Some in the manosphere have been quick to label mass murderer Anders Breivik a “madman,” trying their best to pretend that his noxious misogynist ideology bears no resemblance to their own. Others, while endorsing at least some of his ideas, have distanced themselves from his actions.
As for MRA loose cannon Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c), well, I’ll just let him explain himself. In a comment on The Spearhead, which naturally earned him multiple upvotes from the assembled mob, the man with the strangely punctuated name offered this take [LINK FIXED] on the killer:
Anders Breivik sees himself as a soldier who is fighting for a worthy cause. That cause being his country. Women and leftists then make him out to be “insane” and are looking for “who is to blame”. Well they might start looking in the mirror. The most pervasive element of western civilization today is its hatred of men and all things male. There is a particularly strong hatred of fathers and husbands. I know. I used to be a father and a husband. I have never experienced hatred in my life as vehement as by women in divorce.
And then the justifications began:
It is only natural and normal that some men decide to take matters into their own hands at all the hatred spewed at them and their marginalization. Men often see that some things are worth fighting for. Men often then take action to fight for what they believe in.
Anders Breivik is not crazy. He’s as rational as the next man. He sees that his country is being destroyed. He sees that the people responsible for that destruction are the left of politics. And he would be correct. He took action to stop what he believes is the destruction of his country.
Followed by a smug told-you-so:
I have been telling women for three years now that hatred of men in general and fathers in particular is going to see men killing a lot of women and children. Well? We just saw 76.
Of course, when Nolan refers to “telling women” that angry men will erupt in violence, what he means is “offering guys on The Spearhead specific tips on how exactly to kill innocent people.”
I’m not going to repost the vile suggestions he set forth in a now notorious Spearhead comment some months back, but I will note that they included handy tips on how to efficiently kill police officers, as well as specific advice on the best ways to take out large numbers of people in “malls … girls schools, police stations, guvment buildings. Full of women and manginas.” He ended the comment with a not-terribly-convincing attempt at plausible deniability:
Do any of you here realise just how easy it is to ANY of these things? I am not recommending them or even condining them. But if a man got into the frame of mind of Sodini and was actually SMART about it. There are PLENTY of ways he could attack women and manginas and their cop protectors with NO CHANCE AT ALL OF BEING CAUGHT as long as he kept his mouth shut.
Naturally, this comment got dozens of upvotes from the Spearhead regulars.
In a followup comment on The Spearhead last night, Nolan mocked another commenter for offering words of sympathy to the “innocent victims.” That last phrase seemed to send him into a fury:
Those who were killed were not “innocent victims” in the main. Anders Breivik is as sane as the next man. …
This was an act of war and he considers himself a soldier. In different times, as in WW II, he would be called a hero.
The people he killed were the children of those who had betrayed him and his fellow norwegians. I would put forward the opinion that the political leaders are responsible for the war on men and the destruction of the families of men. What could be more “an eye for an eye” than to kill the children of those who were so willing to destroy mens families and destroy the homeland of men?
In killing children of those who are betraying men? He is sending a very clear message.
“You may think you are protected by your police and your security…..but we can find your children…and you can not protect them except by locking them into a secure area.”
He then went on to make what I think can only be called a veiled threat towards Predident Obama’s daughters; I won’t repeat it here.
Then back to the “innocent children” remark:
These “innocent victims” of whom you speak are the children of those who are criminals. And since Anders Breivik could not get to the REAL criminals he went after the children. Is that such a bad idea? Are they not legitimate targets if the primary targets can not be reached?
This also received multiple upvotes from The Spearhead crowd, and a much smaller number of downvotes. [UPDATE: The post has now started attracting downvotes, but the upvotes still outnumber them considerably.]
Yes, it is truly strange that anyone could possibly associate the MRM with violence in any way.
Harvey Braineater.
.Now I’m trying to think of a variant name that sounds worse than Bloody Mary, but I can’t
Harvey Braineater.
I would totes drink that.
Marc believes this guy’s motivation was “I won’t be mocked again, revenge is mine!”?
I take that personally. I love mocking people, my sense of humor trends toward the offensive, and I like a lot of troll humor. I hate that the average trolls targets innocent people like autistics on youtube, so I have decided to direct my trollan at MRAs. They are going to have to get used to MOCKERY when they have garbage for opinions. So far the only ‘real world’ impact the MRA has made so far is a self-immolation, cosplay capers, and now a shooting spree. Please prove me wrong and link to something positive and real MRA has accomplished (lol).
So Anders-Breivik is a wuss that can’t handle a little negging. Why can’t these dudes take what they dish out? I thought all his time on WoW would have taught him to handle a little shit-talk. I was wrong, 11-year-olds have thicker skin.
From everything I’ve read about this fellow, he was a invertebrate sponge soaking up the worst from the scummy subcultures of the ‘net. That MRA happened to be one of them is no surprise. He’s not a ‘typical MRA’ but he’s partly the result of their extreme rhetoric. It’s tragic that so many completely unrelated people had to die. The MRA should take a long look at itself, but it won’t because the movement is a joke.
Nom Collins
okay, so having read all of peter nolan and the courtroom of secrets this is what happened:
nolan spent the entire proceeding skulking in the back of the room because the judge wouldn’t assure him that he was approaching the bench ‘with his inalienable rights intact’. he wouldn’t tender any documents because he doesn’t recognize the legitimacy of the court, wouldn’t present a cogent objection to any of his wife’s evidence. also he did some other crazy stuff that the judge did a pretty good job of shrugging off.
the wife’s lawyer asked for 83 per cent of the assets based on a bunch of factors including the fact that he cc’ed her on over 500 insane e-mails he sent to her dad asking him to force her not to divorce him or something. but then she says that based on his antics it’s pretty obvious he’s not going to pay anything, so they should just go ahead and award her sole custody. which is probably what happened.
also at one point he fined the judge one million ounces of gold and now he’s going to put him on trial in his high school auditorium in front of a thousand people.
Yep, he got his @ss handed to him in court, due to his own foolishness, and now he’s on a mission to save men’s lives by encouraging them to do the same, using his handy-dandy sovereign citizen docs.
Sharculese: Yeah, that part is really chilling, in a documentary filled with chilling moments.
Does the “warning” also have a Dean Wormeresque “Double Secret Probation!” type status?
If he’s going to sue everyone who has looked at him the wrong way and demand gold for it, perhaps we need to start trucking in alchemists to keep up with demand.
Snowy—lol! Noice.
Lenin mocked and ridiculed his enemies?
Hoy me gott!!! Iz der no eveel dat man deedin’t schink tzu!?
Trollin, furthermore, I have no idea what their goals are. So far what I can gather is that they want hot–no fatties, please!–pussy on demand, and for women not to, you know, not challenge them on anything. Or have opinions. *shrug*
Vait… Vait! Befur ve can tek hyu seeriouz az a vorthy eenomy ve haz tzu know eef hyu haf a nize hat.
Trolling MRAS, I agree with you on what you say. I have an offbeat sense of humor, I enjoy pushing the envelope, and it takes a lot to offend me. It probably seems a bit twisted but I even cracked jokes about the tornado May 22 once my family and I got to safety at my parents’ house. When I heard Yakov Smirnoff was coming to do a charity show in town, I said “In Joplin, you chase tornado, but in Soviet Russia tornado chases YOU!”. When I looked at the mangled mess of our yard after it hit I said, “At least I didn’t stain the deck this weekend like I had planned”. My neighbors went from crying to laughing. It is very healing to look at the light side of life. It is a necessary coping mechanism.
That being said, I also draw some lines about humor. I don’t like humor to be used a weapon people use against other people, and then the bully says they were just kidding to justify cruelty. That is what MRA humor looks like to me, thinly veiled viciousness. When the tables are turned, you find out the Internet tough guys sure do dish it out but they can’t take it. I like it when they get a taste of their own medicine, but I don’t believe it will ever change them.
@cynickal:
“Vait… Vait! Befur ve can tek hyu seeriouz az a vorthy eenomy ve haz tzu know eef hyu haf a nize hat.”
De true mark uf a vorddy enemy. Also, it iz very nize to see anodder Jägerkin here.
Herr zombie barkeep, Hy vould like a fuzzy neocorteks please und a Hervey Braineater for my friend.
via Wicky wahcky woo:
with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion
So mockery serves as not giving them on-topic discussion to disrupt. for the purposes of a mockery style board, let’s focus on the ‘normal’ discussion rather than ‘on-topic’. I am particularly bad at on-topic, and I apologize to anyone who finds that tiresome. What can I say? I grew up at Sadly, No.
However, arguing with them as if they are arguing in good faith, DOES give them what they want.
From what I’ve seen, their primary intent is to find a a group that has like-minded discussions, and throw that as off kilter as they can. It is very narcissistic, because the more it is about them, the more they feel they have ‘won’. In extreme cases, this results in ‘copypasta’ trolling where the troll posts long, boring blocks of text from nearly any source, trying to slow down the flow of discussion; or things like nym-jacking, where the troll uses a regular poster’s nym to try and fool people into arguing.
Oddly enough, people like MRAL start as trolls, but it seems that he has actually made some headway away from that behavior.
Others around here, not so much.
@kirbywarp
And when he finds him, Australia will simply wrestle him into submission and then surf away on his wombat.
well, dangit, now I want a wombat of my own.
Would a hyena do?
@MertvayaRuka
Ja! Ve schould zee ef dey vould send us peekchures ov der hats.
@cynickal:
Hy get de feelink der hets vould be too schmall.
Would a hyena do?
can it surf?
-ALSO- I totally dibs on “Surfing Hyena” as a band name. or a drink name. Haven’t decided yet.
I told you again and again to stop these dangerous Lenin-like “my opponents are deluded and evil but still so ridiculous we just can make fun of them” rhetorics….Now you have mocked enough, Anders Breivik, like Wayland the Smith, said to himself “I won’t be mocked again, revenge is mine!” and did his terrible deeds. This is the end result of all this cowardice and of going the easy way to just ban uncomfortable opinions from normal discourse and to surrender them to the extremists, to the Internet you can’t control. As always the cost for this have to pay innocent people.
Holly compared you dudes to a protection racket a while back, and boy was she right. You’re pleased that innocent people got hurt, if it means it’ll scare feminists.
FFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
@havebookswilltravel- yeah, i like how they basically gave him enough rope and let him hang himself
@VoiP: Yeah, pretty much. Marc is just smiling at all of this, because it (supposedly) scares his arch-nemesis: Feminism.
Ugh.