Eliot Rodger and TFL or True Force Loneliness.

GalwayGuy2

**** me :eek:

I was kind of relieved to find out he had mental health issues (and is presumably getting help for them), because I'd be afraid he'd turn violent.

**** me. That was the most rantiest piece I've ever read in my life. Jesus.

Although, as always with anything, there are a few interesting comments among all the awful ones. It's a sign of how bad the two articles are that I can only pick out two that I kind of agree with.

1) Don't go to feminism for dating advice or self-improvement. Just view as people giving an opinion.

2) If porn's unrealistic to begin with, you might as well completely go unrealistic.

Although, porn is porn. There's massive amounts of relying on fantasy as reality in that post.

Lou.m

beano345 wrote: »

If it helps some guy out there who's involuntary celibate get laid what's the harm,obviously what they're doing isn't working

There is harm being done internally to them. And that in turn has an impact on society.

Lou.m

This is all getting insane.

I feel the need to state this.

There are some men and women out there who have lost the plot.

We are only validating their craziness by attempting to discredit it.

We don't need to come up logical reasons of why they might think the way they do. Or try to understand them.

These people are psychologically abnormal. They do not behave reasonably. That is why the have trouble socially and that is very painful.


I was once told that most psychologists come across narcissists and sociopaths ( real ones not pop culture ones) in their practice not for crimes they have committed but for things like depression and the pain they themselves are going through. It is very difficult going though life I would imagine so separated from other human beings that you could hurt them.

Pop culture depicts murders as cool...but they are always in real life very lonely. Not caring about others is isolating the nicer you are usually the more friends you have.


Parts of their brain are not working the way they are meant to.


Sure there are parts of feminism that go off on one. There is a similar aspect to parts of male sites etc. These are usually driven either by con artists for attention and money or people who are ill.

Reasoning with crazy people will drive you crazy.

Good looking rich men and women can have a bad attitude ..be ill.

Looks are not as important for women as you may think. Personality is really key.

There is nothing wrong with healthy porn for healthy people.

But that wordpress blog is full of delusions. He would be delusional about a different obsession but this was the one his illness just happened to suck him into.

Some men and women can't see reality. It's not a question of explaining it to them. They have something wrong.


But being bad or evil...isn't enjoyable ...it's lonely. Usually people end up like a Shakespearean villain..losing it.

I see where you're coming from Lou.m and I agree there's certain actions and patterns that even starting to try to understand in a way validates it.

Thing is in this case is that it's a combination of a personality who will end up shooting/stabbing people (bearing in mind his racism and all) and the conflation with that of all PUA and "anti-women" stuff online. As I said, I could relate to a lot of what he "went through", as could many guys. I haven't bothered getting into PUA stuff or whatever, most lads don't. Even those who do won't "believe" in what they say, they see a lot of it as banter. Those communities are tiny and the proportion within those tiny communities that may snap and shoot up a footpath is smaller again.
IMO this is a case of a mental pinning himself to a "cause", the same as the odd white supremacist does, or the odd anti-islamic guy, or the odd "right-wing" guy or the odd "anti-government" guy. In a weird way the reasons he gives for his ultimate actions are almost irrelevant.

Lou.m

Deleted User wrote: »

I see where you're coming from Lou.m and I agree there's certain actions and patterns that even starting to try to understand in a way validates it.

Thing is in this case is that it's a combination of a personality who will end up shooting/stabbing people (bearing in mind his racism and all) and the conflation with that of all PUA and "anti-women" stuff online. As I said, I could relate to a lot of what he "went through", as could many guys. I haven't bothered getting into PUA stuff or whatever, most lads don't. Even those who do won't "believe" in what they say, they see a lot of it as banter. Those communities are tiny and the proportion within those tiny communities that may snap and shoot up a footpath is smaller again.
IMO this is a case of a mental pinning himself to a "cause", the same as the odd white supremacist does, or the odd anti-islamic guy, or the odd "right-wing" guy or the odd "anti-government" guy. In a weird way the reasons he gives for his ultimate actions are almost irrelevant.

Nail on the head.
Sometimes I think extremists from opposite side throw muck and normal people in the middle are who get hit by it.

I would even say PUA has some average guys who dabble for a little while but leave the nastier side of it out, then eventually move on.


Never share a platform with a racist, it gives them a platform.

Some 'feminists' are not actually espousing anything that could be called an ideology they are just plain nuts.

Germaine Greer goes off in to that sphere. She is a difficult person and that is the issue sometimes.

ragnarl

"Looks aren't important for women, it's all about personality"

LOL, thanks for a good laugh this morning.

kunst nugget

walshb wrote: »

I asked can a person be plain bad/nasty, or evil without having a mental illness? There are times when it's just nastiness and badness that makes folks do what they do. What that guy did was pure evil. Deliberately evil and bad. It took real planning. Nothing to do with women/looks/shyness/confidence. That may have been his justification. Doesn't make any of it plausible.

Sure, if it makes you feel better we can label somebody as just plain evil if that helps you. Can't see how it helps anything and doesn't get anyone any closer to figure out what causes people to do unspeakable acts like this.

'Ah well, he was just evil. There's nothing that could have been done to avoid this situation…'

kunst nugget

Deleted User wrote: »

I see where you're coming from Lou.m and I agree there's certain actions and patterns that even starting to try to understand in a way validates it.

It's not about trying to validate it. It should be about understanding so that something can be done to intervene with certain personality types before they reach a fatal outcome. Why are nearly all mass shooters men? What unifies them? In comparison to women, men suffering from depression are more prone to blaming others for their problems, feel angry and ego-inflated and engage in escapist behaviour. Combine this with someone with psychopathic or sociopathic tendencies, lax gun laws and a winners/losers society and you got a pretty toxic mix. They may be raging against women, high school jocks or liberals - their target is irrelevant, the end result is that they seek to punish the people that they feel are responsible for their inadequacies.

kunst nugget

ragnarl wrote: »

"Looks aren't important for women, it's all about personality"

LOL, thanks for a good laugh this morning.

Looks and attractiveness are important to a lot of people. That's not the fault of women - it's pretty widespread on both genders.

Pawwed Rig

ragnarl wrote: »

"Looks aren't important for women, it's all about personality"

LOL, thanks for a good laugh this morning.

Mod note - Be more constructive and please do not change statements when you are quoting. An easy method to ensure you do not do this is to click quote in the relevant post.

kunst nugget

kunst nugget wrote: »

It's not about trying to validate it. It should be about understanding so that something can be done to intervene with certain personality types before they reach a fatal outcome. Why are all nearly all mass shooters men? What unifies them? In comparison to women, men suffering from depression are more prone to blaming others for their problems, feel angry and ego-inflated and engage in escapist behaviour. Combine this with someone with psychopathic or sociopathic tendencies, lax gun laws and a winners/losers society and you got a pretty toxic mix. They may be raging against women, high school jocks or liberals - their target is irrelevant, the end result is that they seek to punish the people that they feel are responsible for their inadequacies.

My point was that the "justification" he uses is fairly irrelevant IMO. The "hatred" of women stuff just happens to be what he fell into but if it wasn't that it would've likely been something else.

Sleepy

I found that blog post quite interesting. While the guy's reaction to his experience wouldn't be anything to laud, his analysis of his earlier experience seems quite accurate to me when you strip away the vitriol. A lot of us have been conditioned from an early age to be the "nice guy" who puts women on a pedestal, lives his entire life for them and then seems confused when they don't see him as high status enough to be attractive in a buyer's market.

From what I can make of it, most of the PUA stuff seems to be trying to imitate the nature of a man who's comfortable in his own skin, lives a life based on his own passions and who tries to make the best of what he has physicaly (I'm thinking of the likes of Bear Grylls: a who's literally the boy scout, an earnest Christian and a family man who claims to have been a virgin on his wedding night, yet whose self-assured air, physical condition, achievements and passion for adventure made him attractive long before he was rich).

The mistake these guys seem to make is to emulate the negative traits they see in men who "best" them sexually: the "negs", the feigning a lack of interest, the "use and abuse" mentality etc. while ignoring that the prick behaving like that is interesting because he has

While I can find the bitterness at the "just be yourself" stuff understandable enough, it's the blaming women for it that's illogical: some poor girl was too nice to be brutally honest and tell them that they were sexually attractive to them because they were fat and deathly pale from spending all day playing games while eating junk and behaved like a simpering puppy desperate for her affection and then they turn around and blame her, or all women, for that?

Maybe it's more of the "special snowflake" syndrome we see so much of nowadays but there seems a real inability in our society to accept ownership of our actions and accept responsibility for their consequences.

ragnarl

Sleepy wrote: »

I found that blog post quite interesting. While the guy's reaction to his experience wouldn't be anything to laud, his analysis of his earlier experience seems quite accurate to me when you strip away the vitriol. A lot of us have been conditioned from an early age to be the "nice guy" who puts women on a pedestal, lives his entire life for them and then seems confused when they don't see him as high status enough to be attractive in a buyer's market.

From what I can make of it, most of the PUA stuff seems to be trying to imitate the nature of a man who's comfortable in his own skin, lives a life based on his own passions and who tries to make the best of what he has physicaly (I'm thinking of the likes of Bear Grylls: a who's literally the boy scout, an earnest Christian and a family man who claims to have been a virgin on his wedding night, yet whose self-assured air, physical condition, achievements and passion for adventure made him attractive long before he was rich).

The mistake these guys seem to make is to emulate the negative traits they see in men who "best" them sexually: the "negs", the feigning a lack of interest, the "use and abuse" mentality etc. while ignoring that the prick behaving like that is interesting because he has

While I can find the bitterness at the "just be yourself" stuff understandable enough, it's the blaming women for it that's illogical: some poor girl was too nice to be brutally honest and tell them that they were sexually attractive to them because they were fat and deathly pale from spending all day playing games while eating junk and behaved like a simpering puppy desperate for her affection and then they turn around and blame her, or all women, for that?

Maybe it's more of the "special snowflake" syndrome we see so much of nowadays but there seems a real inability in our society to accept ownership of our actions and accept responsibility for their consequences.

good post. I agree that the whole PUA thing is cringeworthy. Elliot Rodger was subscribed to PUA youtube channels. The fact is, women are not machines. I'm not quite sure how they get away with their marketing. If you do an image search on some of the images on the irishseduction.com site you can find the images across the net so its pure marketing and fake reviews. the another irish PUA site daygamelifestyle.com is equally as ridiculous. What these guys miss is that you can't really fool women. Women are vastly more socially intelligent than men and will see through ANY tactics you try to use on them. It's also ridiculous to think that looks don't matter. Sorry but if you look like gollum, you're not going to be getting women if you don't have some other kind of value.

How this relates to Elliot rodger is that he was sucked into this shambolic PUA industry and this only furthered his rage. He was never going to be pulling the hot sorority girls anyway so it was pretty pointless. He couldn't accept his genetic level.

nc19

Standman wrote: »

It's amazing the sense of entitlement and self pitying arrogance these men display.

'Muricans

/thread

GalwayGuy2

PUA is weird. If you have some sense, and self esteem, you may find some of the tips useful. If you don't, then I'd say it will do more harm than good.

Neggings a weird one. I think I'd look down on anybody who did it on purpose, but it seems to be a weirdly good social trait. Maybe it's just me, but I don't particularly like it when someone is complementive. I think they're insincere, but if they throw in a little bit of snark then I view them as 'an equal'. Maybe it's an inherently irish thing?

There's probably other helpful tips towards social interaction, but you have to wade through all the biased viewpoints.

Lou.m

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Neggings a weird one. I think I'd look down on anybody who did it on purpose, but it seems to be a weirdly good social trait. Maybe it's just me, but I don't particularly like it when someone is complementive. I think they're insincere, but if they throw in a little bit of snark then I view them as 'an equal'. Maybe it's an inherently irish thing?

I am completely the opposite. I would HATE it. I like positive sweet people.

Lou.m

nc19 wrote: »

'Muricans

/thread

Sorry to 'Muricans over listening ...but yeah the girls too often.

When You look at some American youtube channels of males and females the cultural differences can be amazing in their demeanor.

Wibbs

ragnarl wrote: »

I'm not quite sure how they get away with their marketing.

They know their demographic. Quiet guys, who feel left out of the loop and are desperate and the same guys tend more towards reductionist thinking. They're a charm for this kind of PUA stuff. More than that it gives a sense of community to guys who may have a limited male social circle if any, guys who may have had absent fathers and no other male role models.

Wrap up any BS well enough and people will buy into it. When you see ads aimed at women like anti wrinkle cream modeled by 17 year olds and hair care products modeled by women with hair extensions. The male equivalent would have William Shatner advertising head and shoulders. The PUA stuff is a much easier sell by comparison.

Pug160

Like I've said before, it would be much more productive if we examined society as a whole, and pieced together the toxic parts of it. All I see is finger pointing and blaming. It's just going to make people feel isolated - men in particular. I feel there is a bigger picture being missed, but these types of topics are emotive and being completely impartial when we take our own life experiences into account is difficult. Men are products of their environment just as women are, so if there is dysfunction, that dysfunction must surely be caused by everyone in varying degrees. Take these 'entitlement' issues that are being brought up as one example: the seeds of entitlement are often planted/and or perpetuated by both men and women. When it's found out that a certain man isn't successful romantically or sexually, both sexes tend to say very similar things actually - especially if the man is decent looking and presentable. It's not thought of as a bonus to be 'successful' or find someone - it's expected. Yet people complain of this 'entitlement'. Maybe some of the people complaining about it have helped cause it, although they didn't mean to. Just a thought.

To me, a lot of people are very angry and cynical in today's world and it's not coming from a particular sex or class. Actions may well speak louder than words but actions alone do not tell the whole story.

Lou.m

Pug160 wrote: »

Like I've said before, it would be much more productive if we examined society as a whole, and pieced together the toxic parts of it. All I see is finger pointing and blaming. It's just going to make people feel isolated - men in particular. I feel there is a bigger picture being missed, but these types of topics are emotive and being completely impartial when we take our own life experiences into account is difficult. Men are products of their environment just as women are, so if there is dysfunction, that dysfunction must surely be caused by everyone in varying degrees. Take these 'entitlement' issues that are being brought up as one example: the seeds of entitlement are often planted/and or perpetuated by both men and women. When it's found out that a certain man isn't successful romantically or sexually, both sexes tend to say very similar things actually - especially if the man is decent looking and presentable. It's not thought of as a bonus to be 'successful' or find someone - it's expected. Yet people complain of this 'entitlement'. Maybe some of the people complaining about it have helped cause it, although they didn't mean to. Just a thought.

To me, a lot of people are very angry and cynical in today's world and it's not coming from a particular sex or class. Actions may well speak louder than words but actions alone do not tell the whole story.

Well said.

Some people feel a lack of community.

People want to be seen as not caring or not needing anyone...but we do need each other and to feel part of community ..it's human.

We have a real need to have companionship and we should be honest about it.

As much as people don't like to admit it the PUA stuff works so well that it'd be easy for someone to slip into it. If you've gone years without getting anywhere then a couple of nights of trying "tactics" works then why not?

diveout

Deleted User wrote: »

As much as people don't like to admit it the PUA stuff works so well that it'd be easy for someone to slip into it. If you've gone years without getting anywhere then a couple of nights of trying "tactics" works then why not?

These tactics are as old as the ages, from Ovid's The Art of Love, to medieval and renaissance courtship manuals.

Same old same old.

beano345

[Deleted User] wrote: »

As much as people don't like to admit it the PUA stuff works so well that it'd be easy for someone to slip into it. If you've gone years without getting anywhere then a couple of nights of trying "tactics" works then why not?

As much as I used to be anti PUA,I don't see what a socially inept person has to lose using a bit of it, if it helps them in anyway,don't know why anyone would pay for books and seminars though when its available to look at or download online.

Lou.m

Deleted User wrote: »

As much as people don't like to admit it the PUA stuff works so well that it'd be easy for someone to slip into it. If you've gone years without getting anywhere then a couple of nights of trying "tactics" works then why not?

It's wrong and it hurts women. The fact that is demeans women means nothing to you...??? I must be very naive ...

Lou.m

Lou.m wrote: »

It's wrong and it hurts women. The fact that is demeans women means nothing to you...??? I must be very naive ...

Again, if you've been "hurt" over and over again by rejection then something that gets around it is going to be very appealing.
I also find that it's pretty "poor-wee-women-don't-know-their-own-mind" to suggest that they're innocently minding their business and weren't considering a ONS or fling until someone gets at them.

Lou.m

Deleted User wrote: »

Again, if you've been "hurt" over and over again by rejection then something that gets around it is going to be very appealing.
I also find that it's pretty "poor-wee-women-don't-know-their-own-mind" to suggest that they're innocently minding their business and weren't considering a ONS or fling until someone gets at them.

I think you've snapped.

Lou.m

Deleted User wrote: »

Again, if you've been "hurt" over and over again by rejection then something that gets around it is going to be very appealing.
I also find that it's pretty "poor-wee-women-don't-know-their-own-mind" to suggest that they're innocently minding their business and weren't considering a ONS or fling until someone gets at them.

I don't care if it is appealing shoplifting may be appealing. It's still wrong.
Also why would be be hurt by a woman rejecting a ONS?

And honestly most women most of the time have no interest in ONS. There are some that do.

But it is generally not what a lot of women want. That is the real truth. Some women do but not that many.

PUA itself is all 'poor -wee -women-don't -know -their-own-mind' that is what it is based on as a theory no?

Manipulation of others for your own extremely self serving agenda at the sake of their mental health or feelings
is not ethical.
I am not going to talk about PUA anymore I don't want to make the thread toxic.

ragnarl

Deleted User wrote: »

As much as people don't like to admit it the PUA stuff works so well that it'd be easy for someone to slip into it. If you've gone years without getting anywhere then a couple of nights of trying "tactics" works then why not?

It's all marketing with no proof that any "tactics" work. Women are far more socially intelligent than men will ever be. Do you really think tactics will work on a woman?

Seriously?

ragnarl wrote: »

Women are far more socially intelligent than men will ever be.

That's quite the statement, got anything concrete to back that fact ?

Pawwed Rig

Seriously? wrote: »

That's quite the statement, got anything concrete to back that fact ?

mod note - ragnarl warned for sexist posting. please move on