Elliot Rodger

The point is that women get the POWER to choose. On a base level. Men DO NOT.

Feel free to copy and paste your other post onto here and I will do the same, just replied on it to you.

That women get the power to choose. But doesn't that also encourage not only serial killers but rapists and murders? With this thought in mind?

From previous discussions with Hawkeye - this is just one of Hawkeye's base premises. That said - he has barely raised this point here, and I don't see anyone having said anything against it (even if it is a concept that deserves greater context)

Is there a point to you raising it?

***This was my post***

One of the reasons there is so much opposition to feminism is because it takes the actions of ONE man and blames them on supposed attitudes of ALL men.

By that rationale, the lady below is reason enough to consider ALL women misandrists and foster an environment where we had better teach our daughters not to kill men.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Wuornos

There are PLENTY of women out there who hate men. Just like there are plenty of men who hate women. It's a two way street even if the media chooses to ignore that.

This shooting is FAR less about quote unquote "misogyny" (even if he did hate women), and MUCH MORE about entitlement. He was a RICH little **** whose father was a Hollywood director. He had everything in life handed to him and expected even more.

This is NOT a call to rally around man hating feminist ideology. Nothing is going to get through to anyone today though because the women who died are being held as martyrs, and the men who died just happened to be "unlucky". Even though he killed 4 men (double the amount of women killed) Does anybody care about those men?!?

You can twist things however you want. The point is that if feminism was really about equality, the word itself WOULD NOT be exclusionary.

Hatred is a REALLY ugly thing. The fact is that feminism is destined to fail; just like racism and homophobia are. And that's because it's rooted in hatred.

I will NEVER let ANYONE demonize, demoralize, denigrate, and/or marginalize myself or ANYONE else simply because they were born with a penis. I will NEVER accept that simply because I disagree with a woman or with feminism that I am a "misogynist" or a "rapist" or that there is ANYTHING wrong with wanting men's rights to be addressed with the same precedence and priority as women's are.

I believe that men's issues should be just as much of a priority in society as women's issues are. Being that men: 1) are MORE likely to be victims of violence of ANY sort (INCLUDING domestic violence). 2) Are FORCED to register for selective service while females ARE NOT. 3) Are MUCH more likely to die of suicide than women are. 4) are MUCH more likely to to be incarcerated in criminal court than women are. 5) Statistically are discriminated against in child custody/divorce hearings.


Elliot Rogers does NOT represent all men, just as Ailleen Wurnos does not represent all women.


Quote:

That women get the power to choose. But doesn't that also encourage not only serial killers but rapists and murders? With this thought in mind?


But (and AGAIN I'm NOT condoning murder and/or hate) women do NOT have the same perspective on this issue as men do.

The fact is that feminism is destined to fail; just like racism and homophobia are. And that's because it's rooted in hatred.

The point being - fairness has little to do with it, and discussing it won't change it. What then?

His Mother gave him the car. His mother gave him the sun glasses, a gold chain that's the extent of his spoiltness.

And the world and the media seems in large to be not only unsympathetic to it, but also aggressively hostile to men and male culture.

Part of the problem is that the culture has become so pervasively anti male that we take it as normal,

I am talking about an entire school career where they get shown that the females are the chosen ones and that males are inferior, I am talking about watching the vice president get on a stage at talk for 30 minutes about how much men suck.

But why are men so liable to react violently to being disrespected, while women, who are arguably disrespected far more often in society at large, mostly just roll with it?

Women and girls face systemic sexist disrespect from childhood to the grave. There’s all the obvious, blatant stuff, like sexual harassment, videotaped rape and misogynistic rap music, not to mention getting paid three-fourths of what men do for the same work. Or, for instance, being told by men who become presidential advisers, like Larry Summers, that we are as a group no good at math and science.

Then there’s the endless dissing that is so subtle that, unless we’re students of gender politics or like to walk around gnashing our teeth all the time, we just ignore. In that category, off the top of my head, go things like a television series glamorizing female prostitution, media obsession with female politicians’ clothing, women’s work-life angst, and our own preoccupation with weight, hair, beauty and aging.

Before Tamerlan and Dzhokar made their big move last week—as literal angry white men, being from the Caucasus—I had been trying to get my head around how put-upon some men seem to feel. Whenever I write about things like misogynist bullying, videotaped rape or benevolent sexism, I get attacked for being anti-man by commentators who invariably blame the effects of feminism for any and all bad male behavior.

They always like to remind me that women commit domestic violence too. Oh yeah! Run for your lives to the nearest shelter, all you abused husbands!

I realize that great thinkers like Hanna Rosin, author of The End of Men, have studied this subject much more than I, and come to the conclusion that men are, in fact, at an end. I don’t agree with that. I think such theories merely give aid and succor to the aggrieved, hair-trigger whiners among them.

The notion that men have come to an end is false. Yes, the world’s need for their traditional services—lifting heaving machinery, bringing home the bacon, playing football—seems to be on the wane.

But men are still very much in control and in charge. No woman has ever been Senate majority or minority leader or whip, let alone U.S. president. Men alone own the boardrooms of Apple, Tesla, Exxon, Shell and BP; every single airline; and seven of the 10 most powerful venture capital firms, including Union Square Ventures, Greylock Partners, Sequoia Capital, Shasta Ventures and Blackrock. Every director and music adviser of the New York Philharmonic has been a man, along with every director of the Chicago Symphony, Boston Symphony and London Philharmonic. There’s not even a single woman in the upper ranks of the Westminster Kennel Club.

New Republic writer Lydia DePillis has created a new Tumblr page called 100 Percent Men, a visual inventory of the many realms not yet entered by a woman. It includes all of the above, as well as the current CLIO Awards jury, the top editorial staff at Talking Points Memo, and the editor in chief’s office at the New Republic. It would take an entire section of this paper to list them all.

Yes, men have had to cede some control. Wives go to work, women get to pick their mates (in America; apparently the Tsarnaev brothers’ sisters were bartered off by mom and dad in the time-honored old-country tradition), women get to choose whether to bear children (in most U.S. states), and women now make up one-fifth of the U.S. Senate. Oh, and in America, men who beat their girlfriends, like Tamerlan, can get arrested. Small advances for womankind, but for some entitled men, this is all it takes to make the world seem utterly off-kilter.

What can be done about a peculiarly male persecution complex too vast and entrenched for anti-bullying programs? We might simply have to live through this era, as these men—be they homegrown right wingers who feel slighted, angry misfits, dissed gangstas or jihadis enamored of vestigial honor cultures—slowly evolve or die off. If they don’t, pressure-cooker bombs may soon be the least of our woes.



Read more at http://observer.com/2013/04/diss-diss-bang-bang-welcome-to-the-golden-age-of-male-rage/#ixzz32oVydpUI
Follow us: @newyorkobserver on Twitter | newyorkobserver on Facebook

We will have to agree to disagree then. I would argue that while nothing will change it

The point is that women get the POWER to choose. On a base level. Men DO NOT.

it's important to note it as fact.

It's not actually Fact...the statement is a distortion of the truth.

If you reworded it - it could become both.

that view contributes to a victim culture

While I disagree with hawkeye to some extent, I also agree with his base premise. The point is that women get the POWER to choose.

The major problem for feminists is that this is not what most women want. FOr the moment they are keeping women quiet with such things as fables about campus rape epidemics, and laying on quilt trips about how there are so many (allegedly) women suffering at the hands of men that they need to keep quiet about the abuse of men as the feminists work to save their hurting sisters. It will be women who eventually knock off the feminists, and they should probably get in it before long because the pace is picking up for young men exploding and imploding.

I strongly disagree.

sex isn't the only thing important to a man's mental health, nor to his self esteem, nor to his self-respect, nor to his social skills, nor to so very much of life that is important to a mans happiness

Fine, contribute to a victim culture.

it disempowers men, and gives them an excuse to give up, and not try...because 'I have no power - this is fact'.