Elliot Rodger was bad for feminism in the same way that 9/11 was bad for Neo-Cons

LJ_Reloaded

バクスター の
Joined
Apr 3, 2010
Posts
21,217
When Elliot Rodger went on his rampage that killed 2 women and 4 men in 2014, and when terrorists attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001, feminism and Neo Conservatism reacted in the same way, to equally disastrous results. That is to say, the formula behind their reaction was the same, but the inputs going into the formula were different, as is the sheer scale.

The formula for both feminism and Neo-Conservatism was this: when an attack happens and people are killed, declare a state of emergency, and start a campaign of fear and hate against a massively broad group of people associated with the perpetrators behind the attack. The attack that got people killed was Elliot Rodger’s rampage for the feminists, and 9/11 for the Neo-Conservatives. The broad group of people associated with the perpetrators behind the attack was men for feminists, and Muslims for Neo-Conservatives. The difference in scale is obvious: feminists have waged a media campaign of war against men in America, best known as #YesAllWomen and their disdain for “Not All Men Are Like That”. Neo-Conservatives, meanwhile, have done far worse: they pushed the lie that Islam is the Religion of War, and backed it up by lying about Saddam Hussein to launch a war against Iraq, in which the US Military carried out the direct and indirect (by means of de-stabilizing Iraq) deaths of hundreds of thousands of Muslims, the vast majority of whom were innocent, along with the torture and unjust imprisonment of Muslims and even merely suspected Muslims in various places around the world (most famously, Guantanamo Bay).

At first, Neo-Conservatives were quite successful. Nobody wanted to hear about how Not All Muslims Are Like That. They won elections on their platform of Islamophobia and dominated both Congress and the White House for half of the first decade of the 21st century. Up until 2006, their agenda was unquestionable. Until, suddenly, it was questioned, and the protests swelled, and the war became an albatross around the GOP’s neck. And so the GOP lost Congress in 2006, and the White House in 2008. (The current GOP that is in charge is not the Neo-Conservatives, but a more rabidly racist, misogynist and corporate state-ist group: the Tea Party mindset.)

Feminism followed the same formula and has suffered the same consequences, except that their popularity never surged, except in the media. The media has completely silenced all the evidence that Elliot Rodger was not a MRA (including the fact that he wanted to kill all the men, and that he killed 4 men and only 2 women), and has waged an endless war to prop up feminism and to denigrate men. It has never been a more profitable time to pick up a megaphone and demonize men as America’s next big terroristic threat, and feminists are calling for men to be put under curfew or even thrown in internment camps, all without any mainstream media criticism. And, of course, feminists and the media are deeply offended when they hear the truth that Not All Men Are Like That. But the polls show a declining support for feminism - most Americans believe in gender equality but after Elliot Rodger’s rampage only 20% of Americans wanted to be associated with feminism. A year later? Only 18%. In England? Only 7%.

This has a precedent in history as well. Remember what happened when the Japanese hit Pearl Harbor in 1941 and we went to war? Same formula, different magnitude. No one wanted to hear how Not All Japanese Are Like That back then, either. The same went for Germans during World War I.
 
Back
Top