Misogyny Kills Men Too


They guy who shot up that Jewish center a couple months ago didn't manage to kill any Jews. The guy who shot up the Sikh temple a few years back thought they were Muslims. The idea that he wasn't misogynist because he also shot men is a pretty stupid one.
An important component of our misogynist culture is being largely overlook--virgin shaming. Men are told that we are worthless unless we have had sex. I did not lose my virginity until I was twenty, about to enter my senior year in college. (My grandmother forbid me from dating during high school, so I was way behind everyone else and lacked confidence.) It really hurt me that even the feminists I was friends with made comments like, "he's just mad because he isn't getting any" or "he's not sexually frustrated--he knows how to maturbate." Comments like this PROMOTE a rape culture by pressuring young men to do ANYTHING--stupid, immoral, even illegal--to get sex. Would things have turned out the same in the California case if this guy had felt OK about himself being a virgin?
In my own case, this stigma led me to stay in some abusive relationships. One woman cut me off from friends and all activities I enjoyed, to focus all of my time with her. She was extremely jealous of any female friends, but she also cheated on me (as Dan often says is the case.) All she wanted to do when we were together was have sex--but sex interrupted by fights caused by her harshly criticizing my technique/lack of experience. "You should JUST KNOW what to do!" This manipulation caused me to stay with her by convincing me that she was all I could get.
I am against slut shaming. Men and women should be able to have as much consensual sex with willing partners as they wish. But the flipside that everyone forgets is that there is NOTHING WRONG with someone who is not sexually active, whether by choice or circumstance. STOP VIRGIN SHAMING, and there will be less incentive for men to be misogynist jerks.

A huge amount of the coverage of Rodger’s murderous spree has been focused on his misogyny—brutal anger toward women—which dominates his video, and is central in his manifesto. The killings and coverage have launched a number of viral Twitter hash tag campaigns demanding an end to the horrors that this “women hating” attitude has manifested in society with stalking and violence.
But very little attention has been given to the overwhelming message of society that for heterosexual men—if you are not attracting women, if you are not getting laid—you are an utter failure. The dividing line between men who are desirable and have sex, and those who don’t, is often cruel and arbitrary. In the case of Rodger, his rejections likely had something to do with his affect, which suggested to girls and women that he wasn’t right for dating, a relationship or sex. We all know males who seem to be particularly klutzy around women, and don’t have a clue as to why they fail with the other gender. That failing and frequent rejection is devastating and can breed depression and worse.
Women have to suffer under the whore/madonna dichotomy, but there is one men have to operate under as well when society tells them to be carnivorous predators at work, and sexual dynamos who are constantly getting laid all other times. At the same time they are told to be kind, sensitive nurturers, providers and little league coaches. Otherwise, they are failures.

It is just the same old issue of the Double Consciousness popularizes by Du Bois. One mind being pulled two ways when there is no safe middle ground to be had in society.

This is where it all comes from: the idea that if your a person type A you have to do XYZ, and it you are person type B, you have to do ABC, and if you do not fit that box, you are a failure.

From what I've seen, his misogyny seems to be a symptom rather than the real problem.
He was rejected before he was a misogynist. I'm not blaming all the women and girls who rejected him, just trying to get to the root problems.
Women probably rejected him because he was socially inept. The back story on him seems to paint a picture of a kid who spent too much time alone staring at his computer, whose parents probably over-therapies him (2 counselors, really?). He grew up in the bottom rungs of an otherwise wealthy culture, giving him an exaggerated sense of "poverty".
There has been a somewhat incomplete picture of this guys life. What I have seen tells me his parents at best we're incompetent at best, and probably emotionally neglectful. They were over concerned with wealth and achievement.
With all the factors in his life, I still can't help but feel, especially after watching that one video of him, that he was a ticking time bomb from the start. Part of me feels that the number of people he harmed with this incident is many times less than he would have had be been a successful popular person. The harm he would have done wouldn't have made the news.
@3-- What you've just described is one of the many ways misogyny hurts men. If women are primarily valued for the sex they provide to men, then the men who don't or can't have sex with women are also de-valued.

It's why being a male virgin is shameful. It's why gay men and gay sex are gross and you'd better be careful not to show any male-male affection unless it's very carefully within acceptable forms. It's why effeminate means lesser and the guys who are effeminate are lesser as well.

Misogyny hurts all of us. Focusing on Elliot Rodger's misogyny doesn't ignore or diminish his male victims-- it helps explain them.
@4 But then some of us actually are predators at work, sensitive nurturers AND sexual dynamos who are constantly getting laid.

Yes men, you can have it all!

Does it count if I am constantly getting laid by the same woman?

All kidding aside, normal men play many roles everyday, but most of us don't shoot up the street when we fail at those expectations. Becuase most of us fail to live up to our expections in some small way each and every day. That's life. And that's why I continue to beleive that this kids broken belief system and urge to kill both stemmed from his mental illness.


More than hatred of women -- or misogyny -- the problem seems to be the commodization of females for sex. Rodger was angry women because they didn't like him as much as he thought they should have. So, he wanted the female object, but not the person inside it.

Well, where did he get his notions? Possibly from video games, where females are displayed as prizes (GTA) and other media, or from the constant objectification by porn and internet advertisements for prostitution where sex is something to be purchased, traded, or "marketed" by pimps.

@6 has a very good point.

Misogyny is clearly at the heart of a lot of ills. I have long recognized that homophobia is really just a form of misogyny. That it also results in harm to straight men isn't a big leap really if you look at it as hatred of half the population of the world. When you hate and want to punish half the world then there is going to be a lot of collateral damage in addition to the damage to the primary target.
I find it interesting that Dan listed all those female relatives: "mothers, sisters, aunts, nieces...." and didn't mention daughters. Don't know if it means anything, maybe just that Dan doesn't have one personally, but it seems like an odd omission.
@7: Of course most people do not shoot people when they "fail," but some people do. Just like some people become hopelessly depressed when they lose a loved one, and some people bounce back quickly. Perhaps mental illness is part of it, but who is to say that these societal pressures are not driving some mental illnesses, or perhaps the tipping point between a mental illness manifesting as violence or not?

If we are going to try to get to the bottom of why these types of people rampage like this, we need to look at the ones who do and why, not the general population. But as always I defer to the alpha male, who is clearly you, predatoring and banging all day, like you do (I kid, I kid).

@8: So you argue that misogyny was not the problem, but rather his desire for a female object, who was not an actual person. That is basically the definition of misogyny, you dip. John Bailo is the dumbest motherfucker on the planet.
Elliot Rodger certainly isn't entitled to sex. Nor is he or any other man entitled to the affection, love, companionship, respect, and/or friendship of women. Or of men for that matter.

But imagine living a life (like so many men do) where for whatever reason you are unable to develop these basic human connections. Imagine the loneliness and despair, and for some, the anger at a world that seems to have no place for you.

So many of our problems, whether it's homelessness, addiction, petty crime, gang violence, suicide, murder, or mass killings, come down to alienated and hopeless men, something of which the US seems to have in great abundance.

It's notable that those on the left and right refuse to see these men as in need of help. Instead, we grind our political axes, we excoriate and punish, we remind them they aren't entitled to anything, tell them to solve their own problems. Ok, fine, but don't be surprised when their "solution" turns out to be homelessness, addiction, petty crime, gang violence, suicide, murder, or mass killings.
Maybe our society should start talking about the unrealistic expectations piled in men. We've been hearing for decades about how media image standards are harming young girls, how about we talk about the damage caused by the cultural standard of men being macho successful breadwinners. Further, lets talk about the narrow set of mainstream cultural norms of just what meets these standards.
Women may have impossible standards of physical beauty thrown in their face, but they can accept their natural beauty without being called quitters. If we men decide we don't want to peruse material greatness, we're called quitters, dropouts, and unambitious. If we want to dedicate ourselves to unconventional pursuits, or pursuits without a quick payout, we are slammed for not being realistic. If you're a man not living up to others expectations, you are more likely to have someone in your face telling you about it.
Man or woman, strait, gay or other, no matter our race, ethnicity, or religion, we are all having expectations of some sort thrown in our faces. Some of us have more unrealistic expectations than others, and some of us handle this better than others. No matter what, our societies standards are generally bullshit. Our way of life is mostly bullshit. Deal with it! If you can't handle this shit, and your inability to handle it makes you want to go on a killing spree, start with yourself.

Perhaps you might be interested in reading his manifesto then.

The guy was never, not once "rejected" by any woman, if by rejection you mean he tried to ask a woman out and she said "no". He admitted to going to public places, sitting around wearing his designer sunglasses or what-the-fuck-ever, and expecting women to come up to *him*. That women didn't telepathically pick up on his special snowflake status amounted to "rejection" in his pathetic mindset.


What do you suggest the solution is? How do you solve the alienation of someone who doesn't want help?
In a system where women's value increases with her sexual desirability, but decreases the more actual sex she has, dudes are going to have a harder time hooking up.

BE the change everybody! If more easy pussy is what you want, make the world a better place for easy pussy! We're off to a good start, but there's a ways to go.

However, I don't think this guy could have been helped by all the easy pussy in the world. Women didn't avoid him because he was effeminate (some women love that) or bad looking (I think he was cute), or even awkward. I bet with in minutes of conversation, anyone could pick up on something wrong, something like mental BO. I've felt this before, and while I could not point to a specific reason, my instinct was to back away slowly with out drawing too much attention and avoid contact there after. His parents were evidently concerned but it seems instead of prioritizing their son's mental health in a proactive way, they just warned other people something might be wrong with him and let it play out.
This was really driven home for me when I read Self-Made Man by Norah Vincent. It's in the Black Like Me mold where the author lives as a man for a year and realizes how hard living in a patriarchy is on men.
I really recommend it to all women. It's a fascinating book. The author spent some time in psychiatric care after writing it because it took such a toll.
@8 Commodization of women for sex goes back at least as far as the Iliad, where it's the central cause of the conflicts that drive the story. I'm pretty sure that Homer didn't get his ideas about this from video games or Internet porn.

Mr. Rodger was misogynous, but he wasn't just misogynous. He didn't kill the men he killed by mistake, thinking they were women.

He also didn't kill them because of his alleged Asperger's. Any more than murderers who happen to be gay murder because they are gay.

Anyway, reducing misogyny is certainly a good thing for women, and that's a sufficient reason to combat it. But don't pretend you're doing it out of concern for men. Because you're not.
"What do you suggest the solution is? How do you solve the alienation of someone who doesn't want help?"


This kid's problem wasn't that he wasn't successful with women. It was that he wasn't successful with women but felt he was entitled to be.

Instead of doing something about his situation he, instead, chose to blame the women for his incompetence with them.

I can feel for someone who honestly tries and fails. But someone who doesn't try because they believe what they want should come to them, and that they shouldn't have to do any serious (and sometimes painful) self reflection and make some hard changes hasn't tried. This guy was an entitled douche, and when things didn't happen for him he blamed all the wrong people.

Instead of finding people who could help him he, instead, chose to find people online who would feed his delusional sense of entitlement and foster a hatred for others.

I'm sure there is a lot of complex social influences that went on with this kid, but in the end it comes down to the fact he believed he was entitled to the attention of women, and when he didn't get what he wanted he threw the ultimate temper tantrum.

The kid needed help, but the fact he was in therapy but still decided to act out rather than go to his therapists for help with these ideas and urges just goes to show that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. You can take a self entitled douchebag to a therapist but you can't make they actually accept help even when it is laying in front of them.
Nah, if you're talking about men's interests, we (men) need to look at the gender roles that make us more likely to kill ourselves/be murdered/become homeless/be imprisoned/lose custody cases. Once we've finished looking at the misandry maybe we can have a look at the misogyny too.
@12 I think some men getting lots of pussy and some men getting no pussy has been the norm throughout most of human history. For every king living in a palace w/ 500 wives and 500 porcupines there would have been 999 grubby peasants who weren't getting any. Of course in the olden days men deemed unworthy of female companionship were often turned into eunuchs, perhaps that made things easier for them.
@19 Is it possible that the brutal competition for mates that destroys so many men is what turns the rest into manly men? I think many of the great achievements of human history can be explained as stuff guys did to impress the chicks so they could get laid.
I just want to collectively applaud the commenters on this thread. You've just had a more serious and insightful discussion of the social context of those killings than any I've come across in the mainstream media. Special kudos to LML @2 and @3. And to seandr @12 for:
So many of our problems, whether it's homelessness, addiction, petty crime, gang violence, suicide, murder, or mass killings, come down to alienated and hopeless men, something of which the US seems to have in great abundance.

Big disclaimer: I'm not the best judge of the media's coverage of this story. I've shied away myself from following this story because the whole topic is just too depressing for me and because the media discussion (that I inevitably turn away from) always seems to to start with the misogyny angle, which (while it's there and it's real) seems just one of many valid angles; it's like it's the only social hook the media can latch on to without getting into the kind of unsafe territory which, to paraphrase Mitt Romney in another context, is only safe to enter into in "quiet rooms."

Maybe Slog comment threads count as "quiet rooms." And frankly, I feel terrible even about having such public discussions in the context of a mass murder, lest they be seen as justifying or forgiving the killer. But then, I'd just as well these stories get far less media coverage, i.e. media coverage in line with their statistical significance.

To which I say to myself:
A. Good luck seeing more people avoid clicking the link and change the channel like I do when one of these stories shows up.
B. Good luck seeing anything happen on the gun control front without sensational stories like this.
@keshmeshi: What do you suggest the solution is? How do you solve the alienation of someone who doesn't want help?

Our culture has developed a massive, multi-disciplinary machine dedicated to researching and addressing the problems faced by women. And by almost any measure, it has been successful, even if its work isn't finished.

Why isn't there something similar for men? (Well, one reason is that the aforementioned machine is hostile to the idea that men might have problems they can't address themselves, or that society has any obligation to help them.)

Also, who says these men don't want help? Elliot's string of misogynistic video-recorded rants, published for all the world to see, were a huge, albeit indirect and encoded cry for help from a young man who, like most young men, was taught that "real" men don't ask for help. His mother certainly recognized it as such (even if the rest of female humanity can't see past the misogyny) and even called the police. Yet, tragically, nothing was done.

For a specific example of what helping men might look like, here's an article in the NYT about how our school system alienates boys at increasingly early ages, for example, by punishing rough and tumble physical play despite an abundance of research showing this type of activity is critical for healthy, normal male social development.

There is no fucking way that kid had Asperger's. Whenever he encountered difficulty in learning how to do something or saw someone who was better at it than he was, he gave that hobby up. That's the exact opposite of how an Aspie actually behaves.

These days, socially awkward and lacking empathy equals Asperger's to the average layperson.

Considering how vociferously you advocate for toxic masculinity (thanks, by the way, for finally stopping calling Paul a "girl" whenever he writes something you don't like), you have no credibility in this discussion.
@23, this discussion has been so intelligent that someone I e never agreed with before said something intelligent. Sorry if that stirs any pots.
Our country doesn't have an abundance of alienated men, we have an abundance of alienated people. It's just that alienated women don't go on killing sprees. Nor does the overwhelming majority of alienated men, such as myself.
I feel the alienation is a societal problem, and a complicated one at that. This kids alienation probably started before he was aware of anything, and may have been a consequence of something inharently wrong in his brain chemistry.
Commodization of women for sex goes back at least as far as the Iliad...

So does bashing their heads in with a blunt object, you sicko.

That doesn't mean that you and Theodore Gorath should get away with it.

@27: Well, sometimes alienated women do go on killing sprees, but they tend to limit the killing to their own children. That fits into a different category of media frenzy.
@keshmeshi: Considering how vociferously you advocate for toxic masculinity (thanks, by the way, for finally stopping calling Paul a "girl" whenever he writes something you don't like), you have no credibility in this discussion.

Translation: I have nothing intelligent to say, so I'll launch a personal attack based on shit I completely made up.

And here I thought I'd finally managed to engage you in a mature, thoughtful conversation. Oh well.
@24, I fully agree that boys need help. But I also feel that many of the problems and pressures that boys face are symptoms of a patriarchal society - the other side of the coin to the problems that girls face. You say that the "machine" has been successful up to a point, and I would agree with that, but I also think that the work that is left to do, like getting rid of strict gender stereotypes which harm girls AND boys, would benefit everyone.
Oh, good, a thread dominated by men pitying the mass murderer and blaming women (with notable exceptions). A-fucking-mazing that Dan can explain succinctly that all your made up "misandry" is the polluted backfire of misogyny and still comments like "feminism is against men." Keep not getting it and this shit will continue.
@12 "It's notable that those on the left and right refuse to see these men as in need of help. Instead, we grind our political axes, we excoriate and punish, we remind them they aren't entitled to anything, tell them to solve their own problems."

Oh right. Meanwhile, at my kids' school, there are innovative programs to help them figure out social skills and how to be an "upstander" not a bystander when they see bullying (even when it's a friend of theirs doing it). The programs don't label kids 'good kids' or 'bad kids,' but recognize positive and negative impulses in all kids, and gives them tools to handle difficult situations.

These elementary school programs also teach "mirroring" -- where kids learn to "mirror" another kid's emotions. Turns out that that's part of socialization in our culture, but some kids have missed out on that at home, and it's helpful to break it down and explain it to those who don't intuitively get it.

That's just what I see in our school district; I'm sure there are other experimental programs all over the country. If you haven't noticed, there's a big anti-bullying movement going on.

When I read the manifesto, my own despair was when his close friend James turns away from him:
>> I constantly talked to James with vehement rage about my envy and anger at such people. I told him about how I wished I could make them all suffer. We had a lot of conversations about what we would do if we had all the power in the world, and I told him about all of the torturous acts of revenge I would carry out against all those who have insulted me or lived a better life than me. I thought that James would relate to me, since he was also a virgin who had no girls in his life, but some of the things I said began to disturb him. One night, he told me, with a lot of distress, that enough was enough. He didn’t want to hear it anymore. >>

James stopped hanging out with Elliot, but he didn't share his concerns with anyone. Maybe that was a moment when the family & friends could have pooled their information and worked harder to get him help, if James had understood that he was in a position to be an unsung hero.
@20 - I know exactly what you mean to say, but I just spit my coffee at the mental image of a king trying to fuck a porcupine.
I agree very much with @23.

I find latent in this thread a recognition (one that I've been stumbling towards for a while) that big, abstract, society-level forces (call them misogyny, patriarchy, racism, privilage, whatever) harm everyone and that individuals can't be agents of them, but only puppets. Mistaking this point equates pitiable people like this UCSB kid with massive power that is in reality beyond the individual's control. Though I guess I kinda only believe this because I can't bring myself to believe in free will.
@34 - "Maybe that was a moment when the family & friends could have pooled their information and worked harder to get him help, if James had understood that he was in a position to be an unsung hero."

They did do this. They got him connected with multiple therapists, police came by and spoke with him, and they did a lot to try to intervene. The problem is that he was able to "pull it together" enough when speaking with the cops and knew the right answer for "Do you intend to harm yourself or anyone else?"

This is the part of the conversation that frustrates me. In the middle of all of this very valid talk about misogyny, we're (again) missing the conversation about increasing mental health resources and developing effective emergency procedures.
@37, let's have that "conversation about increasing mental health resources and developing effective emergency procedures."

Thank you 37. And maybe James could've been an unsung hero and maybe James would've been the first victim if he hadn't stepped away.

But then I recall when my Mother went completely insane and how no one would help us deal with her because she wouldn't admit she had a problem and wouldn't accept any sort of mental or intervention.
Men should care enough about the women in our lives—our mothers, sisters, aunts, and nieces; our female friends, partners, coworkers, and neighbors—to recognize that misogyny is dangerous.

Men should care enough about HUMAN BEINGS—to recognize that misogyny is dangerous. Having some sense of ownership, emotional or otherwise, over a woman in a man's life isn't what should make anyone act in a respectful, caring manner towards anyone else. Try again, Dan.
He'd been in therapy since the age of 9. This reads more like self-loathing to me, and maybe projection onto the "trophy" type of female. I haven't seen any evidence of his cottoning onto a woman of high intelligence or terrific personality, so it may be just a combination of shallowness & narcissistic personality disorder.

I don't know of many anecdotes of biracial people "unable to score." If anything, biracial people are very beautiful, at least superficially (disclaimer: all my nieces and nephews are biracial).
@35 I cribbed that line from here . . .


Thanks for noticing.
@38 - I don't pretend to know all the answers.

One good idea I have heard is that some jurisdictions have begun to send psychiatric nurses along with police when the police do "welfare checks." Psychiatric nurses know how to ask probing questions and to ask questions that are harder to prepare for. My understanding is that wasn't done in this case, and that the welfare check was done by two police officers.
@43 that makes sense to me.
Surely the gun control issue is a big one/ how can a civilized country, such as USA- just keep accepting this madness?
Why haven't millions of you just made that a no one priority?
Whatever this LATEST young mans reasons/ causes of his inhumanity may be/ and yes he also used knives/ and yes violence can be done by hands. But gez, guns? Everywhere, guns?

@43 & 44 I wonder if mental illness was really at the root of Elliot Rodger's problem? I'm ashamed to admit I've read some of his manifesto. He comes off seeming less like a crazy person and more like a vindictive little troll who has had a sucky life and is determined to ruin the party for everybody else. If he had survived to stand trial he wouldn't have been able to plead not guilty by reason of insanity.
Mr Fortunate @18 - Spot on.

Mr Fortunate @9/Ms Megan @6 - Lots of intersectionality, but misogyny is not the whole reason for homophobia. It may be the whole (or almost) reason for what I'll call patriarchal homophobia, but there are other strains - the humanists who buy into gender roles as complementary and needed as such, the womanists who backed Proposition 8, the feminists who think deliberate heteronormativity is the only kind of normativity that doesn't require an apology or who think that misogynistic attitudes about women's bodies means that they can be as disrespectful as they please when they write slash fiction, or the separatists (this is a half-strain, really) who can live with occasional political gains for both sorts of same-sexers but claim that real L/G alliance cannot exist, mainly because they think sex only counts if there's at least one woman involved (and if it's all women, all the better).

This is not to say that reducing misogyny won't do a good deal to reduce other intersecting ills, or that misogyny isn't at the heart of this particular case. I just don't like A being called a subset of B when it's not that simple.
I see dudes wasted no time in turning this thread into being about themselves. *yawn*
@JenV: I fully agree that boys need help. But I also feel that many of the problems and pressures that boys face are symptoms of a patriarchal society

The patriarchy concept is a pretty handy tool for blaming men, but it's not helpful for understanding them. Feminism has done wonders for women. If the goal is to fix the broken men, however, I don't think it has the answers. To my male ears, listening to feminists lecture about male psychology sounds too much like listening to Republican senators lecture about female reproductive anatomy.

I think we should look to the various human sciences for answers (medicine, psychology, neuroscience, etc.).
It's funny how people believe that the garbage posted online, is Elliot's "manifesto", and slate's the publication that ran those bullshit articles claiming that "new research shows" and tried to claim that nearly half, or at least over a third of all sexual assaults are assaults where a male is the victim.

Yes guys are funny, the truth is the typical slog post, either incredibly ignorant author or incredible asshole, and in most cases, both
I think that even if this person had managed to somehow get laid with his personality, he would have snapped for some other thing that other people had that he didn't. Sex isn't a magical cure-all that would solve his problems. According to his own writing he believed himself to be like unto a god, and any evidence to the contrary sent him into a rage.
yes indeed redrum regdren, esp if he spoke the annoying truth about you, thusly thus, indeed.

Our patriarchic culture is very relevant, but we must remember that BOTH men and women participate in reinforcing this culture. Women who slut-shame other women? Part of the problem. Women who virgin shame men? Also part of the problem of reinforcing the patriarchic culture.
Here's how I see it: Rodger had ten pounds of problems in an eight-pound sack. He was mentally ill. He was unable to connect with women even though he felt entitled to a sex life. This grew into a festering pool of misogyny. And he had easy access to guns. (Yes, I know he stabbed at least three of his victims.)

Now, I think it likely that there wasn't much to be done for Rodger, not after maybe three years ago. And sometimes I think, "Crazy gonna crazy" and think that some small number of people are just going to go insane and shoot up a Top Pot.

But I think there are answers to be had here. And maybe they won't prevent the next spree killer. But they could help a whole lot of people, women and men.
It doesn't surprise me that the only opinion piece on Slog about the misogyny element to this event has framed it in the way that men should care about misogyny because it affects them personally. That's part of the problem. And this coming from Dan Savage, no less, a man who loves to talk about feminists getting their "panties in a twist" over issues he disagrees with.

I guess it would be too much to ask for men to care about the issue simply because of how it affects women (even women who aren't related to you!) and their ability to function and interact with people on a daily basis.

I've also noticed that whenever a man writes an article about feminism, the comments are for the most part civil and thoughtful, while most of female feminist writers write about how they receive threats of rape, stalking, and murder on the regular for their articles (See Laurie Penny's "Cybersexism" for more on that).

Maybe you all need to read this. A man wrote it, so you'll probably take it seriously: http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy…
Virginia, I think you might want to read what Dan actually wrote.

He clearly stated that men should be concerned simply because of how it effects women. He threw in the idea that it effects men too as a caveat; "But if that doesn't do the trick...".

Give the guy credit. He clearly said that addressing misogyny simply due to the impact on women should be enough to get men concerned.
did any of you look to read what was posted as the hundred and forty whatever pages of his "manifesto"?

what is floating around on the net is NOT what this kid wrote.

A person who goes out and shoots people whom he thinks didn't want to be his girlfriend, and shooting the boys he thinks they chose over him, is not the kind of person who would have been phased by others treating each other with more respect

it has nothing to do with slut shaming or any other violation of another person's personal private life that has nothing to do with you, therefore you have no right to influence how they choose or who the choose to share their life

are you honestly trying to say that you believe the words you posted in comment #2 luke?

esp the first part :

"An important component of our misogynist culture is being largely overlook--virgin shaming. Men are told that we are worthless unless we have had sex. I did not lose my virginity until I was twenty, about to enter my senior year in college. (My grandmother forbid me from dating during high school, so I was way behind everyone else and lacked confidence.) It really hurt me that even the feminists I was friends with made comments like, "he's just mad because he isn't getting any" or "he's not sexually frustrated--he knows how to maturbate." Comments like this PROMOTE a rape culture by pressuring young men to do ANYTHING--stupid, immoral, even illegal--to get sex...."

You believe the problem does not lie with the men who think like this and you honestly don't think that is exactly the flawed beliefs that is the rape culture we live in, or at least a large aspect of it?

You think that it's OK to blame the victims and not the perpetrators of rape mentality?
this comments read like a exercise in journalism, where you test just how flawed and wrong your assertions can be in principle, yet get people to adopt those flawed beliefs are right instead of wrong

Well then yes, let's forget about all the victims, the perpetrators of sexual crime and crime must really be the ones who need the focus and resources.

White men have ever advantage one could possibly imagine, yet because they cannot think for themselves they are the true victims, here.

Yes, lets base all correct view points on a manifesto that supposedly gives you a glimpse into his mind, when the perpetrator of this viciousness didn't even write the published manifesto.

Yes lets take the latest example of the power the media has to mislead you, and instead of resisting the lies, choose to be fooled,

that way all problems will be solved

there is power is believing bullshit, understanding the truth doesn't empower you, it imprisons you.

Some asshole journalist get embarrassed when he tries to get away with making shit up, but it would be too hard on his ego if it weren't true, so it's better to just appease him

whatever, it's best to tell the coward to fuck off, if you want to help, tell him when he is done with the act, to let you know, because you may not understand why he does this shit but you are willing to listen, to hear him out, but if he really thinks it's ok to invade peoples places that are not his to invade, fuck off and good riddence.
#56, No, he said because it affects "the women in our lives," meaning the women that you know and care about personally, which is, again, stating that it has to be personal before men might have a reason to give a shit about it.

I don't have to personally be impacted by gay rights or civil rights (or even animal rights) to care about them, recognize the issues involved, and support them. I feel like Dan is pandering here to a group he feels is not invested enough to be swayed otherwise, and it's offensive.
100% right on! This guy's actions were inexcusable. We agree on that. At the same time we must understand that plenty of men feel just as belittled. You're also right on that even feminists and liberals mock men who are virgins or just less experienced.

Would the film "The 40 year old Virgin" had worked if the titular character was a woman? No. Why? Because a female virgin is considered virtuous, pure etc...a male virgin? "You fucking loser!"

I would love to see just one feminist come out and say "what's wrong with a guy being a virgin or maybe a little shy and awkward? Why does society punish such men?" I'm not holding my breath for such a thing happening.
He's not saying "blame the victim", he's just pointing out that this culture treats men who aren't sexually active as less than human, and that the same feminists who demand a change to "rape culture" join in in the shaming of virgins and men who aren't "alpha males".

Isn't it a tad bit hypocritical for a feminist to scream about men "hating women" and in the next breath say "and he probably can't get laid so he's just mad"? That's the point.

Why can't the same feminists demanding compassion from men start showing compassion for men? Honestly, is it that bad for a man to be socially awkward?
Virginia, I think you are nit picking his words. I read it as, "if you care about the women you know then you should care about misogyny", not "you should care because if it effects the women you know it effects you".

I really think that people look for excuses to get upset at what Dan writes, forgetting that this is a quick blog post and not an journal article. He's shooting from the cuff here and not trying to write an essay to win a Pulitzer.
#63, Maybe, but it's not the first time Dan has taken this approach:

And women were upset about the "mothers, daughters, sisters...." line used in that video, as well:



And his post probably would not have stood out if this weren't the ONLY opinion piece written about misogyny as it relates to this event on Slog, when they could have focused on something like, say, misogyny on the internet that keeps commenters on even progressive sites like this from being dominated by mostly men. And here's an example of that:


And he is the editor of a paper, so I do expect him to be smart about his word choice.
@61 Doctor Nerdlove. He's a feminist blogger and advice-giver who often points out how toxic and harmful our culture can be about masculinity and he's a feminist. Also where are these feminists making jokes about him being a virgin?

But then I don't understand why his lack of a sex life is held up as the only important thing about this guy.
Seandr: " Elliot Rodger certainly isn't entitled to sex. Nor is he or any other man entitled to the affection, love, companionship, respect, and/or friendship of women. Or of men for that matter. "

You could just hear the "...BUT!" screaming into view all through that, couldn't you.

Sweet how your heart bleeds for a mass-murderer. Indeed it must have been sooooo sad for him and other men who can't achieve sex (nice how you euphemised it as "affection") ONLY men, of course, it's not sad for women who can't get any, because they don't exist.

If you can't be surprised if men who can't get sex go on killing sprees, because the pressure and stress and alienation is just TOO MUCH for the poor diddumses, I wonder what acts you can't be surprised by from women, who who have to live with ever-present sexism and the constant threat of male violence? I mean, just imagine the loneliness and despair, and for some, the anger at a world that seems to have no place for you. You won't want to excoriate or punish, will, you, Seandr, if women start, say, blowing shit up on the regular? I mean we won't be ENTITLED to do it, but you'll feel so sorry for us, won't you? Clearly you'll wish someone would have helped us?

Um, actually, the harm a patriarchal society/belief system does to men as well as women is intrinsic to feminist theory. Patriarchy dehumanizes everybody, and it's not men's fault--a patriarchal system deforms everybody, of any gender identity.

I couldn't find the article I remembered that explained, in list form, for folks not very familiar with feminist theory, how many common issues facing men in our culture that many frame as ignored by feminism or contradictory to feminism actually illustrate the harm done to men by patriarchal definitions and pressures. But a little googling quickly led me to these two articles on everydayfeminism.com that cover the same ground.

Why Men Need Feminism
Feminism Is For Everyone

Also see this article, on Autostraddle, a great web site devoted to "girl on girl" culture, about the problem of women raping women. "When Women Rape: Everything We're Not Talking About"

Basically what I'm trying to get across is that the contemporary feminism I'm familiar with and engage in has nothing to do with men being intrinsically bad, and takes seriously the harm patriarchy does to men as well as women and folks of less binary gender identity. Patriarchy causes people to harm people in predictably gendered ways, as the most prevalent gender-based manifestation of kyriarchy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy

Feminism invites everyone to speak out on their experiences of gender-based oppression, advocate for themselves, and educate and inspire others to advocate for them. Build it, guys. Women didn't wait for men to recognize and work to solve the problems patriarchy causes for women. Men have to do the same for themselves. And you don't have to re-invent the wheel. If you delve into it beyond the more superficial manifestations of it in our culture, feminist theory will be immensely helpful to you. And your perspectives are needed to make it better! By and large, women feminists and other non-male-identified or non-strictly-male-identified feminists, especially the sincere and thoughtful ones, will welcome and aid your efforts to the best of their ability, and recognize how your work benefits people of any gender identity.
JaneKathy1: I respect your idealism. And I know the rhetoric that you cite. But that's not reality.

The reality is that feminism is by women for women: it's designed to fit womens' needs (since expanded to include LGBT), it's based on womens+' experience, it's designed to make womens+' lives better. It's not against straight men, but it's not for us, either. It's just NOT ABOUT us. And that's FINE. It's proper that something like this exists.

But when feminists start taking that structure and talking about how it benefits straight men, too, that's dishonest. Feminists rationalize how ideas that are specifically designed to benefit women+ benefit men, too, without ever asking us our experiences or allowing us to tell them that they're wrong when they make claims about our experiences. And when a rationalization gets the right answer - and the right answer is ALWAYS "what's good for women is also good for men" - feminists accept it as Truth. A very self-serving Truth that lets feminists feel good about themselves: it lets feminists tell themselves that they're not only working to make the world better for themselves, they're working to make the world better for everyone. But the reality is that it's still a movement by and for women+, and it's still not about straight men.

Feminism has a dilemma here. In order to legitimately represent straight men, you'd have to genuinely listen to our experiences, and change your theories when our experiences contradict your theories too badly. But if feminists did that there wouldn't be a movement that's about women+, and only women+, any more. And most feminists very much prefer that feminism remain a movement about women+. I assure you, JaneKathy1, that almost none of the feminists I've ever met share your desire for straight male input into feminism.

It's fine for feminism to be a voice by and for women+. And sometimes the changes that it recommends will, by coincidence, be good for straight men, too. But feminists like Amanda Hess are being privileged assholes when they TELL me what's good for me without having ever so much as asked my input. If someone cares about what's in my best interests, they should ASK me, not TELL me. You sound like you're sincere in wishing me well, JaneKathy1. In that, you represent maybe 1% of feminists.

@61, OK, what's wrong with a guy being a virgin or maybe a little shy and awkward? Why does society punish such men? (My answers: nothing, and because people are cruel & competitive).

@68, what about the feminists like me, who say feminism is the idea that women are people? How does that hurt straight men? And what straight male issues do you want me to keep in mind?

I didn't see the supposed "last video" uploaded by Rogers until today, and I don't believe it's real, just like the 1oo and whatever pages of the manifesto is bullshit, the crazy color scheme reminds me of the idiot journalist who justified his bullshit story about reparations, because he claimed he wanted to start a needed and serious conversation, is nothing but a lying sack of shit.

Does misogyny hurt men?

Of course it does, just like any view point that comes from such a gross misunderstanding -- or chosen option of utter ignorance -- is going to be damaging to more than the victim, but to feel sorry for the perpetrator of this type of violence

or the piece of shit journalist who justified publishing this shit if it really didn't happen

is only making the problem worse

The bottom line is, if a person cannot at least be willing to learn why the mentality of "if she won't be with me she won't be with anyone" is to be so confused that you are mistaking hatred for love, then I am sorry but fuck those people, because the world is a better place without assholes like Rodgers -- or the asshole journalist who justified the story or felt changing the facts about what happened was his right -- and good riddance to their departure
49: "Patriarchy" is not just a fancy word for "men," as anyone with more than half a brain could tell you. Maybe you ought to actually read up on some of this radical feminist literature before you criticize it? Just a thought.

Given the incredible lack of knowledge in both the hard sciences and social sciences that your posts have indicated over the years, I can only imagine what your supposed doctorate is in. Basket weaving?
By the way: Rodger did not lack access to mental health care facilities. He had gone to therapy, his parents were urging him to continue, and he had the money and time. This is not a case of someone who could not get the care he needed. The only thing that stopped him from receiving whatever hypothetical care could have helped him was himself.

Also, he was not diagnosed with any condition that tends to result in this sort of violent behavior (so keep that in mind before arbitrarily deciding that he must have had something that this was a symptom of).

It may be that our mental health professionals are not properly trained to diagnose certain conditions accurately, or that we need to work on our standards for when an adult can be legally compelled to undergo psychiatric care. But I'll say it again: as much as we do need to improve access to mental health resources in our country, this is not a story about someone who lacked that access.