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.
*candle…oh, to post at 2am & tipsy
@Youllneverguess, to everyone else, I am interchangeable.
@wetherby, sounds like regular banter where I’m from. Chalk it up to cultural differences then.
@piratejennie, Good. While I doubt anyone’s going to ever read through all of this, if they do, they will find that I have not lied about myself once. They will see, however, that you needed an internet forum to affirm yourself.
@kittehserf, not at all. I’ve learned that the importance of wealth may just be limited to my geographical location. It didn’t seem to matter in college, but I just took that as an age thing.
OK attacking commenters like that? Not fucking cool. Get the fuck out.
Also, I like how you ignored how I totally owned you on English.
Poeple in the mansosphere accuse David of taking things out of context. I have found that to be untrue. Perhaps they’ve been confusing him for the posters here?
To be perfectly fair, I’ve never seen someone claim they are looking forward to a grandparent’s demise.
I assume und is going to need to masturbate furiously over his special specialness now that someone’s acknowledged it. Ooooooooh, und. Your outlook, it’s so fearlessly bleak. You’re like Nietsche, except maybe even *darker*.
I have been nothing but attacked, wewereemergencies. My integrity has been called into question.
Yoollneverguess, I love Nietsche! And I already masturbated today to a POV of an incredible foursome blowjob scene.
I do?
You get that the badge thing isn’t real, right?
Somehow, I don’t see this winding up in your favor.
Or in mine, again with this not being a competition.
Oh yep. Guaranteed to make me stabby, that one.
As it happens, I can very very easily imagine why someone like you would consider insulting someone’s partner in front of them “regular banter”, especially if it also involved remaining spectacularly oblivious of the fact that the toes of literally everyone else in the room are curling so much as to risk burrowing through shoe leather.
But it’s really nothing to be proud of.
Largely because the thing that you miss is that while mockery can certainly qualify as “regular banter” – it certainly does between me and my wife, as we mock each other all the time – it takes on a very different tone in a supposedly polite setting (since I generally see this relative at large family gatherings) and where literally the only communication involved this “negging”. One of the reasons my wife found his behaviour so offensive is that at no point did he react to her as a separate human being at all – she was just a convenient sounding board for his “jokes”, and evidently didn’t care whether or not she found them funny.
To be fair, I suspect shyness and social awkwardness played a fairly strong part here – some people really do suffer from the delusion that to be considered “cool” in mixed company you have to insult and belittle others at every opportunity. But that doesn’t work unless people already like you, and even then it’s probably not a good idea.
Yeah because you came here in bad faith, you’re a liar and you either don’t acknowledge other people as people or think it’s funny to pretend you don’t.
I was amused by your attempts at trolling 3 days ago and willing to put up with it because others found you amusing until now, but I am not willing to let you attempt to hurt another commenter like that. You want us to treat you with respect? Fine. Apologise or GTFO.
Sure, Wetherby described “sneeringly disparaging remarks about people” and “obnoxious cracks”, or, you know, regular banter. Chalk it up to you having a sucky sense of humor,
Good night Mammothteers and goodnight sweet troll.
@wetherby, You haven’t been to one of my family’s large gatherings, obviously. All we do is mock each other. It’s like an ongoing non-stop roast.
What does that even mean?
LOL no sonny, you didn’t.
::plays world’s smallest viollin::
Someone who tricks people into bed has no integrity.
Anyone else think troll’s masturbation TMI is banhammer time? I’ve emailed the Dark Lord about that one.
Never tricked anyone into bed. Never said I did. Don’t know where your getting that.
I said I’m a liar, but you know I’ve never lied.
Let the record show that I’m an honest, honest boy.
In other words, I’m not a troll.
Mock all that you like, but I like feminism too.
Even if I think the only worth you have is looks.
In just one word, objectification.
In other words, I’m a troll!
(To the tune of ‘Fly me to the Moon’ a la Frank Sinatra)
Oh really? In fact, what we’ve been telling you is that the stuff you say about yourself and your dealings with others does fit together.
All too well. And all too drearily familiar.
The picture isn’t lively or interesting or unique or complex. It’s simplistic, shallow, immature and unattractive. We’re also sure that everything you’ve said about your relationships, such as they are, with women are absolutely true. No substance, no shadow, no hope for fun nor for anything meaningful for either party.
My only hope is that you are actually lying to us and that you’re really only 17. That would give you enough time to grow up and get some sense of decency before you have any real dealings with real women.
And that’s fine, if everyone’s doing it and if everyone’s happy with it.
But if one person’s doing it, and carries on doing it despite the fact that the reaction in general (and the reaction of the person that he’s trying to impress in particular) makes a lead balloon look as though it’s full of helium instead, that’s very different.
Let’s imagine that you’ve actually managed to hold down a relationship for a few months. A relative of hers insults her every single time that they get together (and not in a witty way, just in an unpleasantly putting-down way), while completely blanking you except as some kind of sounding-board. Are you really going to say “oh, it’s just banter – it’s nothing more than an ongoing non-stop roast.”? Especially if you aren’t actually part of the family in question?
Worth to me, contrapangloss. For sexual relationships. In every other aspect of life, women are the same as men as far as I’m concerned.
In other news, sun likely to rise tomorrow.
I hope you cleared your browsing history, or your mom is going to be rilly mad.
These other posters, und, they don’t get you like I do. They CAN’T get you. You’re too special to fit in anywhere. You’re feminist. You’re Red Pill. You’re a lover. You’re a child. You’re a mother. Wait, no. You’re the kind of guy who laughs at a funeral. You’re a magic man. With magic hands.
I emailed him about attempting a personal attack on piratejennie, kittehs. (I know you weren’t hurt piratejennie, but I don’t want a repeat of last time) Plus he’s so fucking boring. He’s not even interesting anymore.
@mildlymagnificent, I assure you. I have had fun with women, and they have had fun with me. Why else would a few of them have deigned to date me for variable lengths of time?
@wetherby, so the relationship I had for two years, the one that started with me telling her to fuck off and eventually she left me for a good friend, She came around my family a bunch. One of my brothers would make fun of stuff she said all the time. Didn’t bother me.
If I’m so boring, then why are you here. Ya’lls harsh reaction to me is just proof of the truth of what I say. You know, on some level, that I’m right about people, so you must argue against it.