Sometimes I hunt the misogyny, sometimes it wanders up right up to me and says hello.
Today’s post is an example of the latter. Below, a slightly edited comment that someone left for me this morning. It’s a response to a post of mine about a dreadful post on Return of Kings in which a fellow calling himself Billy Chubbs argued, with absolutely no evidence, that a recent high school shooter was driven to murder because of his “probable sexual frustration,” Chubbs went on to argue that young women are “selfish” because they don’t have sex with guys they’re not attracted to.
Anyway, my new commenter – posting under the name “whogoesthere?” – thinks that I and the other commenters here were being too hard on Chubbs’ “very good argument.” And so he deposited this giant rant, which in many ways is even scarier than Chubbs’ original.
He’s a tad verbose, so I’ve trimmed out some stuff that isn’t relevant to his general, er, thesis. And I’ve also taken the liberty of adding a few paragraph breaks and bolding a few of the best (i.e. worst) bits.
When men don’t get the women they want they turn to violence.
Not a good start here, because this just isn’t true. In this case, the phrase “not all men” is, for once, appropriate. Most men don’t get violent when they’re turned down.
This is established all over the animal kingdom and offers a good example about how it applies to humans, that snotty girls who keep their sexual treasures to all but a few males cause the remaining males to snap. …
Animals do all sorts of things that humans don’t do, and we can’t always learn from their behavior or assume that it relates to our own lives.
Or maybe the Evo Psych crew is just looking at the wrong animals. When banana slugs can’t find a partner to have sex with, they simply fertilize themselves. There’s a lesson here, I think, for the angry incels of the world: you can’t always get what you want, and when you can’t, sex with yourself is better than murder.
High school is a massively sexually charged winner take all environment. … Today’s high school is basically an ongoing audition for a porno video and the guys and girls who don’t make the cut can only sit at home and masturbate.
wat
It’s demeaning and hits a major blow to a person’s sexual identity to not be invited to frolic with the beautiful people.
Somehow most people, regardless of gender, manage to survive even if they’re not frolicking with Charlize Theron and/or Channing Tatum.
I’m sorry but almost no men go on wild shooting rampages if they have a beautiful female in their keep.
In their keep?! Also, no. Charles Manson was surrounded by beautiful young women. Yet he orchestrated multiple grisly murders.
The only guys that do so are bank robbers and thieves, generally guys at a later stage of life more fixated on money.
wat
Human beings naturally assess the amount of sex going around them and judge themselves in relationship to the amount and type of sex others are getting.
You know, you can’t actually tell how much and what kind of sex someone is having just by looking at them. Yes, there will always be people in the world having more sex with you. And some of these people are having sex with people you would probably like to have sex with. There are also people who are smarter than you, funnier than you, who can play chess or kickbox better than you, who have hundreds or thousands of times more money than you do.
That’s life. Life isn’t fair.
This makes sense because from a reproductive standpoint sex is coveted, and sex with beautiful thin, young women are the most coveted. Being the first to spoil these young women sexually is viewed reproductively as a guarantee of parentage, thus this is why males instinctively covet and burn with passion for these females.
Ah, yes, it was only a matter of time until the creepy pedo-justifying Evo Psych assfacts made their appearance. Not all men “burn with passion” in their pants for virginal high school girls.
This is why we have “morality” which is in its essence is a promise not to flaunt or indulge in sex moreso than the lowest man or woman in your tribe. This is what is meant when people say “morality went out the window.” They mean someone with more sexual prowess is openly indulging in sex and broadcasting it to stimulate the jealousy of the underclasses.
I’m pretty sure that’s not what people mean when they say “morality went out the window.”
This teen killed people cause he thought that beautiful girls were out of reach. The high school environment merely rubbed it in his face. Yes drugs to treat ADD might’ve eroded many of the impulse control functions in the teen, but the rage against the high school was still the gasoline.
[citation needed]
He might’ve had a picture or two taken with a girl next to him, but oftentimes those high school girls lie and simply eat up the male’s offerings without granting sexual access, but grant it to a random stud.
How dare young women choose who to have sex with, and who not to!
I’m not saying the girl he killed deserved it, it’s only that when you are in that frame of mind you cannot tell who is having more sex than others and you simply fill in the gaps with rage.
Wait, so if she had turned him down he would have been justified in killing her?
The beautiful girl simply represented everything that the teen couldn’t get. The steady love and wild sex of a valuable young girl.
Yeah, I think you’re confusing high school with porn again. His rampage lasted roughly a minute and a half. He shot her because she was there.
All the other theories posted on this site seem comical, self-righteous and weirdly off-point. It’s like you’re assessing the situation as an asexual senior citizen or righteous prude.
Not a lot of “prudes” here. Just people who find the “women need to have sex with ‘nice guys’ or these ‘nice gys’ will kill you all” to be a somewhat problematic argument.
Generally men want sex with young thin beauties who validate their existence.
Some men do. But most men, among those who are sexually attracted to women, aren’t as neurotically fixated on this small slice of the female demographic – women in their teens and early twenties who are somehow both virginal and sexually “wild” – as manosphere men seem to be. And most people don’t base their entire self-worth on whether or not they’re having sex with beautiful people.
Some men prefer women older than them. Some like women who are fat. Plenty of men don’t fixate on a particular physical type and are attracted to all sorts of different women. Believe it or not, whogoesthere, there are lots of men who are more interested in what’s in a woman’s head than they are in whether or not she matches up with some particular checklist of physical attributes.
If society removes all of the social pathways to attaining such a beauty, such as making prostitution illegal, increasing shame for men who seek sex, rewarding females and males called manginas who identify and mock the sex seekers and so on… this will lead to depression in men and all of the behaviors surrounding it, including shootings. Sounds pretty much like a logical line of reasoning to me.
And that’s the problem. It’s not actually a logical line of reasoning at all. It’s more like a sort of blackmail.
Men don’t kill women because they can’t have “the steady love and wild sex of a valuable young girl.” Sometimes men kill women because they feel entitled to have sex with these “valuable young girls” and become bitter and enraged when they can’t find a “valuable young girl” who agrees with them on this particular point.
It’s not the lack of “sexual access” that’s the problem. It’s the notion that your desire for “sexual access” means more than the right of that person to say “no.” It’s the notion that society has done you wrong because you can’t (at least at the moment) get laid. It’s the idea that your desire to have sex with a particular kind of woman somehow trumps the right of other people to live.
I mean, what the fucking fuck.
Oh, by the way, there’s no evidence that the shooter in question – Karl Halverson Pierson – was motivated by sexual frustration. His intended target was the school librarian, who is also the school’s debate coach. Pierson was obsessed with debate, and had some sort of grudge against the coach.
WWTH got it.
You’re entirely right, threatening mass murder is a new low, even for the bottom feeder trolls we get here.
Wow, trolls be trolling today.
For right now, I’m going to assume lycere isn’t for real. I have to, you see, otherwise I’ll have to start thinking about people who seriously think government-mandated sex should be a real thing, that preventing murder is selfish and that people should be forced to have sex with folks they’re not attracted to — otherwise we’ll all get ours, threat, threat, threatening threats.
The doofus troll who suggested it’s somehow selfish of the femininst movement to not concern itself with getting men laid was too funny. He almost presented it as a gotcha moment, like, “Ha! Feminism never helped me get laid! What do you all think of that!?”
Duder, feminism — go look it up. Also, I would suggest you’re not getting laid because of self-pity, self-entitlement and sexism. You think if you were living in the 50s it would be totes awesome because you’d have you’re own Donna Reed wifey who would be dependent on you financially to live. Owwwww, how romantic. You have issues, dude.
Taino is too boring to comment on — except to say he’s preternaturally boring.
I Googled “Lycere Cunnigham” and I’m not feeling any better about this. Very much not.
I know it’s rape apologia but I thought I’d be more less specific because there has been a boy who stabbed a girl who didn’t want to go to prom with him.
‘Justifying murder of a woman/women’ as in men are entitled to whatever woman he sees and she can’t say no because then it would be her fault of whatever happens. But if she does say yes then she would called ‘stupid’. We can’t win ladies.
Cunningham.
You will die without food, water, shelter. You won’t die without sex.
I’m having so much trouble believing that a transman could ever argue what Lycere argued.
Considering how often transpeople are the victims of violence and sexual assault, it would be odd indeed for a transman to claim that his life and agency should be considered secondary to the desires of men who would find his very identity reason enough to rape or assault him.
I’m calling bullshit on this one.
Grumpycatsagirl,
So, you’re saying he’s for real?
Daaaaamn.
I just did the same, grumpycatisagirl. You’re right, he is a disturbing man.
Lycere Cunningham is banned for obvious reasons. I deleted his comment as well.
Good. Holy fuck. My jaw literally dropped.
Wow. So here I was, skimming the comments of a silly, entitled Nice Guy troll and chuckling at the funny, insightful responses to the ridiculous arguments, and suddenly, this Lycere Cunningham person shows up, and…
…
…
…umm…
…wow.
I googled him as well. Sheesh, what a terrible person.
I Googled too. Apparently in his mind stalkers are discriminated against. What the fuck?
I googled as well. I have trouble believing this person is actually serious, and not just a troll in the truest sense – just posting ludicrous things to get people’s hackles up. Maybe I’m being naive. I didn’t click on any of the disgusting things that came up.
I don’t know, in the current climate, I don’t really think stuff like what he posted here and in other places can be shrugged off.
grumpycatisagirl, for sure it’s horrifyingly wrong, even if the person doesn’t actually *believe* what they’re saying.
Fnoicby
In one of his comments on another site, he linked to the Facebook page of his stalking victim. I’d love to think he isn’t serious, but he appears to be. I just hope he never actually hurts anyone 🙁
weirwoodtreehugger, that is very disturbing indeed. If he’s for real I would be surprised if he has not hurt several people already, after what he posted here and elsewhere.
The essence of what I’m saying is, you want to ruin the manosphere, legalize prostitution. I really don’t know where ya’ll are assuming the rest, especially the notion that I am anti-Feminist or believe I am entitled to sex.
For the record, I think evo psych is bullshit. If we disagree about the realities of the dating market, it is because I have a more realistic and objective attitude about it than than most, which is why I won’t address the supposed counter examples to my claims. However, in my experience I have only seen misogyny rewarded in dating. The most attractive women I have slept with, I was a complete ass towards. The most consistently mysogynistic men I’ve known, the most succsesful.
But, on balance I believe Feminism is far more important than the sexual fulfillment of dregs. It’s not even close.
And Taino, I don’t need to be defended by a libertarian who unironicaly refers to the “friend zone.”
Undfreeland,
You know that these misogynists who think violence against women is an appropriate response to not getting laid by women who don’t want to fuck them won’t take it well when sex workers turn them down, right? Also, stop pushing violent assholes off onto sex workers. They don’t want to fuck them either. Have some fucking humanity and stop pretending that the problem of bigotry aimed at women will be solved when those woman hating asshats can get access to women’s bodies at will. Men do not deserve access to our bodies. It isn’t a right. They can fucking suck it up and deal. Not getting your dick wet is not like starving to death or being denied medical care. If you can’t accept that women are human beings, GTFO. You are adding nothing to this discussion but your skeevy assertions that women owe men sex regardless of our feelings on the matter.
Hahahaahaha. Well, thanks for the comic relief.
Do you think saying something like that makes you look smart?
It’s so weird. The same people who talk about how men all want really young super attractive women, and dismiss women above a certain age or look also go on and on about how horrible women are because of hypergamy. “Oh how horrible that women all want the super rich attractive guys! It’s going to ruin the human race!” So they’re even hypocritical in their own broken kaleidoscope view of how the world works. It’s natural for all men to want only a small portion of the female population, but women wanting only a small portion of the male population is the end of civilization.
(Spoiler: The real answer is they think that women having any kind of choice (that doesn’t include sex with them) is the end of civilization.
Oh, this again:
” The most attractive women I have slept with, I was a complete ass towards. The most consistently mysogynistic men I’ve known, the most succsesful.”
Translation — women enjoy being treated like shit. Women be crazy! That’s why to get with them, you have to treat them badly! It all makes sense now!
RE: undfreeland
I’ve rarely met men who felt more entitled to women’s bodies than those who were actually very successful with women due to their looks.
My husband is a slut emeritus. He’s handsome, charming, and got laid a ridiculous amount before marrying me, and part of the reason why is that he wasn’t a jerk about it. Turns out a pretty face and a sweet heart go a long way for getting laid. He is an honest-to-god kind man, and also just happens to have been poor for pretty much his whole life.
My rapist, on the other hand, was one of those twee soulful nerd boys who played lots of video games and ran around in the woods with a katana. He was pretty, if you’re into twee nerd boys, and from a wealthy family. However, he never actually asked us out; we met him playing D&D, and we thought we were friends until he surprised us with roses and was like, “What do you mean, we’re not dating? I thought we were!”
THAT’S entitlement. The feeling that if you spend enough time playing tabletop games and Mario with a girl, she’s automatically dating you. (Which quickly escalated to automatically fucking him on demand.) It had nothing to do with his looks; it had everything to do with him believing he was the soulful outcast who needed a hot chick to fuck him. It had nothing to do with his ‘attractiveness’ or ‘status.’ He was just a rapist douchebag.
The essence of what I’m saying is, you want to ruin the manosphere, legalize prostitution.
Bullshit. The entitlement won’t change when they get laid; they’ll just move on to being enraged about not getting the quality or quantity of sex they prefer.
I’m all for legalization of sex work, for the protection of sex workers, but I really don’t think entitled men will feel any less entitled.
RE: Lea
I’m having so much trouble believing that a transman could ever argue what Lycere argued.
I’m having absolutely no trouble whatsoever. Trans dudes can be just as misogynistic as cis, believe you me. They are also way less likely be assaulted than trans women, ESPECIALLY if they’re white, and they can certainly believe they’re not like “those” women.
Counterpoints like requesting you back up your claims with evidence? There is still misogyny in countries where sex work has been decriminalized you know.
If you think evo psych bullshit, maybe stop parroting evo psych claims?
If you don’t want to be regarded as an entitled misogynist, maybe stop talking like one?
Just saying you agree with feminism isn’t enough to be regarded as an ally. You are still putting every sexist talking point about dating out there. Being an asshole in order to get laid is not ethical. Has it occurred to you that you’re (maybe unconsciously) seeking out insecure and vulnerable women? I know it’s tempting to assume that a woman who is conventionally attractive has a perfect life and is automatically confident but that isn’t necessarily true. In my experience and the experience of the women I’ve been friends with, being an asshole is not attractive. The women I’ve known who are “jerk magnets” have lots insecurities and usually mental health issues and/or a past history of abuse. Taking advantage of that in order to get sex from them is so shitty.