Pickup artists, classy fellows that they are, are using Elliot Rodger’s killing rampage as a marketing ploy. In the comments to one of Rodger’s videos on YouTube, a company called Strategic Dating Coach offered their solution to prevent similar shootings in the future: send disturbed young men who can’t get dates to one of their coaching sessions!
While this response to Rodger’s mass killing is uniquely crass, the argument that “Game saves lives” is hardly new. To PUAs like Heartiste and Roosh Valizadeh it’s practically an article of faith.
In the wake of George Sodini’s murderous shooting spree in a Pennsylvania gym in 2009, Heartiste (then known as Roissy) wrote
If Sodini had learned game he would have been able to find another woman and gotten laid after his ex dumped him. He wouldn’t have spent the next 20 years steeped in bile and weighed down by his Sisyphian blue balls, dreaming of vengeance. Game could have saved the lives of the women Sodini killed.
The fact that Sodini had in fact imbibed in the alleged wisdom of pickup artistry, going so far as attending a pricey seminar from old-school pickup guru R. Don Steele, a self-proclaimed expert on dating young women, didn’t lead any in the pickup community to reconsider this position.
Nor has it this time. It is clear that Elliot Rodger was steeped in “red pill” thinking about women. And while he wasn’t himself a PUA, he was certainly aware of the basics of “Game.” Indeed, he subscribed to a number of PUA channels on YouTube and was a regular commenter on PUAhate, a sleazy forum devoted to criticizing “game,” not because it is manipulative and misogynistic but because it doesn’t work.
On the Roosh V forum earlier today, Roosh acknowledged that Rodger knew at least a little about “red pill” ideology – noting that Rodger referred to himself as an”alpha” – but still went ahead and argued that Game was the solution to massacres like this:
He is self-delusional and massively entitled, but exposing him to game may have saved lives.
In a followup comment, Roosh expressed his concerns for the real victims of this tragedy – Pickup artists:
I’m trying to think of ways our enemies will come after us because of this, but if anything, we’re the solution to this sort of murder rampage. This is the society that progressives wanted, where women are fully able to choose the top 10% of alpha males while shaming masculinity, leaving beta males with modest resources in the dust. Of course they will simply push a ban on guns, but this wholly neglects the cause. Seven people died because this guy couldn’t get laid … .
Other commenters were quick to agree. According to someone known as Moma,
Roosh has a very valid point. This will continue to replay over and over again. As human beings, our wiring is very basic yet primal. …
When have you last heard of a porn star shooting up a place? How many have emptied their balls in a hot lizard and then felt the urge to go and smoke 50 strangers?
According to Samseau, the problem wasn’t that Rodger hadn’t heard the Game Gospel; the problem was that he had rejected his salvation:
He knew about Game. If he had an account on PUAHATE then he knew about game. He was just a denialist. There was no helping this dude.
Roosh seconded this bit of wisdom, seeing it as clear evidence that “game denialism kills.”
Michelin, for his part, hoped that PUAs would be able to use the massacre as a publicity bonanza and a great “told you so” to all the haters.
One should write a mainstream article about this case. The argument that game could have saved lives can be an eye-opener and a smash in the face to haters of game.
Tuthmosis, the man best known for a Return of Kings post on the “5 Reasons to Date a Girl With An Eating Disorder,” reported his joy that PUAhate was getting bad press:
Seeing your enemies fall is a delicious treat you only get to taste a few times in your life. I’m savoring this delicacy with a cup of freshly brewed coffee. It’s a shame real people had to lose their lives, but I can’t help but think this will discredit a horrible website, PUAHate–and a way of thinking–that could have harmed even more men and innocent people. Beta losers will never go away, but this will wake up a few men and, more importantly, scare others.
Zelcorpion blamed “girls” and MGTOWers for giving Rodgers bad dating advice:
I bet a few girls told him that he only needs to be himself, be nice, be a gentleman, have a nice car, looks etc. – only to realize that it mattered shit. Instead of learning from the PUA-community he chose to listen to PUAhaters and some of the anti-female comments of the MGTOWs who themselves are often refusing to accept Game or even basic concepts like Alpha/Beta. I think that problem will become way worse, since hypergamy and promiscuity will only increase and most men will be left in the sexual wasteland.
But it took a relative newcomer to the forum by the handle of thedavidgt to raise the obvious logical objection to the Game-for-everybody solution to incel rage:
If every sexless beta in the world took it upon himself to learn game, approach girls, lift, dress well etc, would it not simply feed women’s egos and entitlement? So instead of occasionally getting awkwardly hit on by skinny fat, poor-dressed chumps, the average 7 would then be approached several times a day by extremely high value men. We’ll have a society of men working to improve themselves for women who will get lazier and lazier while at the same time demanding more and more.
In fact, the “Game saves lives” mantra is dead wrong, but not for this reason. First of all, there is no clear evidence that “game,” per se, works, except insofar as it encourages men to pursue large numbers of women and numb them to the pain of rejection. It’s possible that a few of the conversational ploys invented by various PUAs may work better than having no conversational ploys at all. But there are no magic cheat codes to “getting with women.”
There is one more disturbing way in which “game” may increase “success” with women for unscrupulous men: many of the standard techniques of “game”– invading a woman’s personal space, touching her repeatedly, trying to “isolate” her from her friends – may serve as “tests” to find women who are less likely to resist violations of their boundaries. In this way, “game” may serve as a quite effective enabler of date rape. Indeed Roosh himself has admitted to raping a date too drunk to consent.
So how much of a solution is training a guy who is already filled with a toxic mixture of entitlement and self-loathing (yes, these strange bedfellows do often go together) in some techniques that might help him to tamp down his insecurities enough to manipulate some willing or not-so-willing women into bed?
You might have simply turned a mass killer into a serial rapist, or possibly a serial killer. Ted Bundy was quite the charmer. Somehow this didn’t make him a decent human being.
Even if “game” were the beneficient form of “self-improvement” that some of its proponents like to claim it is, teaching Rodger how to be a better dater would not make him a better person. Would having a girlfriend solve all his problems? Hardly. Relationships require patience and compromise and mutual respect, and Rodger seems to have had none of these qualities. Instead of directing his narcissistic rage at “girls” at large, he would likely have ended up abusing a string of girlfriends.
The problem wasn’t Rodger’s lack of “Game.” It was his lack of humanity.
@Michelle, Fixed That For You
@titianblue – You mean we should take warnings seriously? What a shocking concept.
Thanks, titianblue!
@ cassandrakitty
it not just blog virus, it MRM shit in general.or a least what that’s what i thought it was like.
When people tell you about themselves, believe them. This dude told the world that he hated women so much that he wanted to kill them, and yet just look at everyone trying to find alternate explanations for why he did exactly what he said he was going to do.
Fuck off, saurabh. You said you were tired of getting shouted at, yet here you are, still wanking. Just fuck off, you’re not wanted and not contributing anything.
I hadn’t thought about it, but damn, yes it does.
Ken L. – the blog herpes in this case refers to a particular troll we had, a very persistent, constantly sockpuppetting creep who alternated between whining and rage-smashing the keyboard about how horrible women were to him.
The thing about a woman in the elevator not greeting him warmly enough and him wanting to poke out her eyes was one of the first things I though of when reading Rodger’s crap.
@cassandrakitty – you mean the part where he passed a woman on the street, and said, “Hi,” and she did not respond, and immediately he called her a foul $^#@%? Because it never occurred to him that she might not have even seen or heard him? Nor that he was not actually entitled to anything from a complete stranger on the street?
Yeah. Same old, same old. Scary.
Sarah, your faithful reprinting of the defining characterises of narcissists is simply a catalog of the traits of assholes.
At this point, I think it’s important to note that there are a great number of assholes in life and that while many of them are harmful to be around those assholes don’t resort to mass murder. Narcissists may believe they are entitled to a great many things, but our society greatly encourages men to believe they are entitled to which ever body part on a woman he’s attracted to. Misogyny was definitely the trigger in this situation, his character flaws were the gun. Not mental illness, not a personality disorder.
It’s funny, when someone with a history of vicious anti-semitism shoots up a synagogue, nobody tries to claim that the perpetrator didn’t do it because they hate Jewish people. When a right wing nutjob murders a gay person or a gay rights activist after years of claiming his or her country could only be saved by instituting the death penalty for “sodomites” everyone pretty much agrees that the murderer was homophobe.
Yet when someone with a heavy interest in MRA ideology and dogma posts a video proclaiming their all consuming rage and hatred towards the female sex, all the while sounding like a supervillain* parody of every Nice Guy ever, and then kills a bunch of women, people don’t seem to believe the very reasons the killer claimed as his motivation.
*The Fedora Fiend?
Michelle – the elevator bit was our blog herpes.
@cassandrakitty
Comment Snob purports to do what you want, though you need to put in blacklisted words rather than just being able to click. Except I can’t seem to get it to work. Maybe someone else can and tell me how they did it. They have a Firefox version too.
@ Kim
You’re awesome!
LOL!
It’s not even working on youtube for me. 🙁 But maybe one of my other addons is interferring with it.
Roger’s psychosis focused on his misogyny just as Son of Sam’s psychosis focused on god talking through a dog, and both of them listened to the voices. Roger was sick, sick, sick, AND feeling entitled to women by the mere fact of his having a penis. There are other men out there who despise and are threatened by women as much as Roger did/was, but they won’t slaughter human beings. Same thing with rapists. Small group of evil men, serial rapists. Most men won’t rape, though they do foster rape culture because they are ignorant of what it is and want to be one of the ignorant boys.
So, the whole Game Saves Lives thing – are women supposed to occasionally “take one for the team” and have lousy sex with one of these horrible misogynistic creeps, in order to prevent other women from getting killed?
That sounds an awful lot like blackmail, with a side order of “throw sacrificial virgin into volcano to appease angry god”. Fuck that.
I have an idea! How about women try to avoid, rather than sacrificing ourselves to, angry men who want to hurt us?
This whole travesty reminds me of David’s post a few weeks ago: https://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2014/05/06/domestic-violence-expert-lundy-bancroft-mens-rights-philosophies-make-angry-and-controlling-men-even-worse/
Perhaps this man’s vitriol, entitlement issues, and hatred can be traced back to before he discovered PUA/MRA/Red Pill. Perhaps he would have eventually committed murder with or without its influence. We don’t know that.
HOWEVER, what we DO know, is that he *clearly*, in his own words, blames his actions on women, whom he clearly, in his own words, claims to hate and wish vengeance upon. Besides the fact that it’s obnoxiously hair-splitting to try and evaluate whether or not the Red Pill logic is *the* thing that drove him to kill, it is abundantly, painfully clear that it pushed him towards murder, rather than away from it.
This is a gigantic, stinking problem, and it is profoundly frustrating to see mainstream media outlets ignoring the issue.
There is a trending hashtag on Twitter right now, loosely responding to all of this. #YesAllWomen is discussing how, while unsafe creeps like this do not represent “all men”, they do in fact negatively affect all women. I’ve weighed in with the hashtag and thought maybe some other mammotheers might want to do the same. [But do note that the #YesAllWomen feed is triggery for the reasons you might expect–both in shared stories and in abusive trolling.]
Yeah, this is just fucking horrifying. My friend sent me a link to the story yesterday, I hadn’t seen the news at that point. Sad thing is, I wasn’t shocked. I mean, I was shocked and angry that he had killed many innocent people, but I wasn’t shocked at all by his disgraceful sense of entitlement and ignorant ideas about women. ‘Supreme gentleman’ indeed. /sarcasm
Also, notice the inherent compulsory heterosexuality inherent in this discourse. Whether I’m a lesbian doesn’t matter – all that matters is that I please the boner of some dangerous, abusive man whether I want to or not.
Unfortunately for them, I’m pretty fucking done with coddling the feelings of abusive men.
RE: Michelle
I recently read LBT’s post with her abuser’s letters,
*cringe* ‘They,’ please. Not ‘her.’ There were at least four of us involved in the Raping Year, so ‘they’ is best.
RE: saurabh
Anyway, I’m tired of being yelled at when I just want to have a reasonable conversation about this, so I’ll just leave it at that.
*siiiiiiigh* Look. Saurabh. I’ve BEEN psychotic. I’ve BEEN delusional. And I mean FLORIDLY batshit, CINEMATIC batshit, unconcealable batshit. Astoundingly, when I was in these states, I never tried to hurt anyone; I had to be talked down off a bridge, and stopped eating because I believed hunger was a material illusion of a weak mind, but I didn’t hurt anyone but myself.
I find it extremely tiresome when people who have presumably never been psychotic or delusional keep fixating on that. Nobody wants to have your “reasonable conversation” about how his (hypothetical) delusions and psychotic episodes caused his (very very real) violence, because these are the arguments I have to have about myself all the time, proving I am not violent. Also, you don’t know this guy. You never met him. You know very little about him, but you’re producing this whole idea that he MUST have been delusional, when I see absolutely no reason to believe you. You read a manifesto. That’s all you know about this guy.
Also, you bring up the insanity defense, which has a 99% failure rate, and generally relies on the rule of, “would this person do this had there been a policeman standing right there?” This guy knew what he was doing was wrong. He made plans so as not to get caught, which means that legal insanity is high unlikely to work. I’ve read freakin’ BOOKS on this, and here you come waltzing in acting like you know everything. It’s very tedious.
And of all it is fucking moot because dude is dead anyway. THERE IS NO INSANITY DEFENSE WHEN THERE’S NO DEFENDER. And I find it incredibly grotesque to play armchair shrink to a dead murderer, when I’m not a criminal profiler. That you are unable to see why other people find it so distasteful does not speak highly of you.
What exactly are your credentials? Why should I have a “reasonable conversation” with someone who doesn’t seem to understand anything but the most rudimentary basics of this shit? You keep wanting me to take you seriously, but to me, you’re just coming off as some other armchair academic who has absolutely no idea what they’re talking about.
And FURTHERMORE, some Mammotheer gave me a very useful article a while back about the psychology of men who kill themselves and people around them. Unfortunately, it was on a different computer, and I can’t find it again.
That manifesto you keep quoting, saurabh, is pretty much exactly what all those other asshole men who murdered their wives and children said in theirs. They equated sexual and relationship success with masculinity, claimed they had no choice, used violence as a way to valorize themselves and prop up their faltering masculine egos.
Misogyny was the link between all these people. And I find it oddly coincidental that it somehow always seems to be straight men with this very specific set of “delusions.”
Basically, you’re full of shit, saurabh, and a lot of us are getting angry with you constantly going, “why aren’t you taking me seriously?” Go fuck off and stop commenting.
This is *substantially* different from the misogyny that we find in other people, and I don’t think it is helpful to ending the latter to conflate the two.
This is what every group says when one of theirs goes on a rampage.
This is a logical extension of lots of manospherian writing/thinking. It’s not that it’s substantially different in form, just expression.
So it’s not conflation. It’s congruence. And it’s not a function of “crazy”.