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.
chuckeedee | July 30, 2011 at 4:11 am
I give up! Oh please, please stop these tales of carnage of female goodness and innocence! I cannot move my hand fast enough to wipe away all the tears streaming down my face! I’m so sorry for having doubted you all! How can I ever make it up to you all! The rawness of your wounds tugs at my heart! I wish I could embrace you all and offer you warmth and succour for the horror of what you’ve been through! I now feel your terrible pain and loss, but as a mere male I realize that I am not worthy to even gaze upon you, let alone hug you all! I am not even worthy of visiting this site! I AM JUST SOOOOOO SORRY… Please forgive me, I hope among hopes that I return in my next life as a woman to make up for all the horrors that my manhood is responsible for! I can’t take it any more! Farewell cruel world! Please, please Dear Goddess make me return as a woman! Make my next thousand lives as a woman, so that I can learn but a fraction of what my poor dear, dear sisters have been through! I am ready for this penitence! Au revoir! A dieu! World so cruel (to women) yet so wonderful (to men)!
Is he NWO? o_O Or did they just train together under the same master? xD Like Ken and Ryu! 😀 (I wonder which one’s which)
I wonder when we’ll meet the troll versions of Akuma and Dan… >_>
xD
@Molly Ren:
“What do we have to do to get some original women-hating commentators around here?”
That’s the problem, the “original” and “women-hating” parts are pretty much mutually exclusive. But when all you’ve got to work with is Valerie Solanas, “Hurrr, feminists is ugly” and a handful of random castrations in the past 50 years, I guess it’s tough to be original.
@Ami Angelwings:
“Is he NWO? o_O Or did they just train together under the same master? xD Like Ken and Ryu! 😀 (I wonder which one’s which)
I wonder when we’ll meet the troll versions of Akuma and Dan… >_>
xD”
These guys are more like Blanka, but without the charm and grace.
Stephen King’s “It” is very well invented! Therefore, all clowns are evil.
Oh, wait.
Yes. Maybe you Chuckeedee are okay with being treated like a sex object while at work but not everyone and certainly not women.
Ukrainian conscript (warning, don’t click if you’re offended by a naked man from behind):
http://www.spiegel.de/images/image-28274-galleryV9-hemq.jpg
Personal opinion: butt & legs are ok, but he has not enough muscles on his shoulders!
Look at the woman on the left, she’s obviously unimpressed by what she can see there (maybe shorter than average?). The blonde on the right… yeah, she likes him, she will now “examine” him a bit further.
@Pecunium:
And those men were, and are, forced to take higher wages for the same work.
That was the one where there was no proof, right?
“Ukrainian conscript (warning, don’t click if you’re offended by a naked man from behind):
http://www.spiegel.de/images/image-28274-galleryV9-hemq.jpg
Personal opinion: butt & legs are ok, but he has not enough muscles on his shoulders!
Look at the woman on the left, she’s obviously unimpressed by what she can see there (maybe shorter than average?). The blonde on the right… yeah, she likes him, she will now “examine” him a bit further.”
A picture, your opinion of it, and what seems to be the beginning of some kind of sexual fantasy scenario. What does this have to do with anything again?
“That was the one where there was no proof, right?”
Uh, no, the gender pay gap is a proven thing. You must be thinking of something else.
I don’t know is someone here is member of somethingawful (you need to pay to see old contents) but two years ago there was a long thread about an MRA that was writing in a college message board. What the guy was saying was pretty crazy, he believed there would be a war between Beta males and Alpha males after his death and he said he was the biggest internet troll and many commenter believed he would end up like George Sodini :
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3225789&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=1
The guy has a blog now inactive and on the Spearhead he said that in college people thought that he was sketchy but he would have preferred that they see him as a rapist :
================================================================
Also, rape (despite being an execrable crime I’d never commit) is pretty “alpha”. It’s a million times more badass than whatever shifty things “sketchy” men do. “Sketchy” is the more disadvantageous label, as women are much more immediately turned off by the possibly-slightly-socially-undesirable than by the violent, dangerous, and evil.
================================================================
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2009/10/01/4-years-for-raping-a-fictional-character/
@Ami: “I wonder when we’ll meet the troll versions of Akuma and Dan… ”
Made me laugh so hard.
It hasn’t taken long for Flufffinder to lose his “it’s all about facts” calm demeanour. Name-calling isn’t nice, Flufffy. *tsk tsk*
I have to say I really enjoy the stuff our MRAs bring forward as proof of the feminist conspiracy. It is so absurd. Look at whoever it was upthread getting exercised about the law holding men responsible for the crimes of their wives. Women were held to be minors under law, and therefore the adult responsible for them was responsible for their crimes. The fact that men made both those laws is completely ignored, and they go on about the feminist conspiracy responsible.
It doesn’t fly, boys.
@MertvayaRuka
“That’s the problem, the “original” and “women-hating” parts are pretty much mutually exclusive. But when all you’ve got to work with is Valerie Solanas, “Hurrr, feminists is ugly” and a handful of random castrations in the past 50 years, I guess it’s tough to be original.”
Nah, the hatred of men is easy ta find. Just go back to the most recent dick removal show and watch the 5 feminists hosts and the entire audience of women of every kind yuk it up at the drugging and mutilation of a man. Or you could click the heels on your ruby slippers three times and say theres no place and you’ll be back in kansas where women and tender, loving and caring.
—————————————————-
@eilish
“I have to say I really enjoy the stuff our MRAs bring forward as proof of the feminist conspiracy. It is so absurd.”
You are definitely correct about a feminist conspiracy.
I mean you’ve got
VAWA/primary aggressor/power and control wheel.
Restraining orders a phone call away.
Title IX
Quotas in education and empolyment
No fault divorce
primary caregiver/Child support
Just too many laws to count.
If it’s a conspiracy it’s the worse kept secret of all time. These are just facts plain and simple out in the wide open. When you’re right you’re right. Theres no conspiracy, just the facts of the modern day feminist.
“What *is* it with these guys and bonbons?”
They resemble the nipples of the sub-altern.
NWO, as has been pointed out countless times before, no one here thought Sharon Osbourne’s comment was appropriate, and some of the regular commenters here actually organized a letter-writing campaign to protest it.
You have made your opinion on this topic clear. So we are moving on. And by “moving on” I mean I won’t let any more of your comments through unless they’re actually on topic and say something you haven’t said many times already.
If you want to continue talking about this, I suggest you find somewhere else to talk about it. For example, did you know that you can set up a blog of your own in just a few minutes, for a cost of absolutely nothing?
Nothing could be farther from the truth. Among the MRAs you will find many who, in a previous life, supported feminism because they believed the same nonesense that is being espoused here. But once it began to dawn on them that it is women that like being barefoot, pregnant and housebound, and that it is women oppressing women (relational aggression), and that it is women that like consuming bonbons, that changes everything, and the entire feminist edifice begins to crumble. Who knows? The same thing might even dawn on some of the bonbon-sucking feminists participating on this very forum!
Ah, the old “I used to be a Democrat” argument. Strangely when the friends of these “former feminists” are ever found, they never substantiate that the “former feminists” were every feminists.
What friends?
“Nothing could be farther from the truth. Among the MRAs you will find many who, in a previous life, supported feminism because they believed the same nonesense that is being espoused here. But once it began to dawn on them that it is women that like being barefoot, pregnant and housebound, and that it is women oppressing women (relational aggression), and that it is women that like consuming bonbons, that changes everything, and the entire feminist edifice begins to crumble. Who knows? The same thing might even dawn on some of the bonbon-sucking feminists participating on this very forum!”
Again with the bonbons! Why? WHY?!?!??!?!????
Also — bonbons are those things with the chocolate on the outside and the miscellaneous stuff on the inside, right? Who the heck would suck those? Unless I guess if it were a cherry cordial with a hole in it and one was feeling silly, but that case can hardly be common enough to support an entire metaphor.
I want to be pregnant and housebound? xD This may be difficult.
Well, I think I could get you interested in being bound…
That may not be quite what chuckeedee means XD
Maybe. But with a change in politics, with your affirmative action freebies removed and the AA gravy-train derailed, you’ll be fleeing back to the kitchen quicker than your SO can say “make me a samich bitch!” lol
We really need a poll:
Do you know what bon-bons are?
If you answered “Yes” to Q1, do you like bon bons?
Do you have a chaise longue?
Do you loll on it often?
Do you have a male partner?
How does he feel about the chaise longue and lolling?
Do lesbians like bon-bons?
If a lesbian lolls about on the chaise longue eating bon-bons, while her partner works to supply them, should MRAs get upset about it?
Do you know why MRAs are so opposed to chaise longues and bon-bons?
Do you support giving MRAs a lifetime supply of bon-bons and a chaise longue if they will STFU?
No thread is complete without NOW slave citing VAWA and Title with the X as Proof of the Feminist Conspiracy. He never gets bored with them: if only we could say the same.
MRAs are always going on about how feminists dominate the political discourse, and implement laws that favour women, but never name any of them. Why are MRAs holding back?
@eilish’s questions
Yes.
They’re okay, but I’ll take mochi candy any day.
No.
N/A.
No.
N/A.
I’m sure a lot of them do.
Depends. Is either one of them butch?
Obviously because Hitler liked chaise lounges and bon-bons.
Support people becoming more like Hitler? Are you mad?
If women are so naturally inclined to favor the domestic sphere, why do you need to force them to go back to it?
You don’t need to force women to go back to the domestic sphere at all. You just need to force them to compete with men on equal terms by dismantling affirmative action, and then they will willingly flee back to the kitchen in droves. Indeed you will need to restrain them so as they won’t trample each other to death in the stampede. 🙂
I was going to take the Eilish Poll, but all my answers were the same as Amnesia’s. So just count everything she said twice.