The motive is misogyny: the Montreal Massacre and the Santa Barbara shooting

In December 6, 1989, a lone gunman entered an engineering classroom at the École Polytechnique in Montreal. Armed with a semi-automatic rifle, Marc Lépine ordered the men out of the room, leaving the women behind. Lépine began shooting. At the end of his massacre, 14 women were dead.

Fast-forward to May 23, 2014. Elliot Rodger in Santa Barbara, California, killed six people in what he described as a “day of retribution” for years of supposed rejection by women. I believe these two attacks were carried out for the same reason: misogyny.

In both cases, the media and the psychological community have attempted to label these men as disturbed individuals suffering from mental illness. Though Marc Lépine and Elliot Rodger may have been mentally ill, these men carried out these attacks because of their hatred for women.

Marc Lépine sought out women attending École Polytechnique whom he believed were feminists. He also compiled a list of prominent women whom he planned to kill. These women represented a threat to Lépine’s position as a man. Lépine believed women were not entitled to basic autonomy. Lépine’s actions were influenced by mainstream sexism.

Men have always denied women their autonomy. Since entering the workforce, women have always struggled for workplace equality. Rape crisis centres and transition houses have always responded to thousands of calls from women experiencing male violence. Canadian women have always struggled to experience the same liberties and freedoms as their male counterparts. Marc Lépine was a madman who executed 14 women; however, he was also a man who learned misogyny very well.

The massacre carried out by Elliot Rodger in Santa Barbara is an extreme example of what happens when men are taught to feel entitled to women’s bodies. Rodger killed four men and two women because he wanted to punish the “sluts” who refused to have sex with him. In his manifesto, he commented, “How dare those girls give their love and sex to those other men and not me.”

Rodger’s entitlement to women’s bodies is no different than the men who rape women or purchase women for sex. All of these acts and the massacre in Santa Barbara are based on a historical belief that men should have unlimited access to women’s bodies.

Both serial murders were predetermined, women-targeted, and public. Both massacres were followed by conversations by mainstream media ignoring the inherent sexist nature of these crimes. Both massacres punished women for exercising their rights to education and to control their bodies.

The only way to prevent future sexist violence is to end sexism and guarantee the safety and equality for all women.

Comments (20) Add New Comment
Combat Wombat
Of course she does. I can tell you the actual reason though. Chronic, untreated mental illness and ready access to firearms. Even looking at Elliot's kill count he hated men (4 killed) more than women (2 killed). It's easier for feminists to paint this as "all men are potential rapey murder machines" because it fits their narrative.

Rating: +16
Alan Layton
"The only way to prevent future sexist violence is to end sexism and guarantee the safety and equality for all women."

And how do you do that? What is the difference between crazed mass murderers who want to kill humans in general, or men, and crazed mass murderers who say they hate women totally or partially? I honestly don't see a difference between the killers. They all have a major grudge against society or at least the system(s) that made them feel inadequate.

Women have made great strides since even as recent as the 1970's in gaining greater equality, in many ways. Has the level of misogyny decreased at the same time? By the logic of the concluding statement there should be a strong correlation.
Rating: -52
Truth Serum
This article is a typical example of how feminists hijack a crisis for their own political agenda.

Fair-haired white people—and blonde white girls in particular—are “the enemy” and all should be killed—this is the core message of half-Chinese mass murderer Elliot Rodger’s online manifesto which is being deliberately suppressed by the controlled media.

A copy of his so called manifesto can be viewed right here:

In the document, the theme of his obsession with, and ultimately hatred of, white people and blonde girls in particular, is a dominating theme. The word “blonde” appears no less than 62 times in the 142 pages.

In addition, his obsession with blonde girls, their unobtainability for himself, and his subsequent hatred of all white males and females, is the single most dominating theme of his “manifesto.”

There is, therefore, no reason for the media to ignore it—except for their obvious desire to disguise the vicious anti-white racism which is the true motivation for the mass murder spree.

Instead, the media (and Samantha Grey) has deliberately focused on his sexual obsession and his failure to interact with women in general, and has completely suppressed any mention of his overt racism and hatred of whites.

Rating: +30
these comments are a trainwreck and a half.
Rating: -44
@Truth Serum
At least two of the targeted victims are asians and one latino. Not sure how this supports your anti-white theory... Also, although only two female victims died, there are more that were wounded and survived. It's difficult to tell from the ratio of female/male victims who were his actual targets because he was randomly shooting at some point as the tried to escape the police, and fortunately stopped before he could do more damage. One thing that is sure from the evidence (youtube videos, manifesto) is that he did this, in part, because of his hatred of women. You cannot deny that. Why are there always some men on the defensive when we are talking about women's rights?
Rating: -44
A woman reader
How can we not talk about the hatred of women when the killer clearly states that this was his motivation?
Thank you Samanta Grey for writing this article and the Straight for publishing it. The comments are sad evidence to its necessity. I suggest that anybody who cares for women's thoughts and feelings about this issue will follow the twitter conversation #YesAllWomen
Rating: -35
The issue is phrases like: "Men have always denied women their autonomy." Are all men guilty of being mass murderers and oppressors because of the accident of birth? There is a need for a valid discussion about women's rights and role in society, but how does the author's invocation of collective guilt help in advancing that topic?
Rating: +29
Alan Layton
A woman reader: My question is, why is this guy being categorized differently than all of the other mass murdering psychopaths because one of his chosen hate-ons is for women? He has gone from being a person with obviously severe psychological problems (since birth apparently) to being called such a general term as a 'misogynist'? To me, and others, there is a very strong political motivation to this article. The awful incident is being tied to women's rights and sensationalized for political gains.

As for following a popular twitter hashtag they pop up every day, people feel indignant and self-righteous for a few days and then they move on to the next 'horror of the moment' and the usual mindless chit chat in between.
Rating: +3
This isn't your tragedy
Funny how four of the six dead in this "misogynist" attack are male but that doesn't stop special interests from appropriating the tragedy for their own propaganda. Perhaps if the murderer had been as selective as that criminal Lepine there would be a rational argument here but the first three victims were the male roommates: hardly the opening of a misogynistic massacre. Naturally there will be a eager chorus of believers eager to identify themselves as victims based solely upon their gender even though 2/3 of the dead has names like Christopher, James, George & David.
Rating: +32
An interesting backgrounder to Marc Lépine (he was repeatedly victimized as a child and adolescent by the men in his life). There was a failure to protect him.
Rating: +23
Perfectly conditioned
The author shows us that she is merely capable of stimulus response based upon her ideological conditioning. Once conditioned a member of a herd is incapable of reason & rationality, instead she/he regurgitates her/his chosen party line and pretends it is the result of "thinking." Look at the absurd blanket statements indicting everyone who happened to have been born with different genitalia or the hubris that leads an advert to declare that "nobody understands the problems faced by women in the developing world than another woman anywhere." Seriously? A female 1%er like Christy Clark knows more of the struggles faced by women in the developing world than an individual experiencing the same poverty but with meat & two veg?

The victims of this slaughter were 2 women & 4 men but the issue is "misogyny?"
Rating: +24
Miranda Nelson
I wonder why the commenters here cannot make the connection that misogyny obviously hurts men too.

Rodger repeatedly referred to a "war on women" in his manifesto.

The rage he felt over being "denied" sex and access to women was then extended to the men who "got" those women.

That's misogyny! (Defined as the hatred or dislike of women or girls.)

From his manifesto:

"I hated all those obnoxious, boisterous men who were able to enjoy pleasurable sex lives with beautiful girls, but I hated the girl’s [sic] more because they chose those men instead of me."

"Women’s rejection of me is a declaration of war, and if it’s war
they want, then war they shall have. It will be a war that will result in their complete and utter annihilation. I will deliver a blow to my enemies that will be so catastrophic it will redefine the very essence of human nature."

"The Second Phase will represent my War on Women. I will punish all females for the crime of depriving me of sex. They have starved me of sex for my entire youth, and gave that pleasure to other men. In doing so, they took many years of my life away. I cannot kill every single female on earth, but I can deliver a devastating blow that will shake all of them to the core of their wicked hearts. "

You cannot honestly believe that those words are not misogynistic. And that hatred of women led Rodger to kill people—including four men.

Misogyny hurts men, too.
Rating: -38
out at night
Just because Roger killed more men than women, or killed some non-white people, I think he was still acting out an essentially misogynist worldview. The "discrepancies" between his manifesto and the murders themselves are probably an indication that in the fever dream of the act, it turns out he had even less control over his actions than he would have liked to believe. He probably committed these murders in the most crazed, panicked state imaginable. He wasn't a methodical Anders Breivik or Marc Lepine, but so what?

Since learning of this tragedy I've been reflecting on what a combination of ubiquitous pornography, sexualized images in every facet of our popular culture (that specializes in blonde, Barbie-type females), a 22 year-old's hormonal (and virginal) frustrations, a gun-crazy nation and real, clinical mental illness would look like. It looks like this I suppose.

When the Columbine murders happened a friend of mine said something that seemed odd at the time. His singular remark on the murders was, "Consumerism". It struck me as being "off", but eventually I saw his point; that the teenage boys who killed so many of their peers were essentially jealous of a lifestyle and economic class they wanted and couldn't have. They craved a life of excess, comforts, thrills, sex, wealth, things - the lifestyle that seems to flaunt itself at us every day from TVs, magazines, billboards, etc - and when they concluded they weren't going to get all that, they burned it down. Likewise Elliot Roger wanted women as objects, he wanted a perfect Barbie doll, he wanted a whole list of crazy, sick, demonic things that our culture fed him from day one. I'm inclined to see this as less the misogyny of an individual and more that of our hydra-headed consumer culture. Things have to change, and quibbling over the wording of this guy's manifesto ain't helping.
Rating: -24
The Rule
The comments on any article about feminism justify feminism.

I read the entire manifesto and not once did it seem like this boy was struggling with mental illness. Entitlement and misogyny through and through. This boy (and I use that term as that's what he was) demanded his mother marry a wealthy man so that he could attain sex by means of wealth and status. When she would refuse, his anger was that he deserved it! How DARE she deny him what is rightfully his, did she not realize all of his problems would go away if she married a rich man, just for her son?

The only reason more men died than women was that he was stopped before he could continue. His first goal was to kill every female in the "hottest sorority". Just because the dead aren't all women does not mean that that wasn't his goal.

Mental illness is used to often as a scapegoat for violent behaviour. Just because someone's thought process doesn't fall in line with "the norm" does not equal mental illness.

Spoiled, entitled, misogynistic brat. That's it. Anyone here who suggests the author is using this tragedy to further her own 'feminist' agenda needs to think twice. If you're not a woman, how do you fully grasp what they have to go through? You can't plain and simple.

The meaning behind #YesAllWomen is to show that while it's definitely #NotAllMen, it does happen to every woman. Think about that the next time you walk to your car in a dark parking lot. Do you men feel like you need to have your keys out just in case someone sneaks up on you? No, you don't. Women do.
Rating: -34
Henry Krinkle
Feminists who constantly bring up their poster boy Mark Lepine conveniently neglect to mention that his original name was Gamil Rodrigue Gharbi, son of an Algerian Muslim named Liess Gharbi. He was authoritarian, possessive and jealous, and was frequently violent towards his wife and his children. It was he who taught his son to hate women, and the belief that they were only intended to serve men.

Understanding this throws a bit of light on why he took up an assault rifle and murdered 14 women and 4 men. But that’s not the public narrative, namely that a MAN (evil) shot women (good) because he hated feminism, (and therefore, hated women). That simplistic lie is the story we are bludgeoned with every year.

Rating: +30
Miranda Nelson
Again, commenters are derailing and failing to understand basic reality.

From Rodger's manifesto:

“I saw two hot blonde girls waiting at the bus stop. I was dressed in one of my nice shirts, so I looked at them and smiled. They looked at me, but they didn’t even deign to smile back. They just looked away as if I was a fool. In a rage, I made a U-turn, pulled up to their bus stop and splashed my Starbucks latte all over them. I felt a feeling [of] spiteful satisfaction as I saw it stain their jeans. How dare those girls snub me in such a fashion! How dare they insult me so! I raged to myself repeatedly. They deserved the punishment I gave them. It was such a pity that my latte wasn’t hot enough to burn them. Those girls deserved to be dumped in boiling water for the crime of not giving me the attention and adoration I so rightfully deserve!”

Misogyny. Right there. How could this be less clear?
Rating: -25
PT Barnum
Why does anyone take this guy's written motivations seriously? "Those girls deserved to be dumped in boiling oil for the crime of not giving me the attention and adoration I so rightfully deserve!" That's just self-delusion, if meant seriously. There are plenty of misogynists and racists in the world but serial killers are something entirely different.
Rating: -36
Obviously this tool was a misogynist.

Commentators can also (and do) point to his access to plentiful weaponry and his having mental health issues, but it would be unfathomable to overlook the misogyny angle given that he TELLS US THAT HE HATES THEM. And then you have to wonder where he got these ideas.

Does the culture tell us that adult virginity is shameful?

Does the culture tell us that if you are man, then you are pulling the chicks?

Have you heard the phrase "the three Fs"?

Do men buy Axe Body spray because they themselves enjoy the stench?

When you see a rack of fashion/gossip type magazines featuring female celebrities, would you consider it completely normal to see these powerful, successsful women posed buck naked, boobs and crotch artfully covered with hands and hair? What about dudes?

And for those of you who object to the feminist agenda: what's your problem with it? How are we getting hurt by it?

Rating: -23
Blows my mind how many people commenting and voting are so blind to reality. Not going to bother adding anymore, will just get downvoted for pointing out what so many here refuse to admit.
Rating: -7
So in other words if someone doesn’t agree with your version of reality or how things should be in your mind, then they are blind, and are just refusing to admit to it.

I think I’ll just be blind to your self-righteous bullshit instead.
Rating: +4
Add new comment
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.