Previous post
Next post
First, if you haven’t heard the details about the shooting spree in Bridgeville, PA, here are the horrifying details. George Sodini, a 48-year-old computer programmer, was a lonely, bitter, demented man. He hadn’t had a girlfriend since 1984 and hadn’t had sex in 19 years. He had unspeakable rage towards women and was also a racist. Two days ago, he walked into the LA Fitness Club and strode into an aerobics class filled with women. He put his duffel bag onto the ground, pulled out four guns, and opened fire. Three women were murdered; nine others were injured. After carrying out the carnage he had been since November, he killed himself.
Killed were Heidi Overmier, 46, of Carnegie, a sales manager at an amusement park; Jody Billingsley, 37, of Mount Lebanon, who worked for a medical-supply company; and Elizabeth Gannon, 49, of Pittsburgh, an X-ray technician at Allegheny General Hospital.
… Jordan Solomon, 14, said she thought it was weird when a man walked into the all-female class and put a black duffel bag on the ground and reached into it.
“All of a sudden all the lights went out and I turned around, he started firing. I turned around and I saw him holding a gun,” she said.
Solomon said the man was expressionless, and she didn’t hear him say anything as he sprayed bullets. The teenager ran out of the room and into the parking lot, bolting into a restaurant where she told the workers to call 911.
… One of the wounded women was a pregnant instructor, who is now in a hospital.
“I remember thinking I wanted to hold my breath because I was afraid if he saw me breathing, he would shoot me again,” the woman, who did not wish to be identified, told MSNBC.
Lauren Dooley, 27, who was exercising on a treadmill on the second floor, ran down the fire escape and out the rear of the building, where bystanders were applying pressure to victims’ gunshot wounds.
… Six patients remained hospitalized, including the aerobics instructor, Mary Primis, 26, who was listed in fair condition. Primis is pregnant but said doctors told her the baby is fine.
It’s just an awful, awful story. And sure, a bunch of women ignored this sicko — they were probably smart enough to realize there was something off with Sodini. The thing is, he was a mentally deranged, unstable, hate-filled monster, and thankfully, he’s probably burning in hell right about now. Hopefully the families of the three victims killed find peace, and the injured victims recover quickly.
And of course, this is just great fodder for feminists to, yet again, paint all men as misogynists and our culture as one of violent, hateful, anti-woman misogyny. The gender warriors are out in force condemning not just Sodini’s actions, which would be completely understandable, but our widespread “culture of violent misogyny”. First up is the always lovely Jessica Valenti from Feministing:
It’s also important to remember that Sodini’s crime is not so different from the misogynist violence that women face every day.
… As ill as Sodini may have been (and it seems clear from his blog and videos that he was indeed sick), we can’t separate this from the larger culture of misogyny and sexism. And also like Amanda, I find it disturbing – and downright frightening – to see how similar Sodini’s writing is to a lot of MRA/NiceGuy ramblings we see so often online. Anna at Jezebel even finds some bloggers in the “pick up artist” world who say if women would have just fucked Sodini, he never would have killed.
So yes, let’s continue to talk about this horrible shooting as a crime against women. But let’s also make sure that we’re discussing this not as an isolated crime – but as one part of an incredibly dangerous, culture-wide problem.
So, this is part of a dangerous, culture-wide problem? Right… moving on to the charming Amanda Marcotte’s take on the situation over at Pandagon:
I can’t even make a dark joke about the fact that last night’s mass murderer turns out to have been motivated by the worst case of Nice Guy® syndrome on record as of yet. What I will say is I doubt many in the mainstream media, except maybe Bob Herbert, will be willing to tie this crime to the daily violence that women experience that is similarly motivated. George Sodini was angry at the entire world of “desirable” women for not up and volunteering to have sex with him, and every day anonymous men around the country and world beat, rape, and even kill women because said women were also considered insufficiently compliant, often to unstated demands that women were supposed to just anticipate and fill without complaint. Today, women will be raped or beaten or maybe even killed for choosing to do differently than a man desired of them—everything from screwing up the household chores to being deemed a tease to thinking they had a right to go to this party/walk down this alley to leaving a man who wants them to stay. But most people won’t see Sodini’s crime as different by degree, but by kind, because unlike most men who commit this kind of hate crime against women, Sodini didn’t know his victims.
We’re going to write him off as crazy. But the thing is that “crazy” doesn’t mean completely detached from the world, at least most of the time. Sodini wasn’t one of those people who is so wrapped up in their delusions that they can’t hold a job and need to be kept in an institution. In fact, what’s disturbing about his diary entries is that they sound pretty much like the same ranting you get from every misogynist who thinks he’s a Nice Guy®, and who hates women for their perceived malicious unwillingness to have sex with him.
And, for the cherry on top of the cake, here’s Jill from Feministe:
Sodini was clearly an unbalanced and aggressive man who fixated on women and blamed them for his problems. The same cultural misogyny that enabled Sodini to blame women for his own social ineptitude and aggression also underwrites “The Game,” and informs people like Roissey’s interactions with women. It glorifies male dominance and relies on male entitlement. And, notably, it relies on there being a class of less-dominant men to serve as contrast to the alpha males — it’s not exactly looking out for the whole of the Brotherhood.
Hating women comes in a variety of forms. Sodini’s was certainly one extreme, but perhaps people like Roissey and other “pick-up artists” who hold dehumanzing views of women — and, equally troubling, glorify a shallow caricature of masculinity — would do well to look in the mirror and see how their actions also contribute to a larger culture of misogyny.
So, the feminist position is basically this: George Sodini was a deranged, lunatic man who hated women, but his violence was encouraged by the violent, misogynist culture that apparently permeates American society today. They come to this conclusion despite the fact that they could only come up with three other examples of supposd misogynist crime sprees (including the Amish school shooting a few years ago) over the last 20 years. And while of course there are too many women who are victims of rape and violence in the country, by no means do we have a monopoly on that problem. It’s a human problem — as long as humanity exists, there will unfortunately be violence perpetuated against men, against women, against children. To say that it is a “culture-wide problem” because America is apparently just still so misogynistic is ridiculous and wrong. And feminists know that. Most men do not harbor secret fantasies of forcing women to have sex with them whether they want to or not, nor do most men dream about enacting violence against women. Yet it doesn’t keep feminists from labeling men this way.
What I think it boils down to is that feminists no longer have anything to fight for. And so, a movement that once was dedicated to fighting for equality between sexes has now resorted to slandering all men as angry, violent, women-haters in order to further their own feminist agenda. George Sodini is a sick, evil man who I hope rots in hell for what he’s done. And while I don’t think feminists are evil, they should still be ashamed of themselves for exploiting a tragedy of this nature in order to continue to smear men.
Bob says: There is no ‘culture of misogyny’ at all. The feminists are, as usual, unhinged. to a point, I think Mr Sodini had a few valid points. I’m not the most attractive guy in the world, and have experienced downright offensive rejections when I attempted to approach an ‘attractive’ girl. The women viewed me as completely beneath them, and how DARE I approach them, since i clearly was not up to their standards. These were the same girls that cried and whined when they had sex with a guy that never called them back. So from one perspective, I can relate to his feelings. He simply took it to a serious extreme.
If the feminists want to blame anybody, they should be blaming themselves for how so many of them treat men in today’s modern society.
sonja says: “”He was just pretty normal, a little quiet — like the classroom nerd,” Kozel said.”
So even after his death, he’s still being written off as a nerd, not worth a woman’s notice.
I’ll state right here that in no way do I condone what he did. It was horrid.
But I’ve seen, even in my own husband, the hurt caused by being written off as nothing more than a nerd or a geek by women. As being not worth dating, for no good reason.
I’m terribly saddened by his murders, but I also believe that he is a victim of the women who dismissed him.
Patricia says: I can not believe people are blaming the women who rejected him. You have to be a pretty big loser not to be able to find a woman who will at the least have sex with you.
Perhaps his standards were a little high.
I wouldn’t chalk this up to misogyny so much as narcissism. Most people (both men and women) that are from the young Boomers on down are increasingly narcissistic and self-centered. They expect to get everything that they want and when they don’t get it, they just come completely unhinged.
Hey, guys get rejected, it happens all the time. But to start blazing away at women because you don’t get sex? Please!!! Grow up!
What you’re seeing is people throwing a violent temper tantrum because they hit the slightest bump of adversity and can’t handle it. Unfortunately, you’re going to see a lot more of this crap in the years to come.
On a side note, when I first heard of this, I was wondering how long it would take for the feminists to make political capital out of this. As Rahm Emanuel said, “never let a crisis go to waste.”
Marc says: So, can anybody play at this game? Mary Kay Letourneau was not just a lonely, misguided young woman but “part of a dangerous, culture-wide female pedophilia problem”. And Andrea Yates was not just profoundly mentally ill, she’s part of “the violent, misopedist culture that permeates American society today”. And Julie Corey is not just one insane person, she’s part of this culture-wide “kill the pregnant mother and cut the baby out of her womb” modern matricidal society we live in.
Patricia,
We’ve become an nation of victims, plain and simple. It’s always someone else’s fault (BTW, this applies to both men and women). They can’t be honest with themselves, so they throw a temper tantrum (which is essentially what happened in this case, only much more violent than the norm). I agree with Cassy when she essentially said that women probably saw things in the guy that made them to avoid him (I mean let’s face it, he was a psycho and the guy seemed to be pretty open about it). If you act like a nutjob, chances are pretty good that people will avoid you. That’s reality.
One loser does not consitute a society.
In the time, one million babies are butchered in their wombs each year, half of whom are females, and all the gender feminists do is to cheer.
patr333x says: Good comments Cassy, I’m glad a woman has an opinion of her own on the matter. Feminists seem to stifle diversity of thought; one can seemingly only support feminism through narrow, accepted channels.
Neither “side” should be exploiting this situation, though they probably will.
CaptDMO says: Mat Says:
… If you act like a nutjob, chances are pretty good that people will avoid you. That’s reality.
Hmmm..except those that have access to lots of cash, especially if it comes from other people’s piggy banks.
And there’s always the the annecdotal “Birds of a feather” axiom. For example- The repeatedly, nay, consistently um…”taken out of context”…(yeah, THAT’S the ticket) Mandy, Jessy, Jill, and company.
I could be wrong of course….
Andy says: I’ll actually agree that there is a culture of misogyny in America. There are a lot of dudes out there that just seem to hate women. They seem to have the following characteristics.
1. A very strong pro-choice view on abortion. (After all, if that stupid ho I slept with last night gets pregnant, I sure as hell ain’t taking care of the kid.)
2. They oppose the oppressive patriarcal institution known as marriage.
3. Tend to view women as physical equals. (That bitch hit me, I have every right to hit her)
Misogynists and Feminists have a lot in common.
BobV says: A misogynist culture that condones violence against women does exist, but it isn’t this one. Check out the middle east, or muslim transplants to the west and you will see a culture that values subservience and that’s about it in woman. That has no problem killing them when they step out of line (seem to enjoy it actually).
Of course these “ladies” will never criticize arab/muslim culture, that would be racist. So they’re going after the one culture on earth that actually seems to give a damn about womens rights. Are we perfect? No. But we are the only ones trying to make things better, and we’re a damn sight better than everyone else.
Besides, if this were condoned here, wouldn’t you see more support for this guy? I’ve yet to hear anyone call him anything other than a psychopath deserving a long prison sentence (death penalty in my opinion). And wouldn’t it be minor news as no one really cares and it happens all the time?
Cpt. DMO,
“Mat Says:
… If you act like a nutjob, chances are pretty good that people will avoid you. That’s reality.
Hmmm..except those that have access to lots of cash, especially if it comes from other people’s piggy banks.”
That’s true, but there are always exceptions. Sodini didn’t seem to have a problem with money though (he actually got a promotion when he thought he was going to get laid-off).
I don’t think he truly hated women, he just felt disconnected from them and so began developing resentment. That feminists try to cash in on this is simply because they have a need to validate their nutty Marxist worldview.
Andy…
Huh??? Your post made no sense whatsoever.
“I’ll actually agree that there is a culture of misogyny in America. There are a lot of dudes out there that just seem to hate women. They seem to have the following characteristics.”
“A lot of dudes” doesn’t necessarily constitute the entire culture. If you were to say distrust women in relationships, you’d probably be more correct. But I think that’s more of a survivial trait due to the legal realm of divorce than anything misogynistic.
“1. A very strong pro-choice view on abortion. (After all, if that stupid ho I slept with last night gets pregnant, I sure as hell ain’t taking care of the kid.)”
Not necessarily. There are a lot of men (as well as women) who are pro-life. If you bothered to read Cassy’s piece on a piece of anti-abortion legislation about a week or so ago, you’d realize that you’re making a false statement. Pro-choice is generally much more mixed genderwise than most people care to admit.
“They oppose the oppressive patriarcal institution known as marriage.”
It’s patriarchal. If you’re going to toe the feminut line, at least get the spelling correct. Again, where is your proof? You seem to be throwing an awful lot of generalizations out there. And why exactly is it oppressive? You’re saying that women don’t want to get married? Any of them? Seriously?
“Tend to view women as physical equals. (That bitch hit me, I have every right to hit her)”
An interesting point, I do have to admit. Personally, I think this has more to do with a woman acting like a harlot than a lady than anything resembling physical equality. As far as I’m concerned, in the clearest sense, “equality” implies all of the benefits as well as the responsibilities that go with that word. No, I wouldn’t haul off and beat a woman, but if she was insistant or persistant in trying to slug me, yeah, I’d feel that I would have no choice but to at least fight back, perhaps initially in a restrained fashion. You’re telling me that I should not fight back if the woman is waving a knife in front of my face or understands some form of martial arts? Please, chivalry is worth fighting for but I’m not suicidal.
“Misogynists and Feminists have a lot in common.”
Obviously, you need to learn how to make a point. In no way did any of your “examples” entail how there was a misogynist culture nor how they have anything in common with feminists. You seem to use an awful lot of ghetto language as your template for how “all” men are anti-women. I might make a suggestion that you should get out more (as in outside the ghetto), but you’d probably ignore me and continue to listen to your eminem CDs.
This guy complained that women treated him badly, then he murdered people. Therefore, it is deeply troubling that anyone at all complains when women mistreat them.
bl says: “Of course these “ladies” will never criticize arab/muslim culture, that would be racist.” -BobV
?!
What rock do you live under? These “Ladies” and also quite a few “Gents” out there fight those types of misogynistic cultures all the time – but that doesn’t mean you can’t fight it on the homefront, too. Relatively better isn’t good enough. Read a newspaper.
Of course the problem isn’t “all men”. It’s just computer programmers. You can’t trust those computer types. They’re liable to go off the wall at any moment, go on a violent killing spree, or who knows what.
That’s why no normal people will associate with us computer geeks, I guess.
But I’ve seen, even in my own husband, the hurt caused by being written off as nothing more than a nerd or a geek by women. As being not worth dating, for no good reason.
Sonja, there are many excellent reasons for sane women to not date this crazed, homicidal maniac… like the fact that he’s a crazed, homicidal maniac.
That aside, and I do ask this very seriously: why not put the cultural blame where it belongs – with Jess, Jill, and Mandy? They are the ones who hate on chastity. They are the ones who think that sex is nothing more than a good time.
If sex is but a good time, it’s a real insult to not sleep with a man; you are denying himself and yourself a fun, healthy time. If sex is special – if chastity means something more than just a way of life to be shunned – then not having sex with a guy is normal.
Once you criticise chastity, you reverse the default position from not sleeping with someone to sleeping with them. So, Jess, author of The Purity Myth, how do you feel about the logical consequences of your politics?
Note to Mat: Andy’s comments were obviously biting sarcasm. You missed it. He was pointing out that the biggest misogynists are liberal men, whose commitment to feminism is all about using women.
Roxanne,
“Andy’s comments were obviously biting sarcasm. You missed it.”
Well, it wasn’t that obvious and until Andy actually replies as such, I’ll stick to my original opinion, but thanks for caring.
“He was pointing out that the biggest misogynists are liberal men, whose commitment to feminism is all about using women.”
Yeah, it’s possible that it could be read that way, but I still think it’s more likely he meant it in the literal sense. There are a bunch of male schmucks who really do believe in feminism (for some odd reason…i.e. look at Jessica Valenti’s “husband” for a great example as such). If Andy’s post is a piece of satire, then it’s a piss-poor attempt.
Perhaps in the future you can let the person who wrote the post tell me what he/she was trying to convey (since I really do think they have a better idea of what they’re writing than someone trying to interpret for someone else). That is, if they choose to.
Mat – it’s obvious what Andy was trying to communicate. Your response was nonsensical.
Perhaps in the future you can let the person who wrote the post tell me what he/she was trying to convey (since I really do think they have a better idea of what they’re writing than someone trying to interpret for someone else).
So it’s okay for you to assume that you know exactly what Andy was saying and excoriate him for it, but it’s not okay for me to point out that your interpretation is unreasonable and that there is a much more clear and logical one to be had?
Got it.
BobV says: bl:
I’ve read quite a few feministing posts, and despite ample oppurtunities to do so, I have never seen them take arab/muslim culture to task for it’s rampant sexism.
Complaints about western culture abound of course.
“So it’s okay for you to assume that you know exactly what Andy was saying and excoriate him for it, but it’s not okay for me to point out that your interpretation is unreasonable and that there is a much more clear and logical one to be had?”
Let me simplify it for you, since you really don’t seem to understand much.
Andy made a comment. I responded. If you were to comment on my response directly, that’s one thing. But what you’re doing is interpreting someone else for them. Personally, I think that’s highly arrogant, but then you are a pompous ass so it’s hardly surprising. As I said before, if Andy gets his feelings hurt, I think he can respond to my comment. If you want to argue, do it correctly.
” Got it.”
Good.
Cabaret Voltaire says: Outstanding essay written by a women who doesn’t engage in communal blame.
Simone de Beauvoir says: To BobV:
Here are just a few Feministing articles criticizing the Middle East or as you called it “arab/muslim culture:”
http://www.feministing.com/archives/016280.html
http://www.feministing.com/archives/014976.html
http://www.feministing.com/archives/009601.html
http://www.feministing.com/archives/008860.html
And just in case that’s not enough for you here are some from Feministe:
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/06/09/where-were-women-in-obamas-cairo-speech/
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/02/21/iran-and-womens-rights/
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/06/08/in-the-name-of-honour-an-interview-with-rana-husseini/
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/06/03/murder-in-the-name-of-honour/
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2008/02/11/zanan-silenced/
And maybe they speak about the United States more because- I don’t know- that is where they are blogging from and where their primary audience is…Hmm. No, that cannot be it. It must be because they are unAmerican succubuses that are filled with too much hot air and are in need of a good screwing.
To Mat:
If you think male feminists are schmucks because they, “for some odd reason,” believe that women are equals and should have legal protection until the United States government can promise that equality. Well then you have proven Mr. Bob Herbert’s observation that misogyny is still alive and well in our culture.
Great post and a nice site you have here.
I saw the same BS you did in the feminist ranting about this crime. Three multiple female targeted killings in 20 years and yet it is “rampant”.
I also saw the lack of the usual blame institutions in the feminist rants like workplace, school, courts but they certainly attacked the Christian church(s) and what they called the easy availabillity of guns.
So your 100% correct the fembots are running out of male dominated institutions to attack and now just spew false notions and pick on god and guns to further disarm the men who can stand up to their police state of entitlement.
Keep up the good work Cassy!!!!
I hope and pray for the day that men have to face a “culture of misandry” as considerate of our needs as supposedly misogynist American culture is of women’s needs.
Alas, as soon as this happened i knew this is how they would roll with it. Im also pretty sure that if a Georgina Sodini comes along the gals at the feminist sites will be cheering her on – not many feminist complaints about Aileeen Wournos as i recall.
Matt says: Plenty of men receive just as much rejection as this guy apparently did.
What is wrong is that society has no support system for a guy like this who unfortunately takes it to heart deeply and then just digs his hole deeper and deeper and deeper.
Mat – your gross misinterpretation of Andy’s comment is absolutely a fair subject of a comment. The only reason you think otherwise is because your little petty tyrant routine got interrupted by someone who pointed out that Andy was actually snarking on liberal men.
Translation of “pompous:” definitely smarter than Mat and does not let him – or any other beta male – pretend otherwise. Thank you.
Here’s the thing, babe: you’re more than welcome to insult my intelligence. Just understand that I’m not a liberal: I run my life by facts. Insult away, but provide some commonly accepted standard of intellect by which we can compare each other. Until that day happens, it’s all bluster from a man who is more than quick to insult others, but strangely slow to provide any evidence of his own candlepower.
JL says: This Sodini guy was undoubtedly a nasty type of person, but on what basis was he a racist?
Melissa says: Nice GIRLS get rejected, too. It happens to everybody.
Melissa says: Also, I don’t see why it takes frequent misogynist crime “sprees” for misogynist crime to qualify as pervasive. Don’t individual ones count?
I was raped in grade school by a group of older boys. The white, male, middle-aged principal sat me down and told me and my parents that the ringleader of the boys had had a crush on me (“fascinated” was his exact word) and if I had been nicer to him the attack wouldn’t have happened. All this was delivered very calmly and matter-of-factly. The male social worker in charge of the boy’s case agreed.
Later in the same year, another boy hit me and I decided to fight back this time. Some people think I’m exaggerating when I say that the phrases “boys will be boys” and “young ladies don’t act that way” were used by the same school administrators, but it’s the truth.
This was in a small, rural, all-white town in New England in the late 1970’s.
Roy says: “Most men do not harbor secret fantasies of forcing women to have sex with them whether they want to or not, nor do most men dream about enacting violence against women.”
Have you ever watched ANY straight porn? Straight porn REVOLVES around raping and humiliating women, and the vast majority of men in this country watch porn.
Renee says: First off, there are times I agree with feminists and times I don’t. With that being said, I think that there’s some merit to the connection between the shooting and misogyny in our culture, because YES it’s still there. It may not be as obvious as other countries and it may not be COMPLETELY widespread, but it’s there. And also, feminists aren’t saying that ALL men are bad, not at all.
It’s funny how some of you criticize feminists for placing blame on anybody and anything, but in a few of these posts, you seem to blame feminists and other women for his actions on that day.
Matt,
Plenty of men receive just as much rejection as this guy apparently did.
What is wrong is that society has no support system for a guy like this who unfortunately takes it to heart deeply and then just digs his hole deeper and deeper and deeper.
I agree with you on this. I think that has to do with a idea of masculinity that’s really harmful to males in this country, not based on true masculinity.
Roxeanne de Luca,
That aside, and I do ask this very seriously: why not put the cultural blame where it belongs – with Jess, Jill, and Mandy? They are the ones who hate on chastity. They are the ones who think that sex is nothing more than a good time.
Maybe I skipped a post, but what does sex have anything to do with this?
If sex is but a good time, it’s a real insult to not sleep with a man; you are denying himself and yourself a fun, healthy time. If sex is special – if chastity means something more than just a way of life to be shunned – then not having sex with a guy is normal.
HUH??? What are you talking about? Jessica isn’t condeming chastity. She’s against the fact that chasity is usually MAINLY being taught and encouraged to females and not males (something that you did in your quote). Also, she talks about how women who choose to have casual sex are critized and often anaylzed like there’s something wrong with them, but not men. Men’s sexual habits aren’t really discussed. There’s so much more to it than what I mentioned, but I’ll leave it at that.
Once you criticise chastity, you reverse the default position from not sleeping with someone to sleeping with them. So, Jess, author of The Purity Myth, how do you feel about the logical consequences of your politics?
Once again, she’s not condeming chastity itself, just how it has been taught and how it’s always focused on only females. Is chastity not important to men too. As a Christian, I believe it should be encouraged for both sexes.
There’s an article from the New York Times that also connects the shooting to misogyny:
Andy says: Mat,
My comments were sarcastic. I am a single man in my 20s who is pro-life and conservative, and wants to love a women, marry her, and make a lifelong commitment to her. Many other young single men I know want to just use women as sex objects, never thinking about marriage, dumping them as they please, and if they accidently “knock one up”, they pressure the mothers to have abortions. Most of these guys are big time liberals. Yet to the feminists, conservative=bad and liberal=good.
Thanks a lot Roxanne for clarifying this.
“Mat – your gross misinterpretation of Andy’s comment is absolutely a fair subject of a comment. The only reason you think otherwise is because your little petty tyrant routine got interrupted by someone who pointed out that Andy was actually snarking on liberal men.”
As I said before, Roxanne, until Andy steps up to the plate and explains himself, then we’ll just have to leave it open to interpretation. I think it to be one way, you obviously think another. BTW, you might want to look into that “little petty tyrant” routine yourself. I’ve seen you operate on several posts and you either act like you’re the expert on everything (“I’m a scientist, so I should know”) or you feel sorry for yourself (“feminists and conservatives always pick on me”). Now I sound like a hard case a lot, but at least I’m man enough to admit it and I have my reasons for being this way. You have some ways to go. Grow up.
“Translation of “pompous:” definitely smarter than Mat and does not let him – or any other beta male – pretend otherwise. Thank you.”
Hmmm…for someone who’s supposedly above all the petty stuff, you like to give people labels. Like I said, you really should look up the word “pompous.” Personally, I don’t think you’d know what an alpha male is if he punched you in the face, but you seem to get a kick out of labeling men (could be that feminist grudge you keep holding on the rest of us…hint hint, nudge nudge, know what I mean?).
“Here’s the thing, babe: you’re more than welcome to insult my intelligence. Just understand that I’m not a liberal: I run my life by facts.”
No “sweetie”, I’m just insulting your integrity, because you have none. See, I can play the name-calling game too. If you’re a feminist, then you’re at least partly liberal (and I have yet to run across a self-styled feminist who doesn’t eventually go in that ideological direction). You’re facts have much to be desired.
“Insult away, but provide some commonly accepted standard of intellect by which we can compare each other.”
Well, who’s been insulting the ideas put forth (me) and insulting the person (you)? There is a distinct difference, but then subtlety doesn’t seem to be one of your strong points.
“Until that day happens, it’s all bluster from a man who is more than quick to insult others, but strangely slow to provide any evidence of his own candlepower.”
As I said before, you seem to be resorting to name-calling, so obviously something is bothering you about what I said. Oh well, come back with some decent information and I’ll peruse it. Until then, just keep firing off the insults. Someday they may actually make sense.
“To Mat:
If you think male feminists are schmucks because they, “for some odd reason,” believe that women are equals and should have legal protection until the United States government can promise that equality.”
Ah Simone, but it’s one thing to promote equality (which I’m all for) and quite another to promote special privileges (which most feminists want). And if you bother reading your own literature on that silly page, then you’ll see that’s pretty much what feminists want. They don’t want equality, they want men to be second class citizens. And you want to know why? Because most of them have an irrational hate against anything male. Something happened in ancient Babylonia where women were definitely chattel and all of a sudden, they all think that’s what all American males are trying to do to them. Guess what? That was several thousand years ago. Totally different circumstances then. Provided they have the talent, women can and do anything that they set their mind to in this country (though feminists say otherwise).
What I take issue with is when feminists insist on absolute equality and throwing qualifications totally out the window. You really think a 5′ woman who weighs 90 lbs should be a cop? Just because she wants to and to hell with the responsibilities of the job? I don’t, because she’d be overpowered in a critical situation ((which, I believe, in fact happened in an Georgia courtroom a while back with tragic consequences).
Now, I have a cousin who’s a fire chief in Illinois. She has the physical strength to do that and that’s great. So let’s promote equality because it makes rational sense, not because there’s a silly political/ideological position at stake.
“Well then you have proven Mr. Bob Herbert’s observation that misogyny is still alive and well in our culture.”
Well, Bob Herbert writes for the NYT and he’s a super-leftist to boot so if that’s the best you can come up with for an example, then you’re found wanting.
“Mat,
My comments were sarcastic. I am a single man in my 20s who is pro-life and conservative, and wants to love a women, marry her, and make a lifelong commitment to her.”
Thanks Andy for clarifying. I was wrong and I can admit that. Good luck with the second part of the statement, though.
“Many other young single men I know want to just use women as sex objects, never thinking about marriage, dumping them as they please, and if they accidently “knock one up”, they pressure the mothers to have abortions. Most of these guys are big time liberals. Yet to the feminists, conservative=bad and liberal=good.”
Andy, most of those guys probably don’t have the wherewithal to have an ideological position, because they’re too busy trying to rut their way through life. I’ve found that many of those guys have little more than animal instincts. There’s not a lot of reasoning capacity there.
Feminists equate conservatives as bad because of the term “conservative.” If a guy’s conservative, then he has to be part of the group of men in the world who’s trying to keep women under wraps (hence my comment to Simone about ancient Babylonia). Liberalism, or more accurately, “Progressivism” is to the feminists that idea of progress, of moving forward (or in Obama’s terms, change) which it is anything but. Most feminists I’ve come across can’t get past the ideological irregularities and constrdictions of what they supposedly believe in that it’s pointless trying to talk rationally to them. Hence, my short fuse with most of them.
WayneB says: Melissa – There is no doubt that incredible miscarriages of justice such as you describe do happen, but the term “pervasive” has a meaning. Now, the dictionary definition I just looked up is “diffused throughout every part of”, which would mean that yes, it would require frequent occurrences throughout the country to qualify as “pervasive”.
Note that that DOES NOT excuse your principal. I’m just clarifying the terminology. When things like that happen, they need to be brought to light and cleaned up properly, but misogyny does not qualify as pervasive in this country, because it’s not the norm.
“Straight porn REVOLVES around raping and humiliating women, and the vast majority of men in this country watch porn.”
A deliberate misrepresentation. The great majority of porn is not about raping or humiliating anyone. Typical feminist bull.
Melissa Says:
Also, I don’t see why it takes frequent misogynist crime “sprees” for misogynist crime to qualify as pervasive. Don’t individual ones count?
Not unless such individual examples are pervasive! Should be obvious, really. This idea that misogynist crime is pervasive is rubbish -there’s a difference between killing someone who happens to be a woman and killing someone because they are a woman, just as there is a difference between a white man who kills a black man because he hates blacks and a white man who kills a black man because he just wants to kill someone.Also, it is interesting that you have to go back to the 70’s to get a story which you then use as evidence for present day “misogyny.”
Melissa says: Wayne8 – if it had been some sort of rare aberration, it would have been cause for outcry. This was as Middle-America as it gets, and not a single eyelash in the community was batted. My case isn’t a rare, unusual occurrence; similar cases happen all the time. The fact that it’s just an everyday fact of life instead of it being a splashy news “spree” shows just how pervasive it is.
You’re welcome, Andy.
Mat – glad that you could admit to a man that you were wrong. Next up, admitting the same to me.
Personally, I don’t think you’d know what an alpha male is if he punched you in the face, but you seem to get a kick out of labeling men (could be that feminist grudge you keep holding on the rest of us…hint hint, nudge nudge, know what I mean?).
ROFLMAO.
That’s comedy, Mat. Alpha males punching women in the face? All feminists – even the conservative ones like myself, Christina Hoff Summers, Sarah Palin, etc – being grudge-holding harpies who are in need of guidance from a man who acts like he’s hung like a half-eaten Tic Tac?
I haven’t laughed so hard in a while. Keep ’em coming… you should be on Jon Stewart. 🙂
Andy,
Mat,
My comments were sarcastic. I am a single man in my 20s who is pro-life and conservative, and wants to love a women, marry her, and make a lifelong commitment to her. Many other young single men I know want to just use women as sex objects, never thinking about marriage, dumping them as they please, and if they accidently “knock one up”, they pressure the mothers to have abortions. Most of these guys are big time liberals. Yet to the feminists, conservative=bad and liberal=good.
Thanks a lot Roxanne for clarifying this.
You’re welcome.
I experienced a lot of the same in college, and, as I’ve previously pointed out to Mat, have experienced a lot of the same since. There are many politically aware men who know that the “feminist” – I put the word in quotes because those women do not speak for me – ideology gives them the grounds to use women without social condemnation.
Now, on to less weighty matters – you’re a single guy, in Pennsylvania, in his (early? mid? late?) 20s who is looking for, presumably, a nice lady? Do allow me to play matchmaker….!
“That’s comedy, Mat. Alpha males punching women in the face? All feminists – even the conservative ones like myself, Christina Hoff Summers, Sarah Palin, etc – being grudge-holding harpies who are in need of guidance from a man who acts like he’s hung like a half-eaten Tic Tac?”
I’m naturally not all that surprised that you took my comment in the literal sense. But then, you’re the one making all sorts of pre-conceptions about men. BTW, you’ll be waiting a while for that admission from me. As for an admission that I was wrong, I believe that I said in several posts that I was waiting on Andy to clarify. I never said I was right all the time. Can you say the same?
Mat, Mat, Mat.
You just don’t get it, do you? You are the one – not me! – who has all sorts of preconceived notions about other people (i.e. those who call themselves feminists). You’re the one who mentioned Alpha males punching women (or a woman in particular – i.e. me) in the face… which, although obviously not literal, is still hilarious in its stupidity.
You’re also the one who jumped all over Andy. It was a relief, in many ways, for me to see that, because it became absolutely clear that your hatred of me actually doesn’t have anything to do with me. You treat other people just as badly, because you’re just that kind of person. The differences between Andy and I are small, such as that I fought back, for which you can never forgive me.
“Mat, Mat, Mat.
You just don’t get it, do you? You are the one – not me! – who has all sorts of preconceived notions about other people (i.e. those who call themselves feminists). You’re the one who mentioned Alpha males punching women (or a woman in particular – i.e. me) in the face… which, although obviously not literal, is still hilarious in its stupidity.”
I suggest you go back and look at your myriad of responses (not just to me) on this website since you’ve started posted here. It’ll reveal a pattern. BTW, you’re the one who started going off on the alpha/beta male crap(who exactly talks like this anyway? Guys are just that…guys…well except for the liberal manginas, but they don’t really count). Now, granted, my analogy could have been clearer (such as “you wouldn’t know something if it hit you”), but it was hardly “stupidity.” And that’s the issue with you. Anyone who doesn’t bow to your particular set of beliefs is automatically a total idiot. Not wrong, not misguided, but a complete imbecile (again, look at some of the stuff you’ve called people on here). You might want to ponder that for a moment (though you’re so full of yourself that you never will).
As for feminists, they are hardly preconceived. Every, and I do mean every woman I’ve come across that says “I’m a feminist,” will eventually trip themselves up with some man-hating comment (no matter how hard they try, even if they’re married). And I don’t think that attitude is going to change anytime soon. So if I encounter that attitude, then don’t be surprised if I’m going to fire back. I have no issues whatsoever with women gaining equality, but I’m certainly not interested in men becoming second-class citizens (which feminist leaders definitely preach to their disciples). You don’t seem all that oppressed to me, so enough with the chattel crap.
“You’re also the one who jumped all over Andy. It was a relief, in many ways, for me to see that, because it became absolutely clear that your hatred of me actually doesn’t have anything to do with me.”
You confuse hatred with annoyance with someone. Andy might have clarified it, but I still think it was a poorly written piece of satire (for good conservative satire, try Iowahawk). And that’s the difference between you and I. I make snarky and snippy comments about a person’s thoughts, but you personally insult people.
“You treat other people just as badly, because you’re just that kind of person.”
Oh, look who’s calling the kettle black. I might disparage someone’s comments (which I have many times), but you resort to rank namecalling when you don’t get your own way. Try looking in the mirror sometime before you start that nonsense.
I am tactless because I’m sick of being polite when everyone around me (male or female) does their very best to be an asshole. You might have noticed that decorum seems to have gone out the window these days.
“The differences between Andy and I are small, such as that I fought back, for which you can never forgive me.”
No, actually they’re much greater than you can obviously comprehend. My issue was with Andy. I wanted to see how Andy would respond; he did so and I was mistaken. Let’s talk about the hatred here. You obviously dislike me (no worries), so you decided to pick a fight. Ok, no problem. I can handle myself.
BTW, your response spoke volumes about your feminist attitude. You impled that I wasn’t going to apologize or admit wrongdoing because you’re a woman. I didn’t (and won’t) apologize because you sound like a pompous ass who didn’t prove anything but being a narcisstic know-it-all. So just because I disagree with you, you automatically assume that it’s because you’re a woman and I just can’t handle arguing with women (or hate women in some way). If anything, I believe that you can’t handle men who argue back when you make a comment. So I guess we’re at an impasse in that respect.
If that was the case, I wouldn’t be working where I am now, where virtually all my co-workers (and higher-up supervisors) are women. I sass them, they sass me. No big deal. You’re just bitter (like most feminists). Cripes, I wouldn’t even be on here reading Cassy’s posts if I didn’t like women (you do realize that she’s female, right?). Most of the conservative blogs that I read are women, since the male blogs are pretty milquetoast and wishy-washy (for some reason, conservative women tell it like it is and I like that; I just wish some of the male bloggers could grow a similar set of balls).
I’m sure all of this will go right over your head.
Mat,
Be honest for a minute.
When you call me names or insult me (bitter, pompous, stupid, “I’m sure all of this will go right over your head,” etc), that’s okay in your book. It’s not okay, however, for me to return fire.
Looks like Mat can start a fight but can’t end one.
The “pompous” stuff started when you got bitch-slapped into a different time zone after implying that I am scientifically ignorant. Pointing out my scientific credentials and God-given candlepower doesn’t make me pompous; it just makes you a laughingstock of this blog.
Last I heard, 88% of the female population identifies as feminist. So if you have a problem with feminists, you have a problem with about 7 out of 8 women. That’s not a feminist problem, Mat; that’s a woman problem.
Then again, those are facts, and, as per below, you don’t do well with those.
Let’s get back to facts: you picked a fight with me. I fought back. You tried to imply that I was a moron, or didn’t know anything about science. I pointed out that one of my degrees, and several years of my work experience, is in science and high-tech R&D. You then decided that I’m a pompous, man-hating bitch.
If “pompous” is the charge that I’ll have to deal with for not knuckling under to you, and not lying by pretending that we are intellectual equals, then pompous I will be. Let it be known, though, that I don’t ordinarily give a flying duck about who does and does not have a lot of natural intellectual talent – I care about what they do with it. Nevertheless, woe to those who call me stupid.
Every, and I do mean every woman I’ve come across that says “I’m a feminist,” will eventually trip themselves up with some man-hating comment (no matter how hard they try, even if they’re married).
Maybe it’s not a man-hating comment, Mat; maybe it’s a Mat-hating comment. 🙂
/bitch-slap
“Mat,
Be honest for a minute.”
I usually am. I know my limitations.
“When you call me names or insult me (bitter, pompous, stupid, “I’m sure all of this will go right over your head,” etc), that’s okay in your book. It’s not okay, however, for me to return fire.
Looks like Mat can start a fight but can’t end one.”
Well, that’s because you are, in fact, pompous. That’s just stating a fact. I don’t think I ever called you stupid, but you’ve called at least three people (including myself) either stupid, moronic or idiotic. And yes, you do sound bitter to me. Sorry if you can’t handle that. BTW, you’re the one still going on with this, so who can dish it out, but cannot take it? But I’m game to continue this if you are.
“The “pompous” stuff started when you got bitch-slapped into a different time zone after implying that I am scientifically ignorant. Pointing out my scientific credentials and God-given candlepower doesn’t make me pompous; it just makes you a laughingstock of this blog.”
I was unaware that I was “bitch-slapped into any realm. That’s all in your head (which is pretty swollen). BTW, you sound an awful lot like McCain during the campaign when he started calling himself a “maverick.” People usually term others, not themselves. Seriously, who says “candlepower?” You really do make bizarre analogies (I thought I was bad with mine). I prefer electricity myself, but to each his/her own. As for being a laughingstock, I’m afraid the verdict is still out on that one. Apparently, you’re now the spokeswoman for the Cassy Fiano blogsite. Congrads on your promotion. You can add that title to your collection of scientist and whatever other titles you’ve picked up. Me? I just prefer “Mat.”
“Last I heard, 88% of the female population identifies as feminist. So if you have a problem with feminists, you have a problem with about 7 out of 8 women. That’s not a feminist problem, Mat; that’s a woman problem.”
You heard? Or read? Big difference. Again, you go out of your way to state I’m a woman-hater. I think I established that I’m anything but. But continue to live in your fantasy world (chuckle)…
“Then again, those are facts, and, as per below, you don’t do well with those.”
I have no issue with facts. You’re simply making a lot of claims. Your claim does not necessarily mean that it’s based on fact. But keep trying…
“Let’s get back to facts: you picked a fight with me. I fought back. You tried to imply that I was a moron, or didn’t know anything about science.”
Please quote me on this. You’re the one who started this one way back. Again, I don’t think I ever called you a moron. You’re the one throwing those terms around. As for scientist, I believe I made (roughly) the comment that you like to throw around the fact that you’re a scientist. Ok, big deal, but a scientist of what, exactly? Science is a pretty broad topic. Just because you’re a scientist doesn’t mean squat. Scientists are never wrong? Ever? Let me give you an example. There are two different groups of scientists on the issue of global warning. One side swears that it’s all our doing and the other side says “bullshit.” Who’s to be believed? Who has the right “facts?” Scientists are not immune to either arrogant suppositions nor political motivation (in fact if anything, they’re far less likely, at least from what I’ve seen on my campus and I hardly think that’s an exception to the rule). Simply throwing “scientist” around doesn’t faze me a bit. Again, you don’t really answer anything I’ve stated. All I’ve heard so far is “no, you did it, so nyah!”
“I pointed out that one of my degrees, and several years of my work experience, is in science and high-tech R&D. You then decided that I’m a pompous, man-hating bitch.”
No, you just said “I’m a scientist,” (and the implication that since I’m not a vaunted scientist, then I must be a Cro-Magnon tard…yes, I fully expect a comment from you on this) as if that’s the end all answer. You’re the scientist, so how can you possibly be wrong? And it wasn’t the fact that you were a scientist, it’s the way you said it. Again, re-read what I wrote. You seem to have a hard time between what I’m actually saying and what you claim I’m saying.
“If “pompous” is the charge that I’ll have to deal with for not knuckling under to you, and not lying by pretending that we are intellectual equals, then pompous I will be.”
ok. You’re so superior to me. Feel better now? You seem to want to force this superiority complex on me for some reason. Did you have a bad childhood?
“Let it be known, though, that I don’t ordinarily give a flying duck about who does and does not have a lot of natural intellectual talent – I care about what they do with it. Nevertheless, woe to those who call me stupid.”
First of all, it’s flying fuck. If you’re going to say that, then go for the gold. Obviously, you very much care that you have tons of intellectual superiority over people here, or you wouldn’t yell about it so much. Like I said, you’re the one who keeps talking about how awesome a scientist you are and that we should all bow to your “infinite” wisdom. Wow, you really do have an inferiority complex, don’t you? I’ve never seen anyone go so wacko about this. Seriously, you really need to start writing for Feministing.
“Maybe it’s not a man-hating comment, Mat; maybe it’s a Mat-hating comment.
/bitch-slap”
Ah, is that wit I detect? Well, since you have no idea of any of the contexts where I’ve heard that, I’ll just chalk that up to ignorance.
BTW, I want to congradulate you on your maturity with the comment. That’s high-school level humor, is it not? I mean, really, I hear that from my student workers on campus a lot and they’re generally in the 18-19 year old range. But I do want to thank you. You proved my point(s) in welcome abundance.
shirley says: You really are a bunch of malajusted weirdo’s on this site, aren’t you?
Creeps.
Funny, isnt it,that all the ranting and raving pays not the slightest attention to facts about whom commits crimes against whom.
Still, I guess factual evaluation is only for reasonable bright (attractive) people, not the women-hating hysterics on this sight.
did you know that males are chromosomally defective females? All scientists will confirm that – no matter what their gender.
52 Comments