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.
Most men are more logical than most women, most women are most emotional than most men, be it by default, biology or culture or all of them. And there are huge variations. I for example, am not the male logic brain extreme. Im feminine / sensitive / artistic while still heterosexual. I have met women more logical and mechanical than most men I know, but these are rare cases. Etc.
So now we go from “natural” to maybe it’s cultural xD And there are HUGE variations!
Except he just said Lyn was a woman b/c XYZ and Kirby was a man cuz ZYX…
still waiting on me xD Except now it could be cultural too!
@YOHAMI:
Good guess on the gender, I suppose. But…
“Most men are more logical than most women, most women are most emotional than most men, be it by default, biology or culture or all of them. And there are huge variations. I for example, am not the male logic brain extreme. Im feminine / sensitive / artistic while still heterosexual. I have met women more logical and mechanical than most men I know, but these are rare cases. Etc.”
Alright, we already know you don’t have actual data to support your claim, so all you have is personal experience. But just because you call logic “masculine” and emotion “feminine” as fuck-all to do with whether they actually are. These are, word for word, cultural stereotypes that are repeated ad nauseum, and the fact that you have no objective data simply means you’ve picked up on these stereotypes.
That huge variation? Those “rare cases” as you put them? Not as rare as you think, and easily a result of statistical randomness. But even this statement is far removed with what you started with, that “women´s natural way to resolve conflicts goes from-repulsion-to-violence without passing through logic or dialog.” So, alright, you’ve back-pedaled to a less extreme view (one can only hope.) Now to actually provide evidence for your claim, one that isn’t determined by confirmation bias. As I’ve said before, good luck with that buddy.
@Johnny Pez XD I AM! 😀 Cruel, Vile, Petty, Nasty, Divine, Goddess…
I like this xD
Nobby,
“I thought you were trying to put Holly down?”
Holly was accusing NWO of doing something that she herself was doing – using the murder horror to back an agenda.
Me, apparently being the “sensible centrist” jumped in to tell her so.
“I thought you were trying to put Holly down?”
This phrasing is yet another way to depict “the stranger” as “the snake”. This stuff is really overused here.
Yohami, could it be that you use empathy, fears and desires when you are arguing with men, too, but you don’t notice so much because the man shares your fears and desires?
So you’re saying Nobby’s gender iss….. xD
@ Ami
It also means that you own everybody.
Well that’s a given xD
It also means that you pwn everybody 🙂
@YAHOMI:
““I thought you were trying to put Holly down?”
This phrasing is yet another way to depict “the stranger” as “the snake”. This stuff is really overused here.”
Umm, actually no. This phrasing is a way to ask you about your own beliefs. You know, by asking you. You know what I think? It may sound crazy, but I think you are seeing what you want to see.
Ami, I wish I’d bet the over. I’d be a rich man now.
Lyn,
“You realise this means you aren’t engaging honestly and respectfully with us? You won’t actually take a position and defend it, instead you will just share (unfounded) ideas in order to test to see how open we are to dialogue…with a bunch of ideas from someone who says they don’t really know much.”
Bullshit.
See, I say I dont know THE LAWS AND POINTS OF THE MRA IN DEPTH, and humbly accepting my ignorance – Im not a voicer nor an expert.
Somehow this goes evolving and Im a person who “doesnt know much” in general?
Guys. Guys.
Im engaging honestly. Giving my opinions, etc. With all the crap you keep pointing, it slowly makes me feel defensive. Once I get into defensive mode, you guys will just attack more. I think this is how nature wired us.
But, Lyn, Im 100% honest, and not a snake, and go read my blog, theres plenty of colors. I guess some of it will disgust you, and maybe some you will like, but, wtf.
Not a snake!
Not that I believe this stuff will have an effect whatsoever.
Im saying what I think honestly! believe me!
lol.
The thing is he’s alrdy set it up, that if you think he’s a troll or a misogynist, you’re alrdy proving that you’re an emotional woman xD Because you believe a stranger is a snake xD It’s not how he’s acting, or obfuscating or being rly dishonest about his squishy slateness it’s YOU. xD (but apparently, not me xD )
Im engaging honestly. Giving my opinions, etc. With all the crap you keep pointing, it slowly makes me feel defensive. Once I get into defensive mode, you guys will just attack more. I think this is how nature wired us.
There is another option XD
Johnny Pez,
“Also, “Sensible Centrist” is a pejorative term to describe someone who affects a pose of being an objective outside observer who is above all irrational passions.”
Got it. So you were insulting as well.
Im not above irrational passions. Thanks for the link though.
Johnny, despite your name you are a woman xD
You should be Johanna Pez xD
Ami,
“So I switched to my male char and made basically the same argument… and suddenly it was “wow that was logical, well laid out” etc etc xD And bam, the rules were changed and homophobic slurs were made against the rules by the GMs xD”
I´ve done similar experiments. Way to go. Stuff like that happens all the time. You get filtered by what the people is already expecting from you. Pretty mind blowing.
“I´ve done similar experiments. Way to go. Stuff like that happens all the time. You get filtered by what the people is already expecting from you. Pretty mind blowing.”
Mind blowing indeed. Something like that should have a name! I wonder if it applies to other situations involving observation of ‘nature’?
XD I love the blase dismissal and also admittance about confirmation bias xD
Really, YOHAMI, you’re not saying anything. You seem to move back and forth, alternating between posturing like you above everything around here and stating (frankly) stupid shit, and then back again.
What are you trying to prove?
Rodeo cat eventually gets thru. xD
@Ami:
Yeah… This is a nice little hole he’s dug for himself. He keeps changing his opinion, as I’ve tried to point out, then says he’s communicating honestly. -__- He’s spending way more time on our reactions to him then what we say. Maybe this is his feminine brain going haywire… x__x
Well, if he wants to insist on the snake metaphor, I’m all for beating this snake down. Any women want to join me? XD
(note to YOHAMI: This is how you paint the outsider as a snake)
So, YOHAMI, you come in here saying that we misunderstand the MRM, and that we’re blinded to the bias in feminism by being a part of it, and though you think the MRM is messed up it has valid arguments that are dismissed by feminists because they’re men… but you also don’t know very much, and you want our opinion. Is that right?
I think he regrets getting involved in this but his pride won’t let him leave. xD
Nobinayamu,
“Why? What does it mean?”
Dude. What does life mean?
Seriously I dont get your question. I think you are trying to make it fit into something else. Theres some science behind men being more logically oriented than women, and then the culture brainwash that fixes that stuff, and then all the human variants that either confirm or override the brainwashing. But, when you ask “what does it mean” and “why am I bringing this up” is like Im doing something profane.
Im just talking out lout what I see.