|
SedanChair posted:I was very alarmed to see the targeting of Rodger as possibly gay based on his affect. Not so much because it belittles gay people (that's always disturbing of course, but nothing new) but because it tells me there are a whole lot of people out there who are real bad at reading affects. This guy was a cold fish for sure, a guy wrapped up in his own world and totally uncaring towards human life. You can hear it in his speech patterns. Maybe it's because I've spent a lot of time screening people (OK it is) but how does a guy who presents like this not set off alarm bells in your head? This is something I've really noticed a lot too. I've had a hard time articulating it. Mostly I just settle on stupid poo poo like, "you just know", so thank you. e: I really don't like when people say, "obviously, he was a closeted gay!", because it really goes to show you how deep homophobia runs, even in people who wouldn't normally call themselves homophobic.
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 19:35 |
|
|
VitalSigns posted:You didn't mention misandry in this post, denying its very existence. i know fuckin tumblrites right?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
bassguitarhero posted:I just don't think that I would label misogyny his sole motivator - I think he was hosed in the head long before he had any romantic or sexual interest in women. I personally feel his privilege and entitlement complex, connected to an inferiority complex over not being racially pure, is just as much a motivator - it may not be why he decided to start his day of retribution, but I just don't think the guy can be summed up as easily as "Dude hated women, case closed." But I also stress that his killing spree is exactly the kind of thing women have to deal with and that women are concerned about, and that conversation needs to be had. I agree with this post but I would say that misogyny as translated by internet MRAs provided him with a totalizing explanation for why he was unhappy with his life. This kind of extreme violence tends to come from men (usually young) who are aimless and deeply unhappy with their lives and who at some point hit upon an ideology that focuses them by telling them who is to blame--racism, antisemitism, religious radicalism, or in this case misogyny. The community of like-minded fellow travelers that comes with joining a hate group also radicalizes people over time, particularly somebody who is already mentally ill or at least unstable. It's not unreasonable to think that it made him more intransigent and violent than would otherwise have been the case. R. Mute posted:I think the manifesto said something about him not taking his meds and that those meds were usually prescribed to target schizophrenia. According to what I read in the news coverage, his meds are intended for schizophrenia but are also commonly prescribed off-label to autistic persons who act out violently, to curb their outbursts.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:40
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:Edit: The birth control pill did more for women's rights than any amount of feminist literature. I think we'll need some way to safely breed/raise children without the need for a traditional mother before we get all the way to complete equality. I missed this before. It's good you brought this up, I wanted to tell you that... ...access to the pill and other forms of contraception and reproductive services are actually a major part of modern feminist advocacy!
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:40
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:Elliot saw having a blonde woman as a prized asset, a status symbol. He never talks about even considering women who are not blonde, he says blonde over and over. He wanted someone BEAUTIFUL, a ten out of ten by his reckoning, and would not accept less. You can measure how much grasp someone has on the concept of "other people", by how disappointed/surprised they are when they don't hit the Powerball. Lots of folks can't really wrap their heads around the personhood of someone they aren't intimately acquainted with. So as far as they were concerned, there were only like forty people playing, instead of 150 million. SedanChair posted:That's what we need to fix in society right now, is that people are getting suckered by creepos with an obviously horrifying presentation. We don't scream about those people because we get confused by other signals, like dressing OK or driving a nice car. I see hosed up psychos all the time, from car dealers to politicians. They don't speak and emote like healthy people. I'm not sure everyone calibrating their creepometeres to that of a psych worker would do much in the way of repairing society. agarjogger fucked around with this message at 01:44 on May 28, 2014 |
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
copper rose petal posted:I missed this before. It's good you brought this up, I wanted to tell you that... No no, feminism clearly had nothing to do with repealing and overturning laws that restricted birth control and reproductive services to married women only. In fact, I think we can say that feminism totally dropped the ball on contraception and reproductive services because feminists were too busy writing books while men went about liberating women scientifically 
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
copper rose petal posted:I missed this before. It's good you brought this up, I wanted to tell you that...
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:46
|
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:Elliot's fundamental flaw was an inability to humble himself. He had such a grandiose view of his destiny and his life, to me there is no clearer example of this than when he believed he was destined to win the lottery, that the universe owed it to him. This is true and it's why all this has nothing to do with autism. Bleuler used the word "autism" to mean "utter self-regard to the point of delusion and morbidity" and that's what this guy was. For a fuckhead like this, there truly is no outer world, it's reflections in a prism for him to play with. We can say, "oh sure his parents enabled him to be fully narcissistic by fulfilling his material whims" but there was that fundamental poisonous nature within him, that difference that is so unrelated to autism. The autism spectrum has nothing to do with his disgusting actions. I've known many caring, empathetic individuals on the autism spectrum. This guy was just criminal filth, is all. He had his hosed up opinions but he ran out and did a bunch of killing, that makes him nothing more than refuse. e: agarjogger posted:I'm not sure everyone calibrating their creepometeres to that of a psych worker would do much in the way of repairing society. Probably not, but jesus christ people, nonverbals. I think I could read creeplords pretty well when I was younger, it probably led to me having an interest and aptitude in the jobs I've done. For what it's worth I score higher than the male average on eye expression tests as well. woke wedding drone fucked around with this message at 01:51 on May 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
copper rose petal posted:This is incorrect. He killed his roommates so that he could create a torture chamber in his apartment and lure people back to kill them. The most attractive ones he could find, because to him the most attractive people were having all the sex that he was not having. I can't tell if you're joking or not.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Probably not, but jesus christ people, nonverbals. I think I could read creeplords pretty well when I was younger, it probably led to me having an interest and aptitude in the jobs I've done. For what it's worth I score higher than the male average on eye expression tests as well. That's probably because your skull is more feminine than the standard human male's.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
copper rose petal posted:I missed this before. It's good you brought this up, I wanted to tell you that... Dude why do you keep trying to make Feminism include everything!
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
Ungoal posted:I can't tell if you're joking or not. I posted the excerpt where he says it himself. 
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:55
|
|
SedanChair posted:Probably not, but jesus christ people, nonverbals. I think I could read creeplords pretty well when I was younger, it probably led to me having an interest and aptitude in the jobs I've done. For what it's worth I score higher than the male average on eye expression tests as well. Hey can you link this. Always wondered if I've got the aspies. SedanChair posted:This guy was just criminal filth, is all. He had his hosed up opinions but he ran out and did a bunch of killing, that makes him nothing more than refuse. The really empty, vacant thing about it all is that it's impossible to hold a true psychopath to account for the killing, and this is part of why most of the families don't seem to get all that vengeful. They were able to do it because they don't understand what they did, all severed sparking wires in that region of the brain. If you wanted to make them pay in any real way, you'd have to strap them to a Clockwork Orange chair and force-feed them video of human beings being Awww for like years on end. What can you do with refuse? Nothing. That's why it's garbage, all you can do is distance yourself from it.
|
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
Ernie Muppari posted:That's probably because your skull is more feminine than the standard human male's. It has an extra bone!
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:Ohhhh, so the procession of George Washington to Barack Obama is responsible for Eliot Rodger going on a virgin rampage. IT'S SO CLEAR. Slobjob Zizek posted:Oh, I just mean attributing everything to the amorphous "patriarchy." That is stupid, and non-materialist. Slobjob Zizek posted:Well, my point is that because of sexual dimorphism, patriarchy will be reproduced forever. It's not just strength, but who bears children, the characteristics that are desired in sexual partners, modes of socializing, etc. Slobjob Zizek posted:But society has not yet evolved past needing women to breed (sure, they have more power due to decreased infant mortality and less labor needed to run a household). So, it's not a surprise the patriarchy cannot yet be abolished. Patriarchy: an amorphous and meaningless leftist watchword that doesn't exist, and also an inevitable social organization of men ruling over women because 
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
It's time to educate men.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
tbp posted:It's time to educate men. One might say, rather, re-educate men.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Real hurthling! posted:Egalitarian societies with no visible patriarchy have apparently been documented, just not the reverse of patriarchy where gangs of women harass men on the street and make decisions about their ballsacks for them. I have never heard of such a society.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Patriarchy: an amorphous and meaningless leftist watchword that doesn't exist, and also an inevitable social organization of men ruling over women because The reason men rule over women is because society is founded by violence, and women don't have the ability to commit violence to men as much as the opposite way around.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
Miltank posted:I have never heard of such a society. That's not the same thing as there never being any.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
tbp posted:It's time to educate men. Where should we start? (I figured out it's useful to ask questions.) agarjogger posted:Hey can you link this. Always wondered if I've got the aspies. Here's one, I'm not sure about it but it seems to use the same image library as another one I took. I just took it and got 32/36 and I'm preeeety sure I could pick up a diagnosis of Asperger's if I wanted to http://kgajos.eecs.harvard.edu/mite/
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
Miltank posted:I have never heard of such a society. Hunter-gatherers is the most obvious example.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:Yes? It certainly made women vulnerable and dependent on men in pre-modern eras. Materialism does not mean biological reductionism. There are materialist feminists, as well as feminist marxists, and neither of them say the patriarchy is reducible to sexual dimorphism. In response to your other posts which I'm too lazy to go quote: Base-superstructure orthodox Marxism is dead, but the relationship between the two is dialectical and Marx himself would never just say ppffftt ignore the superstructure. Also, didn't you name drop Baudrillard earlier? Early Baudrillard was a close reader of Marx who flipped the primacy of production with exchange and added a bunch of semiotic poo poo, later Baudrillard was pretty much just a crazy anti-materialist. Either way, I don't see how either stage of his thinking supports your arguments so why bring him up?. It's almost like you don't know what these words mean, or how they apply to these thinkers. Debunk fucked around with this message at 02:22 on May 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
on the left posted:The reason men rule over women is because society is founded by violence, and women don't have the ability to commit violence to men as much as the opposite way around. What? No, men don't rule over women, the patriarchy is a whacko leftist conspiracy theory. Now where was I? Oh yes: men naturally rule over women because women are baby-making machines...
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
EvanSchenck posted:I agree with this post but I would say that misogyny as translated by internet MRAs provided him with a totalizing explanation for why he was unhappy with his life. This kind of extreme violence tends to come from men (usually young) who are aimless and deeply unhappy with their lives and who at some point hit upon an ideology that focuses them by telling them who is to blame--racism, antisemitism, religious radicalism, or in this case misogyny. The community of like-minded fellow travelers that comes with joining a hate group also radicalizes people over time, particularly somebody who is already mentally ill or at least unstable. It's not unreasonable to think that it made him more intransigent and violent than would otherwise have been the case. If you're interested in his posts in the PUAHate forum, Anna at Queereka compiled some of them into an article and wrote a bunch of words about them.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
Debunk posted:Materialism does not mean biological reductionism. There are materialist feminists, as well as feminist marxists, and neither of them say the patriarchy is reducible to sexual dimorphism. It's not really Slobjob's fault. Everyone knows that men, being simple sperm delivery systems, generally lack the structures in their brains necessary to comprehend language.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
on the left posted:The reason men rule over women is because society is founded by violence, and women don't have the ability to commit violence to men as much as the opposite way around. Yes. And by the time society evolved past needing to utilize violence on a daily basis and power became softer, consolidating power into male hands had already occurred. This is why you see all kinds of bullshit biological rationales for why women can't do all kinds of poo poo men do. They can't work because they have to raise babies. They can't be scientists because their brains are smaller. They can't be in the military because they're too weak. These are all things that men do, and conveniently by doing those things they maintain control over politics, money, households, countries, etc. This is how gender norms are formed, as fake-biological rationales for maintaining male power. But all of these gender norms begin as a way of codifying the subjugation of women by defining the gender responsibilities as distinct. It's why toxic masculinity is a concept, which requires that men have to be aggressive and dominating and sexually successful and wealthy. Because being submissive and weak is a female trait. And why receiving treatment for mental illness has been difficult for men to seek out, because it shows weakness and weakness is not a male trait. Dismantling gender norms that harm women also dismantles gender norms that harm men, because they are inextricably tied to one another, so much so that male gender norms are dependent on defining a man as non-female. So when people talk about "why isn't feminism humanism anyway?  " it's just ridiculous. The issues MRAs claim to be in support of, more support for male domestic violence victims, more acknowledgment of male rape victims, better egalitarian split of custody during divorce, etc. are all issues that feminists have worked towards improving. The reason these issues exist in the first place is due to gender norms that say that women are weak and men are aggressive (so men can't be victims of domestic violence), that men are sexually aggressive and women are sexually submissive (so female on male rape is not taken seriously), and that women are responsible for child rearing and men are responsible for working (so the tendency is to see custody awarded to the mother). So that's patriarchy. It's the cultural gender norms that consolidate and maintain power in male hands by perpetuating the stereotypes of male and female traits, and punishes people who don't conform to those traits. Misogyny plays a role because in order to elevate yourself as a man above women, and define yourself as not being in possession of female traits, you have to see the traits they embody as harmful and bad. If you see female traits as harmful and bad, it's not a stretch to see women as harmful and bad, especially when our society displays women as disposable sex objects. Elliot Rodger was a victim of patriarchy because he felt that to be a successful male he needed the trappings of successful maleness: money, a woman, expensive status possessions. When he didn't have them, he became angry and his anger was directed at women, the only thing he was lacking out of the required possessions of a successful man. His entire life became defined by his lacking in this one area, and his entire existence defined by not having the hot blonde girlfriend.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
Debunk posted:Materialism does not mean biological reductionism. There are materialist feminists, as well as feminist marxists, and neither of them say the patriarchy is reducible to sexual dimorphism. First, materialism is obviously reducible to sexual dimorphism, in the context of male-female relations. How else did "the patriarchy" independently develop across multiple cultures simultaneously (not even capitalism did that)? Second, Baudrillard is mainly concerned with mass culture, and in this context, strong anti-materialism makes a lot of sense. In the realm of pure culture unbound by reality (these are the simulacra), obviously materialism has little sway. Most other post-structuralism is garbage though. Anyway, a mostly-cultural strategy to deal with material concerns, with respect to feminism, is, I think, useless. Elliot Rodger wanted to be respected by women and peers. Telling him to just not care about being respected would not have helped.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
Spiffo posted:If you're interested in his posts in the PUAHate forum, Anna at Queereka compiled some of them into an article and wrote a bunch of words about them. Well that was a journey down a rabbit hole, but honestly, it sounds a lot like many places you get a bunch of nerdy, young, middle-class, mostly white males. The only difference is how much other people tend to put up with it. Slobjob Zizek posted:First, materialism is obviously reducible to sexual dimorphism, in the context of male-female relations. How else did "the patriarchy" independently develop across multiple cultures simultaneously (not even capitalism did that)? So have you decided whether we're living in a patriarchal society, or not? And yeah, go ahead and elide over his obsession with women and having sex with them if it makes his rage more palatable for you because other people weren't giving him his due respect. The fact is, he was obsessed with having sex with women, and "get over it, you're not owed poo poo" is a perfectly reasonable response from anyone he ever would have wanted to have sex with. edit: Debunk posted:I think there are many strains of feminist thought which would point to a political strategy you'd agree with though, and I wouldn't dismiss feminism as an intellectual project based on the second-hand view you've gotten filtered through the Internet. I think Debunk is right about this. Sharkie fucked around with this message at 03:08 on May 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:05
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:First, materialism is obviously reducible to sexual dimorphism, in the context of male-female relations. How else did "the patriarchy" independently develop across multiple cultures simultaneously (not even capitalism did that)? First, patriarchy refers, from a global and historical perspective, to any kinds of power structures that result in the domination of men over women. But when we say "the patriarchy" in reference to how it appears in our society, we are referring to the outgrowth of a system that is more directly traceable back to the transition between feudalism and early capitalism. Even an orthodox Marxist analysis will reveal that all kinds of things like the forces of production, the relations of production, the class struggle, the relations between people and the environment, and so on all contribute to how this domination of men over women was formed and reproduced. If you are interested in a Marxist reading of that whole development check out Silvia Federici's Caliban and the Witch. Second, since the era of Baudrillard's thinking you're referring to is after he abandoned Marx's economism, it wouldn't be entirely too unfair to describe him thinking in terms of a superstructure that has determined itself and moves autonomously. I don't see how you can coherently draw on Baudrillard then ask people to look solely at the economic base through a materialist philosophy when they call you out on quoting dumb evopsych poo poo to strawman feminism. I think you're right that he was looking for some kind of social validation, and that telling him to not care about it would just reinforce his alienation. I think there are many strains of feminist thought which would point to a political strategy you'd agree with though, and I wouldn't dismiss feminism as an intellectual project based on the second-hand view you've gotten filtered through the Internet.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:05
|
|
SedanChair posted:Here's one, I'm not sure about it but it seems to use the same image library as another one I took. I just took it and got 32/36 and I'm preeeety sure I could pick up a diagnosis of Asperger's if I wanted to Sweet, I did good and am relieved. The reason I think I'd be bad is that I've never liked to stare people in the eyes when I'm talking to them. Test isn't perfect though. It's all white people, so if you're a black nationalist who hates white people you might interpret all thirty-six expressions as "smug". quote:"I've been told that the shooter's father has said he wanted to devote his life to making sure that doesn't happen again. I share that with him," Martinez told the paper. "He's a father. I'm a father. He loved his son. I love my son. His son died. My son died." 
|
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Well that was a journey down a rabbit hole, but honestly, it sounds a lot like many places you get a bunch of nerdy, young, middle-class, mostly white males. Isn't that, uh, the point?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
CheesyDog posted:Isn't that, uh, the point? Yeah, it is, and I didn't mean to imply otherwise. I guess my wording was clumsy there. Instead of "but honestly," read "And it really does."
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:Elliot's fundamental flaw was an inability to humble himself. He had such a grandiose view of his destiny and his life, to me there is no clearer example of this than when he believed he was destined to win the lottery, that the universe owed it to him. The whole "mental illness vs. misogyny" thing seems like a false dichotomy to me. Dude seems like he had extreme narcissistic personality disorder that manifested in an extreme hatred of women, probably at least in part because of this: A Winner is Jew posted:Not to goodwin this (totally going to anyway so sorry) but I'm willing to bet there's a reason why he didn't fixate on targeting jews or minorities when he exploded, and that reason is that racism and antisemitism is actively ostracized while MRA's aren't. This is how extremist violence always happens (at least outside of warzones). You get an extremist movement that develops a bunch of crazy ideology, crazy people get involved in the movement and get radicalized by the ideology, then spin off and go full on crazy. Militia movement --> McVeigh being the classic example. From what I've read so far it seems like that's basically what happened here. Guy was a crazy narcissist, picked up a lot of extreme misogynist ideology, radicalized, acted out.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
I can't remember if the terrorist derail was in this thread or the gbs one, but I was thinking that the privileged Saudi guys who got recruited into those airliners were a lot like our parade of male adolescent shooters. They found anti-west terrorism as the outlet for their anomie, ours find MRA or Alex Jones or FBI stings to blow up bridges. And then they inevitably find guns.
|
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:This is how extremist violence always happens (at least outside of warzones). You get an extremist movement that develops a bunch of crazy ideology, crazy people get involved in the movement and get radicalized by the ideology, then spin off and go full on crazy. Militia movement --> McVeigh being the classic example. Elliot never really cites any authors or thinkers that contributed to his worldview, does he? (aside for popular media) Rather it's always about his personal experience and feelings.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:18
|
|
|
Judakel posted:Hunter-gatherers is the most obvious example. But the patriarchy exists in every hunter gatherer tribe I've ever heard of? Saying I had never heard of such a thing was a snarky way of asking for a source referring to one of these documented societies. Miltank fucked around with this message at 03:26 on May 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:20
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:Elliot never really cites any authors or thinkers that contributed to his worldview, does he? Rather it's always about his personal experience and feelings. Not sure, I don't think you'll find anyone admitting to having read all 141 pages. Couldn't make it past page twenty if it were my job.
|
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:20
|
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:Elliot never really cites any authors or thinkers that contributed to his worldview, does he? (aside for popular media) Rather it's always about his personal experience and feelings. You can actually look at this article Spiffo posted. to see him in conversation with other "authors" and "thinkers" who share his ideology. Not all people who wield extremist violence leave behind footnotes (even though you do see the exact same themes and ideas in his manifesto shared in other extremist men's groups), but that doesn't mean it's impossible to connect the ideological dots.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 19:35 |
|
|
SedanChair posted:Where should we start? (I figured out it's useful to ask questions.) Unless you meant 22/36 idgi because the average for adult males is 26/36. [edit] or maybe I just didn't understand what you were getting at.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 03:28
|
|
