Seven dead in drive by California shootings

[Morrigan]

Actually, if misogyny were as commonplace as feminists claim, I think that you'd be hearing a lot of men defending this guy, and that's just not happening.

I don't know about "a lot" but it's definitely happening.

BTW..."misogyny"...I know Morrigan thinks I'm picking nits here, but here's the dictionary definition: "hatred of women". From several dictionaries. Not a mild dislike. Not stereotyping. Hatred.

I already addressed that in a previous post. But since you want to go on about dictionaries:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/misogyny
hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/british/misogyny?q=misogyny
feelings of hating women, or the belief that men are much better than women

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/misogyny?q=misogyny
Dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women:

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/misogyny?rdfrom=Misogyny
Hatred of, contempt for, or prejudice against women.

Enough already.

but I find it highly unlikely...mainly because fondness of women is built into our genes, since it's so helpful in perpetuating the species.

Are you for real? No, that would be sexual attraction, not "fondness". And sexual attraction is definitely not mutually incompatible with misogyny. Jesus christ...

 

[Checkmite]

Why? I'm really curious.

Because women are the ones most likely to have encountered a man who exhibited both "fondness of women" (i.e., sexual attraction) and misogyny.

Sexual attraction and misogyny don't seem to be mutually exclusive by definition. Fondness of women - whatever that means - and misogyny, on the other hand, seem to be antonyms.

Except that the earlier poster described "fondness of women" as something that's "built in" to men's genes, which leads me to believe it's a euphemism for sexual attraction, since attitudes and worldviews aren't really a genetic thing so far as I'm aware.

 

[SezMe]

Catcalling is persistent if it's done or experienced persistently - can't disagree with that. Persistent catcalling is harassment - sure, I guess.

You "guess"? What would it take to tip you over into knowing?

 

[SezMe]

Why? I'm really curious. It's the second time in a short while in this thread I hear it's up to women to decide something that is by no apparent reason exclusively theirs to decide at all - it's a matter of rational discourse regardless of genders. It pertains to logic and facts, but now I'm excluded from the discourse, because I'm not a woman.

While I agree that men should not be left out of the discussion, I don't agree that the determination of harassment is a matter of logic and facts subject to adjudication by rational discourse. We are, after all, not innately rational beings. And interaction between humans is freighted with emotions, illogic and personal history. Something which for you might be "meh" could be highly emotionally charged for another person. That is why harassment should be primarily (but not exclusively) up to the recipient.

 

[Checkmite]

Just a follow up - a few pages ago I posted a link to a two-years-old Jezebel op-ed about one of the websites the killer posted at, called PUAhate.

In this new piece posted today, the author relates her observations in a chat forum being used by some PUAhate members now that the site is offline. The level of discourse tends to be similar to that observed in the original article two years ago. Caution - language.

 

[colander]

Just a follow up - a few pages ago I posted a link to a two-years-old Jezebel op-ed about one of the websites the killer posted at, called PUAhate.

In this new piece posted today, the author relates her observations in a chat forum being used by some PUAhate members now that the site is offline. The level of discourse tends to be similar to that observed in the original article two years ago. Caution - language.

Yeah, it's definitely a Stormfront-level hate site. One of many, unfortunately.

 

[IDB87]

Just a follow up - a few pages ago I posted a link to a two-years-old Jezebel op-ed about one of the websites the killer posted at, called PUAhate.

In this new piece posted today, the author relates her observations in a chat forum being used by some PUAhate members now that the site is offline. The level of discourse tends to be similar to that observed in the original article two years ago. Caution - language.

[9:17 AM]: elliot is an hero

Yeah, seems legit.

 

[Howie Felterbush]

Yeah, seems legit.

"An hero."

WARNING: Unsuitable content

 

[Checkmite]

"An hero."

WARNING: Unsuitable content

Yeah I noticed that too. Reading the chat logs, there seem to be a couple different obvious trolling attempts; but nothing the author posted suggests that they worked or started arguments among the PUAhaters.

 

[colander]

Yeah, seems legit.

The passage before that:

[9:17 AM]: they say we shount be entitled, hen everyones sex is all on display. isn't that unfair. that they say we dont deserve it then they SHOW US WHAT THEY ARE DOING SEXUALLY. it is like they want this to happen day to day

The "an hero" meme isn't supposed to be used as a compliment, but when viewed in the context of all the discussion going on in the chat, it seems likely that it's the result of addle-brained, stream-of-consciousness composition rather than an attempt to be derisive of Rodger.

On a related note, it is always funny to see how some people go to such great mental lengths to convince themselves that no horrible thing anybody says on the internet is meant sincerely.

 

[IDB87]

On a related note, it is always funny to see how some people go to such great mental lengths to convince themselves that no horrible thing anybody says on the internet is meant sincerely.

Not really going through the "mental lengths" required to convince someone that the things they read on the internet may not be as they seem. That point should be self evident to anyone by now.

 

[Howie Felterbush]

The "an hero" meme isn't supposed to be used as a compliment, but when viewed in the context of all the discussion going on in the chat, it seems likely that it's the result of addle-brained, stream-of-consciousness composition rather than an attempt to be derisive of Rodger.

I've always seen it used negatively, too. Usually someone urging someone else to become 'an hero'.

 

[Checkmite]

The "an hero" meme isn't supposed to be used as a compliment, but when viewed in the context of all the discussion going on in the chat, it seems likely that it's the result of addle-brained, stream-of-consciousness composition rather than an attempt to be derisive of Rodger.

I saw it as a trolling attempt. But it's certainly possible that it could be a case of "meme-reversal"; one time at one of my previous jobs I overheard a fundy Christian co-worker using the "flying spaghetti monster" meme to ridicule another religion.

ETA: I'm sure that IDB87 didn't mean to imply that someone using a troll meme in the chat invalidated the entire chat log as an accurate reflection of what the killer's former associates now think of him. That's what I'm going to tell myself, anyway.

 

[IDB87]

ETA: I'm sure that IDB87 didn't mean to imply that someone using a troll meme in the chat invalidated the entire chat log as an accurate reflection of what the killer's former associates now think of him. That's what I'm going to tell myself, anyway.

You could always ask me

I think while these chat logs may be relevant, they should be taken with a grain of salt, as one cannot easily separate the trolls from the legit sympathizers, especially with such a highly notorious event.

 

[Howie Felterbush]

You could always ask me

I probably should have.

I just posted the 'An Hero' link because I thought you were making fun of the guy's bad grammar.

Mea culpa.

 

[IDB87]

I probably should have.

I just posted the 'An Hero' link because I thought you were making fun of the guy's bad grammar.

Mea culpa.

No worries Howie Good Egg Felterbush. I should have linked to the definition myself, for posterity's sake at least.

 

[Checkmite]

I think while these chat logs may be relevant, they should be taken with a grain of salt, as one cannot easily separate the trolls from the legit sympathizers, especially with such a highly notorious event.

It is true; and I believe there's a term for that sort of effect - when it's difficult to discern the difference between trolls and genuine proponents of a given argument - but it escapes me at the moment.

 

[IDB87]

It is true; and I believe there's a term for that sort of effect - when it's difficult to discern the difference between trolls and genuine proponents of a given argument - but it escapes me at the moment.

Poe's law.

 

[marplots]

It is true; and I believe there's a term for that sort of effect - when it's difficult to discern the difference between trolls and genuine proponents of a given argument - but it escapes me at the moment.

Poe's law.

No, I think he meant "politics."

 

[Axiom_Blade]

Well I for one certainly do not want to mistakenly call someone a misogynist when he only mildly dislikes women; perhaps someone could research what the correct term for a person who mildly dislikes women is, so that I can more correctly assign contempt to both it and misogyny, rather than solely the latter thinking that it covers the former as well.

Well, not a mild dislike, but holding prejudices and stereotypes. You could use the words that feminists used to use: "chauvinism" or "sexism". Why were these dropped, in favor of the more hyperbolic "misogyny"? It looks, to me, like a rhetorical framing device. Being a "chauvinist" isn't so bad, because that's just a prejudice. But now, you better not disagree with feminists, because if you do, you're a "misogynist"! Break out the torches and pitchforks!

This type of political hyperbole has never sat well with me. At best, it makes you look ridiculous. It's like those people who compare the president to Hitler. I mean, sure, if you want to split hairs, neither Bush nor Obama have killed millions of people, but in every other way, they're just like Hitler!

Someone who holds a few negative stereotypes about women is not the same as a misogynist, and that's a good thing. They can be reasoned with, and these false beliefs and prejudices can be eliminated. Someone who genuinely hates women, though, won't be reasoned with at all.

Why do feminists want women to think that there's a "rape culture", a shadowy "Patriarchy" with "misogyny" everywhere? To keep women frightened and spur them to action, giving the feminists more political power. This emotional manipulation is very popular in politics, but it seems to be especially big in feminism, to the point where it's hard to see anything else. There are certainly some important topics which feminism covers, but to get to them you have to wade through a lot of BS. Bring a snow shovel.