Monday, 23 July 2012

Thoughts on the Aurora Joker


In the UK, we still know very little about the Aurora Batman massacre or its perpetrator. This gives us the opportunity to make a few predictions about him, to be ‘reality-tested’ at some future date.


I predict that James Eagan Holmes will be:

  • Single – not married or in a relationship.
  • Sexually disenfranchised – that is, not in a sexual relationship.  In truth, he will probably be a virgin.
  • Deeply disillusioned – his life never ‘lived up to its promise’.
  • A mercenary – one of the new breed of Anglo-American men who are (or become) indifferent to 'mainstream' society and its misandrist values.
  • Alienated – he will have no (or very few) deep relationships with other people.
  • A nerdy, high-IQ individual of the type typically shunned by Anglo women.
  • He will exhibit no sign of organic brain-disease. He will, however, be labelled mentally ill.
  • He will hail from a middle-class or affluent working-class background.
In sum, this man will embody the ‘male crisis’ discussed by so many Anglo-American MRAs. He will be a white, middle-class individual who – prior to the massacre – conformed to societal standards in every way. He cracked the books, respected women and strove to advance himself – and ended up with no sex, no home, no job and no future. Poltroons like David Futrelle visit college campuses telling young men to accept the feminist message – pedestalize women, shun masculinity and conform to approved modes of aspiration (formal education, essentially). The problem with this sage advice is that conformity no longer pays off for Anglo-American men. Males who subscribe to such rubrics get no sex, no money, no public respect and (despite advanced qualifications) little meaningful employment.


Young men who slavishly conform to the misandrist agendas inherent in the Anglosphere eventually find themselves trapped in what British psychiatrist R D Laing called a ‘double bind’ – a contradictory situation where all avenues lead to failure. Instead of being applauded for their conformity, they find themselves despised and scorned for it. While snarling, illiterate thugs monopolize all the sexual action, the Anglo conformist finds himself in a blind-alley of lifelong sexual frustration. While posturing rappers and sadistic jocks rake in millions, many highly-educated males who ‘did the right thing’ end up flipping burgers for a pittance (as James Holmes did).


From what little I have seen of the news footage, it is clearly the toxic blend of knee-jerk misandry and female pedestalization we all expect from the American media. Reports tirelessly praise the female victims – their selflessness, intelligence and vivacity. For example, Jessica Ghawi is universally lauded as a female saint while (somewhat predictably) the male victims hardly merit a mention. With fearful zest, the tragedy has been twisted into an anti-male circusThe only males with positive write-ups are the three White Knights  who died 'shielding their women' from Holmes' bullets. The well-worn feminist double-standard at work, here: men are unwanted except as workhorses, ATM machines, cannon-fodder and now, bullet-proof vests. What clearer proof do we need that the Anglosphere’s ‘default setting’ is misandry – and that men who conform to it are fools?

Oddly, the killer’s behaviour prior to the massacre (dropping out of his doctoral programme) suggests he had belatedly discerned this truth. Further, his adoption of the Joker’s persona implies identification with the anti-heroic, since the Joker is ‘mainstream’ society’s relentless foe. Perhaps the atrocity was an attempt to express his new identity in the most adversarial manner possible. In a culture where manhood is reflexively vilified at every turn, troubled minds will clutch at any archetype containing the least shred of masculine self-worth.




PS: I see David Futrelle has produced a 'pussified' version of Anglobitch. Such incisive barbs... such cutting irony... for a moment there I was, uh, humbled by the brilliance of his wit. Charlie Chaplin, Peter Cook and the Monty Python team will doubtless be looking to their laurels.


What a tosser, as the English would say.



51 comments:

  1. Watching the coverage on CBS evening news here.. there was an interview with one of the doctors at the ER that handled the injured. with odd questions. Its a female doctor. "How do you prepare for such cases". "How did it feel to handle all the injured?". etc etc eventually the female doctor starts shedding tears. So this is primary thing we want our doctors to demonstrate.. tears.
    Feelings.. feelings.. feelings. Fucked up society.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Matriarchal societies are strongly prone to mass hysteria. I'll write about it some time.

    ReplyDelete
  3. We shall have to wait and see, but I can say this: when I heard of the Hungerford Massascre in 1987 I was abroad with my girlfriend and predicted (knowing none of the details) that the man was a loner who lived with his Mother. Such proved to be the case.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Rookh:
    So far, in America, what's managed to seep to through the media filters has confirmed all your predictions; the 'mentally ill' prediction hasn't been determined---but given all the planning and calculation that went into this attack, I doubt that organic brain disease is a factor either.

    This article really dovetails nicely into one of your earlier ones: we're seeing the 'Ugly Realities' of America on full display here.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rookh:
    'Matriarchal socieites are always prone to hysteria.'

    I can't but notice the differences in the national reactions between these incidents in America and Norway contrasted with the more masculine societies' reactions. Look how India reacted to the Mumbai Massacre or Russia reacted to Breslan. Their governments didn't sit around seeking 'closure'. They immediately indentified the problems in their societies and attacked the source of the problem.

    ReplyDelete
  6. And perhaps feminists are going to explain his actions by referring to the "patriarchy" and the "male gender role" which "fosters aggressiveness" rather than communication. The solution? More feminism.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I loved how the media praised the 3 "white knights" who died protecting their girlfriends. All of these guys were in their 20's and did what society told them they are "supposed to do" protect women at all costs.

    Rookh is right when he says,

    "The well-worn feminist double-standard at work, here: men are unwanted except as workhorses, ATM machines, cannon-fodder and now, bullet-proof vests. What clearer proof do we need that the Anglosphere’s ‘default setting’ is misandry – and that men who conform to it are fools?"

    ReplyDelete
  8. I noticed besides the mention of the 3 young guys who decided to be meat shields...the news once again highlighted women and children deaths without mentioning the other men at all. U.S society at its finest. Those 3 disposed of themselves as society demands and only they receive recognition whereas the other men who simply went out to enjoy the new Dark Knight movie received none..and I am referring to the injured ones.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I also read an article by some woman on the Good Men Project praising those three slain White Knights. As I understand it, the GMP is supposed to be liberal and progressive. It seems that the 'men are only useful as bullet-fodder' perspective is alive and well among progressive feminists, not just 'mainstream' America. It makes one wonder about the ulterior meaning of words like 'liberal' and 'progressive' in a feminist context. As I have always said, Anglo feminists like gender-equality in areas where it suits them - employment and education. When bullets start flying, however, all notions of gender equality are instantly forgotten.

      Delete
  9. Roughneck Jase24 July 2012 at 21:33

    Interesting article, Rookh. I agree with what you said about the US media potraying the three men who became "meat shields" for their girlfriends as "heroes" and not saying anything about the other men who were injured or killed in the shooting and putting the female victims and survivors up on a pedistal.

    On another note, Rookh. Has the British media been using this tragic event to take a swipe at the gun laws of the US and to gloat about Britain's gun laws? The reason why I'm asking is because Australia's media outlets and politicians (both past and present) have been using this event to gloat about how "great" Australia's gun laws are and how they have made Australia a "safer" place than America. In reality, Australia's gun laws has not created the "safer society" that its supporters say and it has led to the criminals becoming better armed over the past 16 years due to these laws.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Rookh:
    Yesterday after the authorities recovered the suspect's computer, they promptly announced that he had visited pornographic websites.

    American neo-puritanism and radical feminism: a matching pair.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As a sexually-disenfranchised, middle-class guy who acted out his frustrations with violence, Holmes is an ideal target for femcon hysteria. Watch a whole circus full of misandrist, puritanical bile spew forth from the lame-stream media over the next few weeks, in which ALL American men (apart from suicidal White Knights, of course) will be ridiculed as losers and trash.

      Delete
  11. James Bond:
    Listening to feminist flatheads commenting on the White Knights' actions have convinced me even more that American women are not worth dying for. The general consensus among them seems to be that men simply owe their lives to them.

    Where are all the feminists who whine about 'where have all the good men gone' now? I haven't heard one single female anywhere over here wishing she could meet a man like those theatre heroes. Instead, all we hear is bitching that men didn't do enough; and how a man who'd give his life for a woman still isn't good enough; and self-righteous indignation over blogs like this that dare complain about female attitudes.

    ReplyDelete
  12. *On another note, Rookh. Has the British media been using this tragic event to take a swipe at the gun laws of the US and to gloat about Britain's gun laws?*

    Funny you should say that. There was an article in The Times yesterday pouring scorn on America's gun laws and contrasting their 'Wild West' values with Britain's. It isn't guns, though, that gives America its high crime rate. Americans do not own substantially more guns than several other peoples, who still have far lower gun-crime rates (Canada, Switzerland). I personally think Americans have a lot more violent archetypes to draw on than other peoples (gunfighters, Mafia gangsters) which better explains their astronomical gun-related murder rates. And of course, the American West simply required most people living there to carry guns for self-protection until relatively recently (the late Victorian era), explaining their ongoing attachment to projectile weapons.

    At a political level, American men should definitely NOT give up their guns. If, say, a US femcon Government said tomorrow, 'we are going to put all MRAs in concentration camps for treason' how else could American men defend themselves but with their guns? It may come to that yet. If there is one thing oppressive governments like, it is disarmed and powerless citizens.

    *In reality, Australia's gun laws has not created the "safer society" that its supporters say and it has led to the criminals becoming better armed over the past 16 years due to these laws.*

    Exactly the same is true over here. Restrictive gun laws leave the citizen defenceless before criminals and governments.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Rookh:

    'Watch a whole circus full of misandrist, puritanical bile spew forth from the mainstream media during the next few weeks.'

    Already today, from CNN.com; socon white knight pundit William Bennett had this to say:

    'This is important given the state of many men today: Record numbers are not working or even looking for work. Record numbers aren't marrying or acting as fathers to their children. These men need heroes to imitate whom they can relate to in everyday life, not just make-believe superheroes who catch their imagination for an hour or two. They need heroes like the Aurora Three.'

    ReplyDelete
  14. Astrokid NJ said:

    there was an interview with one of the doctors at the ER .. with odd questions..."How do you prepare for such cases". "How did it feel to handle all the injured?". etc etc eventually the female doctor starts shedding tears. So this is primary thing we want our doctors to demonstrate.. tears.

    This was intentional. This is standard practice for TV "journalists" in the USA - try to provoke tears. They love to film crying people and will continue to ask questions designed to provoke tears. Every goddamn one of these jackals does it.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Very well done. One tough chick.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This was excellent. The contrast between this and the mainstream "discussions" really shows how deluded and retarded our society has become.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What have the "mainstream" discussions in America entailed? We don't really hear much over here.

      Delete
  17. Excuses, excuses. Guess what? Nerdy, high-IQ women are often sexually disenfranchised too. But how many murders or mass shootings are carried out by women?

    I would suggest that the reporting of these events have taken a very traditionalist slant. Were the men really shielding their women or were they simply in the path of the bullets and now being gloryfied (it is human nature to exalt the dead)?

    Men have been killing in one way or another since the very beginning, before feminism was even thought of. Threatening violence when sex isn't offered is also as old as the hills. Reading these bitter little blogs confirms what I already knew - that "MRAs" are nothing but rape and violence apologists.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. *Reading these bitter little blogs confirms what I already knew*

      You need to study scientific method.

      Delete
    2. How about Jennifer San Marco, Priscilla Joyce Ford,Khoua Her, Mary Ann Brough, Andrea Yates, Susan Atkins and the other Manson girls, Laurie Wasserman Dann, Sylvia Seegrist (who stated after the shootings, "I'm a woman and I have family problems, and I have seizures."), and Brenda Spencer who shot elementary school children playing on the school playground, killing two men that were trying to protect the children, because, as she told police when they were trying to get her to come out of her house where she had barricaded herself after the shooting, "I don't like Mondays. This livens up the day. I have to go now. I shot a pig. I think and I want to shoot more. I'm having too much fun to surrender." Spencer committed the shooting in 1979 and she became eligible for parole in 2001 where she claimed the incident was a result of her being under the influence of PCP and alcohol and that the state prosecutor and her attorney, both men, have conspired to hide the drug test records from being entered into evidence. After blaming it on drugs failed can you guess what she tried to blame it on at her next parole hearing? Did you guess an abusive home life in which her father beat and sexually abused her even though she had never mentioned anything of this to any counselor whatsoever in the 22 years since the shooting occurred? Congratulations if you did.
      In America, they are blaming less on men and more on privileged white males in an ever increasing attempt to invoke a greater racial tension among Americans in preparation for the upcoming elections.

      Delete
  18. many highly-educated males who ‘did the right thing’...

    Truer words were never spoken.

    However; some men "do the right thing", but acquire a woman along the way - after slaving at a high paying job, they have it taken away from them after 5-10 years - and are left with high alimony payments.

    Either way - "doing the right thing" is a lose-lose proposition. Unless, you avoid women - or in cases like mine - you are fortunate enough to have them avoid you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's the Double-Bind at work. Since doing 'the right thing' is clearly not rewarded by any successful outcome, it is baffling how many socons/feminists still insist on men doing 'the right thing'.

      Do they really think we're that stupid?

      Delete
    2. Good husbands do not end up having to pay alimony at all. You might want to consider that.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous wrote:
      Good husbands do not end up having to pay alimony at all. You might want to consider that.

      If you're trying to imply that good husbands don't get divorced, that's one of the most delusional comments I've ever read.

      Delete
  19. Anon 0812:

    Nerdy, high-IQ women hide behind the excuse that men fear intelligent, powerful women to avoid facing their own sexual frigidity. Their disenfranchisement is self-imposed, like most other Anglo-American women, because hatred of men underlies most of their problems.

    As for the men who died being glorified: it should be noted that their names are already forgotten, while the Internet is rife with females salivating over how 'hawt' the killer is. As a high-IQ male, he gathered no such attention, and even the three heores are now regarded as expendable by female logic.

    As for bitter blogs being rape and violence apologies: feminist blogs are notorious for expressing their lust for brutal thugs; their fanatasies against normal men; and the celebration of abortion as a supposed right.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Scarecrow:
    Women in our culture are conditioned to hate and compete with men; hence any positive action towards them by men will end in defeat and loss for the male involved.

    Only thugs and losers can 'win' in this inverted system.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anglo women have only themselves to blame. They consistently throw themselves at thugs and losers and then wonder why men behave like thugs and losers. All they have to do is learn to reward men" who do the right thing".But they won't do that because it goes against their culture.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Rookh:
    Postscript to my comment on 7/23 above: so far, the shooter has not been diagonsed with organic brain disease, but your prediction about the mental illness label has since come to pass. Apparently, Holmes had some counseling at the university and the media has shifted the dialogue in the mental illness direction.

    This is what you've described as the 'double bind' at work again, with its extension. The culture sets up men like Holmes for failure and then deems them sick for failing---maybe a triple bind would be a good way to describe it.

    Most disenfranchised men don't go to the extreme that Holmes did, but many more commit suicide, drift into substance abuse or succumb to other forms of less overt discouragement. But such men are invariably labelled as mentally sick or shamed as losers; while the real nutcases and losers are rewarded by the dysfunctional culture.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Rookh:
    As you've probably heard, there was another mass shooting in America today. I was reminded again, listening to the coverage, of your earlier article on 'Ugly Realities' and how the legacy media ignores social problems. According to the magazine 'Mother Jones', there have been 57 mass-shootings in the US during the last 30 years; 49 of these have happened since 1990.

    The government and media officials always call for 'national unity' at these times and the local officals go out of their way to assure everyone that these incidents are anomoulous. The media portrays emotional outbursts and vigils. We heard this after the Aurora shooting: however Aurora was the scene of a mass-shooting in a restaurant just a few years ago; and the Columbine Masscre was in the vicinity. In July, there was a mass-shooting in Seattle---the media and authorities told us the same, yet there was a mass shooting in Seattle as recently as 2006; and an attempted one in 1999.

    Slowly but surely the facade of American culture is crumbling and the Ugly Realities of America are becoming more and more apparent. Here are we are beginning to see a culture racked by social oppression, political correctness, male disenfranchisement, racism, a growing underclass, an uneducated populace, and psychiatric drug abuse on a massive scale that the media and government are finding greater difficulty concealing from world scrutiny.

    ReplyDelete
  24. It does seem that way. The English have a saying, 'play the game'. It means, broadly, that people (read 'men') should accept societal regulations on their behaviour in order for society to work. The thing is, 'playing the game' no longer confers any tangible rewards. Men can 'play the game' until they are blue in the face and still end up with no job, no sex and no home. In fact, they are far LESS likely to get these things than men who don't play the game at all. Of course, feminism is primarily responsible for this. Female sexuality does not favour 'responsible' males, for one thing; for another, post-feminist societies tend to favour 'Big State' solutions, which inherently discriminate against men.

    In sum, there is no reason for Anglo-American men - the bulk of them - to 'play the game' any longer. If 'playing by the rules' leads only to defeat, why play by them? This is what people like Fleming and Futrelle completely fail to grasp. They seem to think that being a 'nice guy' who 'plays by the rules' still works as a male life-strategy - when, in reality, the 'rule-breakers' are continually rewarded by women and society in general.

    Until tangible rewards are forthcoming for 'playing the game', more and more men will not do so. Ultimately, societies that fail to keep men 'on side' are doomed to extinction - largely by random acts of violence, but also by the withdrawal of intelligence and creativity from the societal 'project'.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Rookh:
    Addendum to my comment yesterday: the New York Daily News reported that this shooting was the fifth mass-shooting in Wisconsin in the last seven years. Yet, the Wisconsin political leaders are telling the media that such things never happen there.

    Most of the media commentary has been blaming supposedly lax gun laws and lack of security for the problem, of course again totally ignoring the underlying Ugly Realities.

    The shooter in this case appears to be another marginalized, disenfranchised white American male who had drifted into White Supremacist movements. He was previously a missle-repair specialist in the Army and a musician. I'm willing to wager he shares a lot in common with the Aurora Joker.

    ReplyDelete
  26. G'day Rookh,

    Here's a video by MGTOW commentator Barbarossaaaa that's worth a serious viewing...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otu43z-5-dM&list=UUDoNFQZqQpd6aL32Ua4JPTQ&index=1&feature=plcp

    As an MGTOWer, I agree with Barbarossaaaa and what he says in this video. He really "gets straight to the biscuits" as to how the majority of men in the Anglosphere, Western Europe and Scandinavia really get the rough end of the stick by women and society.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anglobitch is actually a lymie faggot suffering from botched sex reassignment surgery.

    ReplyDelete
  28. @Anonymous (13 August 2012 16:04)

    "Anglobitch is actually a lymie faggot suffering from botched sex reassignment surgery."

    I see. So you mean he REALLY WAS a feminist?

    Thank God he made a full recovery from that debilitating condition of body, mind and soul...

    ReplyDelete
  29. Alan:
    Check out Rookh's article on 'Morrisey's Dilemma'. Anon 1604 sounds like one of those semi-literate underclass thugs who goes around saying; 'Duh...don't know what's up with these men's movement dudes. I get plenty of sex with no trouble at all...cuz I'm an alpha stud...huh,huh,huh,huh'.

    I've heard that the Aurora Joker is getting quite a bit of female attention now that he's a candidate for the hangman. Before, the news reports describe him as a 'shy loner.' There you go...

    ReplyDelete
  30. "Oddly, the killer’s behaviour prior to the massacre (dropping out of his doctoral programme) suggests he had belatedly discerned this truth."

    This behaviour is certainly archetypal. In fact, Timothy McVeigh dropped out of college shortly before he blew up the Murrah building. And it is thought that Harold Shipman's failure to thrive at grammar school and medical school was an early trigger for his crimes. David Koresh dropped put of High School. Anders Breivik was deemed unfit for military service and lost money on the stock market (predictably Breivik is also an opponent of feminism, Koresh had sex with underrage girls, Shipman killed mostly women).

    The truth is that these narcissistic below-average, physically unattractive men had failed to distinguish themselves conventionally in any way. Their narcissism-induced delusion and sense of entitlement made them lazy. They were invisible because they had failed to prove themselves in any sense. Their mass killings gave them a sense of omnipotence, of having a special mission.

    Rookh, we all - to some extent - find ourselves having to 'play the game'. Most of us are simply average (duh!), and most probably have experienced more failure than success. But we take responsibility for our failures and we endure. That is the not 'the game' - it is life.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I think you have a few facts wrong, there. McVeigh began to drift after failing to get into the Green Berets: his tour of duty in the Gulf meant he wasn't the soldier he once was. Shipman thrived enough to become a Doctor, no mean feat for a working class guy. It was what he did afterwards that brought him low. Breivik was notably handsome, at least in youth. Breivik also came from an upper-middle class background.

    So, not all of these guys were 'failures' by any means. I think most of them hit an existential wall in their lives when they realized they could not become the 'cultural heroes' they wanted to be. However, prior to feminism they would have at least been assured female companionship of some sort. It is sexual disenfranchisement that turns disgruntled mediocrities into dangerous killers. That is why mass killers have become so active in the post-feminist age.

    There is simply no reason for them to 'play the game' at all. Consequently, they don't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Harold Shipman had a lifelong, steadfast companion in his uneducated wife Violet. The extent of her denial has led some mental health professionals to diagnose her with the psychological condition 'Folie A Deux'. It could be argued that a supportive wife simply normalises, enables and fuels an already-narcisistic killer.
      Besides all this, why do you feel the need to defend male mass/ serial killers and rapists? It is odd.

      Delete
  32. Rookh:
    I would add to your comment that women in non-feminist, non-matriarchal tend to identify themselves with a husband's relative successes. In other words, men who failed to achieve the cultural status they sought would have at least had the incentive to turn their talents into productive channels.

    Most INCEL and disenfranchised men today don't turn into violent killers, a large percentage end as suicides and alcoholics. That fact gets very little attention, even in the MRM.

    Add into the mix that most men are adverse to violent, anti-social behavior (since civilization itself is largely a masculine institution); while less-prominent underclass thugs and criminals are rewarded sexually and socially for their behavior. These factors destroy any incentive for men to contribute in any productive way and lead to isolation and depression among INCEL men.

    ReplyDelete
  33. If civilisation is a masculine institution, why do men require women at all? Why do men throw almighty tantrums which end in them killing their own children, or in war?

    Moreover - as if it needed pointing out at all - every single human being on this planet was borne and delivered by a woman.

    You claim that women incentivise and procreate with thugs as a way of explaining the steady decline of the male sex. And yet to most females, there is little to distinguish any of you. British men are particularly repulsive. Unfortunately most men do not take the gorgeous, young-looking, clever, successful Prof. Brian Cox (for example) as their role model.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous wrote:
      If civilisation is a masculine institution, why do men require women at all?

      Someone has to bear the children. We don't yet have an artificial womb.

      Why do men throw almighty tantrums which end in them killing their own children,

      Very small numbers of men react that way. Most men respond to disenfranchisement by simple withdrawal. If that weren't true, society would dissolve overnight.

      or in war?

      Your idea of war as a "tantrum" seems pretty peculiar. What about wars over scarce resources, such as farmland? They seem to be a pretty rational response to me.

      Moreover - as if it needed pointing out at all - every single human being on this planet was borne and delivered by a woman.

      And every single human being on this planet was fathered by a man. And grew up under the protection and care of men. Your point?

      You claim that women incentivise and procreate with thugs as a way of explaining the steady decline of the male sex

      They do now. I blame much of that on giving women too much choice on the mating process and the removal of constraints on their behavior.

      And yet to most females, there is little to distinguish any of you.

      As I stated before, relying too much on women's ability to choose good men isn't wise.

      British men are particularly repulsive.

      Did you have in mind a better group of men? Perhaps American, French, or Chinese men?

      Unfortunately most men do not take the gorgeous, young-looking, clever, successful Prof. Brian Cox (for example) as their role model.>

      A British man - I thought they were repulsive. I had to look Cox up in Wikipedia to find out who he is, which tells me he's not that famous. Meanwhile, Russell Brand is all over the scabloids. That tells me what I really need to know about women's real sexual preferences.

      Delete
    2. He's not my type, but I don't really see what you object to about Russell Brand - he's living your dream, right? He's relatively good-looking, fairly young, successful, rich, clever. I would not consider him particularly low quality, though he does nothing for me.

      There are, of course, exceptions - I did not mean to imply that all British men are repulsive, merely around 95% of them. Generally, they are too apt to put on weight and kid themselves that it's masculine (I do not like a curvy man), they are lazy around the house, they don't know how to dress, they think they look better than they do, and more than any other nationality believe in the myth that young women fancy older men (they regularly approach these young women and publically embarass themselves). It's all true, I'm sorry to say. My current boyfriend is a gorgeous French trainee chef - I am very lucky!

      Delete
    3. Rosenthal, M., 71% of children killed by one parent are killed by their mothers; 60% of victims
      are boys. 2008. http://www.breakingthescience.org/SimplifiedDataFromDHHS.php

      Delete
    4. My current boyfriend is a gorgeous French trainee chef - I am very lucky!

      I wonder what he thinks about his luck.

      Delete
  34. Anon0617:
    As an American, I can't speak for the quality of British men, but I do see American females openly rejecting high-quality (and even mid-quality) American males in favor of dysfunctional thugs. If you look through an average woman's magazine the 'hot men' who are depicted there look about like pimps or low-level drug dealers to me. I don't see models posing with strong, successful looking men; and don't see American women pursuing them either.

    'Yet to most females, there is little to distinguish any of you.'

    True. It's because feminism has instilled in you such a deep misandry that all men essentially look alike to an average woman. All men are subhumans and inferiors by female logic---which explains in part a predilection for thugs. Any man who rises above the 'thug' archetype is seen by you as an 'uppity male' who 'doesn't know his place'

    ReplyDelete
  35. Rookh:
    Looking at Futrelle's version of this blog, I couldn't help but realize that the cat pictures are lot more entertaining and informative than what he posts on his regular site.

    Can't that guy do ANYTHING right? LOL

    ReplyDelete
  36. Here is an 'intriguing' slant on the case:

    http://www.helpfreetheearth.com/news617_batmanwhohow.html

    Whether anyone is into the skulduggery theories, that's up to them, but I find it interesting that his dad was involved in exposing the Libor fraud.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Somebody vaguely medical agrees with Anglobitch's diagnosis -

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-attraction-doctor/201208/james-holmes-mental-illness-or-social-frustration

    ReplyDelete
  38. Freeychromosome:
    I checked out the article, I can't believe the politically-correct 'Psychology Today' allowed that article to be published. Still, it was somewhat enlightening to read some of the male comments who agreed with it, in the midst of all the feminist outrage.

    I think things are getting to the point where the media can't keep covering up what's happening to men, and a few are starting to ask real questions.

    ReplyDelete