Oh no, feminist writers stirring up moral panics – someone call – VaculaMan!
Justin Vacula The Daily Mail is over-the-top with its headline, too, calling him the “Hunger Games Assassin.” I guess we can be outraged by tabloid publications. I’d rather not.
Anyway, to recap and follow up on recent comments, I think that focusing on misogyny and people like Valenti/Macrotte/SPLC representatives talking about this as being part of a “war on women” or “proof that misogyny kills” is as silly as people saying women who kill their male sons by microwaving them being “proof that misandry kills” or a “war on men.” It’s just much more complex and it’s really no surprise, unfortunately, that the SPLC and feminist writers are using this to further their agenda by creating moral panic following an isolated incident committed by a troubled individual.
Indeed, statements the shooter made were hateful toward women, but that’s only part of the issue. I don’t, though, think that cultural messaging that men are entitled to have women as rewards has anything to do with this (or at least a major part of it). I further fail to see how a ‘damsel in distress’ trope explained by Sarkessian (or Disney movies) has anything to do with this incident.
Beware the feminists furthering their dastardly agenda of not being treated like shit any more! Won’t someone please think of the microwaved boys?!
Vaculasplaining! Right next to Silvermanning.
That’s right! Women killing their FEMALE sons is different, as is women killing their male DAUGHTERS!
What were we talking about again? I got lost O_O
“microwaved MALE boys”!! Gosh! Get it right!!
Vacula really does imagine that using more words makes his arguments more intelligent.
Yet another isolated incident?
So many dead and injured women in so many isolated incidents.
Presumably, the pattern of young men killing each other is also nothing of the sort, but is actually just a series of isolated incidents? Or, perhaps Vacula can see patterns when the victims have the right gender?
I notice he didn’t share his thoughts on what problems lie at the heart of this incident. He just handwaves the misogyny (an opinion offered with no justification other than “I think this”), despite everything that Elliot Rodger said about women.
God damn but he’s dumb. I mean it. As in, dull-witted.
He’s going to wring his hands and tone-troll the Southern Poverty Law Center? Oh, dear.
As AlbinoWonderland tweeted a couple days back: claims that feminists are using this event for their own agenda are ABSOLUTELY TRUE. their agenda is: they want women to stop being murdered
He’s so stupid it pisses me off.
I would absolutely consider that proof that misandry kills and evidence that there was a “war on men.” What the fuck would he consider it?
“their agenda is: they want women to stop being murdered”
Hey, stop being so political!
Wowbagger: seconded, thirded, fourthed, fifthed, and octaved.
It doesn’t surprise me to see dismissals of misogyny as a factor on a random forum I participate in (where this stuff is not related to the main forum topic), after all in the religion (also a non related topic) sub-forum people there also dismiss religion as a factor in certain terrorist acts.
On entering this movement (you know, on starting to pay attention) I would’ve been stunned to see someone dismiss this in the same way I see people dismiss religion as a factor in other things. I would have thought, back then, that once you could strip religion of its privileged status it would be impossible NOT to strip other things of that status, if not automatically and on your own, at least when others pointed it out to you. After all, you had the ultimate example.
Sadly today I’m not at all surprised to see this ridiculous dismissal not only on that everyday unrelated forum I visit, but even in the atheist community. Man writes manifesto explaining his thoughts on women and why he will kill them… atheist x, y or z is unable to accept that as a factor in the killings. It just speaks to how deeply ingrained each of these things is as a separate idea, even though of course religion and misogyny can ally, they can defend themselves perfectly well on their own to the point where even when you see through religious privilege you might not be capable of seeing through male privilege or white privilege and so on.
I’m glad I’m more aware of all of them today thanks to the people I follow here and elsewhere. Isolated incidents indeed…
Wait – did he just admit that this is a thing? It’s stage 3 denialism à la AGW – OK, it’s real, but it isn’t a problem.
Here is the link to that specific tweet Wowbagger was mentioning: https://twitter.com/albinwonderland/status/470693064856436736
Your link went to @albinwonderland’s profile.
Vacula’s (or vacuole as I like to call him) comments made me think of domestic violence. It is obviously not as dramatic as what happened in Santa Barbara but it certainly caused deaths of a lot of women (and a few men)
From:
http://www.pbs.org/kued/nosafeplace/studyg/domestic.html
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, 95 percent of the victims of domestic violence are women. The National Crime Victimization Survey consistently finds that no matter who initiates the violence, women are 7 to 10 times more likely to be injured than are men. It’s important to realize the climate of intimidation and control that occurs in abusive families. Most men will say they are not afraid of the woman with whom they live, even if they had also been hit, scratched, or punched by her. However, you’ll often hear that women are terrorized and live in constant fear of being battered by the man with whom they live. The difference in strength and physical size puts a woman at more risk than a man.
And the misogynistic culture exacerbates the problem of domestic violence.
… speaking of, was it here I first heard at least one of the women who started that tag is now (so woefully unsurprisingly) being harassed all to hell by the vile, poisonous little shits who make it their business to try to intimidate and silence the inconveniently uppity?
I wish I could say I were, I dunno, even disappointed…
Expectations being what they’ve become, however, it’s more just data points fifteen billion something through fifteen billion something more.
(But what misogyny.)
… oh, and presumably, à la Vacula (rolls eyes, tho’ I guess redundantly), these charmers, too, are each ‘isolated incidents’…
They’re all isolated incidents, you see. It’s a curiosity about denialists. Any number of points in a line that point where you don’t want it to are somehow still just points.
The nicest thing I have to say about Vacula is that, although his fascination belies the fact, he does not regularly partake of microwaved baby boy feasts that I’m aware of.
I really loathe when people do that and don’t offer examples of why. It’s such a smarmy way to discredit something without actually discrediting anything. Come on Mr. Justin, actually put something on the table.
Who is microwaving boys?
Yes, Vacula, you do fail to see.
You fail a lot.
@Blanche Quizno, #2 & #3, but quoting #2:
Well, I don’t know about you, but I’m interested in talking about why you think that Vacula being an idiot in public is a good excuse to go off on how it’s completely ridiculous to think for 1/2 of a second that trans people exist as a way score points.
Why is that, do you think, Blanche?
The trannies just aren’t dying fast enough for you? Gotta pretend we never existed in the first place?
Y’know, throughout this whole thing, I’ve not yet said what I’m about to say, but every fucking time someone went off on how the victims of Elliot Rodger were men or were women or were men and women **in the first 12 hours** when things were confused and no information at all was confirmed, I bit my tongue, because I wanted to talk about misogyny and murder and if I wanted to prevent the next attack, which I do, it didn’t matter what the genders were of the people who died, it just mattered that sexist entitlement caused it.
But I’ve fucking had it. None of you knew any of the genders of the people killed, but you could be absolutely certain that no trans person died? How does that work?
And Blanche Quiznos, with your magical, trans*person-vanishing quips:
You aren’t clever. You aren’t scoring points. You aren’t better than Vacula because he’s a sexist douchegabber and you’re a cissexist douchegabber.
If we win a world where women are no longer killed, but only so long as they stay within arbitrary gender norms, we haven’t won a fucking thing.
You may think the existence of trans people is so far beneath notice, you feel just **compelled** to mock language that might hint at the existence of male women and female men.
We here staring up at the sole of your boot can’t see any distinction beyond the tactical between your contemptuous erasure of our lives and Rodger’s contemptuous erasure of 6 lives in Isla Vista.
Pat yourself on the back if you must for only **rhetorically** blotting us out of existence instead of **ballistically** blotting us out of existence. Me? I note the distinction but fail to see how it should bring you any pride.
@Crip,
I think it helps for you to remind us of an important error we often make when talking about gender, but I don’t think – and I’m sure you probably agree – that Vacula had any thought of gender diversity in mind.
I am confident that male son was simply a clumsy tautology to emphasise upon which side of the binary divide Vacuum’s hypothetical victims fell.
Again, and not wanting to patronise – thanks for the reminder to check my attitudes, because I nearly picked up on the same bit of Vacuum’s phraseology to make a point, without realising that it could accidentally articulate marginalising prejudice.
Blanche Quizno @2:
Your mockery of Vacula treats trans*women and men as if they’re non existent. That’s not cool at all.
Bernard:
While that may or may not be true (and I suspect you’re correct)-it’s irrelevant. The treatment of trans*women and men as if they’re nonexistent–which is the effect of Blanche’s comment–is the relevant point.
@Tony!
I understand, and I hope I didn’t minimise the problem in my response. My apologies go to Crip Dyke for the irrelevant interjection.
I suppose that I was articulating part of the thought process which almost led me to write something using similarly exclusive language. I was probably putting my own need to make a point first, without thinking of the effect; something which is a common theme of many online (and offline) conflicts, even if it was at the much milder end of the spectrum. It is too easy to talk over and across more knowledgable and relevant voices, even with the best of intentions.
Language can be misleading to those of us not living the experience, and this type of feedback is very educational for me. Hopefully, for Blanche, too.
I prefer the term ‘Vac-ing off’.