We’ve already seen some unusual perspectives on the Aurora theater tragedy courtesy of The Spearhead and the Men’s Rights subreddit. Over on whiskeysplace, the manosphere blogger (and sometime Spearhead contributor) who calls himself Whiskey throws some racism into the mix.
In Whiskey’s view, the whole thing just shows … just how badly treated white men are in America today. And, he suggests, unless we change our evil white-man-hating ways we should expect even worse massacres to come. His basic thesis:
[T]hat an (admittedly crazy) 24 year old White guy with an extremely high IQ would paint his hair red, carefully position his beat up old pickup truck against one emergency exit door, enter through the pre-arranged opened other door, and kill (again as of this writing) 12 people while wounding 58, many seriously, shows how out of hand Obama’s America has become. …
Who is at fault? In no particular order, Obama, the entire Affirmative Action establishment, Jessie Jackson, feminists, the media, and the American people for taking the easy way out and not removing the former from public life through a hard, brutal political struggle that costs time and effort and more.
After a long tirade about “low-IQ” black murderers, Whiskey moves on to consider the life of the (apparently) socially awkward, dateless James Holmes, whom Whiskey assumes was oppressed for being a white guy.
Was James Holmes forced out of the University of Colorado for being too White and male? We may never know. But certainly, being White, male, and applying for science related jobs after graduating with honors led to … McDonalds.
Well, not literally. Holmes didn’t actually work at McDonalds. Very few people with undergraduate degrees in neuroscience do.
So you have a very toxic combination. A man with a high IQ, denied any gainful employment or relationship with the opposite sex. … America has become so debased, so hostile to ordinary White guys, that instead of say, devising his own bat-suit and rescuing someone, this guy figures he’s the Joker, and shoots a bunch of people he has never even met, dead.
And it gets worse, according to Whiskey: The continued oppression of white dudes by Obama, the feminists and, er, Russell Brand, will lead inevitably to more massacres in the future:
The constant demonization of White guys, and destruction of heroism as a model, has real consequences. Guys with high IQs who are intent on killing people are dangerous. They get that way not from “turning evil” like a Joss Whedon character in “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” but because they are turned away from anything positive, socially isolated and alone while a lucky socially dominant few have everything (before he ever got famous, and with a massive drug habit, Russell Brand boasted he was having sex with 80 women a month). These guys study for years, graduate with honors, and end up at McDonalds. Wrong sex and color.
Yes, because so many of those who work in fast food restaurants are white men tossed out of grad school because of their race and gender.
And those massacres in the future? Because white dudes are apparently all so super smart, we should expect them to be way worse than the ones we’ve seen so far. Like, atom bomb worse.
I want to be as clear as possible. The most dangerous man in WWII, was not Patton, or Rommel, or Yamamoto. No, it was nerdy, lanky, unassuming and part prima donna, J. Robert Oppenheimer. A high IQ unmoored by social ties, love, family, relationships, a job that is not demeaning … is a man who is a potential weapon.
Whiskey then brings us back around to Obama and his (alleged) anti-white dude agenda:
If Obama’s anti-White guy policies, the media’s demonization of (particularly nerdy) White guys, and the legal discrimination against most non-connected Whites were deliberately constructed to create guys far more dangerous than James Holmes, they could not have done a better job.
Whiskey has somehow convinced himself, based on nothing, that Holmes could have been another Jonas Salk:
Let us be clear. James Holmes had the capacity to maybe find a cure for Alzheimers. Yes he was crazy. But he was smart.
While every white man is capable of intellectual miracles, at least in Whiskey’s mind, those with darker skin are somehow incapable of scientific thought:
Meanwhile Trayvon Martin was never going to amount to much of anything. Ever. And neither will all those young Black man just like him. … Literally any number of people you know, could die, in the future because society did not channel James Holmes into a productive outlet: neuroscience.
Uh, dude, even aside from the racism, there’s no evidence that Holmes actually was a genius.
After a bit more bloviating, Whisky brings it back to Trayvon Martin for his stirring conclusion:
[I]t is [a] fantasy that we can have no cost to marginalizing White guys (particularly the smart ones without connections) and that we can continue to have clean water, and air, and food that is safe to eat, and the power always one [sic], by betting it all on the Trayvon Martins.
Why is it that the guys who talk the most about IQ are invariably such complete fucking idiots?
I’d be hesitant to say it even means that that much. IQ tests are pretty culturally biased.
Still wishing I were better at satire, or at the very least had something useful to say that hasn’t yet been said. For the moment I can provide videos of small, furry animals to cushion the horribleness of the existence of racist misogynists.
Where in the world is Carmen San Diego?
@blitzgal
“He’s cheating on us with Pandagon. He seems a bit more distracted as a result.”
Nah, I’ve been banned from there. Amanda yelled out, “Women are angelic goddesses of infinite wisdom, grace and intelligence, and men are demonic and violent, capable of only death and despair.” The echo chamber replied in unison, “Yes exalted one, that and so much more.”
Somewhere in the echo chamber was a sound of discordance. A commentor wasn’t bending a knee at the altar. Many of the ladettes felt alarmed at this unusual defiance to the glorification of women. Dissent is forbidden in the echo chamber. That commentor was summarily dismissed. The voices in the echo chamber are once again harmonious.
*Where in the New World Order
Maybe he could have been taught that asking for help isn’t unmanly. That suffering alone isn’t required to be a man. That if you’re confused, having trouble, having thoughts of suicide or homicide or even just wanting to drink too much, it’s not a sign of masculinity to go it alone. More feminism might have done him some good.
Or not. We can’t know.
@aworldanonymous:
I’m confused. Is the awful man* saying that Oppenheimer created the bomb because he was unmoored by social ties, love, family, relationships, and a job that was not demeaning? Because from what I know about him, he was pretty damn moored by social ties, love, family, relationships, and a job that was — by pretty much any measure — not demeaning.
*I cannot in good conscience call him Whiskey. Whiskey is good.
I don’t know if ponies can help everyone with brain enemas but this certainly helped me.
Does anyone else think that Owly is just playing a really involved ARG?
That or he is actually writing an enormous corpus of fanfiction, one comment at a time.
It seems like the thing lately in the asshole-o-sphere to treat the victims of a crime the same as the perpetrators. “They’re both lost lives.” That’s such hideous bullshit.
It’s also true, in actual fact.
I’ve noticed that Boobzland seems to be driven- as in this case- primarily by irrationality and emotional impulses, rather than clear, rational and unbiased critical thinking, as is utilized in the Movement. Creep-shaming never happens, because the MRAs use the term regularly! Never never never! Misandry can never be real, NEVER!
It’s pathetic.
I think Owly has the same issues of many another conspiracy theorist. Except instead of targeting exclusively teh joos, or the masons, or the illuminati, he targets feminism.
@Freitag
“Maybe he could have been taught that asking for help isn’t unmanly.”
Maybe he did. And the response he got was to wear dresses, blubber like a child in the street and he should’ve been taught to kiss boys while in the third grade. More feminism was the answer he was given.
@Tulgey
He’s into Sovereign Citizen stuff, so yeah, basically.
The kind of clear, rational and unbiased critical thinking that declared the life of a seventeen year-old high school student worthless?
That “Movement”?
@aworldanonymous
“I think Owly has the same issues of many another conspiracy theorist.”
Does the federal reserve control the money system? If the answer is yes, it’s not a theory, it’s a fact. The masses are easily led, just say the words conspiracy theory and they chuckle with their masters, who are laughing at them.
So… this is an extended metaphor? Or literally, this happened?
Steele, the only kinda “movement” the MRAs are capable of is the bowels. And that’s not somwthing they should be doing so publically.
@Steele
Murderers choose to murder, murder victims do not choose to be murdered. This is definitional stuff.
Of course, the “rational” course of action is to get upset that we’ve “lost” a mass murderer, because, hey, he’s a white dude, so he must be alright, but not mind the racially motivated murder of a teenager because he “wouldn’t amount to anything”.
@Steele
Whoa there, Steele! Logic and rationality are tools of the patriarchy. And that’s misogyny.
It’s just a general pile of racism on top of more racism. But the Obama hates nerds thing was an interesting bit of racism. I mean, I know some racists think that all black people are ‘cool’, but Obama was a ConLaw professor, right? I’ve taken two semesters of ConLaw and I just can’t associate super cool with ConLaw professor. ConLaw professor and nerd sort of fits right together. Not that my ConLaw professor wasn’t a good professor, he was, but I can’t think of that as making him cool either.
Full disclosure, we did once have a conversation about lesbian bondage porn (we were on obscenity law in ConLaw 2, it was on topic!).
Maybe most MRAs are literally a hundred years old and remember the days when all infants wore those white dresses. http://whowerethey.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/green-fan-album015.jpg
MRAs need to update their information on infant fashions…the most popular clothes for infants today are one piece outfits made of cotton or synthetic fibers, some of which have long sleeves and enclosed feet, which are fastened with little metal snaps. These outfits are called “onsies” by many people.
Does Owly even realise that there’s a front-page article on Pandagon right now criticising a woman?
@David Futrelle
You’re right, I did recently post on spearhead for the thread about altruism about the dark knight shooter. Here, I’ll save you the trouble of finding it.
————-
Men are natural protectors, not only of women and children but of men as well. The altruism, valor and honor of men who are willing to sacrifice themselves is a virtue like no other. No other sacrifice can be as great, and men are always on the front lines in any natural or un-natural disaster.
The systemic problem in modern society is the constant demonization of men. This one incident is a classic example. One man did a terrible thing. The media blasts out messages like, “Why do men kill?” “What is it that makes men mass murderers?” “What turns men into terrorists?”
The message is men are universally bad. Men are universally demons. Yet three men showed the ultimate sacrifice. Why isn’t the MSM peppering us with headlines like, “Why are men so giving?” What is about men that makes them so honorable?” “What turns men into heros?”
Everyday we’re told how if one man does something bad it’s men universally being bad, they’re all demons. If one man does something good it’s never men being universally good, it’s a fluke. For the most part, it doesn’t get mentioned at all.
For women, this symmetry is reversed. The politicians, schools and media reguarly blast out messages of any woman doing anything remotely positive to show how all women are good. Even a woman who does something bad is portrayed as somehow being a victim.
Men as a whole perform thousands of acts of valor a day in this country. Men as a whole are demonized thousands of times a day in this country. When society hates and demonizes all men, eventually more and more men will hate that society in return. Instead of demonizing men for the actions of a few, men should be praised for the actions of the many.
————–
There’s plenty to ridicule. There might even be a typo or some other incorrect usage of grammar. Knock yourselves out.
@Steele:
This strikes you as “clear, rational and unbiased critical thinking?” Really?
I’ve noticed that Boobzland seems to be driven- as in this case- primarily by irrationality and emotional impulses, rather than clear, rational and unbiased critical thinking, as is utilized in the Movement.
I don’t think you noticed anything. I think you came into an explicitly misogyny-mocking space with the intent of throwing around explicitly misogynist tropes about gender-essentialism and rationality.
And I think that based on your behavior, which is observable, and your words, which are observable, and putting things together in a logical and rational and critical manner.
—
As for the MRM, only people who don’t understand basic rhetoric think that it’s an example of cogency, rationality, logic, unbiased anything, or critical thinking.