It’s worth noting that the shooter in the California case was in fact given an equal custody split with his ex; that didn’t seem fair, apparently.
Like David, I don’t know any details of the shooter’s ideology or politics, but the MRA reaction has been predictable (though nonetheless startling). MRAs are, quite simply, men who hate women. They especially hate feminists, or women with opinions beyond “Whatever you think, dear.” Because they believe men are superior, they also believe that men should have pretty much free reign to behave however they want towards their women and their children. They believe that violence is often necessary to maintain control, and that judges who declare that children should be placed in non-violent households are anti-male. They believe that violence is provoked by women who don’t know their place. Case(s) in point:
Essentially men need to tell feminism to shut the fuck up, give it a vigorous slap across the face thus reminding it who is the biological superior, then order it back into the kitchen/bedroom.
Gandi [sic] and MLK got what they were after via non-violent means, but they were dealing with people of conscience, people who would think about the issues they espoused and not just kill them. Non-violence only works when your opponent has moral character. …
I submit that women … are much more likely to pay attention when they’re being threatened. If it becomes obvious that claiming child abuse during divorce, withholding visitation and other such actions could result in their death, then they might think twice about such behavior.
Similar Posts (automatically generated):
- Men’s rights advocates promote terrorism by Jill June 27, 2011
- Punished for fleeing abuse by EG March 2, 2015
- All hail the matriarchy, and a note to the dudebros by Caperton June 10, 2012
- That’s an interesting definition of “victim” you’ve got there by Jill August 16, 2011
- “Advocate” Turns Abuser by Cara July 10, 2008