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?
C’mon, this NWO we’re talking about. The moment he conceives of a metaphor it becomes his reality.
@freitag
Agree/disagree with you there. I think raising boys to be able to ask for help isn’t feminism; its raising emotionally healthy children.
And, I don’t know if anyone has mentioned this before, but if they didn’t make seeking mental health services punative, it would be easier for more people to do.
@Steele:
I’m pretty sure “clear, rational and unbiased critical thinking” is what led me to leave the MRM.
Diogenes: And a lot of feminist thinking very explicitly supports raising emotionally healthy children, instead of children who are good at performing the gender roles of Man or Woman.
Clear, unbiased critical thinking— like insisting that Tom Martin must, must be a feminist plant meant to discredit the MRM!
I lol’d.
Yeah Owly, I’m sure that Marcotte banned you simply because you dared to disagree with her. (Well, I think that’s what you were trying to get at with your bizarre goddess-worship rant.) Certainly, the fact that your comments over there were your typical inane blatherings had nothing to do with it.
I notice that trolls who talk about rhetoric and critical skills are significantly less likely to use them.
This is the person who honestly tried to argue that “creep(y)” is a gendered insult.
I also lol’d.
@whataboutthemoonz
“I think you came into an explicitly misogyny-mocking space”
Everything is misogyny. Anytime any woman feels any kind of discomfort to her precious feelings, if it’s said by a man, it’s misogyny.
Manboobz scours the web searching for anything anyone says to prove the rampant misogyny in society. “Look! My pixels were sexually harrassed by his pixels!” His avatar look up the skirt of my avatar.” Oh horrors, when will it ever end??? We need Big Daddy to silence all dissent.
I mean that is what you do here. Looking for pixels that dare hurt the feelings of other pixels. Tropes against pixels.
Hey, my feelings are hurt, how about the gang drops a 160K in my lap. Boohoo, my pixels are sad and stuff.
@Morkais, yeah.
The thing is, most women live in 2012 socially, and most men in the 50’s. Just a month ago I was at a friends house, and we were sitting in his backyard watching his kids play on a hill. One of his sons tumbles down, and begins to cry. He said “suck it up.” He wouldn’t say the same thing to one of his daughters. Its something we largely do to ourselves. 🙁
Here’s an great example of “clear, unbiased critical thinking” right here:
Obviously the problem for Holmes was that all the wimminz around him were riding the alpha cock carousel, thereby turning him away from anything positive and made him socially isolated. Pure logic, dontcha see?
To be fair, if it weren’t for the actual guy showing up at court and in videos, it’d be pretty easy to believe Tom Martin was a false-flag robot. Hell, I only ever learnt some crappy VBasic and I reckon I could program an alright Tombot.
10 PRINT wh*res
20 GOTO 10 'muahaha the previously entirely credible Mens' Rights Movement is now a joke!
Which, by the way, is a total straw man. It is a straw man which is inexcusable given all the time you’ve spent here, Steele.
But please do go on about how unbiased you and the MRM are while deliberately misrepresenting others: it amuses me greatly.
@ Diogenes
Sorry to derail, but I just noticed that a commenter here uses the name of my favourite Classical Greek philosopher as their username and this made my day.
@lowquacks
“Does Owly even realise that there’s a front-page article on Pandagon right now criticising a woman?”
You’re kidding right? She’s being criticized for not being feminist enough. Holy crap! That’s the best you can come up with??? Oh poor women, the indignities they suffer. Obviously she’s fell in with a bad crowd. See how patriarchy hurts women. Tell me more. This is too good.
Don’t agree with everything you’re saying here- sure, he wouldn’t say ‘suck it up’ to his daughters, but aren’t there any things he’d tell his daughter to do/not do and not his sons?
This is coming back to my standard There Are Gender Roles And They Are Shitty For Everyone thing, which is why I disagree with “most women live in 2012 socially, and most men in the 50′s.”
(That or misunderstand what you mean by that.)
Whoa there, Steele! Logic and rationality are tools of the patriarchy. And that’s misogyny.
Hah! Good one, Slave. These guys are unbelievable.
@Diogenes The Cynic
“One of his sons tumbles down, and begins to cry. He said “suck it up”
He’ll be grateful for that toughness when he goes out into the real world where he’s hated on a societal level.
Says the person who scours the web searching for anything/any place where people are talking about women/feminism so he can spew a constant, frothy mix of hate and stupid at everyone who isn’t like him.
Plan and produce something that people are interested in, and maybe someone will donate to your project. I doubt you’re capable, but give it a shot.
Oh dear, now they’re starting a mens rights circlejerk on the manboobz comments.
Steele, are you going to respond to any of the questions you’ve been asked regarding your assertion that the “Movement” engages in “…clear, rational and unbiased critical thinking”?
Or are you just going to spend the thread ignoring the overt racism of what was written by Whiskey while simultaneously trying to suck up to NWO?
Trayvon Martin was male, wasn’t he? Why isn’t it misandry to claim that his life had no value?
CLEAR UNBIASED CRITICAL THINKING
@Steele, I’d like to see you analysis of the post under discussion (see top of page) for how Mr. Whiskey’s opinions are logical, rational and, above all, unbiased.
@Nobinayamu
“Plan and produce something that people are interested in, and maybe someone will donate to your project.”
OK. Oh, boohoo! All the avatars look so strong and it gives me a bad body image. My feeling are hurt. I’m sad and stuff. I wanna whine about why I’m sad and stuff. Now gimmie a 160K.
DAE LOGIC AND REASON?