• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Not *all* men

Derec said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
He wanted girls to like him. They didn't. So he killed some.
Click to expand...
It is very telling that when someone kills four men and two women all everybody seems to care about is the women he killed. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...



Yeah Derec

The most watched and talked about video in this tragedy is about a young man and his grieving father, but everyone is talking about the girls. :rolleyes:
 
Jolly_Penguin said:
In other news, Friendly dog makes new friend

http://www.q107.com/2014/05/27/friendly-dog-makes-new-friend/
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is you don't understand how the link Athena shared is relevant to her response to Derec's post. You've tossed what you already know around in your head, thought about it a bit, and you can't find the connection. It just takes a smarter man than you to figure out the relevance there. All the mental faculties you possess just aren't enough to follow the conversation here. Yeah?
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
Jolly_Penguin said:
Wow. That is one spectacular straw man.
Click to expand...
In fairness, not all strawman...
Click to expand...

Yes, all strawman. My post was motivated in reaction to a sensationalized us news story completely derailing a thread having little to do with it.

I hadnt even read Athena's post yet when I posted.

Or was I missing a pun there. Perhaps ya meant "not all strawmEn..."
 
AthenaAwakened said:
The most watched and talked about video in this tragedy is about a young man and his grieving father, but everyone is talking about the girls. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
The video is about gun control, not the male victims.

The non-gun control discussion is all about claiming he was such a misogynist, "entitled" for wanting a girlfriend and how nice guys should finish last and shut up about it already.
 
Bronzeage said:
What does it tell?
Click to expand...
How differently male and female victims of violent crimes are treated in our society. Other examples - men are much more likely to be victims of violent crime than women, yet "violence against women" is made out to be a much worse problem than violence against men.

The Paul said:
I wouldn't normally agree, but his stated reason for the murder was that none of those cool/sexy football dudes wanted to fuck him. I really feel like that should draw some attention.
Click to expand...
So victims only matter if the perp was sexually attracted to them? Weird attitude.
 
Derec said:
How differently male and female victims of violent crimes are treated in our society. Other examples - men are much more likely to be victims of violent crime than women, yet "violence against women" is made out to be a much worse problem than violence against men.
Click to expand...

Same with violence against children (which may also be rarer than violence against grown men). The reason is obvious. People feel protective towards those they feel are vulnerable, and society and biology have both primed us to see women and children as especially vulnerable.
 
Jolly_Penguin said:
Same with violence against children (which may also be rarer than violence against grown men). The reason is obvious. People feel protective towards those they feel are vulnerable, and society and biology have both primed us to see women and children as especially vulnerable.
Click to expand...

Children are actually more vulnerable. But if we are serious about gender equality then it should not be applied only when it benefits women. You could misapply evolution and biology to justify subjugation of women like traditional societies have been practicing with equal justification.
 
Derec said:
How differently male and female victims of violent crimes are treated in our society. Other examples - men are much more likely to be victims of violent crime than women, yet "violence against women" is made out to be a much worse problem than violence against men.

The Paul said:
I wouldn't normally agree, but his stated reason for the murder was that none of those cool/sexy football dudes wanted to fuck him. I really feel like that should draw some attention.
Click to expand...
So victims only matter if the perp was sexually attracted to them? Weird attitude.
Click to expand...

The crime obviously had very strong sexual overtones. His threat in his video was that he was going to kill the unappreciative women...and the men who monopolized them. The entire crime revolved around being pushed aside by alpha males and females. In fairness to him, he actually did have needs and they were not fulfilled, regardless of his skewed perception of them. We have a society that mistreats and misinforms people and these people have the power to do terrible things if they feel offended.

What is the root cause behind this crime...a young man who felt there was simply no way he could fit into the society in which he was living. He felt he was an outsider and actually he was. This is a recurrent theme in all these mass shooting events. Some react by saying that guns should be taken away. The young man simply had a viewpoint that was skewed by his personal situation. Authorities and friends alike failed to recognize this man as someone in need of some kind of therapy. Some of his friends helped him feel justified.

I am not justifying his attitude but I am saying it should have been recognized and dealt with long before he went to buy the guns he used in this murder/suicide. There will always be means available for committing violence with or without the Second Amendment. The thing to be concerned about is the root cause, the maladjustment and how to eliminate this. He has proven to us that this is a life and death matter, yet we focus only on permanently assigned notions of good and bad and superior and inferior, with pro forma bad treatment of the inferior ones. I have known many characters with the same concerns as the shooter in this incident.
 
Derec said:
Jolly_Penguin said:
Same with violence against children (which may also be rarer than violence against grown men). The reason is obvious. People feel protective towards those they feel are vulnerable, and society and biology have both primed us to see women and children as especially vulnerable.
Click to expand...

Children are actually more vulnerable. But if we are serious about gender equality then it should not be applied only when it benefits women. You could misapply evolution and biology to justify subjugation of women like traditional societies have been practicing with equal justification.
Click to expand...

Yes, you could, and people have. People still do to an extent, even in western society. The drive to both actions and attitudes is similar, even if is comes from opposite ends of the political spectrum.

Athena said:
Why do you suppose the male owned and male controlled media aren't playing up the obvious vulnerability of males?
Click to expand...

Same reason. We are pushed by culture and biology to see men as tough. Its also why its taboo and "unmanly" for men to cry. I very much doubt this is the result of media being "male owned and male controlled".

Perhaps this brings us back on topic. Not all men act macho tough. Not all men are tough. Not all men are big and strong and better able to defend themselves than women are. Just as not all women are weak and more vulnerable than men. Some are stronger and more capable of looking out for themselves than men are. Perhaps we should occasionally consider this double standard Derec points to rather than dismissing it out of hand. Men are just as deserving of our empathy as women are.

And saying what I just said is not a cry of "not all men" to change the subject and subvert our caring about violence against women. I suspect a few here would call it exactly that. It isn't. We can care about both, without losing compassion or attention for either.
 
Last edited:
AthenaAwakened said:
Derec,

Why do you suppose the male owned and male controlled media aren't playing up the obvious vulnerability of males?
Click to expand...

Actually, the shooter was bullied by males. It is not surprising that he killed some of them. Still what impresses me about this case is the utter hatefulness of his attitude toward women who rejected him. Some of them may have been merely trying to keep him out of a male hormonal dogfight they knew would hurt him. Women in a jock society are not in a position to defend men from men, nor are they liable to want to do so. The problem is the dominance of hormones over reason and empathy...and it exists in women sometimes as much as in men.
 
arkirk said:
AthenaAwakened said:
Derec,

Why do you suppose the male owned and male controlled media aren't playing up the obvious vulnerability of males?
Click to expand...

Actually, the shooter was bullied by males. It is not surprising that he killed some of them. Still what impresses me about this case is the utter hatefulness of his attitude toward women who rejected him. Some of them may have been merely trying to keep him out of a male hormonal dogfight they knew would hurt him. Women in a jock society are not in a position to defend men from men, nor are they liable to want to do so. The problem is the dominance of hormones over reason and empathy...and it exists in women sometimes as much as in men.
Click to expand...

The jock society is so 1950s to 1980s. The social dynamics are different. I'm not saying they have improved necessarily, but that the old "jock vs nerd" trope doesn't really exist anymore. It's altogether different, though, in a lot of the ways the end results are the same. There is social ostracism, it just doesn't fall down the same social lines as it used to. Everyone grew up having watched the Breakfast Club.

And of course it exists in women as much as in men. How many stories of girls being driven to suicide because of social ostracism has to occur before we accept that both men and women have the same capacity to be monsters. Men just tend to use physical violence rather than other sorts of violence.
 
Also, remember this guy killed his roommates whom were certainly not "jocks" but if you watch his videos or read his manifesto (I wouldn't hold it against you if you couldn't stomach it) he described these guys as "disgusting" and talked in very hateful, resentful ways against him. Look them up. They were pretty much the opposite of jocks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom