George Sodini, Spree Killer and Misogynistic “Beta” Males

 

Jacqueline S. Homan

 

On August 4 2009, George Sodini shot up a gym full of women at an aerobic’s class before turning the gun on himself in the suburbs of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Within days of the shooting that left 3 women dead and 9 wounded, including the pregnant aerobics instructor, George Sodini’s online diary of his sexual frustration at being a “beta” male and his hatred for women and plans to go on a killing spree was made widely known.

Sodini was also a member the PUA community (Pick Up Artists) which advise men on how to lie/coerce/harass their way in between women’s legs (this is called “game.”) And it turns out that he had subscribed to huckster R. Don Steel’s seminars advising older beta males on how to “score” pretty young women that are young enough to be their daughters.

Unfortunately, there is a large pool of men out there with this entitlement attitude; and they’re mostly of the white and selfish middle to upper-middle class flavor.

One blog comprised of this “community” of males is riddled with over a thousand comments from men who hailed Sodini as a “hero” for teaching women a lesson: namely that not giving men — no matter how socially repulsive and hateful towards women — their “right” to sexual satisfaction, dead women are the “tax” society will have to pay. One poster, “Arpagus” said regarding Sodini:

I am calling him a hero for being a symbol for the consequences of denying men sex, not for killing those women. Obviously they didn’t personally deserve it. But something like this has to happen, perhaps hundreds of times over again, before feminists get the message. As Bhetti observed, it can easily go the other way and create more anti-male sentiment instead. There probably won’t be much sympathy, but maybe fear. From reading his blog it is so clear-cut that celibacy was the problem. (No wonder it has been taken down.) And even fear of the “nice guy” is an improvement. Fear can cause social change even if sexually frustrated men always will be met with the attitude that they don’t deserve to get laid and are basically human garbage as Bhetti believes.

I know the feminist media will try to emphasize his other issues and downplay the sexual frustration. Even so, his other issues mostly seem to result from an absent father (who was just a “sperm donor” in his words), and that is not supposed to be a problem according to the feminists either. So either way this is good press for the MRA movement.

These men all have one thing in common: they view women as “less than”, as objects less deserving of equal human and civil rights, and as something they have a “divine right” to.

One male poster, “whiskey”, who is probably only marginally slightly less selfish and Neanderthalic than the rest, said that men are not “investing in women” and this is the crux of the problem. But he still missed the boat. I responded with a post of my own. However, given that that blog is misogynist central and moderated, I don’t expect my reply to be published. Therefore, I am posting it here:

Viewing women as nothing more than reproductive chattel, as fuck holes that exist only for men’s benefit and sexual pleasure (while it’s to hell with our sexual pleasure, including our right to prevent unintended pregnancy which ruins our bodies and risks our health and lives — only to end up having to fight for child support); and viewing women as things to own instead of as equal partners of a species is not the way to “invest in women.

Treating women like the human beings we are whose needs and feelings matter is a damn good start. But I am not seeing that from any of the men posting here.

Instead, I am seeing women being called “cunts”, “bitches”, “cameltoes”, “jezebel twats”, and “dumbasses” along with other pejoratives — all which imply that women somehow deserve to be punished for being children of a lesser god, that we aren’t even human enough in these men’s eyes for any kind of harm to us to matter.

According to the most recent census data, there are 44 million Americans living below the federal poverty level — 84% whom are women. Many are ending up permanently disabled or dying prematurely for lack of access to basic resources and things like medical and dental care.

Jobs considered “women’s work” don’t pay enough to live on, yet women who aren’t “pretty and thin enough” who get left on the shelf have no choice but to work to support themselves, and often a child or two (thanks to mostly beta “pump and dumpers”), and we don’t get to pay less to do all that than a man.

Yet, the majority of men posting here want all the free sex they can get (from only the most perfect-looking young babes) while promoting job discrimination, imbalanced power relationships in marriage/divorce, and the impoverishment of all women, while us women get nothing in return — not even the benefit of a commitment and equal access to the marital assets, including the checking account, and something “extra” for us once in awhile even though the men are entitled to their young mistresses on the sly, their expensive toys and hobbies while we get nothing. And that is somehow “fair?”

Listen up misogynists and selfish nitwits of all stripes who bitch about not “getting any”: everything isn’t all about you.

There is a lot of prejudice against fat women, against plain-looking women, against older women, against poor people, and against disabled people. There is also a stereotype that assigns such people to the category of “unfucakable”, or at least, “asexual.”

Yet many of us who fall into one or more of those categories end up having fulfilling sex lives and marriages. Is everything a bed of roses? No. But no one has a perfect life. That’s an illusion; just like our “meritocracy” and the American Dream.

George Sodini and these Mens’ Rights Advocates and PUA’s are a large part of the problem, not so much the victims of it. They see women as commodities with which to attain a higher social status in our class-stratified capitalistic society — a “trophy” with which to keep score of their masculinity, not as human beings.

There is a serious disconnect between their hatred of women and their desire for women. But they only desire women as inanimate sex toys that double as “arm candy” to inflate their egos, and then they wonder why they can’t “score” with the women who they claim to hate. By being selfish and inconsiderate, they’ve made themselves “unfuckable.”

No woman wants to go to bed with a man who really doesn’t give a shit about her — not even enough to ensure she enjoys the sex too, and enough to respect her right to not risk unwanted pregnancy which puts her body, wellbeing and life 100% at risk, not the man’s. It does not matter how much or little he makes or how “fit and trim” he looks.

George Sodini had so much more than 80% of those in this country who struggle, suffer in poverty (one paycheck away from homelessness) without access to health and dental care, never mind a decent house and a car. He had more than most in America ever got/will get the chance to have. He had a six figure a year salary at a cushy job with health and dental benefits, a nice car, a house in a middle class area, and a net worth of $250,000.

How many women in poverty would love to have the privilege of a nice smile with their natural teeth, like George Sodini, but don’t due to a real lack of equal opportunity for middle class jobs with health and dental benefits and many women don’t find a middle class male willing to commit and provide her with that via his good job? Let’s put things into perspective here.

These men are not being sexually ghettoized because of being poor, disabled, or physically repulsive. It’s more likely that they’re not getting laid because they’re misogynists who treat women like meatpuppets they somehow feel “entitled” to “have”; rather than treating women like people. We as a society need to start evolving beyond this patriarchal privilege shit and treat each other with respect, as human beings worthy of love, affection, and sex — not as a “score” or as a special class who is “owed” something that others are somehow not. As for the element out there who consider certain classes of people as “unfuckable”, you don’t have to participate in that.

When your goal is not to meet people to get to know, talk with, hang out with and maybe sleep with, but instead just to meet someone “hot” to masturbate inside of; you’re not trying to meet a person. You’re trying to meet an object, a thing, a sperm receptacle. You’re not looking for a hot girlfriend because you find her interesting and sexually attractive. You’re looking for a disposable fuck trophy. There’s no deeper, more debased commodification than that. It is important to recognize the link between this commodification of every aspect of our lives, and especially of an entire group of people (women) within capitalism’s architecture of aggression and competitiveness which reduces our collective humanity.

 

"Divine Right: The Truth is a Lie", by Jacqueline S. Homan

 

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , ,

35 Responses to “George Sodini, Spree Killer and Misogynistic “Beta” Males”

  1. Larry Carter Center Says:

    Thank you MS Homan for a powerful posting to confront and wake up sex obsessed patriarchs.

    The unearned privileges these males demand and extort from both women and those without living wages were well described by your writing above.

    Real men don’t define themselves as dicks.

    Real women won’t be fooled to fuck these dicks.

    Real lovers take great care to join in health, happiness & sharing.

    The violent ignorant males you properly describe do not deserve to look, let alone touch feminine beauty.

    Beauty is in the love lovers share.

    Ugly is the theft of human capital.

    Patriarchy is a bower no person should walk under.

    Feminism is the natural world acknowledging that we are a nurturant species, as no single person exists without the love of a mother or the wrongful rape and coverup of a rape by others to the child of rape.

    Teaching this kind of class war of males against women and people for profit is the epitaph of our future failed species.

    Teaching and practicing love rather than rape ensures our species future.

    Those are the ideals I held in service to my nation as a USN vet.

    My liberty included the love from women for my kindness and respect.

    My two daughters have been taught to defend our species from the likes of misogynistic patriarchs so well described by MS Homan.

    843-926-1750 Larry Carter Center

  2. bondwooley Says:

    Thank you for sharing this – great reporting and a very important topic. And you’re right – there is a sense of entitlement among may men which not only leads them to blogs like the one you found, but influences every element of their life.

    If two people want to be “objects” for each other, so be it. But if it’s one-sided, it’s simply despicable.

  3. UnEasyOne Says:

    Astounding! But not surprising.

    I sincerely hope that the vast majority of those men were just blowing off steam. I myself have gone through some periods of real hostility toward women and I support men’s rights as well as women’s.

    Having said that, I’m glad you went to that site so I wouldn’t have to. I happen to know that you support fairness for men as well as women, so we can dispense with arguments about whether men have any legitimate grievances.

    I also want to mention in passing that there is a large number of women as rabidly anti-male as these men are anti-female; but you know this also.

    The kind of crap you highlight here begs for some kind of learned solution, but I sure as hell don’t have one. It is a sad fact of life that some men simply can’t get a woman. I have known some of those men, and frankly, they don’t deserve one. They are damned lucky there is such a thing as prostitution because that’s probably the only way they will ever have sex.

    I have also known men in solid, loving relationships that apparently had nothing to offer a woman but a kind heart. This is the key point that these men completely miss. Everyone has seen some guy with a girl and wondered how the hell THAT guy got THAT girl and vice-versa.

    A lot of us – myself definitely included – are damned lucky that there are a lot of women out there who are more interested in the content of a man’s character than such externals like looks, money, power and position.

    But you have to be a decent guy to get that kind of woman and that’s where those pathetic individuals completely miss the boat. I have been known to use that kind of jerk as a foil, going places with them and apologizing for their bad behavior. Stupid bastards never realized that I was actually getting the phone numbers of the women they offended; or if they did, they called me a pussy or something equally intelligent. It’s amazing so many of them eventually manage to breed.

    • Jacqueline S. Homan Says:

      Here’s the rub: George Sodini was not unattractive-looking. He made $120K/yr as a systems analyst. He had a paid-off house in an affluent Pittsburgh suburb and a net worth of $250K — all at the age of 48. He also had had a girlfriend at one time who had his baby, whom he never paid one dime in child support. He also paid $895 for one of snakeoil salesman Steele’s seminars plus over $500 for the guns and accessories he used to shoot up a gym.

      Yet, he would not pay for a hooker. Neither do any of these other socially inept men with more money than brains who likewise enrich hucksters like R. Don Steele.

      The reason is because in the PUA community, picking up a prostitute is verbotten. The whole idea in the PUA is for these asshats to deceive their way into women’s pants, but not just any woman — only those under age 35 who look like Playboy centerfolds or supermodels. They’re very specific.

      They don’t want a woman who is slightly overweight, or who is their own age or who is maybe only a “7” on a scale of 1-10. They want the Spring Break hottie that looks perfect in a thong bikini with perfect everything. They view getting these gorgeous girls as a measure of their status, to impress co-workers and bosses. But above all, they view getting to bag some perfect babe for just a one-night stand as some sort of warped revenge on behalf of all dudery.

      They’re not interested in getting women to have a relationship, and a marriage. They’re not interested in forming relationships with less-than perfect looking women who might truly fall in love with them.

      Also, some of the comments on that blog I linked to in my article, actually said that “alpha fucks” (men who are getting the women, regardless of looks or wallet size) asked for it when “beta males shoot up the joint and kill half a dozen people.”

      If the Men’s Rights/PUA community was really about helping socially awkward men develop healthier self-esteem by teaching them how to read non-verbal communication, how to develop emotional maturity and empathy, and helping them to realize that women are people just like they are people, I would wholly support them. But that’s not what they’re doing. They’re taking advantage of these poor saps’ character flaws and fueling their ineptitude and their hatred for women for a princely sum.

      • UnEasyOne Says:

        I’m kinda gobsmacked.

        I’m no plaster saint by any means, but this is so nonsensical as to make my mind reel with arguments that “This just can’t be so!” If I had the slightest doubt of your veracity, however, I would check it out for myself – and I don’t. Nor do I want to descend into that pit.

        I keep trying to think of another way to say “I believe you, but I don’t believe this!

        You know, I am thinking that a good investigative report on these jerks is just the kind of thing that a number of publications would be happy to pay for. Somebody’s gonna do it, and I would prefer that it be done by somebody who actually likes sane men.

        Just be careful.

        I know that as an author, you probably get dozens of suggestions a week about what you should write, so not to worry if you blow this off; I won’t be offended in the slightest. still, I think it’s something I would like to see that you could do well.

  4. UnEasyOne Says:

    I got interrupted by an unhappy baby (stay-at-home dad) mid-comment before I got to the most important part.

    I can wrap my head around the notion of some crazy SOB killing a lot of women. We get used to that kind of thing in this society. But it’s really hard for me to accept the notion that some supposedly sane men actually cheer for that kind of atrocity.

    Even when you know they are true, it is sometimes virtually impossible to accept that such things are real. That diminishes all men, myself included.

    • Jacqueline S. Homan Says:

      These types of incidents are why a lot of women live in fear every day, and often snub the harmless guy with honorable intentions. But the tragic thing that most people overlook is the classism behind it. The men doing this have all mentioned things like “status” in connection with scoring the “10” (even though they have no intention on keeping her). We live in a predation nation where socially awkward men such as these become psychopaths and hateful because our class-stratified society reinforces in every way what kind of looks we should all have, where we need to be on the socio-economic ladder in order to not be “losers”, and what body types and looks our dating and marriage partners should have so that we’re not socially shunned. That, my friend, is more of an indictment against capitalism than against all dudehood. These men are victims, too. And they’re being fleeced for lots of money by snakeoil salesmen profiting from their frustrations.

      • UnEasyOne Says:

        My comment below was intended as a reply to this.

        Decent men fear for the safety of the women they care for also. We couldn’t keep you in purdah if we wanted to – and women who have never been the victims of stranger violence are all to often blithely unconcerned about the possibility.

        My attractive wife walks our baby around the neighborhood almost daily – which makes her doubly vulnerable. If she had ever been the victim of some terrible violence, I am sure she would be willing to gouge out an eye or whatever else would be necessary to protect herself and our baby. I would. But she says she couldn’t.

        It’s because until it has happened, you don’t really believe it can, deep down. Scares the hell out of me.

    • Larry Carter Center Says:

      it is easy to “get your head around” men cheering for violence against women when you see the millions of dollars paid for snuff films, extreme bondage against women films and read the details of FBI and local murder files of one dead woman or another…. just to not leave out gay serial killers and mass murderers, don’t forget Jeffrey Dahmer and John Wayne Gacy. As for Ted Bundy, the debate is still on whether he was a power and control freak acting out hatreds for his mom and sisters or not….it is easy to see how pedophiles from the Vatican on down actually fight for the right to rape girls and boys while hiding behind clerical garb and divine rights….I freely confess to cheering in the theatre when Glenn Close shot to death Jeff Bridges in “Jagged Edge.” The score on women fighting back against males who kill with sex as a ploy is sorely very low for women and very high for males.

  5. Larry Carter Center Says:

    it’s nice to see some thoughtful men weigh in on this, but let’s get to the fundamental issue: do males have a right to sex with women? The King James Bible and thousands of fundie churches teach millions of men and dupe women and girls into saying “yes.” The Quoran and Hindu, Buddhist and Sikh societies are saying falsely yes. When the answer is no. If men could get yeast infections, endometrosis, pregnant, ovarian cysts or just get accustomed to being fucked vaginally or anally would they say yes? We are nurturant mammals who have evolved to care for young, care for one another and care for the elderly and infirm. All of this does not include sexual intercourse as a”‘right” of males from females. It all boils down to negotiation. It all boils down to equality. If men had accurate empathy with women, they’d count their lucky stars when women ask them for love as I have for the last 40 years. If any guy thinks he “seduced” her he’s an incompetent fool. Either he date raped her with or without booze, dope or false promises of money, vasectomies or marriage or he was lucky she found him attractive and she was deciding to allow his external organ into her internal organ. All the liars and scam artists who want men to pay for “how to score with babes” are just plain fools if not evil misogynists wanting institutional support for their objectification of women

  6. UnEasyOne Says:

    Okay, not all dudehood.

    And capitalism undoubtedly plays it’s part. Even a big part. It had a lot to do with imbuing these weasels (my apologies to the entire rodent family) with their false sense of entitlement and absurd facade of superiority hiding those enormous inferiority complexes.

    But I have known this same kind of guy in considerably worse economic stratum and seen that same sense of entitlement before (“Once a chick gets me all hot and bothered, I’m gonnna get me some pussy, period – if I have to take it.” That’s pretty nearly a direct quote.) It isn’t that uncommon, I hate to say.

    What is shocking and unusual is the organized part, for which capitalism, I agree is entirely to blame. This organization apparently provides a rationale or “philosophy” (and I use the term advisedly), an in group for camaraderie, and, I’m betting, a forum for the braggart. That they are being manipulated and provided cover by the organizers is the capitalist evil, but I don’t think, personally, that capitalism created these assholes – any more than a gun creates a mafiosi.

    Maybe we aren’t really disagreeing here, so much. I’m sure if we are, you’ll let me know. 😉

    • Jacqueline S. Homan Says:

      No, we’re not disagreeing at all. 🙂 The organized part is the part that legitimizes and normalizes and justifies the indefensible. I probably poorly worded that sentence on “all dudehood” because what I was trying to say was that it is unfair that all dudehood gets the blame for shit like this, when it should be our pro-predator culture that actually promotes predation for a buck that gets scrutinized.

      • UnEasyOne Says:

        I think a lot of it starts with all the artificial barriers that our culture puts between boys and girls almost from infancy and the useless and counterproductive antisex brainwashing that literally begins from infancy.

        Since it is known that, on average, the better sex education children receive, the later they experience intercourse and the less likely they are to have negative consequences like unwanted pregnancy. Let somebody like me (as a younger, unmarried, much hornier man) who studied sex and the female body and responses with more enthusiasm than I ever mustered for another, get my hands on some ignorant girls body and I could get her so hot, she was an ex-virgin before she knew what hit her. Although they are often completely unaware of the fact, I don’t think there is anything in the universe hornier than a virgin. If there is, I don’t want to meet it in the dark.

        Even when I was younger, ethics demanded that I pass on some of these opportunities, but – and this is key – I wasn’t taught this ethic, I had to develop it on my own on an ad-hoc basis. People got bruised in the process.

        I think boys and girls should be encouraged to socialize together and separately in an environment set up to be as loosely structured – but structured so they all do socialize – and loosely supervised (with classes outside or in dirfferent environments to whatever degree possible – but well enough supervised so that everyone is safe. I think this should actually be a class – with sex ed as an integral component. And ethics.

        I think this environment would produce a lot fewer of these wackos, and fewer women who have no judgment about whom to trust and so trust no one or delight in teasing or just never learn to see boys/men as human beings with feelings that can be hurt. (Largely because boys are taught not to show any feelings – but they are still there.)

        A girl with hurt feelings tends to cry and feel sad. A boy tends to get angry. If he gets more of that kind of treatment, he stays mad and blames the girls he wants so badly and can never touch. So he wants revenge, and not necessarily from any harm that was actually intended – because the girls involved often are simply in a defensive mode brought on by the male in the first place!

        Whew!

        The only way that cycle can be broken is early, through education.

        As long as things are the way things stand now in our society, we will keep turning out these psychopaths – and there will be predators there to manipulate the saps for a buck and train them to be more effective psychopaths.

        Or you could turn over a rock and see if they shrivel in the sunlight.

  7. UnEasyOne Says:

    I omitted a phrase in the first sentence of the second paragraph. It should read”

    Since it is known that, on average, the better sex education children receive, the later they experience intercourse and the less likely they are to have negative consequences like unwanted pregnancy, it is past time to remedy the situation.

    It’s remotely possible that makes sense now.

    Gonna fire my editor, lol.

    • Jacqueline S. Homan Says:

      Your editor is better than this guy’s (women are poor so they’re easy prey):

    • UnEasyOne Says:

      Sears and Macy’s? Wow! I’m so impressed!

      Graduated from what? I can’t imagine.

      And I reread that last comment again. My thought was coherent. Somehow the coherent part just never quite made it on to the page, lol.

      The second sentence of that second paragraph is also screwed up. Should read …another subject

      What can I say? I was very sleepy.

  8. World Wide News Flash Says:

    George Sodini, Spree Killer and Misogynistic “Beta” Males ……

    I found your entry interesting do I’ve added a Trackback to it on my weblog :)…

  9. epppie Says:

    This is a brilliant discussion of aspects of the relationship between predatory capitalism/patriarchy and misogyny, as well as a window into a horrifying sector of the internet that I wouldn’t have been able to imagine existed, before reading this … a place where a horrific and insane crime is applauded. Your input to that site comes off as a brave attempt to inject some sanity into a place of insanity.

    It isn’t just the rich guys who sometimes have these feelings of needing to victimize women in order to prove their own manhood. I’ve been just as shocked at the way some poor guys talk about women, such things as boasting about how many children they have sired with various women, clearly not involved in taking care of them, in caring about either the women or the children. Either way, rich or poor, it’s surely got a lot to do with predatory capitalism/patriarchy and the attitudes/complexes it fosters – objectification, commodification, status-based anxieties, etc..

    Such angry men may not be wrong in feeling like victims; but they are clearly wrong in terms of who they are seeking to blame. This can be seen as another permutation of the divide and conquer strategies of predatory capitalism. There is no victim so weak and oppressed that they cannot find another victim, still more oppressed, to blame. Few, it seems, blame those with MORE power, rather than LESS power, as basic commonsense would surely suggest that they do. Always it is someone or some group of people with less power who must be blamed – immigrants, muslims, blacks, women, poor people, socialists …

    But it may important to recognize that many or most men have or have experienced being tormented by agonies, true agonies, over their masculine standing, and over sexual aspects of it in particular. The system of predatory capitalism instills profound anxiety in men (as it does in women), and women play a role in this system, which afterall affects the way they think about life too, just as men do, often validating socalled “alpha males”, while invalidating males who are perceived to be lesser. It isn’t just being a socially repulsive person that gets someone ignored, disregarded, treated as invisible. In fact, it is often the most socially repulsive who are most validated, in an ugly circle of objectification/commodification all too common in social settings. We are all familiar with the ‘alpha male’ who is a total, using jerk, who seems to attract women in droves, as compared to the ‘lesser male’, very likely also a jerk, who is treated as though he does not exist, and should he ever attempt to cross the invisible barrier between himself and the ladies, is attacked, humiliated, perhaps even subjected to unfair accusations.

    It’s a good idea to recognize that social dynamics are participated in by all. Men must take the biggest role in seeking their own healing, but women have a role to play too. Social rejection can be a very damaging, even devastating form of aggression, and it can lead to dysfunctional behavior in the target, which then becomes the retroactive justification for the social rejection.

    Both men and women seek to overcome their embedded anxieties (am I good enough or will I die), while enhancing their social standing, by using other men and women. Much of the time they don’t even know they are doing it. They just think ‘this is what men do’, ‘this is what women do’, ‘this is what people do’…

  10. Jacqueline S. Homan Says:

    epppie,

    You’re absolutely right in pointing out the damaging effects of social rejection. But there’s something important that needs to be said here.

    When was the last time a fat, middle-aged woman from the lower socio-economic rung (those who suffer a disproportionate amount of social rejection on all levels) went into a fitness center and shot up a room full of unarmed men on the treadmills, or a corporate executive office full of men?

    I’d be willing to bet that if such an incident were to occur, such a woman would get zero sympathy, much less open support. Yet a lot of men feel sorry for the George Sodinis of the planet and even iconize them, while having NO sympathy for the innocent women Sodini shot — three whom he killed weren’t even the “babes” he resented; they were older women (ages 38, 46, and 49).

    When was the last time a long-term unemployed overweight woman over age 35 went on a killing spree after an entire lifetime of getting nothing but shit on by everybody else — from prospective employers to prospective dates to the cad who got her pregnant and dumped her without paying any child support — and killed a bunch of innocent people after leaving a misandrist axe-grinding litany online for the world to read?

    What about the fact that it’s the male half of the species that are much more violent (on average) and physically stronger than their female counterparts?

    I’m not calling for emasculating men here, but I am calling for men to use their larger size and greater physical strength in a more socially responsible manner: to put those abilities to work in striving for a more fair, humane, and sane society.

    How many males have to completely plan their entire day for every day of their lives around taking precautions to try avoiding becoming another rape and murder statistic?

    One in five women are raped in the US. They not only have to fear getting an incurable, or even deadly, STD; they have to worry about ending up pregnant too. In the wake of “fetal personhood” laws and “conscience clause” laws enacted in 47 contiguous states have resulted in poor female rape victims being denied timely access to emergency contraception, prescription contraceptives, and abortion.

    Pregnancy is bad enough on women’s bodies, health and wellbeing when its desired and planned. But to have to go through that as the result of a brutal rape by force of law? Do men have to live in fear because of this kind of crap?

    Living while female (and a rape survivor, BTW) in the US has taught me that:

    (a) I can’t walk alone on the street after dark (which makes getting/keeping a second-shift job difficult if a woman is poor and has no car and depends on public buses) because if I do, and I end up attacked by a serial killer or rapist, society automatically holds that it is my fault for not being “careful enough.”

    (b) I can’t talk any old way I please to a man after he disses me because I’ll probably get the crap beat out of me, but because men are stronger, they can talk any old way they please to women (calling us cunts, jezebel twats,dumb bitches, etc) and as a woman, I’m just supposed to “suck it up” and take it.

    (c) I am less “deserving” of a good job and a decent life for being born the wrong gender in the bottom socio-economic class.

    (d) All men are entitled to have sex with only the “9’s and 10’s” and nothing less will do, but a fat/older/unattractive woman is supposed to just remain uncomplainingly celibate and lonely and poor while NOBODY cares at all.

    (e) No matter what personal qualities, talents, and skills I may have, I will always be valued solely on my looks and age — regarding job opportunities, writing gigs, and dating/marriage chances.

    • Kim Short Says:

      When I heard about George Sodini in the news, I immediately thought of the fictional character General Jack D. Ripper from the movie, “Dr. Strangelove.” General Ripper tried to start World War III after discovering that he could no longer get an erection. You couldn’t say that in a movie in 1964 but it was clearly alluded to when General Ripper explained to his executive officer that “during the physical act of love” he “experienced a profound fatigue…a loss of essence.” He then protected his ego by emphasizing “I assure you it has never reoccurred.”

      America’s steroid obsessed culture has been transforming ordinary men into bitter lunatics for a very long time.

  11. World Wide News Flash Says:

    George Sodini, Spree Killer and Misogynistic ?Beta? Males…

    I found your entry interesting do I’ve added a Trackback to it on my weblog :)…

  12. boy next door Says:

    Went on dates once, never felt “entitled”, got drummed out of the dating
    game and it is better for everyone that I am alone and stay that way. I am
    not a danger to anyone, so you can call me “loser” and feel superior, but
    your dating game is very unfair and full of double standards.
    Please call the ‘GAME’ what it really is!

    • Jacqueline S. Homan Says:

      The “dating game” is unfair to women, too. Ask any “beta” female how they’ve been treated by the “pump and dumpers” trying to be alpha males when all they really were, were alpha dipshits. I could get into the whole Marxist theory behind my view of how badly the dating game sucks for both men and women, but…you probably wouldn’t be interested because ::gasp”” heaven forbid a godless Commie like me attempts some serious discourse on the matter.

  13. Michael Says:

    Lest we forget George Sodini may have had undiagnosed Asperger Syndrome. Had he been to a therapist, he may have found answers. If Sodini had been 15 in 2009 instead of 48, he would have been diagnosed.

  14. boy next door Says:

    Maybe, in a way, George Sodini WAS a hero, since we are actually talking about this now, in a manner that should prevent this kind of desperate
    sullen loneliness from an impossible game. Maybe Ms. Homan is not such a “Commie Marxist” after all.

  15. Jual Beli Harga Logam mulia terkini Says:

    Harga Emas…

    […]George Sodini, Spree Killer and Misogynistic “Beta” Males « Feminism — The Other "F" Word[…]…

  16. nfs world boost Says:

    Nice blog here! Also your website a lot up very fast! What web host
    are you using? Can I get your affiliate hyperlink on your host?
    I desire my web site loaded up as fast as yours lol

  17. aksesoris suzuki ertiga Says:

    I do not drop a comment, however I browsed some responses on this page George
    Sodini, Spree Killer and Misogynistic Beta Males
    | Feminism — The Other “F” Word. I do have 2 questions for you if you do not mind.
    Could it be just me or do some of the comments look like they are written by brain dead folks?
    😛 And, if you are writing at additional online social sites,
    I would like to keep up with everything fresh you have to
    post. Could you post a list of the complete urls of your shared pages like your Facebook page,
    twitter feed, or linkedin profile?

  18. General Poster Says:

    I pay a visit each day a few web pages and sites to
    read articles, however this weblog presents feature based content.

  19. Bill Says:

    Mr Sodini should have given up on women long before he snapped. If I were him I would have adopted a pet, made my home super comfortable and enjoyed life. He was fighting a battle that he could not win and it drove him crazy. I believe that he said that 100 women had told him he was a nice guy but they were not interested. That is overwhelming evidence that there is no point in pursuing women. Had he given up on women he would have experienced great serenity and he would not hate women..rather he would be glad that his futile struggle was over

    • Jacqueline S. Homan Says:

      I don’t think anybody should spend time and energy obsessing over their attractiveness and “pursuing” anybody. Some shit is just best left to spontaneity. In other words, if the chemistry happens then it happens. Great. If not, oh well.

      I saw George Siding’s pics and his video diary after the shootings. George Sodini was not an ugly-looking, repulsive guy. He certainly was no Harrison Ford or Robert Redford. Just like most women are not Pamela Anderson or Angelina Jolie. So he probably gave off some very bad vibes that had absolutely nothing to do with his looks or the fact that he had a prestigious high-paying job.

      There’s an old saying that goes something like this: “If one person calls you an ass, ignore it. If 2 people call you an ass, take a minute to reflect and examine yourself. But if 3 or more people call you an ass, it’s time to invest in a saddle.”

      I don’t know who all the women were that told George Sodini that they thought he was a nice guy but that they were not interested in him romantically. I also don’t know what kind of vibes he might have given off when he approached them. What I do know is what clues were left behind in his diary. And unfortunately, those clues do not reveal a very nice person.

  20. Keith Patti Says:

    If I may add my two cents:

    I’ve left a comment like this on boards before and this board will be no exception.

    As a man who most men would consider “beta” (average height, not “strikingly” good looking, a bit overweight, shaved head, middle-class, etc.), I can tell you that I, representing that population, do NOT consider myself “entitled” to sex. In fact, there probably, at least in theory, are more men than we all think who genuinely WANT a relationship and not merely sex. The problem is what we’re told and what we see.

    Told: Either by “Ron Louis & David Copeland” or “David D’Angelo” or any other self-proclaimed “dating expert” (or “dating coach”), men are told some variations of the following: “be confident”, “be a master seducer”, “the laws of attraction”, “how to make her find you irresistible” and the list of clichés goes on….Now, bear in mind, these alleged “dating experts” assume every man reading their (ahem) “tips” has an equal chance of success, regardless of their appearances (Louis & Copeland even make a point of saying “[We’ve coached handsome men, ugly men, rich men, poor men]”), their socioeconomic classes, their personalities, etc. I think even the movie “Hitch” is kind of a satire of “dating coaches” when Eva Mendes falls for the Kevin James character just as he is instead of anything Will Smith told him in the same vein as “She’s Out of My League”‘s Molly telling her (self-proclaimed unworthy) suitor “You were always good enough for me but you weren’t good enough for you.” So, in other words, it’s either preached (verb intended) by dating coaches wanting to sell their services, or a theme in film, that any man can win the girl, since it’s pleasant to think about and…to some extent that’s true and to another extent it’s wishful thinking, which leads to my next point.

    Women choose men much more arbitrarily than men do, and I think we can all agree to that. Here’s an example. It’s a text of a conversation I had with my friend, Taylor, regarding horror films that she’s into.

    Taylor: “I’m getting too picky to be honest with you. It takes a lot to make me enjoy a horror movie lately.
    I know what I’m looking for in my head but I can’t figure out what it is exactly lol.”

    Keith: “Right.
    Can I be honest? You just described women’s outlook on dating lol.”

    Taylor: “LMAO yeah basically.
    That’s 400% true.”

    Keith: “Um excuse me…..
    You mean 400,000% true
    Smh..
    Lol”

    Isn’t that so true what she said? “I know what I’m looking for in my head but I can’t figure out what it is exactly” and SHE AGREED! How often does it happen that a woman actually agrees with a man regarding dating? Very rarely I would think, so, doesn’t this really say a lot about how women choose their boyfriends? They know they have a “type”, yet, can’t figure it out, and thus, will form a sexual relationship with the one man(en) they “feel it”. Very arbitrary.

    Men, speaking for myself, too, know to whom they’re attracted because women do such a good job of telling them by virtue of the fact voluntarily competing in bikini pageants, modeling, and making it a point to look a certain way (e.g. better than their peers, I mean), yet, complain how much they’re judged for their looks….I’ll set that contradictory societal expectation that women have aside for the moment, but, the point I’m making is at least women can do what they can to improve their appearances and have the satisfaction that they’ll be rewarded for that by dinner offers (aka dates) or at least attention, whereas, men, per the above paragraph, are at the mercy of the sentence “I know what I’m looking for in my head but I can’t figure out what it is exactly” so it’s far less likely that even if a man were to improve his physique (let’s just use that as an example) and could be cast as an underwear model, let’s say, he’d be as guaranteed to have a girlfriend he chooses as a woman would be to have a boyfriend she chooses. It’s really the lingering dynamic of women waiting to be asked out, choosing which one she wants out of that population (e.g. suitors), and choosing another one once she no longer “feels it”, hence, why women initiate more divorces than men (well, aside from divorce settlements but that’s another issue).

    Anyway, so we’re told bullshit by “dating experts”; we’re at the mercy of something we have no control over; we have to watch men find very attractive women as dating partners for no more concrete reason than “we just clicked”, so, as we age and get more and more separated from beautiful, young women, you can see why we’re a little frustrated. It’s not about believing we’re “entitled” to sex….We’re just entitled to the truth, and, to rip off Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson, yes, we can “handle the truth”.

    • Jacqueline S. Homan Says:

      You said the operative word: “experts.” (And yes, “bullshit experts” is an accurate observation.) A favorite saying of mine: “An ‘expert’ is someone who has been over-educated beyond their mental capacity.”

      That said, it is also very very hard to find someone you will “click with” in person in an era where most people have a soundbyte attention span, and are more connected w/ their technical gadgets than they are to and with other people in “real space”, if you get me.

      As for those other men who are finding partners because they “just clicked”, a huge part of that “clicking” is being as caring about her as a person and as interested in her and what’s important to her as you would want her to be about you. Now, that’s not a recipe that will guarantee you 100% success or guarantee you that you will end up dating the beautiful, younger women you want (to the exclusion of all other women – even those whom you may be a lot more compatible with for the long term). Nothing in life is guaranteed (other than death). Anyone who tells you otherwise is full of more bullshit than a Texas cattle ranch.

      But what I am telling/advising you for free here is a good rule of thumb.

      Women – just like men – are people. Not some prize to be won like the big brass ring on a carousel. Part of that “clicking” is caring about the other person’s feelings.

      Just my two cents.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: