[CONTENT WARNING: Misogynistic violence, rape apologia]
His complaint was a familiar one:
I think every girl is a type of slut, they are fussy with men nowadays, they do not give boys like us a chance.
You can find nearly identical laments in the profiles of self-described “nice guys” on OkCupid, on Men’s Rights blogs, and on forums for self-described “Incels” comisserating about their “involuntary celibacy” and what they see as the shallowness of young women.
But these words actually come from a video filmed by Ben Moynihan, a British teenager who was convicted of attempted murder earlier this week after stabbing three women in an attempt to take a sort of revenge upon the “weaker” gender he felt had made his life miserable by denying him sex. Another young man trying to punish women with violence for the “crime” of not dating him.
“I am still a virgin,” he wrote in one note. “Everyone is losing it before me, that’s why you are my chosen target.” In another note, he declared that “all women needs to die and hopefully next time I can gauge [sic] their eyes out.”
Moynihan’s twisted logic is of course eerily similar to that of Elliot Rodger, who went on a shooting spree in Isla Vista last spring in an attempt to “punish” women for their lack of interest in dating him, which he declared to be “a crime that can never be forgiven.”
Thankfully, Moynihan, unlike Rodger, was captured by police before he actually succeeded in killing anyone.
Not so thankfully, both of these men have their fans, including some amongst the usual suspects I write about on this blog. On the incel hangout slutHATE – the successor to PUAhate, on which Elliot Rodger was an occasional commenter – both Rodger and Moynihan have become heroes of a sort to some of the more bitter commenters. Or at least the source of much amusement.
In response to news about Moynihan’s trial, one slutHATEr posted a thread asking “Okay, which one of you did this?” “A new supreme gentleman rises,” wrote another in a different thread devoted to the would-be killer.
A third commenter, going by the name Homesick Alien, asked the question “Are Females days numbered?” listing an assortment of incels who’d killed “females” in an act of twisted “revenge” for their lackluster or nonexistent dating lives. In the comments, Homesick Alien chillingly wrote that
I’m sure someone somehow is rightfully very rageful currently planning the next shooting spree . We can only hope it’ll be more elaborate. Female entitlement is off the charts now, they are out of control,. It’s about time they are put in their fucking place.
Another posted a link to Rodger’s 150-page manifesto, suggesting that “it has the potential to motivate incels to damage the females.”
In a thread from several months ago, a slutHATEr calling himselt NewGenious119 went after fellow incels for not supporting shooting sprees enthusiastically enough.
Seriously, is there something mentally wrong with you? Thinking that a school full of sluts and frat stars getting slain by an incel is a bad thing is characteristic of a normalfag mindset. Our ONLY hope for ever getting to fuck multiple hot sluts is if there are enough incels in the western world who snap and cause bloodshed. It’s the only way that sluts and alphas will realize and accept that there are serious consequences for allowing so many males to live their lives in misery.
Emphasis mine.
As it turned out, there was no need for him to worry that other incels didn’t support spree killngs aimed at “sluts,” as assorted commenters soon let him know.
The rogue MRA and American-Women-Boycotter who calls himself John Rambo seconded his sentiment, writing
I wouldn’t do one myself. But I wouldn’t prevent one from happening if I knew it would as long as I wouldn’t die or a girl that willing to fuck me would. …
Honestly, I truly have very little sympathy for the victims.
A commenter calling himself Worthless Trash only had one complaint: that the death tolls weren’t higher.
I just wish these guys would make better plans and kill their targets and more of them, but sadly most of them have a weakened will-power after all the years of rejections and maybe bullying.
Also i don’t care if it will solve the problem or not, i just feel better hearing this, it’s like divine justice, they feel so superior but in the end they die like worms, just like they treat other guys, like worms, so in the end we are all equal.
Still others offered their assent:
I personally rejoice whenever I hear news of a school shooting.
The higher the death count, the better
i like their kill count high, because it’s always satisfying seeing someone arrogant going from rich to poor, beautiful too ugly from popular to dead
While a few commenters spoke out against the idea of mass murder as a reasonable response to a lack of dates, they were in the distinct minority.
And then there was this guy:
i support ERism [Elliot Rodgerism], but I would never do it myself, my brother is a doctor and his career would be ruined if our family name ever got tarnished
It would be a little easier to dismiss all this as merely internet dumbassery, were it not for the fact that Rodger went out and killed 6 people after posting similar comments on the message board that later became slutHATE.
While commenters like these are a distinct minority even in the sordid world of the manosphere, the sad and scary fact is that there are a frightening number of young and not-so-young men who have embraced one of the central assumptions of the murder-spree-supporting incels of slutHATE – the notion that women who put “nice guys” in the “friend zone” are committing some kind of crime against them, and deserve to be punished for it, individually or collectively.
You can see variations on this in assorted memes attacking women – much as Moynihan and Rodgers did – for supposedly preferring “bad boys” and assholes over the “nice guys” of the world.
Other “friend zone” memes are a bit darker.
And darker still:
And somehow even darker than that:
And we’re just begun to scratch the surface here.
In a followup post, I will look at the ways in which the rampant “slutbashing” of Men’s Rights Activists and other manosphere denizens helps to feed the toxic culture of aggrieved sexual entitlement that has contributed to violence against women.
Well, they kind of are, in the sense that making these movies takes power away from the people who used to define the way these character’s stories would develope by means of fan letters.
Not that that power has become nonexistant decades ago already…
The theory that men would stop hurting women if the government funded prostitution is laughable even if you set aside the bodily autonomy issues. Incels aren’t angry and misogynistic because there’s a human right to sex going unfulfilled. It’s because they hate women and the whole involuntary celibacy thing is just their excuse. That’s why there don’t seem to be gay men in the incel community. Surly there are gay men who can’t get laid out there. But gay men who aren’t getting laid aren’t going on violent sprees and fantasizing about killing straight men who are too “entitled” to consider sex with them.
Nope. These are just misogynists who have chosen this way to express their misogyny. The misogyny is not caused by sexual frustration but by patriarchy.
Okay, where did this anonymous asshole go poo-poo? I wanna swat that sock around before it gets laundered.
A page back.
cyberwulf: OK I get what you meant now.
@anonymous,
Hypergamy is the act of pursuing relationship partners of a higher status or class. Women are hypergamous, men are hypergamous. This implies that people are hypergamous. That would put women in the exact same boat as men.
And what’s always annoyed me about this tripe parade is that hypergamy is the act of wanting good things. You are raging at women for wanting good things for themselves.
Stop being shitty. Be a good thing, you dimwit. You don’t get to tell women – or these imaginary ‘alpha males’ you loathe – what they can pursue.
How do I link a cat picture? I feel like I have to link a cat picture now. Is it just an img tag with the link inside?
Oh, dear holy. Anonymous’ use of “girls” is so eerily similar to ER’s manifesto that I can’t even.
@Scildfreja
Put the link on a line by itself and if the stars are correctly aligned, it will embed itself.
“I think every girl is a type of slut, they are fussy with men nowadays”
“all women needs to die and hopefully next time I can gauge [sic] their eyes out.”
Then he says:
”they do not give boys like us a chance.”
Gee! I wonder why!?
And maybe the reason we are ‘fussy’ is because there are entitled murderers, abusers and rapists out there pretending to be nice guys?
And thank goodness that some people noticed the ‘anoynoumous’ troll. Women can be with anyone they want to be with and men can do the same too. Nobody owes sex to anybody or should be entitled to it ever.
This is such depressing garbage to be reading. Is this really from 2015?!
I am so relieved that I have never known men like this in my life – at least, none of the men who became anyone significant in any way.
Assuming everything our sluthater friend say is true…..
why don’t they just require men to stop sleeping with women less attractive them themselves? If the big problem is ladies can get laid by men more attractive than themselves and therefore don’t put out for average and dumpy guys, how about, instead of making it the responsibility of women, tell the fellas to up their requirements for physical beauty and starve the plain women so they’re willing to sleep with the plain men?
Just a hint though: As one off those nasty women who tends to sleep with men more conventionally attractive than herself, celibacy is more appealing to me than sleeping with dudes I’m not attracted to. I hypothesize, instead of the in cels getting laid, people will have less sex in general when men are required to sleep only with women equally attractive to themselves.
As someone who lives in reality, I gotta say, I see plain, sometimes unattractive, dumpy, fat men getting laid erryday. I can say with relative certainty it’s not the physical attractiveness that’s preventing these incels from getting laid.
(OK, looking for a January 2015 post, but this last week or so has been hell)
OK, I think I just fell asleep at my desk.
Which is good! Goddess knows I need the sleep!
And so, heading upstairs in the hope it will come back!
Also, after a hyper (Not Bi Polar Hyper, just…well not getting anything done whilst feeling great and posting a lot gratuitiously) fit followed by a total breakdown….where even then I don’t sleep.
Uh yeah. Sleep is the best!!
Followed by eating (had ribeye steak with chips, peas and onion rings for lunch, and tomato soup for brekkie at 0600) First real meals for 48 hours. (Ok, had a few small slices of cold roast beef for dinner, but was too full after abstinence to finish them.)
I need a Bill Paxton picture:
Okay, I found the ca-ca. Here comes a turd-by-turd breakdown, Anonymous Asswipe, so brace yourself for a Royal Flush:
No it’s not. It’s a bunch of whiny, entitled(-to-SQUATTOLA) pablum pukers who are very well understood indeed…and those who’ve had the misfortune of being impinged upon by one in person understand better than anyone that these guys have problems, and that fucking them is not a solution. It only encourages them to go on thinking of themselves as superior beings, which they most certainly are NOT.
No, you don’t. You want sexual supremacy over ALL TEH FEEEEEEMALEZ. And you’re not getting it, so suck it up, buttercup.
“Whine! Stomp! It’s not FAIR!”
So, whoever said life was “fair”? Or that it had to be, by your whiny, entitled (-to-SQUATTOLA) lights?
Look, dude. “Girls” do NOT control the “sexual marketplace”. For one very simple reason: THERE IS NO SEXUAL MARKETPLACE. Sex and love are not commodities, to be bought and sold to the highest bidder, or doled out to the “deserving poor”. Women and girls are HUMAN BEINGS, and they choose their PARTNERS (not MASTERS, not OWNERS, not FUCKERS, but PARTNERS) based on whether they actually like a guy or not. (Or in some places, another woman or girl, or a person of variant gender; those exist too, so don’t you dare erase them!)
And you are not a slave owner; you are a person, plain and simple, just like them. If they like you, and you like them back, great; you’ve got a relationship of some sort going, and you should learn how to navigate those with contentment, instead of expecting some kind of grand fairytale reward that you’re not entitled to and thus never going to get. Relationships are not owned, they are made. They are not property, they are processes. As long as you don’t understand that, nothing that women do is going to make a particle of sense to you, and neither are you going to succeed with them.
It doesn’t matter what you think is “objectively multiple points below you”. Your mirror is warped, and of course you’re gonna think you’re the highest-hanging banana on the tree, even when you’re just some moldy old mush-filled tube sock with a greasy black peel. If a woman doesn’t choose you, she’s not being “hypergamous”; it means she’s taken a long hard gander into your soul, such as it is, and decided that she’d rather not even try to live with that. The problem isn’t HER, it’s YOU. You’re the one with the unrealistic ideas about what kind of woman is “good enough” for you. All you “incels” are so boringly alike…you think you’re entitled to Victoria’s Secret models, when in fact you ignore all the regular girls who are more your calibre. It’s no wonder that even the regular girls think you’re a jackass. It’s because, objectively speaking, you fucking ARE.
Stop with the ablism, right there. I happen to know people on the autism spectrum who are only moderately good looking, and have still succeeded in connecting very happily with lovely partners. I reject categorically the nonsensical notion that “aspies” can’t find love. They can. It’s because these guys are ASSHOLES, not “aspies”, that they’re not connecting with “decent girls”, a.k.a. fucking supermodels.
NO. Just NO.
Again, prostitutes are WOMEN, and women are PEOPLE. Do you seriously think that fording the government into supplying them, and then paying them to fuck you, will make them want you? It won’t. In fact, there are plenty of women in prostitution who wouldn’t go with the likes of you even if you did pay them, because you’re an asshole and a misogynist, and their job is already dangerous and unpleasant enough as it is without glaring-eyed “slut-hate” mixed into the bargain.
And you want all the “hottest women” forced into it? FUCK YOU, ASSHOLE. Money does not buy desire, which is why I’m an abolitionist where prostitution is concerned. The job is basically rape-for-pay, because there is no desire on the part of the woman, and that makes it objectively rape. They may tolerate it for a certain amount of cash, but if they had to do it for free, it would become instantly clear that they don’t WANT it. And since men have been controlling women’s bodies since forever, and prostitution is just one of the many ways they do it, it makes sense to abolish it altogether in the name of real freedom and sexual equality. Sure, some horny dudes might be mildly inconvenienced, but so what? They’ve got hands, let ’em use those. Or buy a Fleshlight and a good book of erotica. At least no woman is being subjected to their hatred and contempt that way.
But of course, you clearly don’t realize that women are people, and they should as such be allowed to choose whom they sleep with. Or not. Because, you know, asexuality exists, and there is no reason why an “objectively hot” woman can’t be completely and utterly uninterested in sex. Thanks for erasing them too, you jackass.
No it is NOT. Not in essence, and not in degree. A person can live comfortably without sex, an entire life long if necessary. A person cannot live without food or water.
“Boohoohoo, not fair not fair NOT FAIR!” Whine, pout, stomp. How old are you anyway? Because you’re approximately two years old in the head, and that’s not sexually mature, let alone appealing.
Dude, get a fucking grip. YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO SEX WITH ANYONE, any more than a woman would be. And women are not “hypergamous” for preferring handsomer, smarter, nicer or even richer guys over you. Pull your head out of your ass and look the fuck around. There are plenty of guys out there who aren’t rich, handsome, particularly smart, or anything, and they still manage to find someone because they have a positive attitude and realistic expectations, and other people like them for it. You are their opposite. Your entitled attitude is repulsive, and it will send the ladies scuttling to greener pastures every fucking time. Until you understand that it’s your attitude turning us away, no amount of legalized or state-subsidized prostitution (which is a despicable concept, BTW) is ever gonna help you.
For the record, I was an Ugly Duckling at 12. By 18 I was showing signs of actually being a pretty fine cygnet, especially upon trading my glasses for contact lenses. But I was still a virgin, and remained one for a few years more, sometimes very much against my wishes. I was often maddened by the fact that guys I considered my equals weren’t interested in me, while guys I wouldn’t look at twice would not leave me alone no matter how I tried to shove them aside. Yet somehow, I never felt the slightest need to stab, shoot or prostitute anyone just so that my “needs” would be satisfied. Mainly because, as a horrible “hypergamous female”, I realized that those things weren’t needs, they were merely wants. And as such, they weren’t going to kill me if they didn’t get immediately and 100% fulfilled, or even fulfilled at all. Girls are taught from an early age that you can’t always get what you want, especially if you are a girl, because as a girl, the deck is already unfairly stacked…AGAINST US. I had to learn how to fulfill myself. I strongly advise you to do the same.
Now PISS OFF.
I don’t understand how long-term relationships fit into the SlutHate dystopian vision.
Are all the hot ladies supposed to be mated for life with all the hot dudes within 2 points below them in some kind of arranged marriage system? Or is sex just reduced to a basic provision, like you queue up and get your standard-issue rations?
It’s sooo comforting to know some dude sees me as the equivalent of the school lunchroom’s meatloaf. That thought won’t keep me awake at night, at all.
I would suggest these pricks take themselves off to some fundamentalist Mormon sect that still does the hardcore polygamy thing, but a) I feel badly for any women in that social setting. b) The fantasy of getting loads of hot wives just does not exist in real life.
http://www.cracked.com/article_19595_5-things-i-learned-as-mormon-polygamist-wife.html
Anonymous, if you’re still hanging around – wake the fuck up. Women are not here on Earth for your enjoyment and your ideology is not only despicable, but utter deluded bullshit.
Your website is called “SlutHate” ffs. That should be a clue that it’s for toxic, bitter people.
Gender-targeted terrorism. I hope there are people keeping an eye on these sorts, like FBI types…
Yup. Fundie-Mornon polygamy has a lot of problems built right in, and the main one, for horny and lovelorn young guys, is the high likelihood that they’ll be pushed out of the community to free up more marriageable girls for the old patriarchs who already have way more wives than any single schlong can handle. The cults (let’s call them what they are) are structured so that the “prophet” can arrange marriage after marriage for his cronies, and those old perverts are all watching the girls like hawks, and expecting the pick of every litter for themselves. They can’t afford to have young men sniffing around and rumpling the nice neat wrappers of the walking, talking presents the “prophet” promised them! So the young guys who are hoping for a girlfriend or a bride, usually don’t get any chance at that; as soon as any of them shows signs of interest in a particular girl, boom, out he goes to live on the streets of Salt Lake City or wherever the nearest major metropolis is. Boys are disposable in those cults. And so, in a different way, are girls.
Hey everybody. I’m that evil guy who wrote the blog post talking about male sexual entitlement and health care/education. And, it is obvious that nobody came close to understanding the point I was trying to make. First, here is the post in question:
http://inconvenientobservations.blogspot.com/2015/01/elliot-rodger-toxic-masculinity-or.html
Okay. Now, let me clear a few things up: I do not think men have a “right” to sex. I do think the buzzword “male sexual entitlement” is used by feminists to vilify any guy who dare criticize the sexual choices that women in general make. Women have a right to make the choices they want as to who they have sex with. On the same note, men have the right to verbally vent and express anger about said choices. Just like unemployed people can express anger about the people who got job offers over them.
I also think that the anger these men feel is worsened by feminists calling them “entitled”, when really they are just lonely and confused. Sometimes, as you feminists should know, loneliness and confusion can lead to anger. I wish we had a stronger support system for said men to reach out to. I mentioned in the post that I thought we have the equivalent of a “gynocentric masculinity” today that leads me to define themselves solely by the female attention they get. Feminists claim to be against this. But, when people like Warren Farrell and Robert Bly offer men a perspective place to talk about how powerless men can often feel, feminists go berserk for anyone daring to question the “male privilege” meme.
Feminists don’t have a responsibility to offer solutions for these men, but they do have a responsibility to not demonize any alternative for these men. By the way, the feminist alternative for these men seems to be self loathing: “women don’t like you so deal with it and become a feminist so you can realize how wrong you were for daring question the way women view you”.
Contrary to what feminists say, the best way to prevent another Elliot Rodger style attack is to let these men have space to talk about their experience with women. Women have all kinds of spaces to talk about their experiences with men. All you feminists need to do is let them talk about their experience without calling them an entitled neckbeard.
One more thing. When I talked about the health care/education thing, I wasn’t saying that sex is the same as health care and education. What I was saying was that both education and health care require people providing services to other people. If nobody was willing to provide said services, we would have to force somebody to be a doctor or teacher in order to “fulfill” a right.
But, the more important point was ignored. I was, and continue to be, highly critical of feminists thinking female sexual entitlement in the form of women being entitled to free birth control is ok while male sexual entitlement is always evil. I agree sexual entitlement is wrong. But, I condemn it when females think they are entitled to birth control to.
Well, yes. What right does some random person have to criticize other people’s sexual choices? How is it even any of his business? Offering up that sort of uninvited criticism is a perfect example of entitlement.
Do you understand the distinction? If a person specifically asks you what you think of their new boyfriend/girlfriend, then you’re allowed to answer honestly, but you’re not allowed to barge up to complete strangers and make pronouncements about how much they’ve disappointed you.
@Tom Saw
I can’t wait to read the replies explaining every thing wrong with what you just posted.
Much as what happened with anonymous and the post about Sluthate on the last page, everything that came after this sentence demonstrated that actually we did understand what you were saying, really well.
But, the more important point was ignored. I was, and continue to be, highly critical of feminists thinking female sexual entitlement in the form of women being entitled to free birth control is ok while male sexual entitlement is always evil. I agree sexual entitlement is wrong. But, I condemn it when females think they are entitled to birth control to.
Yikes, I just realized that I missed your most important point.
Free birth control is a health-care entitlement, not a sexual entitlement. I’d certainly agree that men are entitled to free condoms, but that doesn’t mean that men (or women) are entitled to sexual partners, especially government-provided sexual partners.
By the way, have you ever noticed that the US has a real contempt for people who need government services, and they try to make the experience miserable as possible? So if you did get a government-sponsored brothel, it would be some kind of public-private partnership where 90% of the funding goes straight to Goldman-Sachs, and you’d be waiting in a drafty room for four hours filling out paperwork for clerks who hate you, and then at the end of all that they’d send you into a tiny cubicle with a porno magazine and a bottle of cheap, scratchy lubricant.
(Grrr, first paragraph of my previous posting should have been blockquoted.)
http://imgur.com/NKKsMmP
*eagerly awaiting replies from people not in bed and not too sick to have fun with “Tom”‘s post*
I’d do it, except that I’m betting that Tom is a drive-by. It’s no fun to rip apart drive-bys.