeed that’s why so many people in charge of countries are men! That’s why it’s almost impossible to get a guilty verdict for a rapist unless the rapist is black and the victim/survivor is white (that’s when it plays into racist stereotypes as well as gendered ones).
Also, the problem is not that MRAs ‘whine’ about women who have hurt them, the problem is that that is followed by a ‘therefore all women are evil/hateful/moneygrubbing/idiots’. Feminists tend to agree that, as women are human beings, they can do terrible and hurtful things. Arguing that this is in some way inherent to the gender is, however, hateful and misogynist.
@YOHAMI:
“What I KNOW however, is that nobody pays the attention because they are men. If they were women and had the same problems, people like you, and the state, and the powers that be would be bringing them assistance.”
You had me going there for a second… I really thought I was just misunderstanding you, that somehow I had misread what you had said earlier.
Jesus… and you say we are leaping to conclusions. I’ve already mentioned that some feminists have started up pro-man blogs, and It might absolutely shock you to learn that I and others think that there are some mens issues that are worth looking at. Feminism is about equality across genders, and if women are treated better because of their gender, that is also a problem.
“Am I saying feminism is a hate movement? no. But do I consider MRM a hate movement? neither. oh surprise! you didnt see this coming did you.”
Actually, no, I saw it coming from a mile away. Shocker.
Yohami: Ah, I see what you were getting at, now.
@Kirby Somehow I doubt you’re going to get nething out of him more than “I’m more objective than you as an outsider” stuff and that he perceives feminism to be anti-male (which is of course his own bias as a male right? xD since we’re talking about biases and not being able to see stuff xD)
He’s alrdy set up the situation where if you argue w/ him he’ll say you’re just being defensive and irrational b/c you think he’s a troll xD Or you’re too far involved in feminism to see it’s an anti-male philosophy xD
I am wondering tho… he said he’s tired of us xD Before he said he’s becoming ill b/c of this site (srsly after 3 days… somehow I suspect 3 weeks later he’ll still be here telling us how ill he’s getting xD )…. and yet he’s here xD it reminds me of NWO and “you’re so vile and hateful and awful!” and “ignoring” me XDDD or the troll strike… xD
It’s like “this food is so rotten but I can’t stop eating it!” xD
Also Kirby, since I’m apparently full of hate (what w/ my Safe Space Project and all xD ) I can’t love you nemore 🙁 I’m sry Kirby : We must be apppppaaarrrrttttt xD
@YOHAMI:
“Thing is, the MRA adopted the guy as a martyr. Some feminist bloggers hated the guy and denounced him as an “abuser” for making his family suffer trough his suicide. Obviously, if it was the wife who set herself on fire, the feminist blogs would still blame “the guy” for making her commit suicide? so whatever the case is, the guy is the bad guy, and the woman the good person.”
Feminists. I don’t think these people are who you say they are.
Off Topic Alert: Yohami’s earlier comment (Talking about misogyny is fine. This guy hated women, and repeats a lot of nonsense from the MRA. However if this was a MRA crime he would have killed WOMEN ONLY or something like that.) reminded me of the Polytechnique Massacre.
After reading Lepine’s suicide note, he mentions some MRA-ish things in his suicide note but I don’t think he identified as MRA or could have at the time (1989 was probably too early for that). However he did quite notably separate men from women when he was killing people. He tried to kill only women, and he had a list of some 19 prominent local feminists he wanted to kill.
Is this also not an example of how the violent rhetoric inherent in the MRM, shared by this mass-murder, is not concerning?
“Some feminist bloggers hated the guy and denounced him as an “abuser” for making his family suffer trough his suicide.” If you’re talking about Ball – feminists labeled him an abuser for hitting his daughter so hard in the face that he split her lip.
No, feminism does. What else is patriarchy theory? Why does feminism claim all of women’s ills are, at their very core, the result of an external force perpetrated by men?
“Put a human being in a cage, you will see survival behaviour. Survival behaviour is ugly.
– eilish”
FactFinder, that in no way justifies what Breivik has done. Are you going the NWOSlave route now?
Obviously, if it was the wife who set herself on fire, the feminist blogs would still blame “the guy” for making her commit suicide?
Which feminist blogs are you referring to? o_O And when did this happen? xD
Nobinayamu,
“do you think that the Men’s Rights Movement actively pursues the promotion of men’s rights?”
No, I think they are doing everything wrong. No movement, no proposals, nothing. The only thing they seem to have is to have been victimized by and / or resent women / feminism / etc. However, no one sympathizes with the role of weak / victim men, so they wont have luck with passing their points unless they organize and present their stuff in a “manly” way. They cant succeed by playing the “poor victim woman” part, because they wont trigger the white knighting instincts in the rest of us. At least, I think thats the case. I do think people would be helping them if they were women.
“What are the valid issues presented by the MRM that are ignored by feminists and society as a whole?*”
The main issues feminism presented a few decades ago have been solved by now. We should be working in favor of “social rights” and meritocracy, regardless of gender, etc. It seems like the law system is really benefiting more women than men and pushing the stuff too far.
But Im really ignorant on this subject: I dont know what the laws are, I dont have the data, etc. But it wouldnt surprise me since most claims I hear from feminism these days have no correlation with my day to day life. Maybe its time to change things up again.
Is it my blog? 😀
I am from multiple alternate realities after all xD
I suspect his sudden change of tone and appearance of ignorance about feminist issues is him doing:
http://yohami.com/blog/2011/07/18/logic-conflict-the-instincts-in-play/
That xD
“The main issues feminism presented a few decades ago have been solved by now. We should be working in favor of “social rights” and meritocracy, regardless of gender, etc. It seems like the law system is really benefiting more women than men and pushing the stuff too far.
But Im really ignorant on this subject: I dont know what the laws are, I dont have the data, etc. But it wouldnt surprise me since most claims I hear from feminism these days have no correlation with my day to day life. Maybe its time to change things up again.”
Individuals still have a lot of work to do, man. The problems that people face under misogynistic cultural ideas didn’t end during the 1960’s or 70’s. There are issues that face women worldwide, and feminists are fighting for solutions in 2nd to 3rd world countries. Even the richest countries (like Japan for instance) are dealing with problems.
Also, how can you be ignorant on social issues, yet have an expectation of what will be the issues at hand?
What a ridiculous and stupid article. Every MRA I’ve spoken to is appalled by this incident.
In contrast, Sharon Osbourne saying that a man’s penis being amputated is “fabulous” is greeted with cheers by her female audience and gets viewed nationwide on daytime American TV.
Kirby,
“But I’ve explained exactly why saying Feminism and the MRM are identical is nonsense”
Which I didnt say, did I. Thats why I keep calling you on the strawman thing.
@YOHAMI:
“I have no insight nor a clue of what are the facts.”
“But Im really ignorant on this subject: I dont know what the laws are, I dont have the data, etc.”
Alright… You apparently don’t understand how an argument works. Slipping around saying “You’re wrong, the two movements are the same, you are just treating me like a troll, etc” doesn’t work if you don’t have any grounds for it. And admitting your ignorance also admits you having no basis for your claims, save for what you feel (sorry, KNOW) is correct.
Go away, base your opinion on some actual evidence, then come back. Til then, I don’t see why I should take anything you say seriously.