[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]Original Article: tumblr.com/siryouarebeingmocked/189242331052/syabm-comic-52-rodger-rodger-special-guest?source=share
The Isla Vista mass murder is probably one of feminism's biggest failures.
According to them - and the mainstream press - Elliot Rodger was nothing but a misogynist killer. Heck, they even managed to claim he was an MRA. And of course, they started the
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] hashtag.
Except if you look at the actual facts, you'd realize men came off worse. Feminists ignored 4 dead men to make women the Real Victims
. >We Hunted The Mammoth/Manboobz said the higher number of men dead were because Rodger was “forced to improvise”<, even though Rodger's first victims were his two male roommates, and he had Googled how to stab them to death. >And he did, in fact, hate men<*.
Rodger did say women rejected him, but he also claimed he was outright bullied by girls who pretended they were interested. Oh, and abused by his stepmother. If this sounds a lot like the "a man hurt me so I hate all men" rhetoric spouted by feminists like Hannah Gadsby, and who knows how many tumblrinas, you're very perceptive.
Heck, most victims of murder and assault are men. If feminist women want to say the possibility of those crimes justifies their misandry (EG "women are scared men will kill them for rejection!"), men should be even more afraid of other men.
Where did the MRA allegations come from? >One article at the DailyKos that mistook Rodger for an MRA<**. One single person, and "respectable" publications >like Mic< and >Slate end blindly repeat it<. And then >the Woozle Effect< kicks in, and people believe it just because other people say it and it’s ideologically convenient.
Heck, these days Rodger is an “incel”. Instead of being used to blame MRAs or toxic masculinity, his memory is used to demonize men who are already marginalized, the latest boogeyman. I’m honestly surprised nobody managed to blame him on Gamergate.
In short, feminists could not have chosen an incident which would self-own any harder, and show how little they care about men. Including dead ones. They just used it to attack their enemies and push the usual victimhood nonsense.
Previously: More ranting about the Rodger narrative.
* Some say that doesn’t count, because Rodger only hated other men because they were competition for women. Because apparently that makes it not-hate, somehow?
** >The Kos was still claimed Rodger was an MRA as late as 2016<, incidentally. And took WHTM as gospel, even though Futrelle is a whiteknighting malefem liar.
Second Article: siryouarebeingmocked.tumblr.com/post/93455040158/cause-youre-going-round-in-circlesand-everyone
“‘Cause you’re going round in circles/And everyone knows you’re trouble”
The film Carrie, based on the Stephen King novel, came out in 1976. In it, a shy, asocial, bullied young woman with a religious fundamentalist upbringing is invited to the prom by a cute guy she has a crush on. She is crowned Prom Queen (via, unbeknownst to her, a rigged ballot), only for some of her bullies to pour pig’s blood all over her, humiliating her in front of her entire high school. While a modern-day solution would rightly involve lawsuits and viral videos leading to (less rightly) harassment of anyone who even looked like the perps, the title character takes a more direct route to vengeance; she lashes out with her telekinetic powers, killing just about everyone in the entire gym, including people who tried to help her.
Elliot Rodger was in a similar situation. His upbringing strongly influenced his views of life, and the Asperger’s couldn’t’ve helped. He spent much of his childhood being bullied by girls (including his crush leading him on just to slap him down later) and boys for being different, leading him to conclude, among other things, that romantically successful men were evil, and there was something wrong with women for choosing them instead of men like him. And when he finally snapped, lots of innocent people were caught in the crossfire, though he used cars, bullets, and stabbings instead of mind powers before killing himself.
Many feminists said Roster’s actions were the result of male entitlement. Many even said he was a member of the Men’s Rights Movement, despite a complete lack of evidence. (Rodger was an ex-PUA, and the two groups are commonly confused by feminists.) Some every tried to blame “white entitlement” and “white supremacy” because Rodger expressed racist views, even though he was half-Asian. Some even went for the twofer of blaming “white masculinity”.
All of them were wrong. Rodger’s racism and sexism was arguably a result of his class-based bigotry. He believed that he deserved to get romantic attention because he was Just Better, and when that didn’t work out, he actively rejected the world’s standards and sought to overthrow it. He was not merely a misogynist, but a misanthrope, as his killings and manifesto make perfectly clear. Heck, there’s even a pattern of studiously ignoring his Asperger’s or outright saying it doesn’t matter (because it just doesn’t), because admitting he wasn’t a typical man kinda spikes the wheels when you’re trying to blame all men.
This left David “Manboobz” Futrelle in a bit of a pickle.
MRAs responded to feminist swiftboating - which was widespread enough to make the mainstream news - by pointing out that not only was there no evidence to support the claims Rodger was an MRA, as well as pointing out that feminists were exploiting a tragedy for political advantage, by blaming both MRAs and men in general. They also pointed out that Rodger hated and killed men, and that feminists cared more about the two women he killed than the four men, as long as they could say he was a misogynist. Either that, or they didn’t do any research.
David Futrelle is a sexist, intellectually dishonest scumbag who runs We Hunted The Mammoth, formerly Manboobz, a website that claims to mock misogyny
. What it largely actually does is demonize MRAs, hiding it behind “mockery”, and occasionally engage in feminist/female apologism. I’d call Davey a “white knight”, but he’s closer to Monty Python’s Black Knight; a near-complete inability to acknowledge any flaws in feminism or his own logic. His exploits include >saying being made to penetrate someone shouldn’t be called rape<
(>then backpedaling a few days later<), >saying real feminists don’t talk about equality<,
dishonestly quote-mining Paul Elam while debating Paul Elam, >and characterizing MRAs as men while his website has a category for the woman who might be the most popular MRA, male or female<.
So when it came to >addressing criticism of feminist claims about Rodger<, Futrelle needed to do several things.
1. Talk around the fact that feminists were wrong about Rodger. He does this by not actually mentioning it.
2. Try and downplay the fact that Rodger was said to be an MRA.
David says that Rodger’s manifesto resembles MRA thinking, though he doesn’t elaborate, implying that it would be perfectly reasonable for someone to mistake him for one.
Anyone even vaguely familiar with either Rodger or the MRM is probably wondering why he thinks so, since MRAs seldom talk about how they want women only to exist, locked up, for the purposes of artificial insemination. Similarly, MRAs supposedly blame feminism for everything, but Rodger barely mentions it in his manifesto.
In this article, Futrelle claims that Rodger looked like a thug sounded like an MRA.
>In a later article<, he says that it was the MRA reaction to the killings that make “people” think Rodger was an MRA. This includes such dastardly deeds as saying bullying may have contributed to Elliot’s mental instability, pointing out that his hate wasn’t limited to women, and pointing out many feminists were taking advantage of the tragedy by smearing the MRM.
If you are familiar with linear time, you may find that last one a bit suspect.
In neither post does he directly address the fact that feminists were wrong
. In fact, his statements are phrased just ambiguously enough that someone who thinks Rodger was an MRA could read them as support.
>Bullying? What bullying? Men? What men?
Rodger was bullied by his peers of both genders, and this had a significant influence on his social development, he claimed. Thing is, “he hated everyone” doesn’t fit the gendered threat narrative. So some feminists have reframed the issue to claim that Rodger only hated men because they got more women than him, and therefore it was misogyny.
That’s right. Hating men because of women is misogyny. (This isn’t exactly an uncommon bit of lolgic.)
Futrelle took a different tack.
According to him in his first linked post, Elliot’s real target was women, and men were just “improvisation”. This doesn’t actually refute the claim that he hated men, and Davey suddenly changes the subject to misogyny, but it does imply that the deaths of the men were less important than those of the women, despite their greater number. Notably, Futrelle doesn’t actually back up his claim in any way. If you check out Endgaem’s post at the end of this one, Rodger specifically talked about how he was planning to kill his roommates. And surprise, surprise, they were his first three victims.
As for the bullying, Futrelle is strangely loathe to address it. He quotes the bit from Rodger’s manifesto I mentioned earlier where Rodger says men who are romantically successful are “evil”, but focuses on Elliot’s hate for women.
He can't discuss the bullying. Not really. Rodger was bullied by dudes, and he’s trying to downplay the kid’s distasteful feelings for men. Nor can he talk about the girls who bullied him, because that looks a lot like victim-blaming, even though it’s true. He could talk about both, but that combines the worst of both options.
Even someone saying that maybe Rodger should not have been buillied (second post) is something David finds ridiculous. Either he thinks “creep-shaming” wasn’t a factor, (despite Rodger’s manifesto saying it was, that he was called such lovely terms as “faggot”), or he has no problem with people bullying a kid with autism because he’s “creepy”.
Unless, of course, he doesn’t actually *know* Rodger was diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome. Which seems unlikely, given that he’s done enough research to quote Rodger’s manifesto. Maybe if he listened only to the feminist and mainstream news sources that ignored that Rodger had a social disorder, as well as his racism, classism, and hatred of men.
I don’t have the intestinal fortitude (because David’s posts generally make me feel either ill or enraged) to check all of his posts under his Elliot Rodger tag (if he even has one), but I’d bet money that if Futrelle ever mentions it, it’s in a way that tries to downplay its importance. As the Party Line dictates.
Heck, even the old “entitled to women’s bodies” chestnut goes out the window if you read the manifesto; Elliot didn’t just want to get laid, he wanted to be loved. And not just romantically either; he desperately craved social acceptance.
>Racism? What racism?
I’ve got a confession to make; I haven’t actually read Rodger’s manifesto myself. My claims about it are based on a rather extensive examination from GendErratic.
In it, they found that Rodger had an obsession with class and lineage. On his dad’s side, he was descended from once-prosperous British nobility. He groused about how an “inferior, black boy” could get a white woman when he couldn’t. All three of his first victims were Asian men. He wasn’t exactly fond of Latino’s either. He was better than they were, he was sure if it.
I need to emphasize this; Rodger didn’t think that women should love him just because he had a sausage and beans. He thought, in part, that because he was aristocratic girls should fall at his feet. That’s not “male entitlement”, that’s class entitlement.
Heck, it might even have worked, if not for his social issues. I’ve seen his photos; it’s not like he was exactly a dog. For all we know, he might’ve just missed the people trying to reach out for him; he rejected mental health treatment when he turned 18, and acquaintances said he rebuffed them.
So, how do Futrelle and other feminists address this? They don’t. The class and race based bigotry of Rodger is apparently completely irrelevant. Just like the fact that he was in therapy. Or the fact that he was bullied, or the fact that he didn’t just hate women, and in fact any facts that don’t fit the story, any inconvenient truths.
Including four dead men.
The biggest irony is that David Futrelle insists that he and other feminists care about men and their issues, and that the Men’s Rights Movement is doing it wrong.
I certainly hope this isn’t what he calls doing it right.
These articles are not mine, but they literally make perfect sense and not only that, they contribute to my claims that the official investigative report was DELIBERATELY MANIPULATED, to establish a narrative, due to the use of the Isla Vista case as a means of dissemination and criticism ideological/political.
Subject: Why the Isla Vista Hoax? Article truly explains what happened 
Wed Dec 06, 2023 12:21 am