Re the Norwegian deaths.

BoF - the OP started off this thread with huge speculation yet sakura's posts are worse? I can understand you not wanting join in, however. I also believe that there are other thread(s) offering condolences.

" i did not comment on any change in male violence, only a change in violence in women." That's why I asked the questions. There is no evidence that an equal society would be equal more female violence. For example, equal relationships don't tend to involve violence.

HDS - also on 'male dominance and violence are instrinsically linked' for me, that sentence should read 'dominance and violence are instrinsically linked'

No it shouldn't. We don't have female dominance, we have male dominance in society and men have used violence to become dominant.

HDS - also on 'male dominance and violence are instrinsically linked' for me, that sentence should read 'dominance and violence are instrinsically linked'

HDS - (1) i did not comment on any change in male violence, only a change in violence in women. (2) i dont think violence is inherently male so for me to say more violence from women is not saying they are becoming more male.

It is in poor taste, IMO, to use an atrocity like this to tub-thump about one's world view, especially merely days into the aftermath. Generally speaking on MN, the news of a tragic event is greeted initially at least with a thread which expresses condolence and sympathy for people who may be affected. Not ideological theorising. But if that's the direction people wish to take this, that's entirely up to them- I don't want to participate further.

But I don't see why that makes sakura's posts "worse". She isn't baselessly speculating either. She is stating that male dominance and violence are instrinsically linked. Male dominance has its roots in misogyny. I don't think that is speculation.

The logic is simply that he targeted politically engaged young people associated with the Labour Party, who he blames for their multicultural immigration policies, according to his own words. I think it's tacky to try and make any justification for what he did, but FGS, at least base it in what are his known motives rather than just baselessly speculate. He didn't target women either.

"i think the more equality we have between men and women, the more violence will be commited by women." So you think that women will become more like men? Rather than less violence by men? Why is that?

for me, violence more relates to power than whether you have a vagina or penis.

sometimes it is too much power (DSK), sometimes too little (Breivik escaping into a fantasy world to avoid his own life).

i think the more equality we have between men and women, the more violence will be commited by women.

"I find it just as irritating as the wanker MRA on here who is trying to hang his agenda onto spurious news stories. In fact, your posts are worse, because they are co-opting actual deaths which are recent and painful."

Sorry BoF but I am not following the logic there.

Not wishing to put words into sakura's mouth but I think she is saying that society allows male dominance and violence, that same dominance and violence that has been used to suppress women for centuries. Just because this man chose his cause to be left-wing teenagers, his sense of entitlement and the roots of that comes from a society that has and continues to perpetuate misogyny so basically it is all coming from the same source.

SaF also touched on that with nationalism/patriotism etc. I think it is all tied in.

When I watched this on the news last night they were going for "insanity". Do people really think he is insane? He seemed to have everything very efficiently and coherently worked out to me, manifesto and all. So I for one, Jolene am worried that he will be let off lightly for killing 70 odd people because people will not be able to comprehend that someone who wasn't insane could do something like this.

BitOfFun, "Why are you looking at this through the visor of misogyny though, rather than racism, Sakura"

Because they are always men, always men. (besides the fact this guy didn't target people of another race)

Male violence is part and parcel of a misogynistic culture.

If you want to end male violence, you'll have to end male dominance.

The slavery of women came long long before the slavery of other races and ethnicities.

what I'm also beginning to notice a lot is how skewed women's sense of justice is because they're so used to seeing rapists walk free and wife-murderers getting 4 years in prison, or mass murderers getting "the maximum penalty of 21 years in jail plus psychological evaluation"

It can really get to women who start to mistrust their own internal compass that tells them the difference between right and wrong.

Some women have said to me that if I condone the execution of this Norwegian guy I'm "just as bad as him" for condoning murder.

At what point did women start believing that retribution for a heinous crime is THE SAME THING as waking up one morning and deciding to massacre a load of young kids, or deciding to rape a four year old (countless examples of that on google, remember) or deciding to kill your wife (two a week in the uK alone, remember)

At what point did calling an END to the violence by no longer pandering to these men or pandering to the patriarchal courts and media become the SAME THING as committing a mass murder YOURSELF?

In Spain fairly recently a woman murdered the man who raped her 13 year old daughter. Her. 13. year. old. daughter. The fucking rapist-loving police and courts let him out of jail for three days for his birthday or something and he passed the mother on street, sneered at her and said "How's your daughter?" before going into a pub. THe woman followed him a short time later, poured kerosene all over him and lit a match right there in the pub.

She is now been locked up in a psychiatric hospital for "psychological evaluation"

Because, of course, it's not normal at all to want the rapist scum who raped your child, when she was still a child, off the face of the planet.

She's definitely mental

Doesn't she realize the point of jail is to Protect rapists? Silly woman.

You see, to men, any RETRIBUTION on the part of women NOT ALLOWED>

Men must be returned to society, allowed to rape again, to murder again, to be an example to younger men who will follow in their footsteps.

Most rapists only get to jail once they've raped a load of women.

So anyone who tells me I am "just as bad" as that Norwegian guy for saying I don't care about his motivations and think he should be stripped naked in the square and have rotten tomatoes thrown at him needs to DEFINE WHY retribution is JUST AS BAD as the crime itself.

I strongly believe that the current set-up we have, coupled with gratuitous media violence, and culture of masculinity, encourages these men.

But the BIGGEST problem of all is getting women to see that these men are not aberrations. THat massacres are a male "thing"

Why are you looking at this through the visor of misogyny though, rather than racism, Sakura? As you have said, this is specifically the act of a white male. He explicitly connects his actions to a political ideology, but you are dismissing this as the key factor, and are instead using this tragic event as a prop to hang your own world view onto- inappropriately and tastelessly, in my view.

We all know that men are more culturally conditioned to violence than women, and there are biological arguments that testosterone is associated with aggression. To extrapolate from this awful event that the root of it is a hatred of women is nevertheless fallacious and illogical, and frankly, I find it just as irritating as the wanker MRA on here who is trying to hang his agenda onto spurious news stories. In fact, your posts are worse, because they are co-opting actual deaths which are recent and painful. To exploit them to further a particular hobby horse is crass and insensitive, in my opinion.

Oh and to the person who said I had unresolved issues.

ON the other "In the News" thread somebody said I had "issues with men"

THis was my reaction:

Bahahaha! No SHIT sherlock. I do indeed have "issues with men", Especially men who massacre 92 innocent teenagers.

FFS is there any hope for women if a woman can be accused by another woman of having "issues with men" when she expresses horror at what men are doing.

Issues with men.
Fucking hell.

DO you NOT have issues with what men are doing to the world? THe rape of 4 year olds? THe daily murder of women and children? The mass-killings

Who is the sane one here? THe person who tries to pretend none of this is happening, or the person who has "issues" with it.

From what I've seen online, it's getting harder and harder to dupe women into believing that men who kill are anomalies.
It's simple: they have been trained from birth to kill and many carry out their script. Some don't, and as I said to BitofFun on the other thread, it is worth asking why not ALL men go on to fulfill the murderous destiny proscribed to them. TUrn on the TV tonight and there's a 100% chance you'll come across a man committing an act of violence. THis imprints onto the brains of boys, who of course turn into men.
If ANYONE gave a shit about protecting women and children from these men they would be thinking of making serious laws against what can be shown in the media.
INstead we have twats confusing "freedom of speech" with "freedom to live in a safe society"

Here are some excellent quotes I've found by what seems to be a growing number of women who refuse to put their heads in the sand:

"Let?s call it what it is. White male supremacy. But this dude is hardly an aberration, despite the media?s attempts to pass him off as a lone, crazed individual, as they always do. The Inquisition was not an aberration. The Crusades were not an aberration. The Nazis were not an aberration. Bosnia was not an aberration. The witch hunts were not an aberration. The Montreal Massacre was not an aberration. The Amish School shooting was not an aberration. The Luby?s Cafeteria massacre was not aberration. The KKK is not an aberration. The Roman, British and Spanish Empires were not aberrations. And neither are the wars in the Middle East. Cripes, how many aberrations do we need before we get that it?s not an aberration? And that white and other male supremacists come a dime a dozen? And how methodical and systematic their extermination is, whether it be by political, economic, religious or military means, or like this dude, just plain old guerrilla warfare? I mean, there?s a woman beaten every 9 seconds, raped every minute, and murdered every 15 minutes in the U.S. Is that an aberration too? Cripes, if it were any other group of people, we?d call it a holocaust. At what point does the media and we, as a society ask, ?What is wrong with men?!? instead of pretending like it?s some sort of aberration?

-------
And another

"His manifesto has been described as ?rambling and incoherent?. No it isn?t. It?s measured and controlled. He is not some ?lone wolf? but the physical embodiment of a group who are, white male supremacists, the ultimate in the patriarchy."

The Daily Fail (UK paper I?m not linking to) has the headline ?Mummy?s boy? to describe Breivik. Ah yes! Let?s find an ?oedipal? link somewhere and blame the women for this. It?s deflection. Breivik hated the so called ?feminisation? of men in Europe. His hatred for women is glaringly evident in his manifesto but this really shouldn?t be a surprise. It certainly isn?t to me.

------

"They (well at least his lawyer) is trying to write off ?this norwegian guy? as insane etc.

Hell no, he is functionaling perfectly under patriarchy. But patriarchy just want to distance themselves from the footsoldiers. Tuff shit, we see through that.

If this footsoldier wasn?t doing what he is supposed to, with more to follow, why the inane fascination with his ?motivations?. Who really gives a shit with his ?motivations?, shoot him dead, after some public humiliation. I don?t give a fuck what his ?motivations? are at all.

The meeja, the cops, everyone, should just stop fawning over his every syllable. Which boils down to ?poor privileged little rich white boy, can?t get girlfriend-stroke-doormat, takes it out on others claiming it to be some highbrow political motive. Don?t give a damn.

Oh, and I will take the meeja out the back to be shot after norwegian guy. Teh meeja are just encouraging the next crop of entitled dudes to wreck havoc."

Jolene@sakura I think you have some unresolved issues'
Good, strong, intelligent, well-made argument.

I think you should think about what 'patriarchy' means, how it functions and how it impacts men and women in society - especially before you lob in one of the 'feminist - you are the problem, your attitude is the problem' type of statement.

sakura I think you have some unresolved issues.

You say that mothers should 'kill their daughters' rapists' in a non-patriarchal society, which of course would be extremely civilised and much better for society. Also, Breivik is not a rapist.

I don't think lobbing tomatoes at a mass murderers genitals is the most effective form of punishment but of course, you have all the answers when it comes to criminal justice. After all, what most men really want is to rape and murder women, that is why the system protects men with the Golden Rules:

"The Rules of Patriarchy:

Men must not be held accountable for their behaviour under any circumstances.

Men must be protected from adequate punishment for their crimes."

Of course!

I'm sure Breivik won't be let off lightly by the patriarchy-is that what you are saying will happen? I wouldn't trust his view on any matter and it's pretty unsurprising that he is sexist, considering his other beliefs. What he has done is horrifying and I just don't agree that men are generally similar to him.

Going back to the OP, I think it's quite likely that what Breivik means is that the female members of his family tried to bring him up to be a caring and empathetic person, and that he considers these 'feminine' qualities to have been a hinderance to seeing out his duty to his cause by cold-bloodedly murdering innocent people.

Crikey Archie, you seem to have a lot of stats at your fingertips, you lucky thing. Can you link to the ones about women getting shorter sentences for comparable crimes?

The media is not run by "mostly women", have you seen the DG of the BBC recently, or the board of ITV, or the editors of (all?) national newspapers?

Is this another man one that is trying to discredit MN feminism? Posting to get a rise, waiting for the 'man-bashing' to appear?

Don't let the door... and all that.

Good. Bye!