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.
YOHAMI wrote, “The bad part about the defensiveness is it doesnt help on solving the issues. Say. People at MRM dont care about solving. They care about whining. People here seem to care about mocking – only. etc.”
It always amuses me when people either 1.) don’t read the tagline of this blog or 2.) react as if we’re the only site on the Internet talking about these issues.
Shorter YOHAMI: All the gender stereotypes are TRUE! Why are you all being so MEAN?
I really, really hope we all stop this stupid “with all the violent rhetoric you don’t have to be shocked when someone act on it” argument
Breivik is not like Loughner. He’s not a paranoid schizophrenic who pulls a gun because of the stuff he hears somewhere, he thought about it for years.
I think his pure intelligence is pretty high, the meticulous planning and the efficiency of his acts makes that clear (don’t bee fooled that he looks stupid in his freemason dress or as frogman) and I really really doubt he was influenced by some rants he finds on the Internet.
If you read his manifesto you’ll notice that he unfortunately had some crucial experiences that very probably made him think the way he does.
Like that his female family members got horrible STDs by “sleeping around”: His half-sister had to spend 50k $ on IVF treatments because the pelvic inflammatory disease caused by untreated gonorrhea made her infertile. His mother contracted genital herpes that spread to her brain and caused severe intellectual disability.*
He writes:
“Both my sister and my mother have not only shamed me but they have shamed
themselves and our family. A family that was broken in the first place due to secondary
effects of the feministic/sexual revolution.”
___
* Though that all sounds pretty unbelievable as extreme as it is, I doubt he would write wrong facts in his manifesto, that are easily disprovable.
___
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.
No, he doesn’t. It’s more like “if we don’t change our society we would need surrogate mothers or artificial wombs”.
And then he’s back on his “Sex and the City” hobbyhorse:
and what about the “Madonna”-lifestyle? I really wondered, what’s that…?
“Race-mixing propagandists: Heidi Klum, Elin Nordgren, Madonna, Brangelina,
Lady Gaga etc – An irreversible action, the eternal loss of your extended ethnic
family”
ah, ok.
Just catching up here. Long posts from Pecunium and Marc were caught in moderation (not sure why), but they’re up now.
scott mclellen said:
No, not in any way, shape or form.
@Marc:
“I really really doubt he was influenced by some rants he finds on the Internet.”
“___
* Though that all sounds pretty unbelievable as extreme as it is, I doubt he would write wrong facts in his manifesto, that are easily disprovable.
___”
You do realize his manifesto was 1500 pages long with a lot of it direct copy-pastes from other writings, right? Copy pastes from rants on the internet?
Yeah…
could you please remove the “nobody” in the first sentence, thanks.
I first wanted to write “nobody comes up with this argument”, then I noticed somebody already did come up with it here and I changed it in a hurry.
“I think his pure intelligence is pretty high, the meticulous planning and the efficiency of his acts makes that clear (don’t bee fooled that he looks stupid in his freemason dress or as frogman) and I really really doubt he was influenced by some rants he finds on the Internet.”
Oh good lord. I know I’m going to regret responding to you, Marc, but why do you think someone who presumably intended to push forth a message of white nationalism by killing a buncha white teenagers is smart? Seems to me that a person of high intelligence would have found a way to bridge the gap between means and end, don’t you think?
Also, why you bee so obsessed with me, Marc?
Also, just because I haven’t found a place to put this on the internet yet, and because I feel kind of sad about the fact that I’m arguing about this situation without having acknowledged this yet: I am really really heartbroken about this. My thoughts go out to the families and friends of the 92 murdered people, and everyone else affected by the nightmare caused by this terrible man.
Marc wrote, “His mother contracted genital herpes that spread to her brain and caused severe intellectual disability.”
That did sound really odd to me (I have oral herpes, so I’ve read up on both types.) But I did find this: “Some peole may develop severe herpes infections that involve the brain, eyes, esophagus, livere, spinal cord, or lungs. These complications often develop in people who have a weakened immune system, AIDS, are undergoing chemotherapy or radiation therapy, or who take high doses of cortisone.”
So–
Actually, fuck it, Marc. The dude shot *at least sixty people*. That is NOT how you deal with it when someone in your family gets a disease!
Also, Marc? Most of the people in the *world* have some form of herpes. You might even have it yourself (usually there’s no symptoms, and men are more likely to pass it to their partners), so cut it out with the slut shaming, okay?
Herpes labialis here.
Hold up, wait a minute. How does this guy’s claim that his sister wound up 50K in the hole due to medical treatments square with Norway’s public health care model?
Chicken pox is a variant of herpes right? I am too lazy to Google but I know that a common childhood disease is.
Chickenpox is a highly contagious illness caused by the varicella-zoster virus (VZV), a type of herpes virus. (So says the State of New York public health site.)
I am not surprised that our MRA-sympathizing visitors are trying to minimize both the gravity of his actions and the similarity of his beliefs to those of many in the MRM… hey, haven’t there been a dozen or so rants on MRM sites predicting violence if MRA’s don’t get their way? So why is it so unlikely that Breiviks was influenced by MRM beliefs?
Same way that the right wing in the US immediately claimed that things like ‘do not retreat, reload’ and gun signs on Democratic districts had nothing to do with Gabby’s shooting despite everyone immediately being able to make the connection.
They got lucky-Loughner was a deteriorating Constitutionalist, not a right wing party hack.
Dave: The long post from me had a “word of power”.
Marc: Being intelligent isn’t proof against schizophrenia. Nor does mental illness prevent careful planning.
And really… you are justifying this, notice that he unfortunately had some crucial experiences that very probably made him think the way he does.
Yeah, I know you will say that it doesn’t excuse, it just explains. His mother died, and he decided that was feminism’s fault, and he just tacked it onto all the rest.
You’re just trying to understand him.
I understand him. He is a hate filled human being who decided the modern world was against him, and he blamed immigrants (a whopping less than 2 percent of the society) and women being uppity for the decline of the overlordship of Christian-manhood he thought should be in charge. So he went on a killing spree.
There is nothing to justify it. Nothing.
I’ve had some pretty crappy shit in my life. Republicans who cut funding to mental health clinics, so that I have to deal with people who need help I can’t really give them. I’ve been told I don’t qualify for food stamps because I don’t make enough money. Fuckers who wanted to make a fast buck provided inadequate armor to me, and my friends, some of whom died.
None of that would justify my blowing up the statehouse in Wisconsin and then going to a Young Republicans Retreat and killing them.
@YOHAMI,
“you are a girl, you have “fairy” scripted all over you. Even when you say offensive stuff, you make it sound bubbly and funny. I dont know if you could ever pass for a troll.”
HAHAHAHA! Oh, dear, I think that’s my laugh for the day…
“Im testing how many of you guys are open to dialog and check new / different ideas, and how many are just defender ants ready to kill anything that smells strange.”
I am now considering that YOHAMI is Marc.
“Being intelligent isn’t proof against schizophrenia. Nor does mental illness prevent careful planning.”
According to Marc, Professor John Forbes Nash, Jr. never existed.
I also think that being intelligent doesn’t mean that you can’t be influenced by rants you find on the net – who isn’t influenced by the things they read on a daily basis? I don’t think it’s a simple: “Some blogger instructed me to do this so I did” thing, but about going to a space where shared assumptions about the world are violent and dehumanising.
Does that mean if I say I want baked goods on a blog someone will make me baked goods?! I want I want!
*Makes Elizabeth some fresh baked bread*
Lyn: Yes, feedback loops are a problem. So are echo chambers (they reinforce the feedback loops).
We (liberals, feminists) get accused doing nothing but echo-chambers,and what with all the open comment streams we have, I guess it must be true. We never hear any dissenting opinions.
Nor look at the data provided in them.
If you read his manifesto you’ll notice that he unfortunately had some crucial experiences that very probably made him think the way he does.
Like that his female family members got horrible STDs by “sleeping around”: His half-sister had to spend 50k $ on IVF treatments because the pelvic inflammatory disease caused by untreated gonorrhea made her infertile. His mother contracted genital herpes that spread to her brain and caused severe intellectual disability.*
So if his mother had never had sex, he wouldn’t have murdered 92 people.
You know… that’s absolutely true.
Adds bacon.
Freshly baked bacon bread?! Now do I put butter on here or not?