@cosmo, oh yeah man for sure I agree we should keep guns out of the hands of wackos. the question is, how do we do that? the problem is no one has the answer but everyone thinks they have the answer. Chicago is a prime example that strict gun laws don't mean shit, yet the most often "cure" for gun violence, is tighter gun laws. with every law passed, with every new restriction, there is still violence. that's why we can't look back at the Clinton era assault rifle and high cap mag ban and say holy shit guys, look at the difference in violence when the ban existed.
I don't know if Chicago is a great example. Word on the street is the gangs get the guns from outside of Chicago to get around the tough gun laws. I suppose if those same laws applied everywhere in the US it might be a lot harder for them to get their hands on them, given that they would have to cross a border. But that is just a guess.
Word on the street? Ok.
Word on the street is they get the guns from the Mexican drug cartels who got the guns from the Obama administration through Fast and Furious.
Who's street? Your street? Or maybe they got them from the Bush administration when they started Fast and Furious. And no, I don't remember your vociferous opposition to any government malfeasance back then (on these forums anyway). It seems to have started when Barack Hussein Obama wrapped up the democrat nomination.
A good article that looks at the interaction between all the issues being raised:
Elliot Rodger was a misogynist – but is that all he was?
The killer was enabled by a culture that validates the feelings of angry, lonely and sometimes mentally unwell men
Hadley Freeman The Guardian, Tuesday 27 May 2014 17.03 BST
Elliot Rodger was a misogynist. This cannot really be in doubt about a young man who went out on Friday, armed with three semi-automatic shotguns he had bought legally, to punish all women for rejecting him sexually.
"You girls aren't attracted to me, but I will punish you all for it," he wrote in his manifesto. "I'll take great pleasure in slaughtering all of you. You will finally see that I am in truth the superior one."
That Rodger ended up killing twice as many men (Cheng Yuan Hong, 20, George Chen, 19, Weihan Wang, 20, and Christopher Ross Michaels-Martinez, 20) as women (Katherine Breann Cooper, 22, and Veronika Elizabeth Weiss, 19) on his shooting spree isn't relevant. Misogynists with murderous intent often end up killing men when they set out to kill women (a woman's new partner or a male friend, for example). So, that proves nothing: Rodger was definitely a misogynist.
But is that all he was? Since news of the deaths broke over the weekend, journalists and commentators have argued vociferously about what, precisely, would make a young man from a privileged and, by all accounts, loving family feel such rage against women that he would end up killing six people and himself. Many writers I read and respect enormously have argued that to say Rodger's real problem was mental illness is to dismiss his misogyny – and the misogyny that is endemic in western society. To argue that mental illness lay at the root of Rodger's problem, they write, is almost to excuse him as a lone aberration, as opposed to seeing him for what he was: part of a pattern that is the inevitable effect of a sick society.
I have a lot of sympathy for this point of view. As one of my favourite feminist writers, Erin Gloria Ryan, has pointed out, when a man from the Middle East kills people, the western media immediately ascribes it to terrorism; when a black man kills people, it's put down to cultural thuggery; but when a white man kills people, it is dismissed, she tweeted, as "a freak mental illness ... The fact that the mostly white media scrambles to remove white, privileged men from blame is exactly why we need more diverse newsrooms."
This is all true. But this isn't necessarily an either/or situation. Yes, Rodger was a misogynist. He also very likely had mental difficulties, and to say so doesn't diminish the part a misogynistic culture played in this tragedy. If anything, it emphasises precisely why this culture is so dangerous. Rodger had been in therapy since he was nine years old. Friends of the family have given numerous interviews testifying to his parents' long-term concern for him. His parents stayed in contact with mental-health professionals after Rodger turned 18, but there was little they could do: their son was now an adult, and he hadn't said or done anything that would have merited involuntary mental health treatment. It looks as if, at some point, Rodger found an outlet for his difficulties: misogyny. This is where the culture comes into play.
Rodger was enabled in his misogynistic feelings by a culture that exists to validate the feelings of angry, lonely and sometimes mentally unwell men. Judging from the language Rodger used in his videos, he had been a follower of the pick-up artist (PUA) online community, which teaches men that they can and should trick and bully women into sleeping with them (Tom Cruise's character in Magnolia is an excellent representation of the PUA community). Rodger described himself as "an alpha" and "incel" – "involuntary celibate"; these are terms that come straight from the PUA textbooks.
But Rodger was also a frequent contributor to the PUAhate online community boards, which are for men who find that PUA tricks don't work for them. These men spend their time on the internet railing against women who fail to appreciate their inherent goodness, and argue that women shouldn't be allowed to choose who they have sex with. Indeed, in his manifesto, Rodger wrote: "Women should not have the right to choose who to mate with. That choice should be made for them by civilised men of intelligence."
This misogynistic culture exists, absolutely, and what's so dangerous about it is that it attracts potentially mentally unstable people, including Rodger, and validates their most extreme feelings. To say that mental illness played a part in Rodger's behaviour doesn't dismiss the culture that played a part in it any more than saying eating disorders are a mental illness (which they are) excuses the part played by the sick fetishisation of women's bodies in western culture.
It's also worth pointing out that Rodger didn't just rail against women in his manifesto – he also spewed plenty of racist bile, which is getting far less attention, even though the first people he killed were his two Asian roommates and their Asian friend, whom he had specifically described as "repulsive". (Rodger was half-Asian himself and blamed this for his lack of success with women.)
It is also worth pointing out that even if Rodger had been diagnosed with a serious mental illness he would still have been able to buy a gun, even in California, which has some of the most stringent laws about buying guns in the United States.
Was misogyny the reason a 22-year-old man went on a killing spree? Hell yes. Were other factors at play here, too, such as mental health, a financially straitened mental health system and an American political system cowed by the NRA, leading to too much access to guns? Yes, yes and yes. And to say that doesn't diminish the part played by any of these reasons. In fact, they underline the dangers in one another.
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
@cosmo, oh yeah man for sure I agree we should keep guns out of the hands of wackos. the question is, how do we do that? the problem is no one has the answer but everyone thinks they have the answer. Chicago is a prime example that strict gun laws don't mean shit, yet the most often "cure" for gun violence, is tighter gun laws. with every law passed, with every new restriction, there is still violence. that's why we can't look back at the Clinton era assault rifle and high cap mag ban and say holy shit guys, look at the difference in violence when the ban existed.
I don't know if Chicago is a great example. Word on the street is the gangs get the guns from outside of Chicago to get around the tough gun laws. I suppose if those same laws applied everywhere in the US it might be a lot harder for them to get their hands on them, given that they would have to cross a border. But that is just a guess.
Word on the street? Ok.
Word on the street is they get the guns from the Mexican drug cartels who got the guns from the Obama administration through Fast and Furious.
Who's street? Your street? Or maybe they got them from the Bush administration when they started Fast and Furious. And no, I don't remember your vociferous opposition to any government malfeasance back then (on these forums anyway). It seems to have started when Barack Hussein Obama wrapped up the democrat nomination.
Peace.
I voted for Obama for US Senate. Your theory is null and void.
I'm beginning to believe that the pharmaceutical industry is to blame for these incidents, kids just don't know how to deal with life because they've been drugged up their entire teenage years.
I'm beginning to believe that the pharmaceutical industry is to blame for these incidents, kids just don't know how to deal with life because they've been drugged up their entire teenage years.
Point your fingers there.
the pharmaceutical industry or drugs from the street the short and long term effects are sometimes very dangerous.
I'm beginning to believe that the pharmaceutical industry is to blame for these incidents, kids just don't know how to deal with life because they've been drugged up their entire teenage years.
Point your fingers there.
Good point...and they Make a lot of Money in the Process.
kindness smarts conversationalist shower taker open one's gifted self & do your thing operate smoked/trashed car (unlike elliot) change your name if you are elliot do not purchase $376.99 sunglasses
'game' does not mean 'game'
every person walking this planet had better have 'game' or they are walking dead
if someone owns $376.99 shades they should be slapped so hard that they actually fallover
So GF - if you are still out there today, and interested in seeing why the NRA and RMGO came out so strongly against a civil commitments bill, go to: www.legiscan.com In bottom left corner search for Colorado and then 1386. It had bipartisan support in the House and was killed in Senate committee earlier this month (unfortunately, I'd say).
There were no provisions specific to guns or background checks, period, although the gun lobby characterized it as a gun-grab bill. This was about changing the language so that "imminent" danger was no longer a requirement to get someone held in an emergency mental health crisis. The net effect would have been to increase emergency holds and accelerate the hold process. The criteria for prohibiting someone from owning a gun are federal and would not have been affected by this. Yet, that was why RMGO and NRA lobbied so hard against the bill - they believed more people would be subject to NCIS, and that would infringe on their 2nd Amendment rights. Just me, but I'd say that even if that were true, I think it might just be okay to restrict gun purchases from people being considered for emergency mental holds.
Again, if you've ever been part of the horrible process of trying to get an emergency mental health hold in place, you'd understand why I'm so pissed at the gun lobby (or more pissed than usual, I guess).
He passed his background checks, he waited the 10 day cooling off period, he bought the guns legally, he possessed no magazine larger than 10 rounds, he didn't use an 'assault rifle', etc...
The kid was mentally ill. His therapist knew it...his parents knew it. Unfortunately the gun culture and NRA freak show will not let legislation pass that would allow the information to be available to the police, etc. as to who is being treated for mental illness and, of those people, who owns a gun.
He shouldn't have been allowed to buy a gun in the first place. Secondly the police should have known that he had weapons and confiscated them when they spoke to him about the threats.
But that violates his second amendment rights I assume?
The second amendment is the most misinterpreted of the entire document....and many innocent people are being killed because of it.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
And I'll say this - if his odd vibe were as strong in person as it's been watching bits here and there online, no wonder women avoided him. Who would subject themselves to that?
Uh, yeah. Too bad no one told him that the reason he wasn't getting any girls was because he creeped them the fuck out.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
A good article that looks at the interaction between all the issues being raised:
Elliot Rodger was a misogynist – but is that all he was?
The killer was enabled by a culture that validates the feelings of angry, lonely and sometimes mentally unwell men
Hadley Freeman The Guardian, Tuesday 27 May 2014 17.03 BST
Elliot Rodger was a misogynist. This cannot really be in doubt about a young man who went out on Friday, armed with three semi-automatic shotguns he had bought legally, to punish all women for rejecting him sexually.
"You girls aren't attracted to me, but I will punish you all for it," he wrote in his manifesto. "I'll take great pleasure in slaughtering all of you. You will finally see that I am in truth the superior one."
That Rodger ended up killing twice as many men (Cheng Yuan Hong, 20, George Chen, 19, Weihan Wang, 20, and Christopher Ross Michaels-Martinez, 20) as women (Katherine Breann Cooper, 22, and Veronika Elizabeth Weiss, 19) on his shooting spree isn't relevant. Misogynists with murderous intent often end up killing men when they set out to kill women (a woman's new partner or a male friend, for example). So, that proves nothing: Rodger was definitely a misogynist.
But is that all he was? Since news of the deaths broke over the weekend, journalists and commentators have argued vociferously about what, precisely, would make a young man from a privileged and, by all accounts, loving family feel such rage against women that he would end up killing six people and himself. Many writers I read and respect enormously have argued that to say Rodger's real problem was mental illness is to dismiss his misogyny – and the misogyny that is endemic in western society. To argue that mental illness lay at the root of Rodger's problem, they write, is almost to excuse him as a lone aberration, as opposed to seeing him for what he was: part of a pattern that is the inevitable effect of a sick society.
I have a lot of sympathy for this point of view. As one of my favourite feminist writers, Erin Gloria Ryan, has pointed out, when a man from the Middle East kills people, the western media immediately ascribes it to terrorism; when a black man kills people, it's put down to cultural thuggery; but when a white man kills people, it is dismissed, she tweeted, as "a freak mental illness ... The fact that the mostly white media scrambles to remove white, privileged men from blame is exactly why we need more diverse newsrooms."
This is all true. But this isn't necessarily an either/or situation. Yes, Rodger was a misogynist. He also very likely had mental difficulties, and to say so doesn't diminish the part a misogynistic culture played in this tragedy. If anything, it emphasises precisely why this culture is so dangerous. Rodger had been in therapy since he was nine years old. Friends of the family have given numerous interviews testifying to his parents' long-term concern for him. His parents stayed in contact with mental-health professionals after Rodger turned 18, but there was little they could do: their son was now an adult, and he hadn't said or done anything that would have merited involuntary mental health treatment. It looks as if, at some point, Rodger found an outlet for his difficulties: misogyny. This is where the culture comes into play.
Rodger was enabled in his misogynistic feelings by a culture that exists to validate the feelings of angry, lonely and sometimes mentally unwell men. Judging from the language Rodger used in his videos, he had been a follower of the pick-up artist (PUA) online community, which teaches men that they can and should trick and bully women into sleeping with them (Tom Cruise's character in Magnolia is an excellent representation of the PUA community). Rodger described himself as "an alpha" and "incel" – "involuntary celibate"; these are terms that come straight from the PUA textbooks.
But Rodger was also a frequent contributor to the PUAhate online community boards, which are for men who find that PUA tricks don't work for them. These men spend their time on the internet railing against women who fail to appreciate their inherent goodness, and argue that women shouldn't be allowed to choose who they have sex with. Indeed, in his manifesto, Rodger wrote: "Women should not have the right to choose who to mate with. That choice should be made for them by civilised men of intelligence."
This misogynistic culture exists, absolutely, and what's so dangerous about it is that it attracts potentially mentally unstable people, including Rodger, and validates their most extreme feelings. To say that mental illness played a part in Rodger's behaviour doesn't dismiss the culture that played a part in it any more than saying eating disorders are a mental illness (which they are) excuses the part played by the sick fetishisation of women's bodies in western culture.
It's also worth pointing out that Rodger didn't just rail against women in his manifesto – he also spewed plenty of racist bile, which is getting far less attention, even though the first people he killed were his two Asian roommates and their Asian friend, whom he had specifically described as "repulsive". (Rodger was half-Asian himself and blamed this for his lack of success with women.)
It is also worth pointing out that even if Rodger had been diagnosed with a serious mental illness he would still have been able to buy a gun, even in California, which has some of the most stringent laws about buying guns in the United States.
Was misogyny the reason a 22-year-old man went on a killing spree? Hell yes. Were other factors at play here, too, such as mental health, a financially straitened mental health system and an American political system cowed by the NRA, leading to too much access to guns? Yes, yes and yes. And to say that doesn't diminish the part played by any of these reasons. In fact, they underline the dangers in one another.
Thank you - good article that gets to the point that I was trying to make earlier in this thread.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I'm basing this solely on what I've read about this guy from the things he wrote and the things he said... Here is my response to his manifesto: First off.. a Manifesto? Really? You know who writes manifestos? UnaBombers and Chistopher Dorner types. So, to anyone else who reads this... don't write a fucking manifesto, okay? Granted, you have that Aspbergers Syndrome... and you are uncomfortable around people... I get it. But, that does not change the fact that you lived within a society of people. It's not anyone else's fault they thought you are weird... because you gotta admit... you were fucking weird. You were upset because beautiful girls weren't throwning themselves at you? Welcome to BEING A GUY... you sniveling piece of shit. You thought that money, BMWs and Gucci glasses would help you land some dates? No. Do you know why? Here's why: If you drive around in a BMW wearing a pair of Gucci glasses, looking like a douche... people will just see a douche, driving a BMW and wearing a pair of douchebag Gucci glasses that only douchebags wear to make them think other people will envy them but don't understand that everyone else thinks that only douchebags wear Gucci glasses believing it makes them look attractive. When i was 22, I had a piece of shit, oxidized red 1965 Toyota Corona that I paid 50 bucks for and sunglasses from the Rite-Aid rack... and I STILL went on dates and had girlfriends. And I'm no Brad Pitt. I was a scruffy, scrawny punk rocker that was going to the Community College while living at home and had a part-time job at the 7-11. You know what i did that you didn't? I treated girls like people. Yeah, that simple. I had girls who were just friends and didn't pine away in some sort of 'Friend Zone' and I had girls that were girlfriends. And none of them were models or actresses or princesses. They were just girls who were beautiful to me. You could have stayed on your meds and boosted up the number of therapy sessions.. but, you didn't. You chose to bring about terrible heartache on so many people. And it's too bad you never heard of prostitutes... if you'd gone to see one of them, maybe none of this would have happened. Have a nice day in Hell... tell Hitler i said, 'Eat shit, Hitler'.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
... You know what else they all have in common? They all used guns (many obtained through legal means) to kill people. ... If only there was some sort of way to keep guns OUT of the hands of people on these drugs... hmmmmm. Makes you wonder, don't it?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
@cosmo, oh yeah man for sure I agree we should keep guns out of the hands of wackos. the question is, how do we do that? the problem is no one has the answer but everyone thinks they have the answer. Chicago is a prime example that strict gun laws don't mean shit, yet the most often "cure" for gun violence, is tighter gun laws. with every law passed, with every new restriction, there is still violence. that's why we can't look back at the Clinton era assault rifle and high cap mag ban and say holy shit guys, look at the difference in violence when the ban existed.
I don't know if Chicago is a great example. Word on the street is the gangs get the guns from outside of Chicago to get around the tough gun laws. I suppose if those same laws applied everywhere in the US it might be a lot harder for them to get their hands on them, given that they would have to cross a border. But that is just a guess.
Word on the street? Ok.
Word on the street is they get the guns from the Mexican drug cartels who got the guns from the Obama administration through Fast and Furious.
Who's street? Your street? Or maybe they got them from the Bush administration when they started Fast and Furious. And no, I don't remember your vociferous opposition to any government malfeasance back then (on these forums anyway). It seems to have started when Barack Hussein Obama wrapped up the democrat nomination.
Peace.
I voted for Obama for US Senate. Your theory is null and void.
I'm basing this solely on what I've read about this guy from the things he wrote and the things he said... Here is my response to his manifesto: First off.. a Manifesto? Really? You know who writes manifestos? UnaBombers and Chistopher Dorner types. So, to anyone else who reads this... don't write a fucking manifesto, okay? Granted, you have that Aspbergers Syndrome... and you are uncomfortable around people... I get it. But, that does not change the fact that you lived within a society of people. It's not anyone else's fault they thought you are weird... because you gotta admit... you were fucking weird. You were upset because beautiful girls weren't throwning themselves at you? Welcome to BEING A GUY... you sniveling piece of shit. You thought that money, BMWs and Gucci glasses would help you land some dates? No. Do you know why? Here's why: If you drive around in a BMW wearing a pair of Gucci glasses, looking like a douche... people will just see a douche, driving a BMW and wearing a pair of douchebag Gucci glasses that only douchebags wear to make them think other people will envy them but don't understand that everyone else thinks that only douchebags wear Gucci glasses believing it makes them look attractive. When i was 22, I had a piece of shit, oxidized red 1965 Toyota Corona that I paid 50 bucks for and sunglasses from the Rite-Aid rack... and I STILL went on dates and had girlfriends. And I'm no Brad Pitt. I was a scruffy, scrawny punk rocker that was going to the Community College while living at home and had a part-time job at the 7-11. You know what i did that you didn't? I treated girls like people. Yeah, that simple. I had girls who were just friends and didn't pine away in some sort of 'Friend Zone' and I had girls that were girlfriends. And none of them were models or actresses or princesses. They were just girls who were beautiful to me. You could have stayed on your meds and boosted up the number of therapy sessions.. but, you didn't. You chose to bring about terrible heartache on so many people. And it's too bad you never heard of prostitutes... if you'd gone to see one of them, maybe none of this would have happened. Have a nice day in Hell... tell Hitler i said, 'Eat shit, Hitler'.
I somewhat agree on the pharma front...I mean, which way to go?
Someone needing medication doesn't take it, catastrophic results.
Someone needing medication does take it, with side-effects that could bring catastrophic results.
Someone doesn't need medication but is prescribed (or taking) it...etc.
Someone who is simply, maybe naturally, just utterly fucked up with no emotion, no empathy.
.... There should be something that would lead people to understand that NOT everyone should own a gun. I know, it is a Right, not a privilege. But, i think with the fire power available to people today, there should be something out there that says, 'Sorry you psycho, but you can't have a gun'. I mean, maybe he can have a musket like the ones that were available in 1776... you know, where to load the barrel and set the primer and get off one, highly inaccurate shot. That way, everyone can rush you and take you down while you are trying to reload. And what about the sane and healthy gun owner today? Can he guarantee us that he won't go kooky one day in the future and shoot up the place? How about the gun owner who goes on perscription drug that make you all loopy or prone to violent mood swings? I would think that if they truely ARE responsible gun owners, they would recognize the possible threat they may pose and choose to forfiet their guns. But, I really don't see anything like that ever happening... the same way crazy old people still get behind the wheel of a Buick and end up driving it through a donut shop.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
I think denial would have a lot to do with people not volunteering to give up their guns. what is crazy? where's the line? I don't think i'm crazy, but if I went and talked to a therapist would they think I was crazy? who knows? but I think there would be and are, people who know they are messed up in the head and choose not to own dangerous weapons.
if you think what I believe is stupid, bizarre, ridiculous or outrageous.....it's ok, I think I had a brain tumor when I wrote that.
Cosmo is 100% correct by saying not everyone should own a gun. I'm kind of tired of people wanting to tag the crazies with a named disease or syndrome. This creep knew exactly what he wanted to do an knew it was wrong. He didn't snap in a fit of rage. He wasn't blinded by a disease. This was planned from start to finish. His "syndrome" had nothing to do with this. He was a creep and should have just put the barrel in his mouth. There are hundreds of thousands of people that are rejected and feel awkward in social settings that don't commit mass murder. The only label this fuck needs is murderer.
I think denial would have a lot to do with people not volunteering to give up their guns. what is crazy? where's the line? I don't think i'm crazy, but if I went and talked to a therapist would they think I was crazy? who knows? but I think there would be and are, people who know they are messed up in the head and choose not to own dangerous weapons.
... I don't know if there is a way to figure out a legal definition of 'crazy'. Are there ways to figure out if Gramps is such a horrible driver that he has a high probability of vehicular manslaughter in his future? I mean, we all know some anecdotal story about some 80something year old who has plowed over a bus stop bench and you come to find out that he/she still believes he/she is fully capable of driving, right? We can take away their driving privilege because it is a privilege... whereas gun ownership is a right. Just like alcohol consumption and driving are a bad mix... maybe it's time for us to look into mental health issues and/or perscription drugs and guns being a lethal mix.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
well what do ya know, a crazy kid with a gun kills some random people.
never heard that before...
seriously, if his life is so messed up, why not just blow his own head off and let other people live?
unfortunately nothing will be done about access to guns, and this will happen again in 2 weeks and everyone is going to act all shocked, surprised, and sad, and wonder how such a thing can happen here in america.
repeat,
repeat,
repeat....
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
What Elliot Rodger could have learned from poet Charles Bukowski Isla Vista Tony Pierce, guest blogger
One of the best things about author Charles Bukowski is that he was not pretty and yet he still found intimacy with women.
It’s a truly valuable lesson because any man can strut around if he’s tall, handsome and wealthy. Imagine you’re squat, pockmarked, fat and poor. If you can attract women with all that working against you, then yeah people should read your books. Bukowski needs to be taught in every school. -
Friday night, Elliot Rodger, a rich pretty boy from the Valley drove a new BMW around a college town and shot at girls who in his mind wouldn’t give him the time of day. In the end, he killed six UC Santa Barbara students and wounded 13 during his rampage around Isla Vista.
In a series of YouTube videos, Rodger said he was frustrated because he was 22 and still a virgin despite being what he considered to be beautiful.
Bukowski needs to be taught in every school. The author too was dismayed by a good chunk of American society, but he pushed through. In fact, the main themes of his poetry and prose focus on an important message: No matter what cards you are dealt, you play them. You don’t turn over the table, you don’t cheat, you don’t raise your fist at the sky and ask why wasn’t I born a 6-foot-5 water polo god? You do you your thing, you make your own luck, you turn to the woman next to you and you accept what comes next.
Despite being ridiculously prolific, Bukowski would sometimes go back to his masterpieces and edit them before they were published or placed in an anthology.
The 1977 poem “The Crunch” probably would have resonated best with Rodger.
Here are the three versions of it, all great in their little ways.
“there is a loneliness in this world so great
that you can see it in the slow movement of
the hands of a clock,” states Bukowski, plainly, almost scientifically.
Please tell me the city college virgin wouldn’t have seen himself in this bit from the final edited version:
“we forget the terror of one person
aching in one room
alone
unkissed
untouched
cut off
watering a plant alone
without a telephone that would never
ring
anyway.”
The lesson of Bukowski is he can bust out with something like that, such a clear stark blast, but when he’s done he pours a glass of wine, smiles to himself drinks the wine, alone or otherwise and feels beautiful inside where it counts.
One, are bloggers writers of manifestos as well? Perhaps more drawn out, though I'd imagine the fucked up subject of this thread and others who wrote similar pieces did so over time.
Kind of like us with the posts we make over time - and no, I'm not comparing us to that kid.
Two, on misogyny...was watching tv, a commercial came on for face cream. There's Anniston talking about being beautiful. All ads for creams, hair color, body lotion...the imagery...presented by women.
Next commercial is for Chase with Samuel L Jackson. Majority of these credit card ads are done by men - Baldwin, Fallon.
It's not a huge deal to me since I don't put much stock in celebrity spokesfolks (c'mon, does anyone believe Julianne Moore uses hair color out of the box? They call them "actors" for a reason)
Bukowski in school. How about his drive and pluckiness and views taught at home? Maybe shown by example - at home?
The last quote of his is sweet. But, I find it melodramatic as relates to this kid.
We all got scars.
Anyway, gonna have a little something myself with a smile.
I think denial would have a lot to do with people not volunteering to give up their guns. what is crazy? where's the line? I don't think i'm crazy, but if I went and talked to a therapist would they think I was crazy? who knows? but I think there would be and are, people who know they are messed up in the head and choose not to own dangerous weapons.
... I don't know if there is a way to figure out a legal definition of 'crazy'. Are there ways to figure out if Gramps is such a horrible driver that he has a high probability of vehicular manslaughter in his future? I mean, we all know some anecdotal story about some 80something year old who has plowed over a bus stop bench and you come to find out that he/she still believes he/she is fully capable of driving, right? We can take away their driving privilege because it is a privilege... whereas gun ownership is a right. Just like alcohol consumption and driving are a bad mix... maybe it's time for us to look into mental health issues and/or perscription drugs and guns being a lethal mix.
Nicely said Cosmo...Gun ownership Should be a Privilege and Not a Right...can't be handing out Guns to Just anyone...there has to be some sort of way to Stop Guns being so accessible.
We don't just hand out guns to anyone, he lived in California which is a anti-gunners dream.
He passed the background checks that everyone here screams for.
California's anti-gun laws also kept these victims defenseless as there are only 52 concealed carry permit holders in that county. This murderers previous statements indicated that he was avoiding attacking certain places based on whether someone legally carrying could stop him.
Comments
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Elliot Rodger was a misogynist – but is that all he was?
The killer was enabled by a culture that validates the feelings of angry, lonely and sometimes mentally unwell men
Hadley Freeman
The Guardian, Tuesday 27 May 2014 17.03 BST
Elliot Rodger was a misogynist. This cannot really be in doubt about a young man who went out on Friday, armed with three semi-automatic shotguns he had bought legally, to punish all women for rejecting him sexually.
"You girls aren't attracted to me, but I will punish you all for it," he wrote in his manifesto. "I'll take great pleasure in slaughtering all of you. You will finally see that I am in truth the superior one."
That Rodger ended up killing twice as many men (Cheng Yuan Hong, 20, George Chen, 19, Weihan Wang, 20, and Christopher Ross Michaels-Martinez, 20) as women (Katherine Breann Cooper, 22, and Veronika Elizabeth Weiss, 19) on his shooting spree isn't relevant. Misogynists with murderous intent often end up killing men when they set out to kill women (a woman's new partner or a male friend, for example). So, that proves nothing: Rodger was definitely a misogynist.
But is that all he was? Since news of the deaths broke over the weekend, journalists and commentators have argued vociferously about what, precisely, would make a young man from a privileged and, by all accounts, loving family feel such rage against women that he would end up killing six people and himself. Many writers I read and respect enormously have argued that to say Rodger's real problem was mental illness is to dismiss his misogyny – and the misogyny that is endemic in western society. To argue that mental illness lay at the root of Rodger's problem, they write, is almost to excuse him as a lone aberration, as opposed to seeing him for what he was: part of a pattern that is the inevitable effect of a sick society.
I have a lot of sympathy for this point of view. As one of my favourite feminist writers, Erin Gloria Ryan, has pointed out, when a man from the Middle East kills people, the western media immediately ascribes it to terrorism; when a black man kills people, it's put down to cultural thuggery; but when a white man kills people, it is dismissed, she tweeted, as "a freak mental illness ... The fact that the mostly white media scrambles to remove white, privileged men from blame is exactly why we need more diverse newsrooms."
This is all true. But this isn't necessarily an either/or situation. Yes, Rodger was a misogynist. He also very likely had mental difficulties, and to say so doesn't diminish the part a misogynistic culture played in this tragedy. If anything, it emphasises precisely why this culture is so dangerous. Rodger had been in therapy since he was nine years old. Friends of the family have given numerous interviews testifying to his parents' long-term concern for him. His parents stayed in contact with mental-health professionals after Rodger turned 18, but there was little they could do: their son was now an adult, and he hadn't said or done anything that would have merited involuntary mental health treatment. It looks as if, at some point, Rodger found an outlet for his difficulties: misogyny. This is where the culture comes into play.
Rodger was enabled in his misogynistic feelings by a culture that exists to validate the feelings of angry, lonely and sometimes mentally unwell men. Judging from the language Rodger used in his videos, he had been a follower of the pick-up artist (PUA) online community, which teaches men that they can and should trick and bully women into sleeping with them (Tom Cruise's character in Magnolia is an excellent representation of the PUA community). Rodger described himself as "an alpha" and "incel" – "involuntary celibate"; these are terms that come straight from the PUA textbooks.
But Rodger was also a frequent contributor to the PUAhate online community boards, which are for men who find that PUA tricks don't work for them. These men spend their time on the internet railing against women who fail to appreciate their inherent goodness, and argue that women shouldn't be allowed to choose who they have sex with. Indeed, in his manifesto, Rodger wrote: "Women should not have the right to choose who to mate with. That choice should be made for them by civilised men of intelligence."
This misogynistic culture exists, absolutely, and what's so dangerous about it is that it attracts potentially mentally unstable people, including Rodger, and validates their most extreme feelings. To say that mental illness played a part in Rodger's behaviour doesn't dismiss the culture that played a part in it any more than saying eating disorders are a mental illness (which they are) excuses the part played by the sick fetishisation of women's bodies in western culture.
It's also worth pointing out that Rodger didn't just rail against women in his manifesto – he also spewed plenty of racist bile, which is getting far less attention, even though the first people he killed were his two Asian roommates and their Asian friend, whom he had specifically described as "repulsive". (Rodger was half-Asian himself and blamed this for his lack of success with women.)
It is also worth pointing out that even if Rodger had been diagnosed with a serious mental illness he would still have been able to buy a gun, even in California, which has some of the most stringent laws about buying guns in the United States.
Was misogyny the reason a 22-year-old man went on a killing spree? Hell yes. Were other factors at play here, too, such as mental health, a financially straitened mental health system and an American political system cowed by the NRA, leading to too much access to guns? Yes, yes and yes. And to say that doesn't diminish the part played by any of these reasons. In fact, they underline the dangers in one another.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
Point your fingers there.
Godfather.
kindness
smarts
conversationalist
shower taker
open one's gifted self & do your thing
operate smoked/trashed car (unlike elliot)
change your name if you are elliot
do not purchase $376.99 sunglasses
'game' does not mean 'game'
every person walking this planet had better have 'game' or they are walking dead
if someone owns $376.99 shades they should be slapped so hard that they actually fallover
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
There were no provisions specific to guns or background checks, period, although the gun lobby characterized it as a gun-grab bill. This was about changing the language so that "imminent" danger was no longer a requirement to get someone held in an emergency mental health crisis. The net effect would have been to increase emergency holds and accelerate the hold process. The criteria for prohibiting someone from owning a gun are federal and would not have been affected by this. Yet, that was why RMGO and NRA lobbied so hard against the bill - they believed more people would be subject to NCIS, and that would infringe on their 2nd Amendment rights. Just me, but I'd say that even if that were true, I think it might just be okay to restrict gun purchases from people being considered for emergency mental holds.
Again, if you've ever been part of the horrible process of trying to get an emergency mental health hold in place, you'd understand why I'm so pissed at the gun lobby (or more pissed than usual, I guess).
He obeyed every California gun control law.
What else is there?
I know. Blame Bush.
He shouldn't have been allowed to buy a gun in the first place. Secondly the police should have known that he had weapons and confiscated them when they spoke to him about the threats.
But that violates his second amendment rights I assume?
The second amendment is the most misinterpreted of the entire document....and many innocent people are being killed because of it.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Here is my response to his manifesto:
First off.. a Manifesto? Really? You know who writes manifestos? UnaBombers and Chistopher Dorner types. So, to anyone else who reads this... don't write a fucking manifesto, okay?
Granted, you have that Aspbergers Syndrome... and you are uncomfortable around people... I get it. But, that does not change the fact that you lived within a society of people. It's not anyone else's fault they thought you are weird... because you gotta admit... you were fucking weird.
You were upset because beautiful girls weren't throwning themselves at you?
Welcome to BEING A GUY... you sniveling piece of shit.
You thought that money, BMWs and Gucci glasses would help you land some dates? No. Do you know why?
Here's why: If you drive around in a BMW wearing a pair of Gucci glasses, looking like a douche... people will just see a douche, driving a BMW and wearing a pair of douchebag Gucci glasses that only douchebags wear to make them think other people will envy them but don't understand that everyone else thinks that only douchebags wear Gucci glasses believing it makes them look attractive.
When i was 22, I had a piece of shit, oxidized red 1965 Toyota Corona that I paid 50 bucks for and sunglasses from the Rite-Aid rack... and I STILL went on dates and had girlfriends. And I'm no Brad Pitt. I was a scruffy, scrawny punk rocker that was going to the Community College while living at home and had a part-time job at the 7-11.
You know what i did that you didn't? I treated girls like people. Yeah, that simple. I had girls who were just friends and didn't pine away in some sort of 'Friend Zone' and I had girls that were girlfriends. And none of them were models or actresses or princesses. They were just girls who were beautiful to me.
You could have stayed on your meds and boosted up the number of therapy sessions.. but, you didn't. You chose to bring about terrible heartache on so many people. And it's too bad you never heard of prostitutes... if you'd gone to see one of them, maybe none of this would have happened.
Have a nice day in Hell... tell Hitler i said, 'Eat shit, Hitler'.
Hail, Hail!!!
You know what else they all have in common? They all used guns (many obtained through legal means) to kill people.
...
If only there was some sort of way to keep guns OUT of the hands of people on these drugs... hmmmmm. Makes you wonder, don't it?
Hail, Hail!!!
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Someone needing medication doesn't take it, catastrophic results.
Someone needing medication does take it, with side-effects that could bring catastrophic results.
Someone doesn't need medication but is prescribed (or taking) it...etc.
Someone who is simply, maybe naturally, just utterly fucked up with no emotion, no empathy.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
There should be something that would lead people to understand that NOT everyone should own a gun. I know, it is a Right, not a privilege.
But, i think with the fire power available to people today, there should be something out there that says, 'Sorry you psycho, but you can't have a gun'. I mean, maybe he can have a musket like the ones that were available in 1776... you know, where to load the barrel and set the primer and get off one, highly inaccurate shot. That way, everyone can rush you and take you down while you are trying to reload.
And what about the sane and healthy gun owner today? Can he guarantee us that he won't go kooky one day in the future and shoot up the place? How about the gun owner who goes on perscription drug that make you all loopy or prone to violent mood swings?
I would think that if they truely ARE responsible gun owners, they would recognize the possible threat they may pose and choose to forfiet their guns. But, I really don't see anything like that ever happening... the same way crazy old people still get behind the wheel of a Buick and end up driving it through a donut shop.
Hail, Hail!!!
^:)^ ^:)^ ^:)^
I don't know if there is a way to figure out a legal definition of 'crazy'.
Are there ways to figure out if Gramps is such a horrible driver that he has a high probability of vehicular manslaughter in his future? I mean, we all know some anecdotal story about some 80something year old who has plowed over a bus stop bench and you come to find out that he/she still believes he/she is fully capable of driving, right? We can take away their driving privilege because it is a privilege... whereas gun ownership is a right.
Just like alcohol consumption and driving are a bad mix... maybe it's time for us to look into mental health issues and/or perscription drugs and guns being a lethal mix.
Hail, Hail!!!
never heard that before...
seriously, if his life is so messed up, why not just blow his own head off and let other people live?
unfortunately nothing will be done about access to guns, and this will happen again in 2 weeks and everyone is going to act all shocked, surprised, and sad, and wonder how such a thing can happen here in america.
repeat,
repeat,
repeat....
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
What Elliot Rodger could have learned from poet Charles Bukowski
Isla Vista
Tony Pierce, guest blogger
One of the best things about author Charles Bukowski is that he was not pretty and yet he still found intimacy with women.
It’s a truly valuable lesson because any man can strut around if he’s tall, handsome and wealthy. Imagine you’re squat, pockmarked, fat and poor. If you can attract women with all that working against you, then yeah people should read your books.
Bukowski needs to be taught in every school. -
Friday night, Elliot Rodger, a rich pretty boy from the Valley drove a new BMW around a college town and shot at girls who in his mind wouldn’t give him the time of day. In the end, he killed six UC Santa Barbara students and wounded 13 during his rampage around Isla Vista.
In a series of YouTube videos, Rodger said he was frustrated because he was 22 and still a virgin despite being what he considered to be beautiful.
Bukowski needs to be taught in every school. The author too was dismayed by a good chunk of American society, but he pushed through. In fact, the main themes of his poetry and prose focus on an important message: No matter what cards you are dealt, you play them. You don’t turn over the table, you don’t cheat, you don’t raise your fist at the sky and ask why wasn’t I born a 6-foot-5 water polo god? You do you your thing, you make your own luck, you turn to the woman next to you and you accept what comes next.
Despite being ridiculously prolific, Bukowski would sometimes go back to his masterpieces and edit them before they were published or placed in an anthology.
The 1977 poem “The Crunch” probably would have resonated best with Rodger.
Here are the three versions of it, all great in their little ways.
“there is a loneliness in this world so great
that you can see it in the slow movement of
the hands of a clock,” states Bukowski, plainly, almost scientifically.
Please tell me the city college virgin wouldn’t have seen himself in this bit from the final edited version:
“we forget the terror of one person
aching in one room
alone
unkissed
untouched
cut off
watering a plant alone
without a telephone that would never
ring
anyway.”
The lesson of Bukowski is he can bust out with something like that, such a clear stark blast, but when he’s done he pours a glass of wine, smiles to himself drinks the wine, alone or otherwise and feels beautiful inside where it counts.
One, are bloggers writers of manifestos as well? Perhaps more drawn out, though I'd imagine the fucked up subject of this thread and others who wrote similar pieces did so over time.
Kind of like us with the posts we make over time - and no, I'm not comparing us to that kid.
Two, on misogyny...was watching tv, a commercial came on for face cream. There's Anniston talking about being beautiful. All ads for creams, hair color, body lotion...the imagery...presented by women.
Next commercial is for Chase with Samuel L Jackson. Majority of these credit card ads are done by men - Baldwin, Fallon.
It's not a huge deal to me since I don't put much stock in celebrity spokesfolks (c'mon, does anyone believe Julianne Moore uses hair color out of the box? They call them "actors" for a reason)
Bukowski in school. How about his drive and pluckiness and views taught at home? Maybe shown by example - at home?
The last quote of his is sweet. But, I find it melodramatic as relates to this kid.
We all got scars.
Anyway, gonna have a little something myself with a smile.
Feeling ok when I see myself.
He passed the background checks that everyone here screams for.
California's anti-gun laws also kept these victims defenseless as there are only 52 concealed carry permit holders in that county. This murderers previous statements indicated that he was avoiding attacking certain places based on whether someone legally carrying could stop him.