Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Tiassa, Apr 25, 2018.
I saw no evidence of that. Occam's Razor, as always, applies.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
It Happened Again (and Will Happen Again and Again and Again ....)
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
#nevermind: I just saw another buttchin anime joke, and I think from the same studio. Or maybe the same jump. Never mind.
Via BuzzFeed News↱:
On a YouTube channel in 2014, Beierle filmed several videos of himself offering extremely racist and misogynistic opinions, in which he called women “sluts” and “whores,” and lamented “the collective treachery” of girls he went to high school with.
“There are whores in — not only every city, not only every town, but every village,” he said, referring to women in interracial relationships, whom he said had betrayed “their blood.”
Officer Damon Miller of the Tallahassee Police Department said he could not tell BuzzFeed News whether women were specifically targeted in the attack or whether these online posts were the subject of detectives’ inquiries.
“Everything that he has a connection to we’re investigating right now,” Miller said.
Police said they were still investigating a motive, but noted Beierle had previously been investigated for harassing women.
In one video called “Plight of the Adolescent Male,” he named Elliot Rodger, who killed six people and injured 14 and is often seen as a hero for so-called incels, or those who consider themselves “involuntarily celibate.”
“I’d like to send a message now to the adolescent males ... that are in the position, the situation, the disposition of Elliot Rodger, of not getting any, no love, no nothing. This endless wasteland that breeds this longing and this frustration. That was me, certainly, as an adolescent,” he said.
One: This is America.
Two: The low body count can confuse if we let it.
Three: Of course it's about a girl.
The Tricky Part: There is precisely nothing new under the sun about what just happened. Not the misogyny, nor even the racism. Failure to attain privilege has long been worth killing over in this society.
Sometimes I wonder, should we ever truly countenance, as a society, the fact that this is really happening, whether we will resolve to actually do something useful about it, or just shrug and decide we're okay with it as long as it doesn't get too far out of hand, because, y'know, women, and what're ya gonna do. There is a third way, of course, which is to make things worse and pretend we couldn't see that coming, but, still, what is society really going to do about it?
No, really, if putting a stop to the raping and murdering is such a threat to civilized society, we might wish to consider why.
Mack, David, Amber Jamieson, and Julia Reinstein. "Tallahassee Yoga Shooter Was A Far-Right Misogynist Who Railed Against Women And Minorities Online". BuzzFeed News. 3 November 2018. BuzzFeedNews.com. 3 November 2018. http://bit.ly/2zqrw1v
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
A Brief Reflection on a Decade of Dangerous Dumbshittery
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Flashback: May, 2014. We would rather not remember, but are obliged to not forget. What happened in Isla Vista continues today; there persists a morbid continuity.
The killer that day had various intentions: Punishing women for choosing other men, punishing other men for being competition. The thing is that he was steeped in a particular refinement of misogyny; the killer was a wannabe pickup artist, a failed PUA. Subsequent reactions to pua failure are known as mgtow and incel, each with their own underlying theses on women that tumble riotously through absurdity.
A bit of mgtow blithering I've posted before↗, under consideration of Poe's Law, presumes that even if men learn to just sit around and play chess together instead of go drinking and pay women to get naked, that women would still work those kinds of clubs. At the end of the day, it's still some male's projection of female société érotique.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
In re Poe's Law: Somebody, somewhere, actually believes it.
There's always Futrelle↱:
Hey ladies of the cis persuasion, don't you just love it when some dude on a date with you leans in close and, in his sexiest voice, says, "hey babe, I know your deepest, darkest sexy secret: You love to vacuum your apartment when you're ovulating."
This scenario comes to you from an old (very old) AskMen post by actual professional "dating coach" David DeAngelo that I ran across today. It's a masterpiece of inadvertent humor, offering some of the worst dating advice I've ever seen, of which the weird and completely incorrect claim about ovulation vacuuming is only the cherry on top of a huge crap sundae.
DeAngelo's listicle purports to offer ten tips on how to "flirt with a woman sexually," but the vast majority of his suggestions are variations on one central theme: throw blatant sexual innuendo into the conversation at every possible opportunity and even some impossible ones.
Yeah, um ... it's bad.
Futrelle, for instance, explains, "It's like talking to someone who responds to every single thing you say with 'that's what she said'", and, well, he's wrong: This requires a little bit of really effed up creativity:
You don't need to wait for a woman to use some sexy double-entendre-ready word in order to get the sexy innuendo going. Even a cup of tea can be enough.
Let's say you get a woman a cup of tea; you can follow up by saying: "Looks like you're on the receiving end today. Do you always receive or do you like to give at times too?" Crack a slight smile and she will know exactly what you are talking about.
To the other, what descriptions can possibly suffice: "While DeAngelo warns would-be pickup artists to model themselves on James Bond, not Austin Powers," Futrelle explains, "a lot of his suggestions would make you sound more than a little like the Mike Meyers character."
Even the most unforgiving indictments of Meyers' exploitative humor are far too kind to the PUA's 2009 advice.
Weirdly, while many iterations of masculinism over time have included complaints that feminism somehow thinks men are variously incapable of not being sexually belligerent, the behavior DeAngelo recommends would seem to be just that: The entire formulation is ambient saturation of unsubtle multientendre unceasingly promoting sexual intention; compared to how many other issues there would seem to arise a question of who in the world would think unflinching, clumsy, blatant sexual belligerence is going to work on which women.
Okay, really, it's not all that weird; a decade later, there really isn't anything extraordinary about what is happening, in that old slideshow listicle. Which, sure, is part of the problem, but since that isn't going away anytime soon, or just for the hell of it, we might make a couple points:
• The underlying presuppositions are inherently misogynistic insofar as the women this behavior works most effectively on are already drowning in misogyny. And while this can mean a lot of things, it's just not mine to write Sister's part for her, but we can still observe the significance of intoxicants and impairment in PUA methodology. The entire purpose is to be manipulative.
• While considering the inherent misogyny, we also remind of the underlying would-be misandry insofar as the downstream complaints—i.e., mgtow, incel—rail against unrealistic expectations of masculinity. Not only does DeAngelo pitch to manipulative language about accusation and finding ways to get a woman to "use" a man, this includes helping women do things like put their shoes on.
As an archived page↱ shows, DeAngelo doesn't really think much of women. Or, come to think about it, his market audience. Yes, really:
No.7 - Get her to "use you"
Women accuse men of using them for sex all the time, so why not turn the tables? The next time you do something considerate for a woman, tell her: "So, you're using me already… next thing I know you'll be trying to use me for other things as well." She'll find this role-reversal hilarious and it's a great way to bring up the topic of sex in a safe, fun and non-threatening way.
The photo that goes with it shows a handsome, darker-skinned man helping a paler, thin woman put her shoe on as she sits in a short skirt on the steps with classic-looking columns all around. Nothing about the advice involves any sort of realistic expectations, so of course the boys and men who clamor for pua advice are pretty much doomed from the outset. No, really, they will never experience the moment in the picture, and, really, read the advice point. Those young men, a decade ago, never stood a chance.
In a question of Poe's Law, avarice, and paradigmatic antisociality, not only does it read like the pua is simply scamming his market, latter-day complaints of unrealistic expectations driving men to rant and threaten and occasionally shoot the place up for lack of a hotwife might feel, now that we stop to think about it, nearly inevitable.
And among myriad notions that they did it to themselves, it's not really supposed to stand out so brightly and simplistically.
Within that context, it's not just a matter of PUAs scamming their markets; when wasn't it? But there also comes a point at which these marks aren't just suckers being sold a bag of pseudoscience and superstition, but it really reads like DeAngelo is straightup trolling them. Because, you know, a woman is always sexually aroused by some male acquaintance suggesting prostitution ... or ... er ... right.
It does make a certain amount of sense, though; the key, here, is if women think of themselves the same way a horny man does, and live according to his fantasy.
Then again, in a fantasy presuming women require help putting on their shoes, then, sure, we can believe women know less about themselves than a horny dude or the swindletroll he follows. Or, as Futrelle advises: "No woman wants to hear some 'secret' you 'know' about the way her body works."
Nor should anyone really need to write the advice that, "Ovulation is not really a 'sexy' topic so much as a 'creepy' one to bring up unbidden on a first date."
And noting the point—(oh, Goddess grant)—that, "there is no relation between ovulation and vacuuming", well, right:
And you don't have to take my word for it. One of the perks of doing this blog is that whenever I run across some particularly egregious misunderstanding of human reproduction I can run it past world-famous vagina expert Dr. Jen Gunter—author of the bestselling The Vagina Bible—and she will actually get back to me.
Here's what she had to say in response to DeAngelo's Tip #2:
I have no words. That is stupid. It is a sophomoric fantasy of a hot, horny, housewife. …
That can only be from someone who has a kindergarten level understanding of human reproduction.
Let us pause for a moment to consider:
• No wonder mgtows and incels are so pissed off about being failed puas.
• It's one thing to wonder at the women who might be charmed by such offerings, but, we really do owe some consideration to the idea that it's possible for boys and men to actually swallow this foul load.
• By the time we get to Isla Vista, five years ago, just how much failure and humiliation have the horny hopefuls suffered for the sake of increasing objectivization that can never be fulfilled?
• Of course mgtows and incels are going to blame women for men's unrealistic expectations of masculinity.
The advice always was to behave stupidly, belligerently, and dangerously. They were being told to go out and fail. No wonder these men want to blame women for everything masculinity has done to harm itself.
DeAngelo, David. "Top 10: Ways To Flirt With A Woman Sexually". Ask Men. 2009. Web.Archive.org. 22 October 2019. http://bit.ly/2N3zKTX
Futrelle, David. "Dating coach David DeAngelo: Ovulation compels women to vacuum their apartments". We Hunted the Mammoth. 19 October 2019. WeHuntedTheMammoth.com. 22 October 2019. http://bit.ly/2JdTnaZ
This just comes to show how crazy and backward the world we live in really is.
And what this also comes to show is that there is very probably no loving or caring God or anything, otherwise why would so many women and men suffer for being too unattractive to the opposite sex.
From what I’ve read about incels, they seem to think that a quality life is by chance or luck. If more sought to self improve (for themselves, not for the sole intent of getting laid) they would likely have greater confidence, and date more.
i do not really wish to get into this subject
however for your benefit i shall outline something to give you a little clarity
the luck aspect is only around being born attractive to very attractive females
everything else is hard core conspiracy theory about society being all contrived against them being normal men
paranoid schizophrenia in a semi functional process as the sociopath acting out psychopathic social morality as the basis for equal justice requirement for their hate toward attractive women and lucky men.
guilt is by engaging with those whom are lucky
the average sane persons concept of luck is vastly different.
incels are classic fruedian mother haters
typical incel =
Interesting. I’ve wondered if there’s a correlation with men who have issues with women, and their mothers.
human psyche is schooled by the parents and schools to divide society into 2 groups
Male Vs Female
this is the most common foot in the door to divide the moral balance to undermine equality in the developing individuals psyche
splaining about why men & women can never be the same ...
dictating that ideology into the moral base of a small child ...
then hard core physical reinforcement in puberty and dating socialisation in tweens and teens
forced compliance etc
social isolation as a tool etc etc ...
I think we live in a dog eat dog world for the most part. What I mean by that is that the strong, wealthy and good-looking will always find ways to oppress the weak, the poor and the unattractive. Just like racism, it's part of the human condition in my opinion and has still not been completely eliminated from human nature and the human psyche.
I think patriarchy and toxic muscularity are the reasons that many ugly young men, like myself for example and I believe that there thousands of lonely virgin men just like me will never get sex from pretty young women and will probably never have a loving girlfriend or a wife.
gender views cause of incel.
gender views cause of incel.
21 y/o virgin here
Your "not get(ting) sex" from "pretty (read: white) young women" wouldn't have anything to do with you simply being a loathesome individual now, would it?
Pretty much the linchpin, I think, though--as one can see from the quotes in the preceding post--it comes to encompass all sorts of far-right "sympathies," well beyond misogyny alone. Shared hatred really unites people.
I recommend counselling. being "ugly" myself, I can honestly say that this is absolutely false. I've not only had plenty of pretty young women (consensual, mind), I have a loving wife, a sh*tload of kids and even more grandkids.
but whether they're far right or far left, doesn't matter, only that there is someone to share the hate, a place where people listen and encourage, and an outlet that will feed their ego and need for control, manipulation and domination. (see: John Douglas - "The Killer Across the Table"; "Anatomy of Motive")
I just hope that in the future society will find a way to solve the Incel problem because honestly no one should feel rejected and unloved by the opposite sex.
I think that the existence of depressed and socially isolated incels is just another argument against the existence of a loving God.
I mean why would God make someone so ugly that they are considered unworthy to get any kind of affection from the opposite sex?
This doesn't make much sense to me. If God is good and loving then God knows that everyone wants to feel loved and appreciated (and especially by the opposite sex). But the existence of lonely, depressed and suicidal individuals in my opinion proves that such a loving God does not exist.
That requires getting over sexism in general, which in itself requires getting over misogyny in particular.
You actually give us a fine example: It's true, nobody should feel utterly rejected and unloved, but that last part, "by the opposite sex", is all sorts of problematic -ist derived from sexism in general and misogyny in particular.
The mysteries of God are myriad. Or, as Diderot observed, over 270 years ago, whether God exists or not, It has become one of the most sublime and useless mysteries of the Universe.
God, is ostensibly infinite; you are unquestionably finite. It seems problematic, at least, to presume God should ever actually make sense to us.
1) "If God is good and loving" — This presupposition is problematic.
2) "then God knows that everyone wants to feel loved and appreciated" — This statement is problematic, but which problem depends more on which God and theology you are attending.
3) "(and especially by the opposite sex)" — You wonder why "God make someone so ugly that they are considered unworthy", and in my quarter, the question of why God would create a homosexual is not exactly unheard of. In either case, Salieri nailed it in Amadeus, and whining about the infliction of God's will in our creation and birth is not only futile, but will always run like an infantile farce compared to F. Murray Abraham's iteration.
Futrelle, this week↱, from his outpost at the edge of the hunting grounds:
Hey ladies, if you're so into EQUALITY why aren't you asking MEN out on DATES? CHECKMATE FEMINAZIS.
That's more or less the argument of one apparently lonely Men's Rights Redditor, who recently posted his plaintive (if also slightly belligerent) complaint on the Men's Rights subreddit today.
"Every girl knows that guys prefer to [be] asked out," wrote TC1827, "yet so few will do it cause they can't get that equality goes both ways."
"It's a straight up equality issue," he added in a comment, "with women being unwilling to give up their privilege."
Ah yes, the privilege of getting their DMs invaded by horny weirdos bearing dick pics! The privilege of being propositioned on the train while wearing headphones with their nose buried in a book! The privilege of, well, you get the point.
Happily, TC1827 has a solution to the problem, and it just happens to be the same as Jordan Peterson's.
Bring back socially enforced monogamy so that dating is less about sex and more about a life partnership. And socialize equality from a young age so that each gender has an equal chance of being asked out.
Funny story: I once deflected a bit of obvious political trolling, and this guy I know objected. The thing is, it was some drive-by vapidity about Jordan Peterson, and for whatever reason, in a period when the controversial professor's infamy was surging, the other, who shows sympathy to identity masculinism, showed a pretense of ignorance. And you know how it goes; they say they don't know much about this fellow but he says some reasonable things about this or that, and you're sitting there thinking, He's not really that uninformed. To the other, after a while, if they insist, it becomes nearly easy to believe them when they say they claim ignorance about this or that prominent aspect of an issue they pretend to know, or, at least, care about. At some point, believing them becomes nearly obligatory, because they insist.
At any rate, his line aged poorly. Peterson did a New York Times interview that ran awry when he proposed enforced monogamy. It's worth noting, aside, that while the Canadian professor would try to walk back his statement in a Quilette post, Ross Douthat, a columnist at NYT, wrote a whole article about redistributing sex as if women were a natural resource to be distributed among the commmunity. For his part, though, Peterson's rertreat was something between uncomfortable and stupid. And here I do a joke about Jim Belushi and John Candy, wearing only towels, discussing sex toys in a locker room. It's an actual scene from a romantic comedy, and what it skewered was the divine right of every married man to complain about how awful his wife was, including her sexual failures.
Doc Peterson, it seems, would like to go back to the future, when men constantly complained about how disappointing their wives were. And when we add into that the point that identifying incels count among their number men who are getting some contact, but not enough, or good enough, or from hot enough women, well, history suggests enforced monogamy won't abate the incel problem.
I should note, for incels: You will be disappointed. And, sure, sometimes she's just a lousy fuck, but even still, you will be disappointed because you expect too much°. And, sure, society taught you to expect too much, but don't blame women. Remember, puas cultivate unrealistic expectations, which is why the perpetually disappointed went mgtow, and then embittered onward into incel territory.
Seriously, like I said, earlier↑:
• Nothing about the [pua] advice involves any sort of realistic expectations, so of course the boys and men who clamor for pua advice are pretty much doomed from the outset. No, really, they will never experience the moment in the picture, and, really, read the advice point. Those young men, a decade ago, never stood a chance.
Oh, hey, right, that wasn't all. Shortly after the Peterson article and Quilette post, my associate and I encountered someone who might as well have read the NYT article and decided to put on a show, complete with the overworked dog metaphor and something about humping on old women. My associate again pretended ignorance.
Somewhere in all that, NYT threw another rightist bone, featuring celebrities of the so-called intellectual dark web. You know, people who are silenced by having NYT articles giving them platforms, or investors paying for their web sites, or even the opportunity to write the introduction for a landmark anniversary of an important book about political history. I mean, poor Jordan, right?
After a self-identified incel deliberately ran down pedestrians with his van in a busy neighborhood in Toronto, killing ten, a number of prominent men—among them Canadian psychology-professor-cum-self-help-guru Jordan Peterson and New York Times columnist Ross Douthat—began to wonder aloud if the real problem underlying incel rage wasn't aggrieved male entitlement but the excessive pickiness of women who for some reason don't feel like dating the sort of maladjusted men who think mass murder is a reasonable response to sexual and romantic frustration.
In an interview with the New York Times, Peterson said the solution to this unjustified female pickiness was a system of "enforced monogamy" that would somehow—he was a bit vague on the details—compel women to date and marry men who currently have trouble finding partners. Douthat, drawing on a blog post by George Mason University economist Robin Hanson, suggested that "sexual inequality" was as serious a problem as economic inequality and that some sort of "redistribution of sex" might be in the offing. Both think the root of the problem lies in women's poor sexual choices.
This is part of the discussion about Nazis and sexual violence as a corrective measure; again, we're pulling from Futrelle, but this was last year↱, during the period of my would-be funny story.
Honestly, human sympathy unto living danger is a lot harder than just saying the words. My associate, that other in the funny story, is an example: If he's not this or that, and finds suggestions that he might be so offensive, then perhaps, over the course of passing years, he could, now and then, fail to behave precisely to type.
Loneliness is as loneliness will, and can have enormous tragic power. But commiseration, living sympathy, and especially basic empathy, will hesitate at the grotesquerie of your attitude. Depression and isolation are problematic, and can mark people unfortunately. However, the incel attitude will settle the question, and drive people away.
The people promoting such terrible ideas—mras, puas, mgtows, incels—want you to destroy yourself. It's nihilistic surrender. To the other, at the very least you can take comfort in the idea that your name was writ or not before time began, and thus your loneliness serves God's purpose, and pleases Him.
Yeah, I know, that still sucks. Better advice would be to leave God out of it.
° And, trust me, on such occasions when the answer does involve observing she is a lousy fuck, well, prevailing odds say so are you.
Futrelle, David. "Men are oppressed by women not asking them out, MRA argues." We Hunted The Mammoth. 4 November 2019. WeHuntedTheMammoth.com. 7 November 2019. http://bit.ly/33qfliN
—————. "The Daily Stormer calls for 'corrective rape' because women on Tinder are too picky". 9 December 2019. WeHuntedTheMammoth.com. 7 November 2019. http://bit.ly/2L3UV8B
Since I actually had to ask who Bettina Arndt is, we might as well take the moment to note that she apparently just kicked Paul Elam's ass. Figuratively. Metaphorically. Whatever.
Seriously, though, that's the danger of checking in with Futrelle↱; it's always horrifying.
But, yeah. Apparently the antifeminist, tinfoil°, wannabe sex therapist, Arndt, terrifies the domestic violence advocate, Elam.
In a weird way, it's nearly perfect. No, really: He got called out, once upon a time, for advocating domestic violence; she's a defender of mras, mgtows, and incels, and labors to increase woman's share of culpability for men beating them; he's calling off his conference because she's apparently too mean. This is one of the most ridiculous witchy-woman gambits yet witnessed.
° Did she really just tweet that Australia is too egalitarian for misogyny to have anything to do with domestic violence?
The "incel problem" is not because of rejection and not being loved by the opposite sex.
In the sphere of the “pickup”, seduction is weaponised in the gender war: there is a huge amount of discussion about its finer points, but its core and only principle is that you get women to sleep with you (and behave) by making them feel insecure.
When this, amazingly, doesn’t work, incels disappear down the wormhole of the black pill: the game is rigged from the start. Appearance is everything. If you’re dealt a bad hand, you’ve lost before you’ve started. This escalates to violent fantasy, since if the game is rigged, then the only thing that will get attractive women to sleep with you is force. Attractive men are collateral damage in the violent fantasy, though it is interesting that message boards can get away with a lot of mass rape fantasy, only to be shut down when a man starts fantasising about castrating his male roommate.
Their problem is that they view women as property, objects, things that they should have access to and be entitled to certain women for their own sexual pleasure and sense of worth and ownership.
It has always been about entitlement and supremacy.
Rejection is merely an excuse.
i am skimming this subject as a mental distraction so i have skipped a few posts and will come back tread them later on.
incel & the baby boomer...
who sought to invalidate Freud ?
= predominantly Freud as a common process of conceived paradigm was created and then destroyed by the baby boomer generation.
Freud became their jesus
only it wasn't Freud or Jesus on the cross being crucified, it was their own mother.
now we have a generation of the grandchildren of the babyboomers who have grown up with parents devoid of the basic foundation blocks of personality matrix foundational moral compass setting.
interlaced with projected self-righteous privilege entitlement which defends extremist ideology as a personal right to believe in and entertain.
delivered in all ages family size meals rubber stamped with "religious freedom"
as parmalee says ... its a case of measles
a mental disease spreading that has been allowed to go untreated in young children and teenagers
now it is established as a fatal disease endorsed by leaders and media as legitimate.
The update, via Futrelle↱:
UPDATE: Well, that fight didn't last long. Arndt issued an apology and Elam has announced that the conference is back on.
Some of you are likely aware that Paul Elam from A Voice For Men has announced that the ICMI conference in Sydney will not go ahead because I was threatening not to support the conference because of the chosen venue.
It's true that, in a moment of passion, I said and also wrote in an email that I didn't think I could support the conference if it were held in Hunter Valley. Understandably, Paul interpreted this statement as a threat.
I am sorry I said it, and sabotaging the conference is the last thing I would ever want to do.
Elam, who had called Arndt a “bully” whom he had long thought was a “a potential ‘problem child,'” has accepted her public apology. In his earlier post Elam wrote that she was at best a “purported advocate for men and boys.” Now Elam has swapped out the word “purported” and calls her a “dedicated advocate for men and boys and an invaluable contributor to the public narrative about their lives.”
So, barring any further infantile drama, the conference is on.
Elam has already deleted his insulting post about Arndt, and says he'll delete his “apology accepted” note as well. So I guess it's good I've archived and screenshotted both posts.
Meanwhile, I think "screenshotted" is as extraneous as "sheeps" or "mooses".
Also, instead of herd, it should be a murder of moose, and a cuckold of crow, and, yes, that latter involves proposing the plural of crow lose the "s". And, hey, it really does work: The crowfeet crinkling at the corner of the eye, the gossipy old crony-crow, which is itself etymologically inappropriate, but, sure, why not call a group of gossips a trope of crow?
I'll stop, now.
Futrelle, David. "A Voice for Men just cancelled its upcoming conference because crackpot antifeminist Bettina Arndt might say mean things about it [UPDATED]". We Hunted The Mammoth. 7 November 2019. WeHuntedTheMammoth.com. 11 November 2019. http://bit.ly/33DuE8d
You have identified the problem.
Would you care to speculate why such a view seems widespread ... Is there a tracable cause I wonder.
Separate names with a comma.