When a white supremacist murders blacks or Jews, no one doubts that his murders are driven by his hateful, bigoted ideology. When homophobes attack a gay youth, we rightly label this a hate crime.
But when a man filled to overflowing with hatred of women acts upon this hatred and launches a killing spree targeting women, many people find it hard to accept that his violence has anything to do with his misogyny. They’re quick to blame it on practically anything else they can think of – guns, video games, mental illness – though none of these things in themselves would explain why a killer would target women.
In the case of Elliot Rodger, who set out on Friday night aiming, as he put it in a chilling video, to “slaughter every single spoiled, stuck-up, blonde slut” in a popular sorority house at the University of California, Santa Barbara, some Men’s Rights activists and other manospherians are doing their best to convince the world that misogyny had nothing to do with it.
On A Voice for Men, for example, Janet Bloomfield (who goes by the name JudgyBitch), notes that Rodger killed more men than women, and thereby declares that
Elliot was an equal opportunity hate monger, torn between wanting to kill women and wanting to kill men. …
Jessica Valenti proclaims that “misogyny kills”, blithely unconcerned with the fact that more men than women were killed. Killing men is misogyny? That’s an interesting interpretation.
Bloomfield ignores the reason more men were killed than women: Rodger’s planned massacre of sorority women failed. He was unable to get inside the sorority house. And so he was forced to improvise.
On Twitter, meanwhile, cultural commenter Cathy Young, long sympathetic to Men’s Righsters, seems to think that Rodger’s rampage was entirely due to “mental illness” and argues that connecting Rodger’s rampage to a wider culture of misogyny is a form of “anti-male hate speech.”
Even more strangely, the proudly racist Steve Sailer – a hero to Heartiste and others in the “alt-right” wing of the manosphere – has declared that Rodger wasn’t motivated by misogyny but rather by “anti-Blondism,” and that his targeting of “ blonde sluts” in a popular sorority house was “an extremely intentional racial hate crime.” Never mind that the half-Asian Rodger idolized blonde women as superior (even as he hated them) and that his comments online are littered with rather crude, rather traditional racism against people who weren’t white.
But Sailer’s claim is little more than an attempt at a derail.
The fact is that Rodger made his misogyny very clear — in his videos, in his internet postings and most of all in his 140-page “manifesto,” which is filled with angry denunciations of women and elaborate fantasies of violent “retribution” towards them. As with many misogynists, his misogyny was largely driven by thwarted sexual entitlement: he desired women intensely but they (wisely) wanted nothing to do with him.
Consider the following passages from his manifesto. I’ve put some of the most disturbing bits in bold.
The most beautiful of women choose to mate with the most brutal of men, instead of magnificent gentlemen like myself. Women should not have the right to choose who to mate and breed with. That decision should be made for them by rational men of intelligence. If women continue to have rights, they will only hinder the advancement of the human race by breeding with degenerate men and creating stupid, degenerate offspring. This will cause humanity to become even more depraved with each generation. Women have more power in human society than they deserve, all because of sex. There is no creature more evil and depraved than the human female.
Women are like a plague. They don’t deserve to have any rights. Their wickedness must be contained in order prevent future generations from falling to degeneracy. Women are vicious, evil, barbaric animals, and they need to be treated as such. … All women must be quarantined like the plague they are, so that they can be used in a manner that actually benefits a civilized society. …
The first strike against women will be to quarantine all of them in concentration camps. At these camps, the vast majority of the female population will be deliberately starved to death. That would be an efficient and fitting way to kill them all off. I would take great pleasure and satisfaction in condemning every single woman on earth to starve to death.
I don’t know about you, but to me that sounds just a little bit like misogyny.
Rodger saw his “Day of Retribution” as part of a war against women. Elsewhere in his manifesto he wrote:
Women’s rejection of me is a declaration of war, and if it’s war they want, then war they shall have. It will be a war that will result in their complete and utter annihilation. I will deliver a blow to my enemies that will be so catastrophic it will redefine the very essence of human nature.
Now, there is no question that he also hated certain kinds of men and boys – the “obnoxious brutes” he so often saw with the “pretty blonde girls” he simultaneously desired and despised. His manifesto is dotted with denunciations of them, as well as with denunciations of humanity as a whole. At one point, he posted a fantasy on PUAhate about killing all the men on earth with a virus so he could have all the women for himself. But he thought about, and wrote about, killing women all the time.
Indeed, even when he was bullied as a youngster, he directed most of his anger not at the bullies themselves but at their girlfriends.
Remembering one bullying incident from high school, he wrote
Some boys randomly pushed me against the lockers as they walked past me in the hall. One boy who was tall and had blonde hair called me a “loser”, right in front of his girlfriends. Yes, he had girls with him. Pretty girls. And they didn’t seem to mind that he was such an evil bastard. In fact, I bet they liked him for it. … The most meanest and depraved of men come out on top, and women flock to these men. Their evil acts are rewarded by women; while the good, decent men are laughed at. … I hated the girls even more than the bullies because of this.
Rodger was not only a misogynist; he was explicitly an enemy of feminism. While he doesn’t seem to have ever identified as a Men’s Rights activist per se – the only “rights” he seemed to be interested in were his own – his postings online echo the extreme and ignorant denunciations of feminism seen amongst MRAs and other manospherians.
This, too, has been denied by Men’s Rights activists. On AVFM, the “non-feminist” would-be “philosopher” Fidelbogen declares that
We have no evidence yet that Elliott Rodger was anything but apolitical in regard to feminism as such. He was not outspoken about feminism … He was only a sexually frustrated chump with mental issues, who apparently “hooked up” with PUA literature, and websites like “the Manhood Academy”.
In fact, Rodger attacked feminism explicitly in a number of comments on PUAhate, where rabid antifeminism is essentially the default ideology. In one comment, he declared bluntly that “feminism must be destroyed.” In another he predicted that
One day incels will realize their true strength and numbers, and will overthrow this oppressive feminist system.
Start envisioning a world where WOMEN FEAR YOU.
And while he saw PUAhate itself as “a putrid pit of despair,” he argued that
it does give a view of what the world is really like, what women are really like, and the evils of a feminist society.
Every male should read the posts here so that they can be awakened. There are too many delusional males worshipping women who would only spit in their faces.
There is no question that Rodger was a very disturbed man. I’m not a psychiatrist, nor do I have access to his medical or psychiatric records. But I would not be shocked to find that he was struggling with some sort of mental disorder or disorders. He was seeing several therapists, and a psychiatrist prescribed the antipsychotic Risperidone for him; he refused to take it. This prescription in itself doesn’t prove he was psychotic; psych meds are often prescribed for off-label uses, and Risperidone is also used to reduce irritability in people with autism. (Rodger was reportedly diagnosed as having aspergers.)
But, as someone who has himself dealt with depression for decades, I cannot help but think, reading through his manifesto, that his thinking was, as mine has sometimes been, distorted by depression.
He was also clearly a narcissist, in the colloquial sense if not necessarily in the clinical sense, whose resentment of others was driven by narcissistic rage. And some of his pronouncements, particularly towards the end of his life, were so grandiose it’s hard to know whether these reflected his tendency towards melodrama, fueled by his love of fantasy literature and video games, or if they are symptoms of a delusional disconnection from the real world.
I don’t think, given the considerable evidence there is of his troubled state of mind, that raising these issues detracts from the main point, and that is:
Rodger was a misogynist through and through. In many ways his misogyny was his life. If you watch his videos and read his manifesto, you’ll see that he related anything and everything in his life to what he saw as the grand tragedy of his rejection by “girls,” a state of affairs he blamed entirely on the girls of the world and not on his own “magnificent” self.
He was utterly consumed by his sexual obsession with “pretty blonde girls” and their utter lack of interest in him, and, increasingly, by his elaborate fantasies of “retribution” against them, which ultimately led to his killing spree on Friday night.
To deny that he was driven by misogyny makes as little sense as denying that Hitler was driven by anti-Semitism.
The evidence is as clear-cut as it can be on this point. Anyone who can’t or won’t admit this is either an ideologue or a liar – or both.
—
Thanks to Melody and several other readers for pointing me to some of the examples used in this post.
My brother is a pretty cool dude, and has a high rate of “getting it” when it comes to feminist issues. Yet I had to *talk him into* the idea that misogyny was Rodgers’ primary motive. It baffles me that this is so hard for people to grasp.
EVEN IF we allow for the fact that Rodgers seemed to be a self-absorbed, terrifyingly angry man who hated lots of people, and EVEN IF we concede that other motives may have also been at play, that does not change the fact that HE EXPRESSLY TOLD US WHY HE DID IT. Whatever other issues he had, he flat-out said that his hated of women is what drove him to kill.
Seriously, this is not a difficult concept. The fact that Red Pill style misogyny was *a* cause should be alarming and cause us all to start paying a heck of a lot more attention to the problem.
That was my first thought too, cassandrakitty. I wondered what kind of personality did he have ,what kind of vibes he would have to give off ,for no one to want to have anything to do with him in such an environment where getting laid is quite possibly the easiest thing in the world.
Dark and brooding, like Angelus from Buffy, that’s is NOT sexy!
Another problem with such MRA types: they’re so busy brooding and chasing after the kind of woman they don’t have- the kind of woman all of western male society has been brainwashed to covet, that. they are incapable of recognizing the perfectly acceptable Plain Jane, with the great personality, standing right next to them who might, just might, be attracted to them.
I said this in another post , kootiepatra. It’s the ” the fox and the sour grapes” thing. He coveted women, he couldn’t have them and turned to hating them as the answer.
I had to talk a person who’s a member of my feminist group on Facebook into this. I’m still baffled.
I guess if you’re a misogynist who wants people to know that you plan to kill women because you’re a misogynist then you need to communicate that via interpretive dance or something, because words sure don’t seem to work.
I suspect it has something to do with individualism combined with a self-protective denial mechanism. People really want to think that extreme behaviour has nothing at all to do with more general social attitudes or issues. It’s entirely, exclusively, only because this unique, unusual, deviant, one-and-only person is outside the culture of the general society they live/d in. It couldn’t possibly be that this person is yet another instance of what happens when common attitudes and behaviours are taken to their furthest nastiest extent.
They get confused or offended when POC and others point out that racially motivated murders are, in fact, linked to more general racist discrimination, insults and non-fatal attacks. The same response turns up when people point out that homophobic “jokes” and characterisations of behaviours are the background of the same picture that has hate-crime murders in the foreground.
Even when we’re not talking about mass murder or spree killings, people try to say that the regularly reported murders of the women partners and children of aggrieved men are all about him being outside normal attitudes and behaviours rather than the predictably extreme end of the range of those cultural constraints.
The easiest way to see that this is cultural is to look at other cultures or other times that draw those boundaries differently. Nowadays in European and Western countries generally, the idea of honour killings of sisters/ daughters/ mothers who have transgressed social norms for the behaviour of women and girls is regarded as abhorrent. It’s very conveniently overlooked that in several countries women were killed or shunned or literally driven out of their communities for such offences as associating with a Catholic if they were Protestant and a whole heap of other now-ludicrous forbidden interactions.
And we get very snooty about the fact that our societies are civilised compared to those barbarians who kill many women and more than few men simply for talking to the wrong person in the wrong place. All that we’ve done to become “civilised” is to draw our social boundaries concerning women at a different, but still definite, point than those people.
Jimmy, where exactly are you getting this? He was treated for aspergers in school, according to the accounts I read, and I’ve seen no evidence for any of the rest of this.
As for what about his personality made it impossible for him to connect with women, watch some of his videos in which he complains about girls not liking him. He’s creepy and angry and extremely socially awkward, yet also grandiose and narcissistic. Or read his manifesto. He was seriously screwed up.
He also never, ever approached any women, or got involved in any activities that would allow him to meet women. The way he tried to meet women was to put on expensive designer clothes and then go for a walk around campus hoping that some woman would come up and talk to him.
He ultimately alienated all of small number of his male friends as well because he either got furious at them if they ever got girlfriends or, if they didn’t, he would start telling them about how much he wanted to kill happy couples.
I got the impression from his writings that he didn’t actually approach women at all. He certainly doesn’t seem to have had any women as friends, (and also managed to alienate his male friends by his hostility and inability to go out in public without seething at couples all the time, which disposes of the “aw, all he needed was a friend” comments I’m seeing on a lot of sites).
He expected women (the “hot young blonde ones” who met his requirements) to approach him, what with him being “a perfect gentleman”, “a true alpha” and all that chutney, and seethed with rage when they didn’t, or when he saw such women in public with any other man, but most especially men of other races.
So – apart from the obvious passive-aggressiveness of “You have wronged me by not doing what I won’t tell you I want you to do”, where did he get this idea that just appearing in public would lead to all the blonde hot women in sight falling into his lap? Including women in relationships already?
I’m not saying women don’t approach guys, obviously, but the difference between what he seems to have thought he was entitled to and anything likely to happen outside a sexual fantasy or porn is quite striking.
Ulp! Just been chatting online to my brother. He’s in film and has been in Hollywood for the past couple of years. My lovely niece was hoping to transfer to UCSB last year… thank goodness she didn’t.
oops, David, that has personal info about me on that link
@sparky
A blockquote for a link? Someone’s feeling cocky! 😛
@mcbride
I agree with everyhting elsse you said, but this:
Maybe it’s just me, but I feel like you’re absolving him of too much blame. Yes the manosphere and PUA community is likely to have exasperated Rodgers’ misogyny. However, there are plenty of people, myself included, who found their way to PUA/MRM communities and found the misogyny too much to bear/associate with. While I do find that Manospherians/PUAs are rather predatory in the way they prey on vulnerable men, at some point it’s incumbent on the men to have the innate decency to realise that the misogyny they’re being exposed to is not right.
@Ally
While I don’t disagree with your points re: the relationship between White supremacy and ablism, I think that as a WOC and, IIRC a South Asian WOC, you’re well aware of the rampant ableism that exists in our own community. I’ve heard more than enough ableist apologia from my own community regarding Aurora and Newtown to be wary of the idea that White Supremacy to be the only/leading cause. Granted,as Canadians we are exposed to a White Supremacist news source, but my own experience has taught me that ableism is just as rampant when it comes to my own community as it is the White community
Big Momma, link deleted!
I just wonder why he was so obsessed with pretty blonde girls ?
Ooh, ninja’d by David.
Feeling honoured, but annoyed that my internet connection keeps eating my comments…
thanks david!
” If NO girls whatsoever were AT ALL interested in him despite all that, then really, he had to have been a real prick.”
Judging by the video, he was. But it’s still strange that not a single girl were attracted d to him in spite of that.. My theory is that he he simply focused all his energy on the most beautiful, unoptainable girls and failed to notice the women who were actually interested. Note how he directed his hatred specifically towards pretty cheerleaders.
One of the reasons I have zero sympathy for “nice Guys” is that they whine about being lonely because they ct an’t get that perfect HB 10, while deeming decent looking women in their own age Group unworthy of their precious attention. It’s sad how someone can be so entitled and fail to see how this repels other people.
“Women should not have the right to choose who to mate and breed with.”
This is the secret, unspoken root of so much MRA ideology. They usually stop just short of saying it out loud, but you can see it clearly between the lines.
Aaaaaaaaand I’m done. Done with people claiming there’s no connection between the MRM and this shooting. ALL Rodger’s talking points were straight out of MRAland.
Rodger made clear in his manifesto that he was pretty much only interested in “beautiful blonde girls.” At one point he’s horrified to discover that his fat roommate has a girlfriend in his room with him, and is enormously relieved to discover that she’s “ugly,” so he doesn’t have to feel envious of him.
I believe the only true unconscious cause to the young man’s woes has been because of the increase of sexualization of today’s culture. Believing to be entitled to these women, he idolized their physical forms it seems, these women provided Rodgers with the gratificatory images he sought out. When he sought more – and was denied, he took his rejection much too hard… fucking nutzo.
Didn’t someone say that the police came to talk to him about the videos and left saying he was a charming young man?
It surprises me someone who was supposedly psychotic at the time could have had the ability to do that. It means he had the mental capacity to identify the fact that his thoughts weren’t normal or acceptable and to acknowledge that if he didn’t hide them from other people he’d get in trouble. It also suggests he knew how to hide these thoughts and act normally to the police if not to the general public. It also suggests that these thoughts weren’t so emotionally triggering that he couldn’t hide them when questioned about them directly. I think David said he didn’t have aspergers but, and please correct me if I’m wrong, I’d have thought lying to hide such deeply emotive thoughts would be even harder for someone who did. I understand that with some mental illness you would be able to do all the above. However I think some people here have previously described being psychotic and their description wouldn’t fit with this behaviour. I’m not sure mania would fit either as I was under the impression mania was about impulsive behaviour not maliciously planned behaviour. I don’t know much about mental illness though so it would be good if people with more experience could correct me if I’m wrong.
I don’t mean to imply that people with aspergers wouldn’t see killing people as wrong. Rather I consider lying to a figure of authority, in person, about an issue that is emotive to you to be something that requires a high level of social ability.
To those here who have found the whole thing a trigger episode {{Hugs}}
Mentally ill does not mean violent or prone to violence any more than being on a widely prescribed anti-psychotic means that you have a psychosis. That Rodger was mentally disturbed around the time of his rampage says nothing except that, like any spree killer, he was emotionally and mentally unable to connect with his victims.The trouble was that any problems that Rodger suffered had led him into a toxic community which affirmed the fantasies he was having, perhaps even adding other layers to such fantasies and it is in that community that the roots of Rodger’s acts lie.
This vile group asserts a belief that “real” men have sex by the time they are “X” years old and that failure to do so either means the celibate is somehow deficient or there is some external agency depriving the man of his rights. Nothing is the fault of the man; it is all a plot against him. Given this base assumption of faultlessness it is not surprising that the MRA/PUA/InCel community is in denial – probably even denying that they had any duty to advise the police about this man’s descent into violent fantasy.
Reblogged this on Grey Octave and commented:
Interesting.
@Jimmy: So you think all soldiers are mentally ill? All politicians who declare wars? Police? Sane people kill all the time.
Every executioner and everyone who’s killed in self-defence is presumably mentally ill, too, in that case.