Categories
a voice for men ableism advocacy of violence alpha males antifeminism armageddon creepy empathy deficit entitlement evil sexy ladies evil women FemRAs FeMRAsplaining fidelbogen grandiosity hypergamy imaginary oppression incel irony alert judgybitch lying liars men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA narcissism oppressed men playing the victim PUAhate racism taking pleasure in women's pain terrorism

Why Elliot Rodger's misogyny matters

A chart posted by Elliot Rodger, giving his chilling spin on a manosphere meme depicting supposed female "hypergamy"
A chart posted by Elliot Rodger, giving his chilling spin on a manosphere meme depicting supposed female “hypergamy”

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.

1.9K Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
sparky
sparky
10 years ago

181

sparky
sparky
10 years ago

Enjoy your meal, blockquote mammoth!

jules699
10 years ago

A couple days ago you were trying to prove that all males from every primate species are similar, and that male chimpanzees are violent, and that human society is just like chimpanzee society.

Way to play devils advocate. I already posted that using the word ‘similar’ was a mistake. I meant similar traits. I already said I believe some of the violence is inherit and some social.

Why bring up 3 days ago? So if I was wrong on generalizing primates all my argument must be wrong? That’s your argument?

Argenti Aertheri
10 years ago

Oh hey, female serial killers exist! …in much smaller numbers than male ones, but yes, being heartless isn’t a solely male trait.

“Or, screwier yet, a mutation will be detrimental in two ‘doses’, advantageous in one, and just sort of meh with none. Sickle-cell anemia works that way.”

Ah the malaria protection // painful life shortening condition dictohomy! Given the malaria rates where those genes are prevalent, none might be disadvantageous too, idk on that one though.

Robert — not healthy children who survive to reproduce, just children who survive to reproduce, it’s how something that’s really nasty can manage to survive. Huntington’s for example, it WILL kill you, but symptoms don’t appear until middle age, so passing it on without knowing whether you’d inherented the gene was entirely possible, still is if you forgo genetic testing.

Ally S
10 years ago

I should have specified that I mean radical third wave feminism thats recent. That’s the one that is getting most momentum among the younger generation.

When I said “radical feminism”, I meant all of it. Not just second-wave radical feminism.

The actions are different than the literature. Problem is whenever you confront anyone they claim thats not really feminism.

I don’t care about arguing what feminism is or isn’t, so drop the straw man. Anyway, their actions also don’t really reflect any belief that shaming men is the key to progress. No modern feminist will say this, either, even if they do shame men in general. What actually makes a difference is calling out and stigmatizing men’s misogyny, not shaming men. Again, you don’t seem to know much about any radical feminist theory.

Regarding misogyny, the most profound establishment behind it seem to be religion. How come thats not the direct target of the movement?

Because it isn’t the most profound establishment. Do you seriously think that the origin of misogyny is religion?

jules699
10 years ago

He thinks holding men accountable for their actions is shaming men.

Men are ALREADY being held accountable for their actions. Don’t lie, you just dont like to hear men having social injustice aswell. Most of the problems you mention are not only women’s problems.

toxic masculinity:

Masculinity is TOXIC when men display it. But you will be quick to defend and applaud women for taking masculine roles. As long as women show masculinity its ok. Double standards?

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
10 years ago

BTW, if it wasn’t already obvious, trying to steer the conversation to religion in this forum in the hopes that it will cause the commentariat to go kaboom again? Clearly not this dude’s first time at this particular rodeo. Who knows who’s sock it is this time, but he’s not new.

jules699
10 years ago

Oh hey, female serial killers exist! …in much smaller numbers than male ones, but yes, being heartless isn’t a solely male trait.

Thank you. thats all Ive been saying

Myoo
Myoo
10 years ago

@jules

Regarding misogyny, the most profound establishment behind it seem to be religion. How come thats not the direct target of the movement?

First off, the misogyny in religion is usually the result of misogyny in the cultures that creates/maintain said religion. That religion can then feed back into the culture, reinforcing the misogyny. If the culture changes, so do religions.

Secondly, there are plenty of feminists dealing with the misogyny present in various religions across the world, dude. Some of them are atheists, some are agnostic and some of them are religious themselves. Can’t you get anything right?

182

contrapangloss
10 years ago

Argenti, true that.

I vaguely recall one study we discussed where they found no doses of the sickle cell allele was disadvantageous, but not as strongly disadvantageous as total sickle-cell. It was one of those papers that was really interesting, until you realized Oh my God they got these numbers from people and these numbers represent people dying and aaaaaah!

And this is why I like invertebrates. Way less awkward guilty-feeling nights of being really interested but horrified.

weirwoodtreehugger
10 years ago

How did Jules get to the claim that we don’t mind if women are violent? What?

I lost track a long time ago what he is even trying to argue.

Violence is bad and a mostly trait but shaming men is bad? Is that what he’s saying?

I still need some citations to back up his claim that aggression is beneficial to the species, not cooperation.

Ally S
10 years ago

Masculinity is TOXIC when men display it. But you will be quick to defend and applaud women for taking masculine roles. As long as women show masculinity its ok. Double standards?

I don’t like the term toxic masculinity myself, but you don’t seem to understand it. Toxic masculinity is an oppressive enactment of manhood. It’s used to describe a kind of misogyny present in men by virtue of their structural position within the patriarchy. It doesn’t deny that women can be misogynistic as well.

scott1139
scott1139
10 years ago

Thank you. thats all Ive been saying

That’s all you’ve been saying? You spent all that time and effort just to tell the regulars here something they already knew? Do you enjoy wasting your own time or something?

Ally S
10 years ago

Also, “masculine roles”? Are you referring to things such as positions of relative socioeconomic agency and privilege like working in a STEM field? That isn’t solely the domain of men – it is only considered “masculine” to the rest of the culture. Those women aren’t being masculine simply by doing things that for the longest time only men have been allowed to (although I don’t think a whole lot has changed).

jules699
10 years ago

Because it isn’t the most profound establishment. Do you seriously think that the origin of misogyny is religion?

Hard to say origin but yes I think most of the misogyny in north America and Europe is due to christianity.

Here is why, cultures void of these Abrahamic religions dont show the same patterns of misogyny.

like the Semai people

http://www.peacefulsocieties.org/Society/Semai.html

jules699
10 years ago

“First off, the misogyny in religion is usually the result of misogyny in the cultures that creates/maintain said religion. That religion can then feed back into the culture, reinforcing the misogyny. If the culture changes, so do religions.”

Hard to back that up when Religions like Islam dictate men and women’s roles.

sparky
sparky
10 years ago

Men are ALREADY being held accountable for their actions.

Which is why, when a man states he hates women and is going to go to a sorority house to kill women because he hates women, and then goes and does that very thing (and is only stopped from killing the women I. The sorority house because they didn’t open the door for him), we don’t blame his actions on him being “crazy” or not getting enough sex from women.

Oh, wait….

weirwoodtreehugger
10 years ago

Here is why, cultures void of these Abrahamic religions dont show the same patterns of misogyny.

I’m an atheist and quite critical of misogyny in Abrahamic religions, but this is not accurate. At all.

There is plenty of misogyny in India, China, Japan and many other countries where Abrahamic religions aren’t dominant.

Argenti Aertheri
10 years ago

Um…no? No it isn’t? You spent at least a page going on about how primates have alpha males and thus humans do to.

jules699
10 years ago

Also, “masculine roles”? Are you referring to things such as positions of relative socioeconomic agency and privilege like working in a STEM field? That isn’t solely the domain of men – it is only considered “masculine” to the rest of the culture. Those women aren’t being masculine simply by doing things that for the longest time only men have been allowed to (although I don’t think a whole lot has changed).

No I meant masculine physical labor and generally masculine attitudes. I dont really care about gender roles personally. Its such a silly concept to me in our society but I do believe men and women have different interest.

Ally S
10 years ago

Hard to say origin but yes I think most of the misogyny in north America and Europe is due to christianity.

Misogyny is present in certain interpretations of non-Abrahamic religions as well. Certain interpretations of Hinduism call for strict dress codes for women, among other things.

Hard to back that up when Religions like Islam dictate men and women’s roles.

Hi! Actual ex-Muslim here. First of all, not all interpretations of Islam support gender roles. There are in fact interpretations of Islam that are even trans/queer-friendly. Second, even if it were the case that all interpretations of Islam are sexist, that doesn’t rule out the possibility that the religion itself, a product of social influences, adopted misogyny from non-religious sources.

jules699
10 years ago

There is plenty of misogyny in India, China, Japan and many other countries where Abrahamic religions aren’t dominant.

Absolutely although India has a large muslim population and has been influenced by other cultures. I didn’t mean just Abrahamic religions.

Ally S
10 years ago

No I meant masculine physical labor and generally masculine attitudes.

Um, I haven’t seen a single feminist or womanist shame men for engaging in “masculine” physical labor. I have, however, seen women in jobs like construction be shamed for being “masculine”, and I have seen feminists and womanists attempt to defend said women from that gender policing.

As for “masculine attitudes”, that term is too vague for it to be useful in articulating any point you’re trying to make.

Argenti Aertheri
10 years ago

Contrapangloss — yeah, the color patterns of fish and those genetics are way less horrifying than, idk, that the genes that seem to offer HIV protection offered plague protection — that just a few lines of genetic code could save you from TWO diseases that have killed millions. Far ickier than the genetics behind glo fish (bioengineered danios and tetras, basically)

Myoo
Myoo
10 years ago

like the Semai people

http://www.peacefulsocieties.org/Society/Semai.html

It’s funny how you linked to a site describing a peaceful society which holds non-violence in the highest regard after spending so much time telling us that violence is an inherent human trait that can’t be eliminated.

1 63 64 65 66 67 76