French prosecutors are saying that the co-pilot of the Germanwings Airbus A320 that crashed in the Alps brought the plane down deliberately, after locking the pilot out of the cockpit. If so, this was one of the most horrific cases of murder/suicide the world has ever seen.
At the moment, we don’t know enough about the co-pilot, 28-year-old Andreas Lubitz. to know what motivated him to allegedly crash the plane. French authorities are saying that they don’t think it was an act of terrorism. But that may be because they have a rather simplistic definition of terrorism.
Murder/suicide is an overwhelmingly male crime; studies suggest that men may make up 90% or more of the perpetrators. While most of these cases — excluding suicide bombings — involve a man killing himself and a partner or ex-partner, there have also been cases in which men have resorted to mass murder in order to make some twisted point about what they see as a world unfair to men in general and them in particular. These acts aren’t generally considered terrorism, but they should be.
You know the names: Elliot Rodger, who killed seven, including himself, as part of what he called his “War on Women.” George Sodini, a would-be pickup artist who opened fire on an LA Fitness aerobics class because he couldn’t get a date. Marc Lepine, who killed 14 women at the École Polytechnique in Montreal in an attempt “to send the feminists, who have always ruined my life, to their Maker.” The list goes on.
Whenever one of these horrific massacres occurs, there are always some who rush to excuse or defend or even lionize the perpetators. And there are those who argue that these tragedies could have somehow been averted if women had just treated these poor men better.
In the case of this particular tragedy, reactionary fantasy writer Vox Day — real name, Theodore Beale — is literally suggesting that it could have been prevented “if the sluts of the world were just a little less picky and a little more equitable in their distribution of blowjobs.”
Here’s his, er, argument, from a post on his Alpha Game blog today:
Why he did it, no one knows yet, but it won’t surprise me to learn that Lubritch [sic] was a deeply angry and embittered Omega male. There is a reason Omegas frighten women merely by existing; they are capable of terrible and merciless acts of self-destruction. You can see Lubritch is a small and prematurely balding young man, possibly somewhat overweight, his occupation indicates that he was more intelligent than the norm, and the uncertain smile he has on his face tends to indicate low socio-sexual rank.
Good to know that Vox — who himself has an “uncertain smile” in some photographs I’ve seen of him — can x-ray someone’s personality by glancing at a snapshot.
Now, obviously no one else was responsible for Lubritch’s actions if it indeed was Omega rage at work. He alone bears the blame. But it is somewhat haunting to think about how many lives might be saved each year if the sluts of the world were just a little less picky and a little more equitable in their distribution of blowjobs.
So he alone deserves the blame — but somehow his actions are also the fault of unfair blowjob distribution by the “sluts of the world?”
As a 28 year-old airline pilot, Lubritch would likely have been married in a more traditionally structured society. It’s not impossible that the Germanwings deaths represent more of the indirect costs of feminism.
Oh, and it’s ultimately the fault of feminism.
Now, Vox Day is a famously terrible person, and something of a troll.
But the fact is that similar — if generally less explicit — apologias for male violence are common in the “manosphere” and amongst Men’s Rights Activists.
The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive continues! If you haven’t already, please consider donating with the button below. (The PayPal page will say you are donating to Man Boobz.) Thanks!
@ misseb47
In return for your interesting post I’ll swap some info from things I’ve picked up over the years (can’t guarantee it will be interesting). This is from an English perspective.
In 60% of murders it is the murderer who calls the police.
Women accused of murder who tried to run diminished responsibility as a defence (in the legal sense) were (are?) often portrayed by the prosecution as cold and calculating because they would take steps to clean up the murder scene and the rest of the location. The implication was that they were forensically aware and were trying to cover up evidence.
They would also do things like get the kids clothes ready for school and make sandwiches. Again the implication was that they were cold heartless killers for whom the murder was an in significant act.
It transpired though (from numerous interviews) that the main reasons for this were that women knew that a bunch of strangers would soon be entering the house (in the form of the police and possibly the press) and they didn’t want people thinking they were ‘slatternly’ (insert your own thoughts about gender roles here) and that they knew they would be likely to be remanded in custody so they wanted to make sure the kids had everything they needed (again insert your own thoughts here).
Spindrift-Thanks! 😀
@misseb47: Actually, thanks for that! It contained a lot of statistics I didn’t already know about (I live in America, so some of them weren’t too relevant to me, but I’m going to assume that some of them would likely be the same here).
@Alan Robertshaw: Thanks for adding to it as well! It is a very interesting topic, and even though I’m not a lawyer or a scientist like some of our wonderful community members, I still find I can always use the extra information. :3
@Ann Morgan: As a fat girl with mental illnesses myself, that was a gross couple of comments for you to make. No one deserves to have to put up with Vox Day’s bullshit, and implying that I am some sort of “punishment” was going too fucking far. I am not a “punishment” because of my weight or my mind. I am not something you can wield to make assholes like Vox Day feel bad. I am a person, and I would like to be treated as such. That means with respect.
You should also drop the condescending “sweetie” bit. You got called out for making a rude comment. Don’t double down on it and dig your heels in.
I don’t care what religion you follow, but no one belongs to anyone. Especially women to men. If you have a partner/spouse, they don’t “belong” to you.
Stop armchair diagnosing people. it’s ableist as fuck, and it’s not welcome here.
And you never contradict the Bible at all? You never eat shrimp, work on Saturday, wear polyester, ect? Do you still stone people to death for cheating on their spouses?
I’m all up for Vox not being a respectable Christian, but claiming that he’s contradicting the Bible is a bit of a weak claim, since most Christians contradict what the Bible says verbatim all the time. Mostly because they’ve realized that a lot of the things in there are outdated and we shouldn’t do that anymore, because we’ve grown as a society and learned to look beyond that.
There was nothing “honest” about the debauchery in 50 Shades of Grey. It’s all manipulation, abuse, rape and lies. If you’d like, I could give you a list of all the examples in the books, as well as link you to other people reading it and giving their thoughts on it.
The books characterize BDSM as being a mental disorder, and when it’s not laughably basic or bad (Christian Grey’s “Red Room of Pain” is hilariously vanilla), the BDSM that is portrayed is really fucking unsafe (You don’t use belts for bondage, for example).
I personally couldn’t make it past chapter sixteen of the first book (even though I was reading a sporking of it and not the actual book) because I had a panic attack when Christian Grey beats and rapes Ana in her bedroom after breaking into her apartment because she sent him an email where she said she didn’t want to continue the relationship as way of a joke.
And if you think I’m kidding, you’re more than welcome to Google that bit. Ana talks through the entire scene not like someone who’s turned on by what’s going on, but like someone who’s in pain and wants to get away from her attacker.
The whole scene made me had flashbacks to sexual abuse I had happen to me well over a decade ago. It took me two hours to calm down from that.
Yeah, nothing “honest” about that debauchery. Not in the book, and certainly not from the author, who believes that pointing out abuse in her book belittles abuse survivors, demonizes women who are into BDSM, and ignores women who found the books ‘sexually empowering’.
Alan – that’s fascinating. Is there much investigation into this phenomenon? It seems like the sort of thing that would have a major impact in the way these crimes are prosecuted.
misseb47: No a great post and wonderful questions you raise..
Concentraing on just one area you raised:it is difficult to work out at times why males are like this (and I was one for many years and I struggled to work it out too).. Noting also that so very many are not, sadly quite a few can be encouraged to follow along.
But I grew up in the very violent early 70s in Glasgow so I got a first hand experience of that behaviour, right in my face.
So why do some males act this way, basically being on hair trigger violence alert. Note also that the this gets targetted at other males as well as females and also at gays, lesbian and TGs.
There is this funny twisted ‘honour’ thing that goes on in their minds. For some reason they are ‘alert’ at all times to any impingement of this ‘honour’. In their minds if they decline this, then they are ‘sissies’, not ‘real men’ and all that. The amount of times I have talked men out of violence is not fuuny.
Take the examples of those brothers/fathers who kill their sisters and daughters for ‘honour’.
But and here is the strange BUT, they never target a ‘tough’ target for their ‘honour’ rage. Not a big strong tough looking guy (unless nthey can stab him in the back) . No it is a female or a weak looking male, or a (weak looking) gay guy, or a TG.
Though they have an ‘honour’ system in their mind, however they are very deferential to really tough guys or also now increasingly tough girls or tough gays.
So, IMHO, this is just an extension of 5-10 year old bullying behaviour. They either are those bullies who have kept doing it, or are some that were bullied that are now reacting back by copying it. Instead of fighting against it and later protecting others from it.
The important thing is that in their minds they are ‘respected’ for their violence capabilities. if you ‘disrespect’ that capability then, if you are weak, they feel in their minds you deserve every punishment, inclduing death, that they can deliver. Though they will grovel to someone they think is ‘strong’.
In a sense they need a a hierarchy to function as ‘men’ in their minds..
This has been recognised for all of time and is used sometimes positively more often badly. Armies work on this principle in their training. Young males put together unitiing them in shared violence and nearly always a ‘blind eye to rape’. Spoils of war and all that.
This is such a clear example of this mindset the murderer of Jill Meagher here in Melbourne.
” I was helping her” , by raping her….
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/how-adrian-bayley-was-transformed-from-cocky-and-arrogant-to-a-whimpering-emasculated-shell-of-a-man-20150326-1m5gcv.html
And this is powerful emotional stuff for so many males. True story, UK 1992. Falklands. I was in the Operations Dept of South Eastern gas. We were the ‘brains trust’, seriously bright people. One young guy, happily marrtied and a nice guy, English middle class, never been in a fight in his entre life, and I will never forget when he said to me : I’d love to go there and fight’. You know the saddest thing about it..his wife, also a professional worker, agreed….
Allen-That is interesting! I haven’t heard about that before. I never knew that this happens! I guess it makes sense, though. It also seems to me that these woman faced so much pressure from their abusive partners to abide by stereotypical female gender roles and the abusers had such control over them, that they could not break from those roles even with their partner dead. I have just done some research on this and found that abusers have many ways of messing with the heads of their victims. Abusers use controlling behaviors, rigid sex roles, degradation dual personalities, domination, gaslighting and isolation as well as verbal and physical abuse. O.O I guess it makes their victims easier to control if their entire sense of self is worn down to nothing.
So therefore they didn’t want people thinking they were ‘slatternly’ (inserted thought 1) “because we all know that only women do house work and the house must be spotless, even though there is now a dead body in the house and the whole place is a crime scene..”) and that they knew they would be likely to be remanded in custody so they wanted to make sure the kids had everything they needed (inserted thought 2) “because women have to always be nurturing and put everyone before themselves, even though the he did what ever he wanted, when he wanted, to he wanted…”).
Lisa-Thank you! <3 And thanks for sharing your story, too. Yeah, it is very strange. It is amazing to me how these men pump themselves up with so much aggression to prove how macho they are, but only go for targets they perceive as weaker than themselves, while at the same time acting like this has proved their toughness somehow. But, as you mentioned , as soon someone tougher (or tougher looking, since those guys are all about appearance rather than substance) they crumble. It also amazes me that they feel the need to pump themselves with aggression in the first place?! Grrr! I guess they have never developed past 5-10, mentally. They are like small children throwing tantrums at every little thing that doesn't go their way. At least real children tend not to kill.
"This is such a clear example of this mindset the murderer of Jill Meagher here in Melbourne.
” I was helping her” , by raping her…"
The mentality of such people disgust me. When I read this, I couldn't believe how someone could think like this. Unfortunately, some people do and innocent people get killed.
"True story, UK 1992. Falklands. I was in the Operations Dept of South Eastern gas. We were the ‘brains trust’, seriously bright people. One young guy, happily marrtied and a nice guy, English middle class, never been in a fight in his entre life, and I will never forget when he said to me : I’d love to go there and fight’. You know the saddest thing about it..his wife, also a professional worker, agreed…."
Ugghhh. I bet he wouldn't love getting shot at and seeing people he knows die. I too want to join the military (I can't, because I am on medication for hypothyroidism) not because "I would love to fight" but to serve my country and to give something back. I love my country, because Australia has given me so much-it has given me a good public healthcare system, a great education, welfare assistance stability and safety (Australia has a relatively low crime rate). Also, I have been struggling with long term unemployment (the job market seems to suck at the moment), so I feel like a bit of a free loader. ^^; I just feel that I owe the world something.
Paradoxical Intention-You are very welcome! 😀
“to serve my country and to give something back”
As Dr Johnson said “Every man thinks less of himself for not having been a solider or sailor” [See, even in the eighteenth century no one liked the Air Force]
On a related note, it’s very interesting about the psychology of combat. It is for instance very hard to get soldiers to kill. They fear killing more than being killed. I once wrote a paper for the MOD dealing with the subject (it was in relation to some legal aspects). I can’t share the paper with you but I can tell you a possibly amusing anecdote about it.
I wrote the paper and handed it in (for various reasons it had to be hard copy). I then realised I’d handed in a slightly earlier draft of the final product, so I went to ask for it back and giver them the proper one.
“Sorry, you can’t have it”
“Eh, why not?”
“You don’t have the clearance to see it”
Gotta love security.
Ann,
Seconding Catalpa. Neither fat or mentally ill women deserve to be spoken of like objects that are to be used to punish someone for being an asshole. That was very dehumanizing and gross.
Then you had to double down and throw in some #notallchristians? No. We all know that lots of Christians don’t hold toxic views and are good people. That doesn’t mean you get to say that someone who is toxic and a Christian isn’t one because you don’t like the association. There are assholes in every demographic group. Calling him not a real Christian would be the same as saying he’s not a real man.
I feel bad for the atoms in Vox Day’s body. The poor things never asked to be a part of something like that
Misseb47 – joining in praise of your comments. It reminded me of the Homer Simpson line: “Facts, schmacts! You can prove anything even remotely true with facts.”
Also, nobody actually deserves to be with Beale, not even JB. Although Erin Pizzey comes close.
Allan-I don’t think I could go around shooting people, either. Its a good thing I am not in the Army, then. XD But yes, for most people, killing is very hard.
“See, even in the eighteenth century no one liked the Air Force” LOL!! Ummm. No Airforce in the the 18th century! XD
“I wrote the paper and handed it in (for various reasons it had to be hard copy). I then realised I’d handed in a slightly earlier draft of the final product, so I went to ask for it back and giver them the proper one.
“Sorry, you can’t have it”
“Eh, why not?”
“You don’t have the clearance to see it”
Gotta love security.”
Oh dear! That is hilarious! They did know that you wrote, right? And that it wasn’t the only copy….Yep, you got to love security. ^^;
“Facts, schmacts! You can prove anything even remotely true with facts.” LOL! Well, he did have a brain the size of a peanut. XD
http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&ved=0CAUQjBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.meteoritecollector.org%2Fgallery%2Fmain.php%3Fg2_view%3Dcore.DownloadItem%26g2_itemId%3D1525%26g2_serialNumber%3D5&ei=zucVVaneAsSVmwWhj4DACQ&psig=AFQjCNFl6PgkZZAIb0ZWJV3LgueiBmawww&ust=1427585358136175
@ misseb47
To quote from the fantastic film “Four Lions”:
“You cant win an argument just by being right!”
“You cant win an argument just by being right!” True that. Sad, but true. Some people just ignore evidence no matter how much you provide.
Paradoxal wrote:
**And you never contradict the Bible at all? You never eat shrimp, work on Saturday, wear polyester, ect? Do you still stone people to death for cheating on their spouses?**
Irrelevent. Vox claims loudly and repeatedly to be a ‘Christian’. Yet he immediately contradicts the bible as soon as the bible contradicts his sociopathic sex fantasies. That makes him a HYPOCRITE. I have never made any claims as to what religion I am (which is none of your business, btw). That being the case, any failure on my part in following biblical law does NOT make me a hypocrite.
Paradoxal wrote: **There was nothing “honest” about the debauchery in 50 Shades of Grey. It’s all manipulation, abuse, rape and lies. If you’d like, I could give you a list of all the examples in the books, as well as link you to other people reading it and giving their thoughts on it.**
Paradoxal, I don’t think you understood my comment. I did not mean the behavior of the character ‘Christian Grey’ was honest. You are quite correct in that it was abusive and manipulative. What I meant was that the book itself was ‘honest’ in that it was upfront about being pornography. It did not put a veneer of holiness on what it was, and try to claim that it was depicting abuse and manipulation only out of holy motives, in order to follow this or that bible verse.
It’s not irrelevant if you’re calling him out for being a hypocrite if you’re doing the same thing. If you don’t follow the Bible to the letter either, Christian or no, you calling Day hypocritical is in itself hypocritical. You’re pointing fingers and harping on about him contradicting the Bible, which no one in this day and age follows to the letter in the first place, thus it makes your argument very weak.
I’m not even Christian myself and I can tell you that much.
Plenty of people use the Bible as their shields when promoting agendas. This doesn’t make them right, but specifically calling out Day for it is weak, though with the added armchair diagnoses, it becomes more like bullshit.
Thanks for ignoring the rest of my post though.
Didn’t see this before I posted my last one, apologies.
The book’s upfront about having “sexy” material in it, but it’s still not upfront about it being abuse. I fail to see how the books are “honest” in any sense of the word if they only cover the fact they have porn in them and not that the sex, or the character’s means of getting it, is abusive.
You can say “oh, this has porn in it!”, and still lie about what kind of porn it is. That’s where the author refuses to be honest.
The author doesn’t claim abuse and manipulation out of “holy motives”, but she does claim that these things are “sexy” and “what women want”. She’s using the desires of women to promote abuse, which is just as bad, if not worse than someone using “holy motives” to promote their world view.
misseb47: you wrote:** 1) “because we all know that only women do house work and the house must be spotless, even though there is now a dead body in the house and the whole place is a crime scene..”)**
I’d have to know what place and time frame this came from, before making a judgement on it. People nowadays, at least in wealthier countries, generally are aware of police procedures and that evidence and crime scenes shouldn’t be tampered with. This was not always the case. In fact, it wasn’t all that long ago that the police themselves didn’t understand how to preserve or even interpret physical evidence. Case in point, one of the victims of Jack the Ripper was found in a shed. For ‘decency’s sake’, the first thing the police did was move her body to a bed in the house. Nowadays, that would be unthinkable, the shed would be photographed and measured and sniffed with dogs and who knows what, before anyone would ever dream of moving the body.
Paradoxal wrote: **Didn’t see this before I posted my last one, apologies.**
I wasn’t very specific. Regarding the abuse in 50 Shades of Grey, my intention wasn’t to justify abuse. I apologize if this point confused you, I simply picked a pornographic book that was fairly well known as BEING pornography, and not pretending (as Vox does) to depict assorted sorts of abusive sex ‘just to follow the bible’. There’s plenty of other examples of pornography, such as Playboy, which are also honest about being pornography, and they don’t try to pretend that they are depicting whatever sort of sex it is they are depicting ‘just to follow the bible’.
As for 50 shades of grey claiming that it is depicting abuse ‘just to show love’ or whatever, that’s a seperate subject entirely.
So Ann Morgan is just going to go on about the bible without apologizing for her ableism and fat shaming, then? Okay…
Ann Morgan: That is interesting, but lack of forensic awareness is the cause of this. This most likely occurred during modern times. Allen clearly stated that “Women accused of murder who tried to run diminished responsibility as a defence (in the legal sense) were (are?) often portrayed by the prosecution as cold and calculating because they would take steps to clean up the murder scene and the rest of the location. The implication was that they were forensically aware and were trying to cover up evidence.” They were aware of the implications of destroying forensic evidence, but heir abuses have so thoroughly messed with their heads, that they could not face other people seeing the house in that state. The damage the abuser inflicted does not just disappear the moment the abuser dies.
Catalpa – I don’t know what ‘ableism’ is. I apologize for my fat shaming. You are right, even an unattractive woman does not deserve a sociopath like Vox. What Vox really deserves is the woman one of my ex boyfriends left me, who was a gold digger of a sort I don’t care to discuss. When I told him that she was a gold digger who would betray him as soon as she got all the good out of him, he told me that he already knew that, and that he specifically preferred a gold digger to the fact that I loved him, because ‘he knew where he stood with them. Whatever the hell that means.