A couple excellent pieces on Anders Breivik and misogyny.
First: The other day I posted a link to a piece by Michael Kimmel on Breivik and the sexual politics of far-right thought. It turned out that the article was a draft that got published prematurely.
Now the final version of the post is officially up at Sociological Images: A tale of two terrorists redux. Kimmel argues that what we know about Breivik thus far
indicate[s] that … it will be impossible to fully understand this horrific act without understanding how gender operates as a rhetorical and political device for domestic terrorists.
These members of the far right consider themselves Christian Crusaders for Aryan Manhood, vowing its rescue from a feminizing welfare state. Theirs is the militarized manhood of the heroic John Rambo – a manhood that celebrates their God-sanctioned right to band together in armed militias if anyone, or any governmental agency, tries to take it away from them. If the state and capital emasculate them, and if the masculinity of the “others” is problematic, then only “real” white men can rescue the American Eden or the bucolic Norwegian countryside from a feminized, multicultural, androgynous immigrant-inspired melting pot.
Meanwhile, Amanda Marcotte at Pandagon offers some thoughts on Misogyny and Terrorism:
[T]here’s definitely a strong link between misogyny and violence that can’t be denied. Misogynists are far likelier to be violent people than non-misogynists, which is why rape and wife-beating are such common crimes. (Domestic violence is the number one cause of injury for women 15-44.) All bigotry provokes violence at its ends, of course. This isn’t the Oppression Olympics. But misogyny and violence go hand in hand so often because misogynists really buy deeply into the idea that women are weak and men are “strong”, by which they mean aggressive. A steady drumbeat of misogynist thought couldn’t be better designed to reach the unhinged and cause them to lash out violently, all while imagining themselves to be big, tough men who claim they were forced—with “why did you make me do this?” being the battle cry of wife beaters—into violence.
Discuss.
I’m an amoralist and an anti-humanist (you can read the manifesto here). I don’t care how hateful or ugly your ideology is, I just care about internal consistency, true foundations and that you’re open to criticism. Feminism as MRA-ism is all of that NOT. You complain about that evo-psych isn’t testable… haha, what an irony, what about all your nonsense from rape culture to privilege that works in mysterious non-detectable ways?
marc if youre still puzzled as to why i keep calling you a freshman philosophy major its because you keep writing shit where it looks like you just discovered the concept of ideas
@sharculese, I got a BA in philosophy, most philosophy departments would toss his bad reasoning out on its ass. He’s more like the hipster douche who reads Sartre once and suddenly thinks he is a “philosopher” and knows everything about everything than like an actual philosophy major.
well, yeah, no offense to anyone who actually completed a program of study in philosophy, of course
when i started law school i briefly considered doing a joint philosophy ma program, but then i decided it wasn’t worth at least another 2 years of school. according to the one guy i talked to who did it, it sounds like i made the right choice.
NWO – I find you to be a very dishonest individual in these discussions and also find that no matter who responds to you or what tone an individual uses in his or her response, you frequently resort to hateful rhetoric, mischaracterizations of other people’s arguments, and the use of “facts” with either no supporting evidence or “evidence” that does not, in fact, support what you are holding it out to support. Therefore, I have no intention of getting into a discussion about any of your various pet topics as it is useless and a waste of my time and energy.
@darksidecat:
@sharculese, I got a BA in philosophy, most philosophy departments would toss his bad reasoning out on its ass. He’s more like the hipster douche who reads Sartre once and suddenly thinks he is a “philosopher” and knows everything about everything than like an actual philosophy major.
Funny that you are saying such a thing, you, who can’t even distinguish between fact and fiction, somebody who attacks me that I use the wrong facts in a fictional story… oh please… you who can’t even think clearly from A to B. I read all your posts it seems to me that you consider yourself very smart. You’re a bit more arrogant than smart and your talking points never seem to dive below the surface of the same old boring stuff that any child can spew. You do not have any original thoughts or new evidence to back your claims. You are a rather unimpressive individual, much like some kid that thinks he’s a hot shot because he can play a few chords of “Stairway to Heaven” on the guitar and after all it’s really more annoying than entertaining. I say that just in case that you are trying to be an entertainer.
@Sharculese:
marc if youre still puzzled as to why i keep calling you a freshman philosophy major its because you keep writing shit where it looks like you just discovered the concept of ideas
Oh, come on, it’s just another Microsoft tactics, it’s called FUD.
But it failed, I don’t sit here and think “Oh, damn, he figured me out!”…
No I just know now, that I am right and you’re desperately wrong.
Antihumanists will continue their mission, no matter if you like it or not.
You’re gender-confused, btw.
ya, the way you keep bringing up these weirdo debating tactics that i neither know nor care about is another reason
You’re gender-confused, btw.
okay, this on the other hand i just don’t know what to do with at all
“Funny that you are saying such a thing, you, who can’t even distinguish between fact and fiction, somebody who attacks me that I use the wrong facts in a fictional story… oh please… you who can’t even think clearly from A to B. I read all your posts it seems to me that you consider yourself very smart. You’re a bit more arrogant than smart and your talking points never seem to dive below the surface of the same old boring stuff that any child can spew. You do not have any original thoughts or new evidence to back your claims. You are a rather unimpressive individual, much like some kid that thinks he’s a hot shot because he can play a few chords of “Stairway to Heaven” on the guitar and after all it’s really more annoying than entertaining. I say that just in case that you are trying to be an entertainer.”
Funny how a seemingly “rational” man like yourself can lose it in this fashion.
Marc is still stinging from being called out on his racist failure to make a proper analogy or a sensible hypothetical. Here’s an analogy for you: Marc is to logic what the Insane Clown Posse is to magnets, he doesn’t know how the fuck it works.
Oh, please spare me your racist allegations! We had this much too often.
im really a little bit jealous that you got the awesome storm of anger and convoluted writing and all it got was a burn(?) about me being gender confused
“Oh, please spare me your racist allegations! We had this much too often.”
But you said days ago on this blog that Brevik’s intentions were good…and his intentions were racist, misogynistic amongst other things. Or were you saying something else back then?
okay, this on the other hand i just don’t know what to do with at all
1. You’re a guy.
2. You have an avatar of a girl
3. Your nickname ends with “ese”, an ending that is found in female given names (Denese, Charlese, Elese, Therese)
=> you’re gender-confused.
“1. You’re a guy.
2. You have an avatar of a girl
3. Your nickname ends with “ese”, an ending that is found in female given names (Denese, Charlese, Elese, Therese)
=> you’re gender-confused.”
Nope, still confusing…because what do you care about him being gender-confused?
Be careful, Sharculese, your very existence seems to bug Marc.
uh fucking no. sharculese. half-shark, half-herculese.
and so the fuck what if i’m crossing your delicate gender sensibilities? i’m pretty sure ive got the wherewithal to gender bend a little without getting confused about it.
ps: ya i know it should be sharcules, but that doesn’t really look right so i added an extra e
@Marc: Also what does Sharculese being gender confused have to do with the fact that you’ve made no good points whatsoever while Sharculese and Pecunium have been wiping the floor with you.
One would think that a man who professes to be objective (being an anti-humanist and all) would stick to discussing the values of ideas, as opposed to throwing insults around as a distraction.
Be careful, Sharculese, your very existence seems to bug Marc.
lol, i know.
marc how much does it piss you off to know i wore a girl’s shirt to work today?
I wore a jock strap to a party last week! AND a binder!
I wore womens bowling shoes because they ran out of my size in mens! OH NOES!!!!
But you said days ago on this blog that Brevik’s intentions were good…and his intentions were racist, misogynistic amongst other things. Or were you saying something else back then?
The intentions (like the intentions of Solanas) were good to a certain degree. I would go a different route than Breivik, racism is in a sense just nostalgia, because it clings to outdated notion that racial characteristics are something worth to preserve, I’m just for normal eugenics. Solanas and Breivik recognized one central truth: We cannot live the way we live now forever; our planet is dying, humans are in a constant process of degeneration and only increased technological effort can keep us alive. Massive expansion of technological infrastructure especially in health care and agriculture will be needed, of course, if you’re afraid of Big Government restricting your freedoms, wait until that happens! And don’t think, if we ever get that far, that this will be decided by a democratic process. You think I am a monster, but wait until that happens, the sacrifices you want avoid today, soon you will look back and think “We fools, why didn’t we do something when we still could?”. Even if Breivik’s or Solanas’ have been principles as wrong as they could be, this one conclusion… they got it right.
Thanks for your attention.
PEACE AND FREEDOM!
Maybe I have some immunity to being accused of being gender confused as a genderqueer and borderline intersexed person. It is not us who are confused about our genders, it is Marc that is confused. And Marc hates being confused almost as much as he hates logic and learning.
“I’m just for normal eugenics.”
Care to explain what you mean by that?
Wait, did Marc just sign his post “PEACE AND FREEDOM!”? And he’s a eugenicist…are Marc and Meller the same person or are they just very similar?
I’m just for normal eugenics.
aaaaaaand we’re done here
Care to explain what you mean by that?
I mean by that, that unlike Breivik, I don’t care how your nose looks like.
aaaaaaand we’re done here
Don’t you recognize the decadent and sick world we live in? Technology is everywhere, everywhere, we use it on our fellow creatures, non-human animals and plants, we even change their DNA to fit our needs. Then we eat them. Yeah, eat your burger from a cow that was fed with genetically modified soy beans… the ancient hunter needs his flesh, only that he now he’s morbidly obese, suffering from diabetes and would die after five minutes in the open steppe. But eugenics is unnatural, nuclear power is natural but eugenics… no, we need to leave nature alone. We rather change the environment on a grand scale and the genetic code of our fellow creatures before we change ourselves. Hypocrites!