It’s still not clear if the Umpqua Community College shooter, now identified as 26-year-old Chris Harper Mercer, posted his plans on 4chan’s /r9k/ board the day before the shooting, or if the post, warning of an impeding shooting at a school in the northwest, was just a bizarre and highly improbable coincidence.
What is clear is that a lot of 4channers, particularly the “robots” of /r9k/, are offering the now-dead killer their sympathy and support. Indeed, in one thread on the board today, 4channers are blaming the shootings on women being sluts. Sluts, that is, who won’t sleep with them.
The thread starts with a post attacking “sexual liberalism” for allegedly leaving most men celibate while women have casual sex only with a small minority of the most attractive men.
Yep. As one critical anon put it, the OP’s “grand plan” seems to be “to force women in relationships with men they neither like nor are attracted to.”
Another anon thought the problem could be addressed, at least partially, on a voluntary basis:
Not all anons were quite so, er, optimistic:
Others, meanwhile, pinned their hopes on the inevitable arrival of sexbots:
Still others had even more radical “solutions.”
If at this point you feel your faith in humanity slipping away, you will be perhaps be slightly reassured by the fact that a good number of those posting in the thread thought the OP and those who agreed with him were a bunch of self-absorbed, self-pitying assholes.
One anon got this point across with admirable succinctness.
“Robot,” in this context, refers to the denizens of /r9k/, not the “companion robots” that others in the thread think will ultimately make women obsolete.
Not only is your math valid (or as much as it can be given the bullshit you’re working with) but even if we assume both genders are the same age range, and thus factor out the “risk” of an 18 year old nerd being “stuck” with a 30 something year old woman, there’s that 20% bit. Assume that’s correct, because fuck it, why bother with facts when the whole thing is a house of cards? So 20% of the eligible dudes get first dibs on the women yeah?
If 20%+ of the women are HB10, their grading system is borked. This makes me weep for humanity, but bottom 10% is HB1, 20% HB2 and so on until HB9 is up to the 90% percentile? So HB10 is the top 10%? (Why do I assume there is any logic behind this at all?) But assuming that all is wtf they mean, the top 20% of guys get the top 20% of girls, leaving them with the HB7s and below.
You know, the women they could probably date if they were reasonable people with basic human decency and a realistic view on the dating world. Cuz HB7 is “average” right? So they’re whining they’ll always be stuck with average women when they are, at best, average. And really, they’re scum, they should be happy any woman besides their mother will tolerate them… ooooooh, that’s why they’re so anti-feminism!
We don’t think it’s a woman’s duty to mother her grown ass morally repugnant son! I am so very glad something logical came out of the headache I just gave myself.
Footnote, that makes me weep for humanity not because some people aren’t pretty or whatever I implied there, but because that bullshit math percentile shit actually seems to be how they think. Rereading I fear I implied that ugly people make me weep for humanity and that’s just fucked up.
http://depts.washington.edu/mhreport/facts_violence.php
For some reason it left out this quote on my last post.
Facts About Mental Illness and Violence
Fact 1: The vast majority of people with mental illness are not violent.
Here is what researchers say about the link between mental illness and violence:
– “Although studies suggest a link between mental illnesses and violence, the contribution of people with mental illnesses to overall rates of violence is small, and further, the magnitude of the relationship is greatly exaggerated in the minds of the general population (Institute of Medicine, 2006).”
– “…the vast majority of people who are violent do not suffer from mental illnesses (American Psychiatric Association, 1994).”
– “The absolute risk of violence among the mentally ill as a group is very small. . . only a small proportion of the violence in our society can be attributed to persons who are mentally ill (Mulvey, 1994).”
-“People with psychiatric disabilities are far more likely to be victims than perpetrators of violent crime (Appleby, et al., 2001). People with severe mental illnesses, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or psychosis, are 2 ½ times more likely to be attacked, raped or mugged than the general population (Hiday, et al.,1999).”
Felix
But love isn’t really the issue, is it. What matters is liking people, and being likeable to at least some people if not everyone. The biggest problem for these jerks is that they’re not interested in liking women nor in women who might like them. They’re only interested in 1) sex and, possibly, 2) eternal, unquestioning, undying love.
Most of us understand that a relationship worthy of the name involves all kinds of mutual activities. Some are sexual, some are domestic — cooking, dishwashing and the like, but mostly casual non-intimate shared activities like gaming, watching/listening to music or movies, reading, studying, as well as a lot of time spent apart when working or whatever. Someone who’s just as capable of friendly chat while preparing a meal as they are of mind-blowing excitement in bed is the ideal partner. Anyone whose conversation is enjoyable is a good person to have around regardless of the amount of sexytimes you might also share. A sense of humour also goes a long way, and that goes for bed-based fun times as well. Everyone should be able to share a giggle about extricating a painful foot, elbow, knee from an uncomfortable sandwich between wall and furniture when things get a bit creative or athletic (or too close to the fire).
To like and be liked is as important as loving and being loved — it’s even more important when a relationship is casual or only just starting out.
Every time I try to talk to one of these guys and help them see how the world isn’t such a hostile place and they should approach their own lives first, I find that I’m running headfirst into a completely closed mind.
They would rather be unhappy than do something about it, and are utterly unwilling to question any aspect of their belief system.
It’s as if they’ve built little nests out of misery for themselves.
I wish I knew something I could do to help them.
So the press confirm:
1. The killer didn’t have a girlfriend and was bitter about it. http://www.ibtimes.com/oregon-gunman-note-chris-harper-mercer-left-message-expressing-anger-depression-2125077
2. He was affiliated to a group called the “beta boys”, who were, judging from the reports, incels or MRAs. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/10/02/oregon-college-shooting/73192562/
I guess coupled with him posting on /r9k/ that basically confirms he was an incel.
No surprise to anybody here, but at least there’s public evidence now.
@ shaenon “an endless string of lady-shaped penis cozies” – that is superb, thank you.
And they’d be bitter and resentful that some imaginary “Chad” got a better shaped cozy than they did.
The problem with saying “XXX have a mental illness” is that there is a lot of mental illness, and that mostly nobody know what are their consequence and what name map to what symptom (hence why Scented Fucking Hard Chairs terrify people when he say what he is afflicted with).
So, even if one suppose their attitude is due to a mental imbalance of some sort (like not being in contact with enough different people, or not having trained their critical sense enough, or anything), he would need another term than mental illness to designate it.
They are specific non-mental diseases that lead to being agressive, like rabies. But people don’t get out of their way to point out all non-mentally diseased people to be both agressive like they had rabies, and contagious like they had the flu, and on the verge of dying like they had an untreated Ebola. But they do for mental one, leading to what I call the “sado-schizopathonoid” : every mentally ill people is clearly a super-intelligent serial killer who want to see the world burn, love to inflict pain on anyone, and think the government is monitoring his every action.
(yes, I know BDSM isn’t a mental disease at all. It’s just lumped with the rest for way too more people. On the other hand, insomnia seem to not be considered a mental disease for thoses same, while it’s clearly at least a disease, and not the gentler one to have)
@Ellesar
>>I read the piece that Amy linked to, and the content is utterly shocking – I DO NOT recognise this culture, I really don’t. Is this an American thing?
I’m an American, and I don’t recognize it either. Of course, I’m over forty. When I was growing up, these attitudes may not have come up for discussion as much, because we weren’t so well armed.
Don’t you think if these bros were actually concerned about their fellow dude they’d do something to restrict the presence of guns? Seriously, what kills men at a comparable rate to their own guns? (I think the answer is “nothing” but am open to others.)
cars?
“…Even PUA/Red Pill forums, which are supposedly about pumping-and-dumping an endless string of lady-shaped penis cozies…” (sorry I fail at block-quoting)
This is what baffles me…if they’re all for the constant pump and dump through the cities and suburbs, they’re presumably pumping and dumping women, the very same women who they call ‘sluts’ because they didn’t keep their legs closed…who they would have probably made a video saying how these women are not up to even their pump and dump standards. The only way for the pump and dumping train to keep a-going is to go younger and and that gets ILLEGAL pretty quick. The same guys who claim that women and their fancy feminist ideas are harming girls/sexualizing them before anyone should view them in such a way (along with screwing up sons because, women) want their sex or a bj before the jacuzzi and that’s how it’s going to be, they want endless variety of virginal attractive young women who they can discard casually not to mention be the “creepy old dude/uncle” that hits on them at bars/parties/social outings/at the gym/at work/at school/in their apartment complex while selling an awful pile of elephant dung to ‘betas and omegas’ in the smug way only a pua/mra/other mtgows do because they’re far too busy pretending to get the hot chicks, being creepy guy and badly behaved older uncle, god forbid they have a daughter whose friends they hit on, hopefully not while they’re attending an all-girls catholic high school because no daughter of theirs is going to grow up to be a pump and dump (says the guy doing that very thing but it never clicks nor do the names matter only bodies…)…?
Can’t utilize talents and abilities unless they’re aligned with a never-existed narrow spectrum of the ideal female, or would take an opportunity from a man because penis regardless of the man’s own abilities or level of talent – yeah I know that’s unfathomable to a lot of these guys, for a woman to have talents and abilities outside of cookin’. cleanin’, blowin’, sexin’, birthin’, and that feeling shit the hippies and feminists say women are so much better at. Have they met every last woman on the planet? NO. So there could very well be a large number of women who are awesome welders and another group who would make any service member active and veteran proud to be on the battlefield with them regardless of being an innie or an outie on the down low half – not that a person can’t be both or a configuration of options. They also may have daughters, and the calls for the end to marriage without a repeal of everything women got starting with suffrage, promoting pump and dump ‘game’, and forcing the Cleaver-Stepford way because if they have to be in the house before the streetlights are on and group dates no riding in a car with a boy until it’s a certainty that his intentions are to marry…that hurts daughters too. There is no going back to a fictional sitcom life and what the HELL is wrong with shaking things up with collaborative efforts instead of both sides taking their respective toys and going home? We may not get to the end results using the same path but still get there, it’s the bickering back and forth that the universe is probably about to snap “don’t MAKE me have to go all black-hole on you so I can begin all over again and hopefully do so with no evolving lifeforms that become more of you!”
Maybe we can arrange some sort of schedule to share the burden of someone having to pick, whine, and publicly appear upset each week.
Dudes do die in MVAs a lot, that’s true.
@Scented Fucking Hard Chairs | October 2, 2015 at 11:00 pm
>>2. I’m going to guess that you’re not schizophrenic. I am. As a direct result of being thrown under the bus in the name of the Almighty White Male Ego, I can’t even mention that anywhere but here without being immediately blocked by my friends and harassed off the site. I’m not dangerous, but the media has convinced everyone I am. It’s not fun.
I am absolutely stuck here. You’re not saying that mental illness isn’t a factor; you’re saying that it’ll be bad for you if I talk about it. But I’m not convinced that it isn’t a factor, and if we’re not here for an honest, courageous discussion, what are we here for?
I respect the injustice of your alienation, and I know that most mentally ill people aren’t violent. Neither, incidentally, are most men, or even most misogynists.
I’m not going to press this any further, but I’d like to ask everybody to be careful about their use of “throwing (so and so) under the bus”. I don’t want to throw anybody under any moving vehicles, whatsoever.
“Sluts, that is, who won’t sleep with them.”
http://www.whats-thesayinganswers.com/images/the-cat-is-out-of-the-bag.jpg
Felix, you might find this link useful: http://www.apa.org/research/action/speaking-of-psychology/dispelling-myth.aspx
Interesting read a friend of mine shared:
http://m.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2015/1002/Many-school-shooters-one-common-factor-a-warped-view-of-masculinity
I mean, we’ve already been talking about it, but it’s nice to see it being addressed on something besides a blog.
^ And, anyone lurking who doesn’t know what’s meant by the term “toxic masculinity”: This.
This is what’s meant.
Not that men are toxic.
Not that masculinity is toxic.
But that the standards, requirements, and expectations that *some* place on masculinity are harmful – not least to men and boys.
Felix Ray – thank you for shedding some light on it. I have actually been telling my kids about the anecdotes, so shocked was I. The most shocking part being that other kids do not care, that they blame the girl.
This couldn’t happen in the UK. Not saying we do not have a problem with teen violence, we absolutely do, but that particular threat has not entered the UK as yet (to my knowledge – and I take a special interest in such issues).
@Alan
Thanks! And that’s true, I conflated attractiveness with “conventional physical attractiveness”, Good point. It’s often a mistake we make, especially with the line of thinking “Oh no, this one person finds me unattractive and undesirable that must mean I am unattractive and undesirable!”.
@banned@4chan
Wow. Well clearly their robot is no longer operational because I this lamentation of theirs is highly unoriginal. I read the article of #xkcd IRC, certainly an interesting use for a bot.
So let me translate these thoughts back into proper english. Sluts – that is, women who have sex with other men but not with me – are ruining society, which is obviously centered around whether or not my sexual desires are satisfied. It is therefore completely acceptable to go on a shooting spree because nothing will arouse the ladies like the righteous terror that I might be the next guy to go postal. Hmmm, doesn’t sound any better.
HI Everyone!! Black Kat de-lurking here!! I want to greet Dave and the WHTM community!!
*Pukes* That Mandatory fucking sessions post makes me sick to my stoma… *Pukes again*
That post is a textbook definition of rape cultu… *pukes blood*
need brain bleach…
P.S. I think the picture on that post should be censored…
I think this is an extreme variation of the “men desire” and “women are desired” paradigm. People who fail in their gendered sexual/romantic roles don’t just fail at sex and romance, but as a person entirely, under this paradigm. Men who fail to get when they presumably desire are failures as human beings. Similarly women are required to be beautiful. Of course the answer is to simply reject the whole paradigm, but few can see that possibility.
The thing that always, always blows my mind about this is that their model has nothing to do with the emotions they have.
Okay, so let’s say just for argument that women get to choose who they have sex with, and I am unattractive, so they don’t choose to have sex with me. How is that anyone else’s fault? That sucks for me, but it’s just the way of the world, so it makes no sense to get mad at anyone about it. Self-pity is the appropriate emotion, or just sadness. If your whole point is “I’m a loser” that’s explicitly and unavoidably about your own failings. Where do they get rage from this?