So here’s the strangest response I’ve seen so far to the massacre in Norway. On Sofiastry, an antifeminist blog that seems to be broadly sympathetic to the “alt” (that is, the “intellectually” racist) right, blogger Sofia complains that feminist bloggers – she cites me and Hugo Schwyzer – are talking about the blatant anti-feminism and misogyny of mass murderer Anders Breivik. “The mendacious corollary they are trying to construct,” she writes, falling into the purple prose Alt-Righters seem drawn to like flies on bullshit, “is that all those opposed to feminist principles must be in league with all sorts of unsavory radicals.”
As I’ve already noted, this is not actually true; Sofia is being, well, mendacious. Yes, I pointed out the similarities between Breivik’s noxious misogynistic beliefs and, well, the noxious misogynistic beliefs of an embarrassingly large number of antifeminists and MRAs. But at no point did I (or, for that matter, Hugo) suggest that these people supported his despicable actions.
After purporting to be shocked – shocked! – that anyone would connect Breivik with the antifeminists of the world, Sofia offers an appreciation of sorts for Breivik’s awful manifesto. Waxing pompous yet again, she writes:
[A]lthough his actions were cruel beyond belief, and committed by a delusional, psychopath driven by his delusions of political grandeur, there is lucidity and sense in much of what he writes. He never seemed to explicitly advocated for a genocide of Muslims within Europe, but superficially claimed that he just wanted to sustain European culture.
So, let’s weigh Breivik’s pros and cons here. CON: He murdered 76 people in cold blood, motivated by a hateful ideology. PRO: He didn’t explicitly call for actual genocide?
Here’s where it gets weird. Really weird.
I feel that Breivik is being tried for more than his cruelty within the feminist community. The fact that he belongs to the privileged group of the white male makes him hate-worthy along with every other privileged white male who might sympathize with his ideology, even if they don’t happen to be psychotic. Breivik exemplifies White Men, even though Osama Bin Laden to the very same liberal ideologues did not represent Every Muslim.
It’s another symptom of our culture that feels it is OK to hold white men to higher standards of political correctness, self-flagellation and martyrdom whilst simultaneously relentlessly berating and mocking them on a cultural level.
Yep, that’s right. We hate Breivik … because he’s a white dude.
She continues on in this vein:
The subtle manifestations of an anti-white male agenda could be expounded upon for some time, even in the sexual sphere. In porn, the genre of cuckolding usually involves black men fucking white women to the dismay of her white husband. Something tells me this wouldn’t be acceptable if a black man were to stand helplessly by while a white male was sexually coercive with a black female.
Somehow we started off talking about mass murder and ended up talking about … cuckolding porn?
What. The. Fuck?
Breivik and his contemporaries among the racist right don’t want integration or assimilation. They want immigrants GONE. They WANT a racially homogeneous society because they believe that immigrants will NEVER assimilate. Ironically, (or more likely, intentionally) these dolts make it as difficult as possible for immigrants to assimilate by marginalizing them, spreading bullshit slander about them and generally doing everything they can to constantly point at immigrants and scream “NOT LIKE US! NEVER LIKE US!”. You can dress this crap up all you like but at the core of it, underneath all the layers of rational-sounding “we just want them to assimilate and be more like us”, it’s still “They’re never going to be like us, primitive savages that they are”. We’re not buying it. Backpedal all you like, it’s not going to do any good.
zombie,
i linked to a news clip that proves otherwise. all the rapists in the last 5 years within oslo who have been identified have been men of foreign origin. here is a news source (http://lybio.net/oslo-all-assaults-involving-rape-committed-by-non-western-men/news-politics/). if you can point me to another source that says otherwise, i will redact that statement.
(i never said shooting up people was ever a reasonable response, btw.)
cultural homogeneity is important, yes. i never said that meant racial homogeneity. i’m not white, i’m not a WN (for someone who implicated that upthread) either. sure, culture is adaptable, but i think the problem is when you have a conflict of direct interests. for example, a lot of terrorists who are muslim are opposed to liberalism. so how do you integrate into a liberal society when you are opposed to those values?
i just find it majorly hypocritical when minority groups don’t have to take ownership for being misogynistic, racist, or homophobic (which many muslim minorities are, and african-american men in the media tend to embody those values as well). why are white people held to a higher standard of political correctness? when you are trying to enforce a tolerant society, ALL groups have to be equally tolerant for it work, including immigrants.
a lot of people seem to be misreading what i’m saying to mean that i’m somehow homophobic, racist or possibly misogynist, but the irony is that i just want EVERYONE to be held to the same standards.
“If white nationalists can’t handle their shit and end up shooting a bunch of people, that’s not an immigrant problem, that’s a white nationalist problem. You take care of it by fixing your white nationalists, not fixing your immigrants.”
This exactly. Stop coddling these fuckers. Stop listening to the endless ass-chapped whining of white nationalist racists about how oppressed they are because they have to smell foreign cooking and hear foreign languages. Stop being afraid to call their terrorist actions terrorism.
From Sofia’s post:
I don’t think that Breivik exemplifies white men, but I do think that we can draw comparisons between him and other white* men whose primary ideology is defined by hate and who make statements encouraging violent acts of revolution.
Sofia, can you tell me what’s wrong with that?
*Actually, I kind of feel like the “white,” and possibly the “men” part of that sentence is a little off and might as well be replaced by “people”; I leave it, however, since we’re kinda talking about anti-feminism and the MRM, which are mostly comprised of white men, as far as I’ve ever noticed.
Chomsky hate the US and the West and he support anything against the West or the US. He was a supporter of Osama Ben Laden
No, he loves the US and wants it to live up to its ideals. Used to be known as a ‘patriot’ before jingoism became an acceptable substitute.
And his “support” of Osama Bin Laden consisted of an article critical of the assassination, maintaining that political hits were not something America should be proud of. Of course, he opposes torture also, so obviously he is suspect. But at least he spelled the fucking name right.
Bringing up Chomsky as a bludgeon against the left is the rhetorical and substantive equivalent of bringing up Andrea Dworkin as a bludgeon against feminism, and normally I wouldn’t bother to respond to it, but I have to here, because “Chomsky hate the US,” where he lives and works, is such a wrongheaded, hyperbolic thing to say.
And oh look, I didn’t have to go farther than wikipedia to disprove it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2003/nov/30/highereducation.internationaleducationnews
I start tentatively enough with a question about a remark he made recently in the New York Times about the fact that he continued to live in America, because it was ‘the greatest country in the world’. In what sense did he believe this?
He starts, too, as he means to go on. ‘I have to first of all give a background,’ he says, already a bit exasperated. ‘That interview never took place. It is rather interesting, interviews like that never take place.’
The New York Times made it up?
‘It was a senseless contraction of an hour-and-a-half telephone conversation in which I explained question by question why I am not going to answer this question or that question, because it is not a sensible question.’ Right.
‘And the published interview was contracted from the original questions and sentences extracted from my often lengthy explanations of why I was not going to answer. There is no country in the world where interviews like these would happen. Where these kind of trivial questions would be asked.’
I laugh a little, nervously, quickly running through some of my own more frivolous lines of inquiry in my head. Chomsky does not smile. Does he understand this kind of profile as an effort to marginalise him, by ‘the ruling elite’?
‘Well,’ he says, quietly. ‘I’m not sure the New York Times was consciously trying to trivialise me, but the effect of it is to put everything in the same category as the gossip you read in the magazines you pick up at supermarket counters. I was asked, for example, why I thought there were so many euphemisms for genitalia. It’s not a serious question. Whatever the purpose of such a tone is, the effect is to make it appear that anyone who departs from orthodox political doctrine is in some ways laughable.’
So, I say, he does not believe America is the greatest country in the world, then? ‘My feeling is, to answer your question, that evaluating countries is senseless and I would never put things in those terms, but that some of America’s advances, particularly in the area of free speech, that have been achieved by centuries of popular struggle, are to be admired.’
white* men whose primary ideology is defined by hate and who make statements encouraging violent acts of revolution.
graphic illustration of this:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GE9QVJhdZ_M/Ti4thcNLbRI/AAAAAAAADog/dO_r6CYxNAg/s1600/Anders%2BBehring%2BBreivik%2B-%2BMarxist%2BHunter%2Bpatch.jpeg
That image on the left? Taken from teh shoulder patch in the picture of ABB with a tremendously phallic rifle.
“for example, a lot of terrorists who are muslim are opposed to liberalism. so how do you integrate into a liberal society when you are opposed to those values?”
Please, for the love of all that does not suck, at least try to make sense. How the hell is anyone or anything going to integrate a TERRORIST into a liberal society? Again, you’re talking about these folks in a fashion that makes it quite clear that either a). you believe they’re all predisposed to terrorism from the get-go or b). you’re a blithering idiot.
“a lot of people seem to be misreading what i’m saying to mean that i’m somehow homophobic, racist or possibly misogynist, but the irony is that i just want EVERYONE to be held to the same standards.”
Yes, we get it. You want everyone to be able to run the race and finish at the same time with no allowance for those folks on crutches because that would be unfair.
Consider sharculese’s comment to be footnoted in mine, because I am too lazy to work that hard.
bee,
i don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. i think group identification is a normal and useful habit. BUT what i have a contention with is the hypocrisy along those lines, because as far as i’ve noticed, when a muslim commits a terrorist action most people who identify as liberal are pretty hesitant to pin that on islam, and the statements made by other muslims that focus on revolution. so, if you’re going to incriminate all MRAs/nationalists by the same reasoning, you should also be incriminating all muslims. or at least, drawing the same comparisons.
cultural homogeneity is important, yes. i never said that meant racial homogeneity. i’m not white, i’m not a WN (for someone who implicated that upthread) either. sure, culture is adaptable, but i think the problem is when you have a conflict of direct interests. for example, a lot of terrorists who are muslim are opposed to liberalism. so how do you integrate into a liberal society when you are opposed to those values?
I didn’t call you a white nationalist, I was talking about Breivik. Remember him? But seriously, this is pretzel logic. Who are you arguing against here? Terrorists? Muslims? Liberals? Are you suggesting a conservative minority can’t exist within a liberal society? What are you getting at?
since we’re kinda talking about anti-feminism and the MRM, which are mostly comprised of white men, as far as I’ve ever noticed.
well, there were the Promise Keepers, although they were not specifically MRM; but shared a heck of a lot of anti-woman attitudes and as I recall, were predominantly African-American.
I don’t know enough about the Norwegian history of Muslim immigration, but the French example is instructive.
After the War of Algerian Independence, there was a flood of ethnic Algerians into France. They were almost without exception educated, urbane, French-speaking, francophilic and secular. But once in their new country, they faced vicious discrimination in everything — jobs, housing, education, you name it. They were forced to live in “projects”, that are exactly like American “projects”, which is to say, they are ghettos. The purpose of such residential complexes is to hide people that “real French people” (or “real Americans”, as the case may be) don’t want to see or interact with. The undesirables are herded in there with little regard for their quality of life, but considerable regard for isolating them, and those places become laws onto themselves. In poverty, living on the outskirts of major cities, forced to contend with staggering unemployment or the least paid, most menial jobs, their children teased and bullied at school, discouraged from going to college, or, having gone to college, found that no one wants to hire them because no Berber need apply — after decades of this shit, the grandchildren of people who were Muslim in but name began to turn towards religion as the only thing that offered them hope and consolation.
Indeed, up until quite recently, the biggest problem in French “Muslim” ghettos wasn’t radical Islam, but ordinary criminal violence, poverty and drug abuse. However, when radical Islam did come to France, it found a fertile ground among the disenfranchised and people who felt they had nothing to lose, treated as foreigners in their own country.
And that’s the problem with white racist nationalists — they scream that immigrants don’t assimilate, but they are the ones who put every conceivable obstacle in the path of assimilation. The question of assimilation is a red herring. People who sympathize with Breivik don’t want Muslims to have good jobs, good housing and access to good education — the very things that tend to make people secular.
mertvaya,
i don’t understand how wanting minorities to be held to the same standards of tolerance is unreasonable? my parents are visible minorities who are also immigrants aren’t homophobic, racist, or misogynistic. it’s patronizing that you think that people of colour can’t also embody those same values of acceptance.
HAAH, Johnny Pez, you made me cackle loudly! XD
ZRM, the fact that those patches and stickers sell well enough to exist in the first place is the problem that people like Sofia overlook. The folks that buy them don’t think anyone left of them politically to be wrong. They believe anyone left of them politically to be evil and worthy only of subjugation or death. They’re not joking and never have been and are only distinguishable from any other terrorist by the laziness and passive-aggressiveness of their tactics. Most of them prefer to project a constant subtle threat of violence rather than engage in actual violence and those patches and stickers are but a small part of how they do it.
Sofia, I’m okay with drawing a parallel between Muslims who have committed acts of terrorism and Muslims whose primary ideology is defined by hate and who make statements encouraging violent acts of revolution, too. Same, same.
Actually, it’s been my observation and exp that the ppl who drive the “black dicks in white chicks” thing tend to be white ppl (cuz of the exotification and othering of the black guy, esp when they’re portrayed as being beastial) and they tend to be pretty racist (if the fiction in interracial categories on sites like Literotica are any indication, it’s a fear/attraction thing, it’s so titillating cuz it’s so taboo and scary) xD It’s not like white female feminists are the ones driving that market xD (unless you are! *looks suspiciously* )
If this was all true neways, how come almost every white feminist woman I know is dating or married to a white dude? xD Shouldn’t they all be dating non white guys? o_O
You should be honoured ppl are attacking you personally btw Dark Lord Futrelle xD You’re on the same level as Hugo (who does not have a card yet, so you’re even ahead of him!) xD
Sofia, a couple things;
“and yes, you can link cuckoldry porn… it’s called abstracting a general principle/idea and linking it to other manifestations of the same prejudice.”
I gotta tell yea, I’m really really not seeing the link between “White guy spews hateful shit and murders 90+ people and a not insignificant portion off humanity isn’t willing to look past it to see the lucidity and sense in the 1500 pg manifesto that included the assertion that women’s right should be removed to the point that we are reduced to breeding stock” and “I get off on the idea of some guy fucking my wife.” Am I supposed to believe that this man is being vilified not because he killed 90+ people, many of them teens, not because he spewed hateful shit, but because he’s white? And that, somehow, has to do with cuckolding? What?!
“i linked to a news clip that proves otherwise.
No, really, someone else brought that up before you did and it is indeed false
And I don’t for one minute agree with your claim that cultural homogeneity is important. I actually believe just the opposite. Exchanging Ideas with people who think differently from us is how the human race grows. Homogeneity breeds stagnation; if everyone thinks exactly the same way as you do, where is the innovation going to come from? Also, holding up homogeneity as so important lends itself to a situation where people who are different in whatever way are shamed and ridiculed. I really, really don’t want to live in that world.
@Sofia
I’m living in Southern Germany. All in all, integration works pretty well here. In other parts of Germany it’s a problem. So, what’s the difference between the region I’m living in and the other regions? Here, the economy is strong. The headquarters and factories of many big companies are located in Southern Germany (Daimler, Porsche, BMW, Bosch, SAP, BASF, etc, ). People get a job after finished school. Then they have a steady income, can accumulate some wealth, buy a house, start a family. They have prospects.
I would argue culture is not the problem. The problem is poverty and lack of prospects. Without these issues integration works quite well.
Sofia: “i don’t understand how wanting minorities to be held to the same standards of tolerance is unreasonable? my parents are visible minorities who are also immigrants aren’t homophobic, racist, or misogynistic. it’s patronizing that you think that people of colour can’t also embody those same values of acceptance.”
What I’m not getting about this, is … we don’t even seem to be arguing in the same universe. You have brought us half a thing. You can’t come in here with half a thing! I don’t think anyone’s keen on supporting people’s homophobic, racist, or misogynistic views, no matter who they are, BUT this is not what we are talking about, at bottom. This is not what Breivik is charged with. He is being held to the standard of PEOPLE WHO HAVE MURDERED 93 PEOPLE.
sharculese,
the statement was ambiguous — i wasn’t sure if you were referring to me or breivik.
anyway, the beauty of liberalism is that you can have a lot of different sub-ideologies/demographics existing under it harmoniously. that would include conservatism, gays/straights, people of different races, etc. etc. what DOESN’T work is when you have a fundamentally anti-liberal ideology existing in a liberal society. most terrorists, whether we are talking about whites or muslims, are OPPOSED to liberalism, so people with anti-liberal ideologies will NEVER integrate into society because society IS liberal. certain demographics. belief systems, etc. — at least in a contemporary context — will have difficulty integrating because they don’t believe in the same kind of tolerance everyone else does.
you can’t have intolerant people — white or of colour — living amongst tolerant people.
Sofia, anecdotes about how nobody ever calls immigrants on being racist, homophobic and misogynist are tiresome. You’re making a statement with nothing to back it up except this “I seen it happen!” nonsense and you’re expecting us to treat it like a peer-reviewed study. Sorry, not going to happen.
i linked to a news clip that proves otherwise. all the rapists in the last 5 years within oslo who have been identified have been men of foreign origin. here is a news source (http://lybio.net/oslo-all-assaults-involving-rape-committed-by-non-western-men/news-politics/). if you can point me to another source that says otherwise, i will redact that statement.
Gosh, I can’t believe I worked this hard, but here was a fine, detailed, and referenced post by Pecunium in the prior thread. I understand, of course, that you are not a regular here and I apologize for incorrectly attributing this to earlier in THIS thread, when it was in the one before. But you want the facts, and here they are:
http://manboobz.com/2011/07/25/manosphere-blogs-hey-that-breivik-guy-has-some-good-ideas/comment-page-2/#comment-44943
Seems to indicate quite clearly that the MAJORITY of rapes (in Norway; but your original contention did not make that restriction. However, using my sekrit zombie prediction powers, i knew it was coming) are committed by Norwegians.
“But wait, zombie (only my friends call me ZRM)” I hear you saying ” the percentage of rapes committed in Norway by Norwegians is far out of proportion to the number of Norwegians!”
Ahh, but as others have pointed out, and at this point my legendary sloth will truly prevent me from going further, the bare statistics do not compensate for economic, class, and stress factors; and minorities are famously forced into stressed, dangerous situations where viloent crime is much more prevalent.
Regardless, your initial are assertion was that “the majority of rapes are committed by Muslims” which is demonstrably wrong on a number of levels. I await your redaction.
They’re not joking and never have been and are only distinguishable from any other terrorist by the laziness and passive-aggressiveness of their tactics. Most of them prefer to project a constant subtle threat of violence rather than engage in actual violence and those patches and stickers are but a small part of how they do it.
No they’re not, and I don’t want to give the impression that I think they are.
I, however, am a librul zombee who may not be as unarmed and defenseless as they think I am.