Margaret Atwood famously said that men’s greatest fear is that women will laugh at them, while women’s greatest fear is that men will kill them. Misogyny and male entitlement are sustained acts of aggression against women that everyone should be invested in opposing. –Clementine Ford
Today’s column will be focused on media coverage of–and some observations about– the shooting Friday night in Isla Vista.
The coverage was predictable, ala: “a mentally disturbed young man went on a shooting spree. It seems as though he had some sort of problem with women.” A worldwide reaction via social media kept the “problem with women” part of the media equation from becoming an afterthought.
The Associated Press account featured in UT-San Diego got around to mentioning the “some problems with women” part about 10 paragraphs down, in keeping with the “if it bleeds, it leads” media mantra.
The son of a Hollywood director stabbed three men to death in his apartment, gunned down two women outside a sorority and randomly killed a sixth person in a rampage that was foreshadowed by a chilling Internet video in which he vowed to slaughter all the people who wronged him.
The LA Times gave this terse description of the spree:
The 22-year-old suspect, Elliot Rodger, outlined his plans in a 137-page document, which he sent out Friday before the shootings, authorities said.
Santa Barbara County Sheriff Bill Brown described Rodger as “very mentally disturbed.”
Authorities said Rodger began by fatally stabbing three roommates at his apartment complex in the 6500 block of Seville Road in Isla Vista, then went to a sorority house a few blocks away and opened fire on three women outside, fatally wounding two of them.
Rodger’s next stop was a local deli, where he fatally shot a UC Santa Barbara student inside, Brown said.
The suspect then drove his BMW, opening fire on pedestrians and others on the street, Brown said. He then got into a gun battle with deputies. Apparently wounded, he continued to drive. He was eventually found dead from a gunshot wound to the head that appeared to be self-inflicted.
As I waded through the conventional media’s narratives, I noticed a commonality pointing to insolvable problems (mental illness, the guns rights nuts) as the “why” of their stories. This isn’t to say those things are not factors, but it does point out the limitations of the sort of coverage traditional journalism is capable of producing.
Reporting on misogyny in our culture, the entitlement complex brought on by privilege and the existence of organized groups exploiting those issues is a rare event, something outside of the realm of reportage in the conventional media.
#YesAllWomen
A young women calling herself “Kaye M” helped leverage a broader discussion with this simple Tweet, hoping to show that even though not all men are violent, objectification is widespread:
Guys, I’m going to be tweeting under the #YesAllWomen hashtag. Let’s discuss what “not all men” might do, but women must fear.
Predictably, her twitter feed was soon encroached upon by reporters wanting “her story”. Kaye M was smart enough not to play that game, responding:
I am protecting my private life, so I’m not responding to media.
A short but sweet description of the phenomena via blogger Amelia McDonell-Parry:
Because women everywhere — YES, ALL WOMEN — deal with this denial of their full personhood every day. This shared experience is what prompted the hashtag #YESALLWOMEN, featuring women’s stories of their personal autonomy being violated in ways “big” and “small,” and the ways we’re forced to protect ourselves from these violations. It is incredibly powerful and I urge you all to look through the hashtag here.
Salon.com and Time.com posted some of the more powerful responses, as did Boston.com. As ‘Cai’, writing at Daily Kos pointed out, “Unfortunately, Salon and Boston.com both give the first tweet to a man, and Time gives a man the last word.”
Via the BBC:
In response, Twitter users began using the #YesAllWomen hashtag – originally a response to traditional male rights activists’ complaints – to debate the issue.
The hashtag was used by more than 250,000 people in less than 24 hours.
Some social media users sparked anger by appearing to sympathise with Rodger’s bitterness at being rejected.
From Vox.com
#yesallwomen is a Twitter hashtag in response to a twisted narrative that the women who didn’t date were to blame for Rodger’s actions. Before Rodger allegedly shot those 13 people in Santa Barbara, he filmed videos where he expressed anger at women who didn’t want to date him and that he shouldn’t be a virgin at 22.
“I feel so invisible as I walk through my college. Your revealing shorts, your cascading blonde hair, your pretty faces. I want one for a girlfriend,” Rodger said in one of the videos. “I am polite. I am the ultimate gentleman. And yet, you girls never give me a chance. I don’t know why,” he also said.
The gist: Rodger was frustrated that women didn’t want to date him, felt entitled to a woman’s affections, and talked about women like objects. And now there are people, in the wake of the shooting, who want to blame these women’s rejections as the reason for Rodger’s mass murder. The story, to those people, isn’t that Rodger was disturbed but rather: this poor guy wasn’t treated nicely by women.
#YesItsAHateCrime
The hate-crime and ideological aspects are discussed at the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Hatewatch Blog:
Elliot Rodger, who died after allegedly carrying out a series of drive-by shootings from behind the wheel of his BMW last night near the University of California, Santa Barbara campus, wrote in November that he wanted to “overthrow this oppressive feminist system” and create a “world where WOMEN FEAR YOU.”
Hours before the attack, Rodger – son of “Hunger Games” assistant director Peter Rodger – posted a deeply misogynistic video on YouTube in which he pledged to exact revenge for being rejected by women. “If I can’t have you, girls, I will destroy you,” he says.
A review of Rodger’s online writing suggests an ideology behind his lust for revenge. As I noted earlier today, Rodger was an active member of PuaHate.com, an online message board whose users lament that women are not attracted to them. The self-pitying participants frequently identify themselves as “incels” – short for involuntary celibate – and engage in misogynistic attacks on women.
One local outlet actually picked up on this part of the story. I was surprised.
As aired on 10/News (copy by City News Service):
The Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate groups, said Rodger also posted frequently on the PuaHate website, which criticizes “pickup artists” who are successful with women, and made disparaging remarks about interracial couples.
“How could an inferior, ugly black boy be able to get a white girl and not me?” he wrote in his manifesto. “I am beautiful, and I am half white myself. I am descended from British aristocracy. He (black men) is descended from slaves. I deserve it more.”
#YesItsAnIdeology
Laurie Penny, writing at The New Statesman, cuts to the chase in her analysis:
The ideology behind these attacks – and there is ideology – is simple. Women owe men. Women, as a class, as a sex, owe men sex, love, attention, “adoration”, in Rodger’s words. We owe them respect and obedience, and our refusal to give it to them is to blame for their anger, their violence – stupid sluts get what they deserve. Most of all, there is an overpowering sense of rage and entitlement: the conviction that men have been denied a birthright of easy power.
Capitalism commodifies that rage, monetises it, disseminates it through handbooks and forums and crass mainstream pornography. It does not occur to these men that women might have experienced these very human things, too, because it does not occur to them that women are human, not really. Women are prizes to be caught and used or hags to be harassed or, occassionally, both.
Violent extremism always attracts the lost, the broken, young men full of rage at the hand they’ve been dealt. Violent extremism entices those who long to lash out at a system they believe has cheated them, but lack they courage to think for themselves, beyond the easy answers they are offered by pedlars of hate. Misogynist extremism is no different. For some time now misogynist extremism has been excused, as all acts of terrorism committed by white men are excused, as an aberration, as the work of random loons, not real men at all. The pattern is repeatedly denied: these are the words and actions of the disturbed.
Kate McDonough, writing at Salon.com, gives us some contemporary examples:
And this anger — this toxic male entitlement — isn’t contained to random comment boards or the YouTube videos of disturbed young men. It’s on full view elsewhere in our culture. Earlier this week, a writer for the New York Post quoted a member of a men’s rights group as the sole source in a report on Jill Abramson’s ouster at the New York Times. Mel Feit of the National Center for Men told columnist Richard Johnson that Abramson was systematically firing men and replacing them with women. He said that our society gives women preferential treatment. On his website, Feit bemoans a culture in which men are subject to the powerful whims of vindictive women who exist on “sexual pedestals.” He argues that men can’t be blamed for rape after a certain point of arousal.
These views about women and violence are replicated in our criminal justice system. They filter into our media. This is what makes Rodger’s misogynistic vitriol so terrifying — the fact that in many ways it’s utterly banal.
The news out of Isla Vista is still painfully fresh, and in the coming days we will continue to struggle to understand this pattern of violence. And while we do that — the work of considering what laws, support systems and cultural shifts must be put in place to prevent these tragedies from destroying more lives, families and communities — I can’t help but be reminded of all of the women who have been victimized by a culture and a system that denies their humanity.
Writing under the pseudonym OllieGarkey at Daily Kos, this author delves into the so-called Men’s Rights groups that the Isla Vista shooter turned to for support:
…he sought out the Men’s Rights Movement. He watched their propaganda. He internalized their hatred of women. (There’s no shortage of anti-woman rhetoric and nonsense. For some of the worst of it, check out The Red Pill’s “Pussy Pass” forum, where they take isolated incidents, remove them from any rational context, and blow them way out of proportion.)
He listened to these guys talk about being hard, and tough, and true alpha men. He did what they told them, and began lifting weights. We know he had an account on body building forum which was recently deleted by their moderation team.
So this kid who needed some serious mental help sought out the destructive, BS views coming from the men’s rights movement. He felt entitled to sex with women. He blamed women for not providing him with sex. He exposed himself to hateful rhetoric about women.
And then he acted on that hatred, and targeted college girls for a drive-by shooting, killed six, wounded seven, and then shot himself.
#WomenHaveARightToBeAngry
I’ll turn to Aussie writer Clementine Ford at DailyLife.com for a most excellent wrap up:
This is what misogyny and male entitlement writ large looks like. The denial of its existence is what allows ongoing violence against women to flourish. Women experience a broad range of gender related violence every day, from incessant street harassment to sexual assaults to murder. It is the shadow we live under and the threat we live in fear of, and we endure it solely because we are women. It’s what leads to a young girl being stabbed to death by a schoolmate because she won’t go to prom with him. And it’s what allows a young man to believe so fervently that he is ‘owed’ female attention and adoration that when he is repeatedly denied it, he decides someone must be punished in order to reinstate his power as a dominant male.
If this isn’t a result of structural misogyny and male entitlement, what is it? A coincidence? Why is it that one woman murdered every week in Australia by her partner or ex-partner is not considered a manifestation of the ongoing, ritualised hate crime that specifically targets women? Why must we be further insulted by having our anger explained away as irrational and misplaced? We know what pure, unadulterated misogyny is because we have felt its wrath; yet we’re once again being told our instincts are wrong by people for whom such hatred can never be anything more than theoretical.
Margaret Atwood famously said that men’s greatest fear is that women will laugh at them, while women’s greatest fear is that men will kill them. Misogyny and male entitlement are sustained acts of aggression against women that everyone should be invested in opposing.
No, not all men kill or harm women.
But yes – all women have a right to be angry and afraid when they do.
#PostScript: The Fox News Sicko Spin
I tried to avoid giving the apologists for the Isla Vista shooter much play in this story. And I didn’t go into all the men I’ve seen and heard from over the past day that just.don’t.get.it. But this snippet from Fox News, via The New Civil Rights Movement is just so egregious I had to put it in.
Dr. Robi Ludwig on Fox News’ “Justice with Judge Jeanine” last night attributed 22-year-old Elliot Rodger’s Santa Barbara shooting spree to what she suggested were his “homosexual impulses.” Rodger murdered six people near the University of California Santa Barbara and had left a 140-page manifesto along with more than 20 YouTube videos (some now removed), some extremely violent towards women, the last promising to “slaughter every single one of you.”
In none of his videos or manifesto did Rodgers leave any hint or suggestion that he was gay or struggling with his sexuality, yet Dr. Ludwig, a psychotherapist, psychologist, and host of TLC’s reality TV show, “One Week to Save Your Marriage,” saw fit to posit Rodger was “angry at the men for not choosing him.”
“When I was first listening to him, I was like, ‘Oh, he’s angry with women for rejecting him,’” Ludwig told the Fox News audience. “And then I started to have a different idea: Is this somebody who is trying to fight against his homosexual impulses?’”
Check Out the SDFreePress Calendar
Thanks to the efforts of Brent Beltran, the San Diego Free Press now has an on-line calendar of events. You can see events in the arts, performances and political gatherings of every persuasion by clicking on the ‘Calendar’ Tab at the top of the page. To get your event listed, drop us a line: events@sandiegofreepress.org
On This Day: 1913- Actors’ Equity Assn. is founded by 112 actors at a meeting in New York City’s Pabst Grand Circle Hotel. Producer George M. Cohan responds: “I will drive an elevator for a living before I will do business with any actors’ union.” Later a sign appeared in Times Square reading: “Elevator operator wanted. George M. Cohan need not apply” 1961 – Civil rights activist group Freedom Ride Coordinating Committee was established in Atlanta, GA. 1969 – John Lennon and Yoko Ono began their 2nd “Bed-In For Peace” in Montreal.
Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to “The Starting Line” and get an email every time a new article in this series is posted!
I read the Daily Fishwrap(s) so you don’t have to… Catch “the Starting Line” Monday thru Friday right here at San Diego Free Press (dot) org. Send your hate mail and ideas to DougPorter@
What a powerful piece of journalism! Oh that this would lead to fruitful discussion and resolution, but I fear those who are so consumed with their hatred can not be reached. I’d like to think I am wrong.
@Hannah Witton: And it disgusts me!
That anyone would give the severly mentally disturbed Roger ANY “reason” or leeway for what he did is unconscionable in a civilized society. Verbal or internet expressions of hate are bad enough, but to be put into such action as he did…. Words fail me.
Goleta/Isla Vista was one of the first places in California I ever saw and I remember thinking how very idyllistic a place it was. My good memories are now clouded forever by this terrible crime.
All praise to Porter. This is a quick, deep and broad and persuasive take on privilege and sexual politics. I’ve been more captivated by the Rodgers case than other mass killings we’ve had to read about, and was not aware of the narcissism until this moment. He was superior, he was privileged and woman did not recognize his rights. I’m hoping we’ll see more journalism like this, but, then, it might be more than the journalists can handle.
Excellent article, in our social face….and everybody looking around for someone/thing to blame….. So much in our society is involved around protecting us from violence and wrong doing caused by (95%) men, whether crazy or “normal”, our own or someone else’s: military, penal industry, police, lawyers ; politics is all about controlling those violent selfish reptilian brain urges in regards to the social contract…. Not much time or money left for anything good…
This guy left a 140 (or thereabouts) page document detailing his whole life. If ever there any clues to be discovered about why people do these horrible crimes, maybe something of this guy’s motivations and mentality can be gleaned here. I suggest that it be read and analyzed and then perhaps come conclusions can be drawn that would hold more water than those hastily drawn so far. I think it’s significant that Rodger’s father was a director of The Hunger Games in which teenagers hunt down and kill each other. How involved in this kind of media culture was Rodger, the son?
Killing is just common fare in the media culture today and guns are readily available. Was this guy mentally ill or was he just a product of the guns and media culture he grew up in? That’s what I’m hoping his manifesto will shed some light on.
If it was just a case of losing his virginity, why didn’t he try a prostitute? With his money he probably could have gotten a high priced one … for the whole weekend! Or why didn’t society buy him one? It would have been a lot cheaper than the cost of the lives he destroyed.
At any rate this guy needed some help. Just in terms of coping with rejection if nothing else. Sex seems so readily available in this society that it’s hard to believe that it’s such a problem for some people. And guns as the solution to every problem is becoming commonplace in lore and reality.
“I think it’s significant that Rodger’s father was a director of The Hunger Games in which teenagers hunt down and kill each other.”
Oookay. Should we subject Suzan Collins kids (the author of the Hunger Games) to some kind of mandatory psychiatric evaluation just to make sure they are stable? That’s assuming she has kids. There are plenty of other directors of violent movies who I’m sure have perfectly normal kids.
I think it’s safe to assume he’s mentally ill. I agree he needed help but I really don’t think it’s societies responsibility to get him a prostitute (assuming you’re not being sarcastic).
Society’s, not societies.
Goatskull, do you really want to say John Lawrence should have bought this freaky, over-privileged Hollywood narcissist a hooker? Or that you should have? Or that Suzan Collins should have? Seems to me John Lawrence was saying what he wanted to, pretty clearly, while you seem stuck in the prostitute cure.
??
How did you come to that conclusion or am I missing a joke?
Mr. Lawrence, are you suggesting that the attacker’s actions are somehow excused or explained by the father’s professional credits?
In addition to working as assistant director (NOT director, btw) on “Hunger Games,” Mr. Roger also made the documentary “Oh My God” (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1326954/?ref_=nm_flmg_dr_1).
The documentary “Oh My God” was a financial disaster for the elder Rodger. And Rodger Junior never forgave him for it as he figured it screwed up his life having his father not being able to give him everything he wanted. Elliot Rodger was a narcissist to be sure and expected everything to be handed to him on a silver platter including girls. After reading his 140 page life history (not really a manifesto) with all the verbiage about being rejected by women, there was not one incident mentioned where he ever asked a woman for a date and then got turned down. He put no effort whatsoever into meeting a woman or establishing a relationship. He just expected them to come to him and go to bed with him immediately like he fantasized they did with other men.
Oh yeah, my suggestion for men: evolve.
Whether or not men need to evolve, this kid was a crazy misogynistic kook who like John should have received help. Keep in mind he also hated all men who had more sex than he did (which apparently was never).
“…who like John should have received help.” That stinks up this comment chain.
Boo hoo.
What I was trying to say was “who like John said should have received help”. A typo on my part but still, don’t get so butt hurt.
Keep on trying. You’re kind of fun to taunt.
So are you. But hey it’s all good.
In regard to this incident: in 2010, I introduced a gun safety bill (banning open carry in CA) in my final year in legislative office. My staff and I had never felt so threatened by men- and one or 2 women- who disagreed with the bill.
I withstood frequent attempts to intimidate and harass me and my staff. It got to the point we had to inform law enforcement of my schedule at public events, to make sure officers were present and/or prepared to respond quickly.
We held one event on the bill in Lafayette CA, about 1 hour west of Sacramento. It was within 1000 yards of a school, so no weapons were allowed inside under state current law. Nonetheless, 2 men (brothers) from San Diego drove 500 miles to confront me. They carried guns, ammunition and knives. One of them later bragged on his blog about smuggling the gun and ammo into the meeting, by lying to a security guard about the contents of his backpack and refusing, on privacy grounds, to allow it to be searched.
When we reported the blog to law enforcement, and they contacted him, he denied the actions. Since they had no proof, he was never prosecuted.
In the end, on the last day of my final legislative session in August 2010, my own Democratic and mostly male colleagues refused to allow the bill to be brought up for a final vote. It failed to get to the Governor’s desk that year, then was reintroduced, and signed into law, the following year- after being authored by a man.
So even today, when I read of the efforts of the NRA, open carry advocates etc. to insist on their rights to carry guns anywhere, at any time, I get angry- but also frightened.
Shortly after I termed out of office in Dec. 2010, Rep Gabbi Gifford was shot, and several of her staff were killed, in Arizona. I began thinking: that could have been me, and my staff…
In 2011, I had a few scares in San Diego (men showing up at meetings where I had been invited to speak, refusing to identify themselves to organizers, etc.), and had security lights installed on my home. I contacted SDPD and asked for their help in making my home more secure.
Fortunately, I live close to a school. Anyone carrying a gun near my house is in violation of the law. Small comfort…
Bottom line: There is more than enough misogyny and hatred to go around, and I’ve experienced more than my share in recent years. This is one reason I have not returned to public/political life: I don’t want to be a target of people’s anger- and potential violence, with or without guns.
Lori- your comment is as chilling as it is unsurprising. I don’t think the tipping point will come from the next massacre of innocents. The tipping point will come from having more women in public/political life. And as you wrote, what woman would want to “be a target of people’s anger-and potential violence, with or without guns.”
I forgot to add an interesting twist: 2 of the male CA senators who did the most to hinder my gun safety bill are now under federal indictment for corruption and gun running.
Ron Calderon and Leland Yee were seatmates in 2010. They intentionally withheld votes on my bill while it was in the Senate to keep it from returning to the assembly in time for a concurrence vote.
In addition, Calderon’s brother, Chuck, was the majority leader in the assembly at the time. When the bill made it out of the Senate, Chuck refused to let it be taken up for a vote in the closing hour of the 2010 legislative session.
Both Senators are now under investigation for various offenses, and Yee is under indictment for gun-running to pay off campaign debt.
Here’s a link to the bill that passed the following year, nearly identical to mine: http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_0101-0150/ab_144_bill_20111009_chaptered.html
You can’t make this stuff up…
The conversation should be about mental health and public safety for everyone, not just women.
He started with Knives to kill his first 3 “geeky” male roommates. The crime scene at the apartment was described as gruesome. Counting himself, he killed 5 males (71%) and 2 brunette females (29%). He stabbed to death half of his 6 murder victims.
He hated cocky Mexicans, blacks, PDA couples, beautiful blond girls, his sister’s boyfriend, his younger more popular 6-year old half-brother, and humanity. Not necessarily women. In his manifesto, the only good relationship he had was with his concerned mother.
To quote Salon: “Rodger hated all the women who did not provide him sex, but he also resented the men he felt had been standing in the way of his conquests, though they were never made aware of this belief. (Many men die of domestic-violence-related murders this way, killed by ex-boyfriends, ex-husbands, and family members of the women in their lives.) Some men are using this death count to claim that Rodger’s killings were not motivated by misogyny, but that is a simplistic account of how misogyny operates in a society that privately abides the hatred of women unless it’s expressed in its most obvious forms.”
According to the “manifesto” Rodger hated the men that the girls went for (big, athletic jock types) as much or more than the women themselves. He had resentment, envy and eventually hatred for both men and women who were enjoying life more than he was specifically those in sexual relationships or whom he fantasized were in sexual relationships.
He had planned to kill his younger brother Jazz, whom he deemed to be more socially outgoing than he, on the grounds that he would grow up to be one who was more sexually desired by women. He also resented his sister who was 4 years younger who had lost her virginity already and had a boyfriend who was half Latino.
I think it’s save to say this kid was a worthless POS loser.
Safe.