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.
I am sure you all know about this already, but there is a Facebook page now called Elliot Rodger is an American hero, and in response to my report of it for hate speech, and my friends’ reports for the same or other relevant violations, we have all received the message that the page has not been removed, and that it does not violate Facebook’s community standards.
@mawts
1)he’s not mentally ill
2) he said he did it cuz he hates women
3) yeah we’re pushing such a political agenda of NOT WANTING TO GET MURDERED
4) fuck you and your ableism.
5) citation needed.
@katz
^ a c c u r a t e
(and you’re awesome and I was stressed and your response cheered me up, so go you :D)
@wereterrier
What the fuck? How can glorifying a mass murderer NOT be hate speech?
That is so fucked up.
(Cloudiah! Did you see this?)
@ Marie
Right? One of the few posts that was up when I looked at the page mentioned A Voice for Men, naturally enough.
@katz, Yes, I lurv it!!! LURV!!!
The shooter: “I did it because I hate women.”
MawBTS: “Shame on you for thinking he did it because he hated women!”
WTF is Jean’s point?
Facebook apparently won’t take down anything except breastfeeding photos.
Well, that settles it. There is absolutely no level of hate speech and violence against women that some woman-hating MRA asshat won’t deny is misogynist. You can write a 150-page manifesto about how much you hate women that ends with your wish that you could imprison all women in concentration camps and watch them slowly starve to death, make a bunch of videos threatening to kill women, then go out and try to shoot up a sorority house, and you’ll still get a, “Aw, come on, how is that misogynistic?”
I give up. Honestly. What qualifies as misogyny?
FB actually did message me to let me know they’d taken down something I reported on Roosh’s page once. It was some horrible blog post about how to ignore women’s nos. They did take down a meme I reported on the VforM page too.
There is also no level of hate speech and violence that won’t find support as long as the perpetrator presents himself as a Poor Nice Guy Who Can’t Get Girls Because Society. I am now out of puke from puking at all the men online–nice guys every one–commenting that, okay, maybe he went a little overboard with the mass murder and stuff, but it’s so easy to identify with him and his pain (obviously having Valley Girls not volunteer to blow you while you drive past them in your BMW is much more painful than, I dunno, being shot to death), and it’s so sad that he couldn’t find the happiness he deserved, and instead of wasting time thinking about those dead people, can we sit around and talk about his poor hurt feelings, and incidentally my poor hurt feelings as a guy who would also like more sex?
I, uh, ew. Yeah, I took a look at that page. Only ten people “like” it which, I’m guessing, is why Facebook doesn’t take it seriously enough to remove it. I don’t care. It needs to go. Reported as hate speech and shared with my Friends list, asking if they might be interested in reporting it toooo.
historophilia
I’m really sorry that the guy is trying to force his way back into your life; I hope you will not feel me to be obtrusive if I urge you to break all possible links with him, and talk to people physically around you as well as here on the web about what he’s doing. He’s stalking you, and someone prepared to damage you emotionally in this way may not stop there.
I don’t know where you live; I assume that it’s in the US, and I live in London, England, so I don’t know what the police advice is where you are. This is the advice given here:
Do not confront your stalker or even engage them in conversation.
Do not, under any circumstances, agree to a meeting to talk about how you feel about them constantly bothering you.
Do not respond in any way to calls, letters, or conversations. If you ignore the phone nine times and pick it up on the tenth, you will send the message that persistence pays. Once they have your attention, they will be encouraged to carry on.
Ask friends or solicitors to contact them if you want to get a message to them.”
Your personal safety is paramount, which is why I deferred my bedtime here on this side of the Pond to put this together; I know it may seem like overkill but the police have a lot of experience in this, and they frame their advice to reduce the body count. They know what happens if you don’t.
And now for some zzzs because I will be even more catatonic than usual without some…
I agree with Stevie, btw. The way Historophilia’s former “friend” is behaving is a huge red flag, and it would probably be a good idea to make sure he has no way of getting into her physical space. From The Gift of Fear again – when a person tells you something about themselves, believe them. This man told you that he doesn’t care whether or not you consent to things.
…and how exactly does this contradict what was already said?
Below is a quote from David Futrelle’s article:
“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.”
David Futrelle apparently made this statement without knowing the facts of the incident. He clearly assumed that all 4 men who were killed were killed when Rodger began shooting people outside of the sorority house after they refused to let him in. The truth is that the two women were the only ones killed at that scene.
Three of the men were killed at Rodger’s home with a knife well before he traveled to the sorority house and the fourth man was shot dead at a location away from the sorority house (at a market). So Dave’s reasoning for why more men were killed was based on false information. Weirdwoodtreehugger parroted Dave’s assertion.
So the contradiction is clear as day.
Ok, still trying to get some sleep but it just dawned on me that there is a weird echo of the PUA in the police guidance on why not to pick up the phone after not doing so for the previous 9 calls.
‘You will send the message that persistence pays’
And boy that is certainly not the message we want to send..
Jean, I am sure you feel that you are making a cogent argument, but you are not. David isn’t assuming that all the men killed were shot outside the sorority house. And it is crystal clear that the reason more women weren’t killed was because Rodger was foiled in his attempt to gain entry to the sorority house. There is no contradiction, except in your imagination.
And what exactly is your point, Jean? What are trying to say?
‘Cause you’re about as clear as mud here.
And I truly believe that even if Rodger had shouted “I do this in the name of misogyny” each time he shot/stabbed someone, there would be people arguing that it wasn’t the real reason.
Jean, even making allowances for the time differences between here and there, I’m not spotting anything clear as day in your post. Furthermore, having to explain the basic principles of meteorology to a grown up who doesn’t even realise that there are things called clouds which prevent clear days isn’t a tremendously fulfilling role; particularly when you are trying to sleep.
I shall attempt to succumb to the arms of Morpheus once more, and with any luck it will work…
Jean, are you seriously arguing that if Rodger had gotten into the sorority house he wouldn’t have killed more than four women?
Seriously?
Rodger’s declared intent was to slaughter every woman he found in that sorority house. He tried to gain entry. When he couldn’t, he shot two women on the street in front of the sorority house.
But clearly, men were the real target! (Or maybe Jean just thinks they’re the only target that counts.)
Jean, I’m sorry, but Erin in the other thread is way funnier than you, and I’m a one-troll woman.
“@MawBTS, folks here are not hijacking a tragedy, they are reacting to one. If you are not interested in seriously engaging with the large collection of materials Elliot Rodgers left behind detailing why he made the choice to murder innocents, that’s your call.”
Hello? He was CRAZY. Insane. Flying blind and solo into the land of bonkers. He was seeing therapists. He was on meds. Who gives a shit about his half-assed ramblings? For all that matters, he could have claimed to have done it under orders from the little man who sits in the fridge and turns off the light when you close the door.
Do you really want to double down on your “mentally ill person is completely sane and it’s his philosophy that’s responsible” position? I could find many examples of crazy feminists doing bad things and crediting feminism. Or crazy pagans, or crazy people of any outlook..
About me stigmatising the mentally ill, I’m not really. Just mentally ill people who go on shooting sprees, which doesn’t seem like a bad thing.
@mawbts
Citation needed, you pathetic ableist shitwad.