Rampage shooting in Santa Barbara by misogynist 22-yo.

[Zeropoint]

I'd just like to ask people here to refrain from tarring ALL the people who can't find relationships or sex with the same brush as the PUA, MRA, and loveshy types. There are plenty of people out there who are virgins at 30 or 40 or 50, or who haven't had sex in years, who aren't hate-filled. It isn't helping ANYONE to assume that because someone can't get laid, they must be dangerous.

[Broomstick]

Bundy was a serial killer, but not this serial killer. He killed people because he liked it, not because he was upset over their failure to provide him with sex.

[nitpick] Ted Bundy was a serial killer. This guy was a spree killer. In some ways, a spree killer is more dangerous because with modern weaponry from guns to pressure cookers they can kill and maim more people than quite a few serial killers managed to do before getting caught. [/nitpick]

True, but in the worst case scenario you can always slug him with a roll of quarters or knee him in the balls. Though I admit this is a somewhat different problem if there's a non-trivial chance of him having a gun under his coat.

No, the worst case scenario is that he physically overpowers you because he slugged you. You may not get to decide to initiate the violence.

Or (in Broomy's case) you might even decide to initiate the violence and lose; how often do you consider that you might start a fight and lose? In a woman like Broomy's case this is very relevant, because you really have to think twice about starting a fight with him, if he's a testosterone-fueled loony in his twenties and you are an ordinary-sized woman with no special combat training. Because if you lose, he thinks he can do whatever he wants. Then he drags you into the bushes and rapes you and hopefully doesn't beat or kill you if you're lucky.

Actually, I have had self-defense training. When that scenario occurred at 14 - someone literally grabbed me around the neck, hauled me behind some bushes, and started trying to remove my clothes as a prelude to what I assume would have been rape (the fact I knew him and that he had done this to other girls was a factor in my assumption) that self-defense/"combat" training enabled me to knock him down long enough for me to run like hell away.

I have not had a real-life stalker but I did at one point have an on-line stalker who went so far as to call my flight school and tell them I had a drug and alcohol problem, among other fun things. In his case, it wasn't rape, it was to "prove" to me that no woman could be as good as a man at anything. (And no, I don't care to go into further detail at this time on either of those two stories)

This is a problem ALL women face, without exception. Yes, unquestionably the vast majority of men are decent human beings who wouldn't do such things but it doesn't take a lot of self-important misogynistic entitled assholes to result in women always looking over their shoulder. That one guy in a thousand can do a lot of damage.

[Simon_Jester]

What is 'demonstrated' in this context? Obviously we lock people up for murder, attempted murder and impose lesser punnishments for stalking and threatening beahvior. This doesn't do anything to prevent suicidal spree killers with no previous criminal background, which was the case here.

True. I think in a case like this we should be thinking about what kinds of cases we stage psychiatric interventions in, but so far there is no reliable way to diagnose and preempt a probable spree killer, so yeah.

Or (in Broomy's case) you might even decide to initiate the violence and lose; how often do you consider that you might start a fight and lose? In a woman like Broomy's case this is very relevant, because you really have to think twice about starting a fight with him, if he's a testosterone-fueled loony in his twenties and you are an ordinary-sized woman with no special combat training. Because if you lose, he thinks he can do whatever he wants. Then he drags you into the bushes and rapes you and hopefully doesn't beat or kill you if you're lucky.

Actually, I have had self-defense training. When that scenario occurred at 14 - someone literally grabbed me around the neck, hauled me behind some bushes, and started trying to remove my clothes as a prelude to what I assume would have been rape (the fact I knew him and that he had done this to other girls was a factor in my assumption) that self-defense/"combat" training enabled me to knock him down long enough for me to run like hell away.

I beg your pardon, Broomstick, I had not meant either to trigger bad memories or to denigrate your ability to take care of yourself.

That said, the default assumption for the average woman would be no more special fighting skill than, well, the average woman. The average woman is at a serious disadvantage in a violent confrontation with a healthy young male.

So as you pointed out (I think) and as I tried to explain to Zaune, it is actively dangerous for such a woman to engage socially with a man who is likely to see violence as an acceptable way to get sex. Or who is likely to be full of rage at a woman who denies him after (in his own fantasy-riddled mind) 'coming on' to him by bothering to speak to him in the first place.

If we lived in a world where no one could physically harm another, stopping to engage with unstable loners would be a good idea, within reason. But since crime and violence are very much on the table... not so much.

Of course, you already know all this and routinely explain it to others; I'm more writing this for the benefit of any bystanders who haven't quite gotten the memo.

[FSTargetDrone]

I'd just like to ask people here to refrain from tarring ALL the people who can't find relationships or sex with the same brush as the PUA, MRA, and loveshy types. There are plenty of people out there who are virgins at 30 or 40 or 50, or who haven't had sex in years, who aren't hate-filled. It isn't helping ANYONE to assume that because someone can't get laid, they must be dangerous.

I don't think anyone here has done that. My problem with these people are the ones that are ragey and sound crazed. Just look at that that link on the second page here that Kitsune found. That shitstain (the blogger, NOT Kitsune!) went off and decided that the victims were just as bad as the killer! The fuck? Before two days ago, I had never heard the of the term, "loveshy" or "wizards" or "incels" used in the way they are (for the latter, I hadn't heard of it at all). I'm generally not in the least bit interested in the personal lives of people I interact with online and sure as fuckall I would not be discussing my lack of a sex life with people like that if it applied. They way these people seem to carry on seems so utterly strange to me. And that was just spending a few minutes looking at it (which was enough). I guess it's just an outlet for some people, but there is so much bile. Though it shouldn't be a surprise to me, what with all the weirdness online.

[Broomstick]

Or (in Broomy's case) you might even decide to initiate the violence and lose; how often do you consider that you might start a fight and lose? In a woman like Broomy's case this is very relevant, because you really have to think twice about starting a fight with him, if he's a testosterone-fueled loony in his twenties and you are an ordinary-sized woman with no special combat training. Because if you lose, he thinks he can do whatever he wants. Then he drags you into the bushes and rapes you and hopefully doesn't beat or kill you if you're lucky.

Actually, I have had self-defense training. When that scenario occurred at 14 - someone literally grabbed me around the neck, hauled me behind some bushes, and started trying to remove my clothes as a prelude to what I assume would have been rape (the fact I knew him and that he had done this to other girls was a factor in my assumption) that self-defense/"combat" training enabled me to knock him down long enough for me to run like hell away.

I beg your pardon, Broomstick, I had not meant either to trigger bad memories or to denigrate your ability to take care of yourself.

It was a long time ago, and actually the successful self-defense was, if anything, a boost to my self-confidence regarding my ability to keep myself safe. It was scary as hell, but it proved that yes, these techniques can work. It also illustrates that even for a well-prepared, street-smart woman this danger exists.

That said, the default assumption for the average woman would be no more special fighting skill than, well, the average woman. The average woman is at a serious disadvantage in a violent confrontation with a healthy young male.

A couple of factors here - as recently as my generation women were strongly discouraged from learning to fight or physically defend themselves. Several reasons come to mind, among them a desire for people not to see their daughters/wives/mothers/sisters get hurt, cultural norms for the sexes, and misogynists preferring that women couldn't fight back. It is much, much more common for women these days to engage in sports and/or have some sort of defense training. Unfortunately, it is also much more common for women to engage in criminal violence as well. Fact is, a healthy, muscular adult woman is a pretty strong animal in her own right, even if not a match for an equally well developed man.

And that really is the bottom line here - in a fair contest even a well trained woman will most likely lose to an equally well trained man. On average men are stronger, taller, and heavier than women and in a physical fight all three of those advantages count. Movie action heroines aside, this is an area men and women are not equals. Effective self-defense emphasizes avoiding trouble, fighting dirty, and running like hell as soon as you have a chance to get away rather than continuing to engage the aggressor. It should also include something about surrender being an option if, in a particular situation, a woman thinks she is less likely to be hurt or killed if she does not fight back. This can, of course, cause other issues down the line due to prosecutors and other people not taking rape or assault seriously unless the woman fights back. I detest that sort of Monday-morning quaterbacking.

Of course, you already know all this and routinely explain it to others; I'm more writing this for the benefit of any bystanders who haven't quite gotten the memo.

Completely understood.

[Ralin]

I don't think anyone here has done that. My problem with these people are the ones that are ragey and sound crazed. Just look at that that link on the second page here that Kitsune found. That shitstain (the blogger, NOT Kitsune!) went off and decided that the victims were just as bad as the killer! The fuck? Before two days ago, I had never heard the of the term, "loveshy" or "wizards" or "incels" used in the way they are (for the latter, I hadn't heard of it at all).

Like I said, I'm pretty sure that guy is the same person who once said his mother should be charged with attempted murder for refusing to have sex with him.

What does 'wizard' mean in this context? I think I've heard the term before, but I can't remember where.

[PainRack]

Ah yes, because understanding someone or even being able to empathize with how this with other flaws led to a course of action is providing aid and comfort to the enemy.


Btw, how IS that attitude working for the US in the War on Terror?

You seriously compare someone who's living in misery in a wartorn country and lashing out at foreign invaders to some upper class twit with entitlement issues?

Go fuck yourself.

Nice red herring.

Again, the ability to understand why a person does shitty things DOES not equate to sympathy and AGREEING with him.

[PainRack]

I'm curious about the idea that the number of social misfits is increasing. If as ray245 mentioned there is a trackable increase, this may be the first of a general increase of misfits going out in a blaze or murder.

It also makes me wonder why the number would be increasing. Were they always there, but gender equality removed the ability to just take what they want? Or something else changed and many aren't adapting?

Two things.

There are some societal changes, such as increasing urbanisation and density of population that's increasing alienation. Even work practices such as mass production.

But that isn't entirely applicable to Elliot. Elliot is and remains a sociopath, maybe even as psychopath.

It's probably a mixture of both, when psychopathy and alienation mixes together along with more modern news reporting that we're noticing it more and more.

Jack the ripper was sensational, but is his behavior any less warped than knights who raped and killed nuns in a convent in the 1300s?

And for Jack the Ripper, how many undocumented spree or serial killers went undocumented? Or was stopped by vigilante justice?

[Simon_Jester]

I don't think anyone here has done that. My problem with these people are the ones that are ragey and sound crazed. Just look at that that link on the second page here that Kitsune found. That shitstain (the blogger, NOT Kitsune!) went off and decided that the victims were just as bad as the killer! The fuck? Before two days ago, I had never heard the of the term, "loveshy" or "wizards" or "incels" used in the way they are (for the latter, I hadn't heard of it at all). I'm generally not in the least bit interested in the personal lives of people I interact with online and sure as fuckall I would not be discussing my lack of a sex life with people like that if it applied. They way these people seem to carry on seems so utterly strange to me. And that was just spending a few minutes looking at it (which was enough). I guess it's just an outlet for some people, but there is so much bile. Though it shouldn't be a surprise to me, what with all the weirdness online.

To be fair, it's at least sane for people tired of being lonely to have a word for themselves ("loveshy" has the benefit of sounding nice, and I remember hearing "incel" used as shorthand for "involuntary celibacy" some time ago). And to form support groups.

The problem is that there's several different reasons why a person might have trouble having a meaningful sex life. Some of them are things like physical disabilities or serious image problems that make you insecure about being seen in public, and people with those problems may be able to offer each other moral support that's worthwhile. Others are things like raging personality disorders, and people with those problems are not able to offer anyone meaningful support, and if anything will egg each other on into being even stupider and more asinine than otherwise.

And that really is the bottom line here - in a fair contest even a well trained woman will most likely lose to an equally well trained man. On average men are stronger, taller, and heavier than women and in a physical fight all three of those advantages count. Movie action heroines aside, this is an area men and women are not equals. Effective self-defense emphasizes avoiding trouble, fighting dirty, and running like hell as soon as you have a chance to get away rather than continuing to engage the aggressor.

To be fair, good self-defense training for men should probably emphasize much the same. What it comes down to is that the legal definition of "self-defense" usually only excuses you in using force to avoid violence. If you deliberately square off for a boxing match against your attacker, the odds are good that you're doing what the law would consider "fighting," by seeking out a violent confrontation you didn't have to participate in.

Having the common sense to avoid areas where you might get mugged, to disable an attacker and try to escape the situation rather than hang around where a (possibly armed) criminal may well have (possibly armed) friends hanging around... sounds pretty good to me.

[Grumman]

I tend to believe what the killer says is his reason for killing. At a minimum its what HE believes is his motivation.

The motive is not the reason. The motive might have been that women weren't tearing off their clothes to get to him, but the reason is that he was a sick fuck who lacked every one of the attributes that would make a person refuse to murder innocent people. Empathy, fear or respect for authority could all have made him decide not to go on a killing spree, but none did.

[Morilore]

What does 'wizard' mean in this context? I think I've heard the term before, but I can't remember where.

Slang for "male virgin," particularly a male virgin of age 30 or above.

[ray245]

Aren't we still physiologically torturing him by the sheer virtue of locking such a person up, no matter how nice the prison is?

You are sure as hell torturing the women in society by NOT locking up someone who has demonstrated targeting and killing women for the "crime" of him not getting laid.

Sure, it's bad for the rabid dog that we lock him up or put him down, but it's bad for everyone else to let a rabid dog spread rabies and kill people. Likewise, yeah, bad we lock up a spree killer but it's worse if we let someone like that run free to injure/maim/kill others.

Bottom line - we're not locking such a person up to punish them as much as we're locking him up to protect everyone else. The alternative is to kill him to prevent more deaths. On the other hand, if we lock him up and he kills himself I'm not going to shed a lot of tears over him.

In this case it just becomes a punishment before the actual crime though. Elliot survived 22 years before he went on a rampage and kill everybody. So I just find it troubling that just because a person like Elliot has a strong potential for committing mass murderer.

There are bound to be plenty of people out there that might share the same sort of desire without going around killing everyone in their entire life. Should we all lock them up?

The blunt fact is, he's not just useless to society, he's actively dangerous. If he won't seek appropriate help, and isn't willing to stretch his mind far enough for therapists to engage with him, and if he's a danger to other people...

This is a textbook example of why we have mental institutions in the first place, and why sometimes you can't just check yourself out of a mental hospital. Some people are sufficiently irrational and deranged that they are a threat to the lives and health of other people. No matter how much you sympathize with them, you can't just let them wander around as free-range predators.

I'm not saying they should be allowed to wander freely. There is bound to be an option between locking them up in a mental ward for life and allowing them to wander freely.

I think it really boils down to whether we will be having the same discussion we are currently having if Elliot was caught by the police before he went on a rampage. What is the chances of the law throwing up into prison for the rest of his life? Right now it seems like we are all trying to treat all the people who are just as mentally disturbed as Elliot as being just as likely to commit mass murder as Elliot himself. Yet Elliot waited till he is reaching the end of his college life before he went nuts.

In other words, we should not be looking at locking everyone who is just as disturbed as Elliot for the rest of their lives based on their potential to be a threat to society. The example of Elliot has shown just that such a person can resist or at the least not think about mass murders until they reach a tipping point. So in a way, this kind of mentally disturbed person is not entirely different from many other kinds murderers out there. Something in their life push them towards a point of no return, so it is crucial we help these people avoid that. I highly doubt that Elliot wants to be a mass murderer before he went on a rampage.

[Metahive]

Nice red herring.

You were the one who brought the War on Terror out of nowhere in here. That fishy smell is emanating from you.

Again, the ability to understand why a person does shitty things DOES not equate to sympathy and AGREEING with him.

Your and Ray's (well, it's Ray's idea but you didn't contradict him) plan is to supply these people with women to counter their "loneliness" issues. Since that would be essentially rewarding them, what else but sympathy is it?

Question, when a christian fundamentalist blows up an abortion clinic, do we react by further curtailing women's access to abortions? Fuck no, so why this quest to "understand" and "help" people who are just as bad?

Just so we are clear just what kind of people we are talking about here, let me show you some of the quotes I collected while lurking on loveshy messega boards. They're behind spoiler tags because, fuck, that shit is vile.
Spoiler

Tomorrow will be a completely unique date. Two dates in one day, separated only by an hour. Unfortunately, my first date is ugly, fat and seems to be pretty unintelligent but we’ll see . I expect more from the second one, which was arranged in an hour but it’s still very risky. I might be completely fucked up after both of these.

Anyway, I’ll try to test my behavior in such situations. Most imporantly, can I act more relaxed with the first girl knowing I will have a date with the second one just an hour later?

Damn, this will be tough, and I will hardly have the time to eat.

My way of thinking is like this – I will be relaxed with the fat girl, knowing I’ll have a date with the prettier one later. That could make the fat girl attracted to me and give me more confidence with the prettier girl.

Chemistry, I need to find it

Spoiler

You miss the real reason women oppose prostitution. They oppose it because prostitutes are competition. American women are utterly repulsive human beings. The only reason that a man pursues an American women is for sex. American women have nothing else to offer, certainly not their horrible personalities. If prostitution were legal, American women would not be able to find husbands and thereby get alimony and child support. The European system is different. While in America, women are supported by enslaving a husband, in Europe women are supported through taxation and forcing companies to hire incompetent women. Since women can suck men's money via the government in Europe, they don't depend on a husband, so prostitution poses less of a threat. This is why women tolerate prostitution in Europe.

Spoiler

[After all, there are a lot studies about the rapist striving for the humiliation of the victim and demonstrating his or her power over the victim.]

This is simply liberal feminist propaganda. Feminist cannot except the truth that rape is quite simply about filling a biological need. Feminists much prefer this myth which is designed to demonize rapists

Spoiler

My concern for level of pain of rape would be greater if it weren't for the fact that most American women deserve to raped because they oppose prostitution as a sexual outlet for men. Since they deserve to raped, I cannot concern myself with the pain rape causes them.

Spoiler

So why do women despise me?

I have done nothing to any woman. I have ALWAYS treated them with respect.

So why don't I get some back?

...

I'll leave you with this thought;

One day, a loveshy man will not be content with gunning down a few women.

One day, a man will take A THOUSAND of you bitches with him.

Then, maybe the world will sit up and take notice.

Still feel motivated to help these people and "understand" them?

[Broomstick]

Aren't we still physiologically torturing him by the sheer virtue of locking such a person up, no matter how nice the prison is?

You are sure as hell torturing the women in society by NOT locking up someone who has demonstrated targeting and killing women for the "crime" of him not getting laid.

Sure, it's bad for the rabid dog that we lock him up or put him down, but it's bad for everyone else to let a rabid dog spread rabies and kill people. Likewise, yeah, bad we lock up a spree killer but it's worse if we let someone like that run free to injure/maim/kill others.

Bottom line - we're not locking such a person up to punish them as much as we're locking him up to protect everyone else. The alternative is to kill him to prevent more deaths. On the other hand, if we lock him up and he kills himself I'm not going to shed a lot of tears over him.

In this case it just becomes a punishment before the actual crime though.

Go back and read what's in bold above.

NO ONE is talking about locking people up for life BEFORE a crime is committed. That's coming from you.

Assuming Elliot Rodgers had survived his killing spree yes, we would need to protect society from him for the rest of his life. I would argue for the minimum security required to do that, in the most comfortable surroundings we can manage, but once you stab three people, run over a bunch with a car, and shoot a dozen more you have lost some privileges in life.

There are bound to be plenty of people out there that might share the same sort of desire without going around killing everyone in their entire life. Should we all lock them up?

If they are capable of controlling their impulse no, they should not be locked up. When people start posting YouTube manifestos and discussing detailed plans, though, we should have them under some sort of observation.

It's the difference between "My life sucks, I should kill myself" and "My life sucks, I'm going to write a note, leave it nailed to my front door, get in the car drive to the 12th street bridge at 3:10 pm, walk 12 feet along the railing to where there's all those rocks under the water, swallow 100 pills of 650 mg Tylenol, suck down a fifth of Jack Daniel's, and take a swam dive." The first is most likely an expression of frustration. The latter is a detailed plan to off yourself and indicates a much deeper issue along with a higher risk of doing it.

I'm not saying they should be allowed to wander freely. There is bound to be an option between locking them up in a mental ward for life and allowing them to wander freely.

What is that option or options?

I think it really boils down to whether we will be having the same discussion we are currently having if Elliot was caught by the police before he went on a rampage. What is the chances of the law throwing up into prison for the rest of his life?

Pretty slim. In fact, holding him more than 72 hours if he been taken in before such a crime would pretty much be the limit given how controlled and composed he could be. He wasn't, after all, the drooling and gibbering sort of insane. Now, if they had search his possessions they might have turned up some guns, which is cause for alarm in someone with severe mental issues, or if he had cracked and let it be known this wasn't idle fantasy but something truly about to happen they could have taken him before a judge and asked for a longer confinement but in his case I don't think that likely. They didn't have sufficient reason to get a search warrant.

Right now it seems like we are all trying to treat all the people who are just as mentally disturbed as Elliot as being just as likely to commit mass murder as Elliot himself.

Really? We're rounding up everyone cheering him on and posting in ant-PUA and extreme MRA boards and putting them in camps? Oh, wait, we're not.

Something in their life push them towards a point of no return, so it is crucial we help these people avoid that. I highly doubt that Elliot wants to be a mass murderer before he went on a rampage.

Really? Because his videos on YouTube seems indicate differently.

[ray245]

Your and Ray's (well, it's Ray's idea but you didn't contradict him) plan is to supply these people with women to counter their "loneliness" issues. Since that would be essentially rewarding them, what else but sympathy is it?

Who the fuck is saying we should throw women at people like him? Unless you think sex therapist are the same as prostitutes, I fail to understand why you think sex therapy is some sort of reward.

Question, when a christian fundamentalist blows up an abortion clinic, do we react by further curtailing women's access to abortions? Fuck no, so why this quest to "understand" and "help" people who are just as bad?

Because we are not talking about people who have committed a crime here? If we caught someone planning to blow something up before that person can commit such an act, then we should make some effort to change this kind of thinking. If Singapore can help reform wannabe terrorist before they managed to hurt anyone, and release them back into the public, I fail to see why we cannot do the same to any Christian fundamentalist who were caught before they hurt anyone.

Just so we are clear just what kind of people we are talking about here, let me show you some of the quotes I collected while lurking on loveshy messega boards. They're behind spoiler tags because, fuck, that shit is vile.

So we know that there is a fairly sizeable of males out there who shares this kind of horrible thinking. And given they have not committed a crime, we can't exactly lock them up. Neither can we continue to ignore them until another person decides to copy Elliot's actions.

Go back and read what's in bold above.

NO ONE is talking about locking people up for life BEFORE a crime is committed. That's coming from you.

Assuming Elliot Rodgers had survived his killing spree yes, we would need to protect society from him for the rest of his life. I would argue for the minimum security required to do that, in the most comfortable surroundings we can manage, but once you stab three people, run over a bunch with a car, and shoot a dozen more you have lost some privileges in life.

Sure, if he survived his killing spree, but what I am talking about is what if Elliot was caught before he went on a killing spree. What should we do with him in such a scenario?

If they are capable of controlling their impulse no, they should not be locked up. When people start posting YouTube manifestos and discussing detailed plans, though, we should have them under some sort of observation.

It's the difference between "My life sucks, I should kill myself" and "My life sucks, I'm going to write a note, leave it nailed to my front door, get in the car drive to the 12th street bridge at 3:10 pm, walk 12 feet along the railing to where there's all those rocks under the water, swallow 100 pills of 650 mg Tylenol, suck down a fifth of Jack Daniel's, and take a swam dive." The first is most likely an expression of frustration. The latter is a detailed plan to off yourself and indicates a much deeper issue along with a higher risk of doing it.

Yet from what I am seeing, it seems like Elliot was able to resist this kind of impulse until fairly recently. What should we as society do to mitigate the chances of such people losing control of their impulse to kill others along with him?

What is that option or options?

Have a sex therapist aid such people in changing their pattern of thinking? Someone who is able to form a long working relationship with people like Elliot before they went off the rails, and help them keep themselves in check? If not electroconvulsive therapy might be able to help. If we can reform terrorist and release them back to society with heavy monitoring, why can't we do the same for a person like Elliot if he was caught early?

Pretty slim. In fact, holding him more than 72 hours if he been taken in before such a crime would pretty much be the limit given how controlled and composed he could be. He wasn't, after all, the drooling and gibbering sort of insane. Now, if they had search his possessions they might have turned up some guns, which is cause for alarm in someone with severe mental issues, or if he had cracked and let it be known this wasn't idle fantasy but something truly about to happen they could have taken him before a judge and asked for a longer confinement but in his case I don't think that likely. They didn't have sufficient reason to get a search warrant.

So current measures aren't really that sufficient to prevent Elliot from being a threat to society if he was caught early. So we need to find a way to ensure Elliot, if he was released early can receive sufficient help to change his thinking. I highly doubt that what Metahive is proposing, which is basically continuing to aggravate such a person is beneficial at all. If someone's pattern of thinking is a threat to society, the solution shouldn't be saying "fuck him/her". How's that going to help and improve the scenario?

Really? Because his videos on YouTube seems indicate differently.

There seems to be a time before he started to post videos detailing his plans in steps. And even if he did start posting it, there was a time gap which he have yet to carry out his actions. Understanding the time gap and helping him to change his thinking before he actually commit mass murder is crucial if we really want to prevent such tragedy from repeating itself.

I just think that right now, society has yet to become sufficiently receptive of helping people who requires urgent help in understanding there is a problem with understanding women. Why would they come out and seek help if all we are going to do is to lock them up in a mental ward for the rest of their lives?

[Broomstick]

Your and Ray's (well, it's Ray's idea but you didn't contradict him) plan is to supply these people with women to counter their "loneliness" issues. Since that would be essentially rewarding them, what else but sympathy is it?

Who the fuck is saying we should throw women at people like him? Unless you think sex therapist are the same as prostitutes, I fail to understand why you think sex therapy is some sort of reward.

I think you're missing the forest for the trees, here.

First of all, the problem isn't just a lack of relationships with women. This guy had a MASSIVE sense of entitlement, way over the top. Even if he had his own personal sex slave he'd still be butthurt over other perceived slights. That aside, he is so fucked up about women that there is no way in hell he'd be receptive to anything a female sex therapist would say, because of course she'd be one of those evil NPC's in on the conspiracy. He has to be brought around to the concept that women are full human beings like himself and are his intellectual and social equals, something I'm not sure he believes even of other men.

Remember, he wasn't simply abandoned. He's been in therapy from a young age. It's not like there was no help offered, there was a lots of help offered. This is what the guy was like after years of therapy, one shudders to think what he would have been like without any.

I'm all for treatment, counseling, and help but some people just can't be fixed. Not everything works all the time.

So we know that there is a fairly sizeable of males out there who shares this kind of horrible thinking. And given they have not committed a crime, we can't exactly lock them up.

No one is locking those guys up. I'm not sure why you keep raising this strawman.

Neither can we continue to ignore them until another person decides to copy Elliot's actions.

Again, what do you propose we do with these people?

Sure, if he survived his killing spree, but what I am talking about is what if Elliot was caught before he went on a killing spree. What should we do with him in such a scenario?

Legally, there's damn little we can do. In fact, in this case it appears every legal option was used prior to his rampage. What more do you propose we do?

Yet from what I am seeing, it seems like Elliot was able to resist this kind of impulse until fairly recently. What should we as society do to mitigate the chances of such people losing control of their impulse to kill others along with him?

What are your suggestions?

What is that option or options?

Have a sex therapist aid such people in changing their pattern of thinking? Someone who is able to form a long working relationship with people like Elliot before they went off the rails, and help them keep themselves in check?

His sexual problems are a SYMPTOM, they're not the root of his problem. The root of his problem is that he thinks he's a god and should have everything supplied to him without effort,

Remember, he was in therapy for many years. There WERE people with "a long working relationship" with this guy.

MAYBE if someone had hired a hooker for him, got him laid, then said "OK, you're not a virgin anymore, did that really change anything? No? Want to discuss that maybe the biggest problem in your life isn't lack of sex?" it might, might have helped. Or maybe not. But giving this kid a sex life wouldn't have fixed his sense of entitlement or distorted thinking.

If not electroconvulsive therapy might be able to help.

How so?

Although there is a place for ECT in extreme, unrelieved depression I'm not aware of it having ANY use for personality disorders. If you have any such evidence please provide a cite.

If we can reform terrorist and release them back to society with heavy monitoring, why can't we do the same for a person like Elliot if he was caught early?

He WAS caught early. He's BEEN in therapy most of his life. It didn't work.

That's the very sad truth when it comes to mental illness and disorders. You can't always fix people. Sometimes, you can't even do as little as make it better.

So current measures aren't really that sufficient to prevent Elliot from being a threat to society if he was caught early. So we need to find a way to ensure Elliot, if he was released early can receive sufficient help to change his thinking.

Again, he WAS caught early. He's BEEN in therapy most of his life. It didn't work. This wasn't some poor, lost soul who slipped through the cracks. He's been in the system most of his life. There may be nothing that could have made this guy safe to be out on the street. That's goddamn tragic for everyone.

Really? Because his videos on YouTube seems indicate differently.

There seems to be a time before he started to post videos detailing his plans in steps. And even if he did start posting it, there was a time gap which he have yet to carry out his actions. Understanding the time gap and helping him to change his thinking before he actually commit mass murder is crucial if we really want to prevent such tragedy from repeating itself.

Yeah, problem is that time interval was 4 days. That's not a hell of a lot of time. Especially since most people who viewed the videos thought they were satire.

The problem here is that the vast majority of the time the people who post videos or manifestos don't go on to commit crimes. I don't think we want to live in a society where expressing distasteful opinions or viewpoints means a forcible lock up or enforced treatment for thought crimes. I don't want to see the zero-tolerance bullshit imposed on schools imposed on all of society. Hell, I don't even want it in schools, but that's another topic. We need better filters for finding the serious threats and letting the blowhards vent harmlessly. We also need to realize that a certain number of people, despite treatment, despite everything, are going to go on to do Terrible Things.

I just think that right now, society has yet to become sufficiently receptive of helping people who requires urgent help in understanding there is a problem with understanding women. Why would they come out and seek help if all we are going to do is to lock them up in a mental ward for the rest of their lives?

Again, this guy's problem wasn't just women. He didn't understand other human beings, male or female.

That aside - yes, there are many young men who are sexually frustrated and don't understand how to relate to women. They need help. They need other men to help them, not necessarily a female sex therapist because they aren't going to listen to a woman. This is one reason fathers/uncles/male mentors are so important to boys. They teach how to relate to women by their actions. Boys learn how to relate to women by seeing how the older men in their lives relate to women. In many traditional societies boys are taken away for a period of time for indoctrination by older men on how to conduct themselves in society, after which they are considered men and expected to adhere to a code of conduct. We don't have that any more. I think maybe that would be useful.

I don't know, maybe if some of these guys had an older man they respected saying "Hey, kid, you've got the grooming part of it down pat, you dress sharp, you have good looks, but you're missing this vital part here, you need to work on this, and this, and this" it would help. Once I get past my initial disgust it's very clear these guys really are frustrated not just sexually but mentally. They can't figure out what they're doing wrong or how to fix the problem. I don't think a mentor is going to help all of them but it can probably help some of them.

I also think society overemphasizes sex way too much. Being compelled to say "yes" is NOT sexual freedom, sexual freedom is having as much right to say "no" as "yes" and that applies equally to men as well as women. Remarkable as it may sound to young, horny, frustrated permavirgins grown men do turn down offers of sex. I know this because I've made some offers that were turned down. We need to value celibacy as much as promiscuity. As a society we're getting past the notion that a woman's value is measure in how many children she's birthed, we need to get past the notion that a man's value is measured solely in sexual encounters.

[Simon_Jester]

Your and Ray's (well, it's Ray's idea but you didn't contradict him) plan is to supply these people with women to counter their "loneliness" issues. Since that would be essentially rewarding them, what else but sympathy is it?

Who the fuck is saying we should throw women at people like him? Unless you think sex therapist are the same as prostitutes, I fail to understand why you think sex therapy is some sort of reward.

Some have mentioned prostitutes, which is not to say you have.

The catch is that sex therapy itself requires a certain amount of trust and maturity on the part of the person receiving the therapy. That's a real issue here- professional sex therapists might also not want to deal with a person like this, in a professional capacity, because of the risk that their client would become irrational, unprofessional, or even violently criminal.

It all circles back to the fact that women who deal with men this misogynistic and unstable are putting their lives and safety into the hands of Fortune... and most of them know it.

So we need a way to address the risk issue before we can ask anyone, even a therapist, to engage in anything sexually charged with such males.

[Lagmonster]

Further reading of this guy's final year, via CNN articles, paint a portrait of someone screwed up: he attacked people in the park for 'being happy', threw coffee and tea on people for kissing in public, tried to kill girls by pushing them off the ledge of a house (and wound up getting the shit kicked out of him by the party-goers for trying, in addition to a broken leg when he fell off the ledge instead). After all that, he was still able to arm himself and kill people. Imagine if the party-goers, instead of viciously beating him in the driveway, had instead just restrained him and called the police?

[xerex]

it's very clear these guys really are frustrated not just sexually but mentally. They can't figure out what they're doing wrong or how to fix the problem. I don't think a mentor is going to help all of them but it can probably help some of them.
.

I agree with this.

[ray245]

I think you're missing the forest for the trees, here.

First of all, the problem isn't just a lack of relationships with women. This guy had a MASSIVE sense of entitlement, way over the top. Even if he had his own personal sex slave he'd still be butthurt over other perceived slights. That aside, he is so fucked up about women that there is no way in hell he'd be receptive to anything a female sex therapist would say, because of course she'd be one of those evil NPC's in on the conspiracy. He has to be brought around to the concept that women are full human beings like himself and are his intellectual and social equals, something I'm not sure he believes even of other men.

Remember, he wasn't simply abandoned. He's been in therapy from a young age. It's not like there was no help offered, there was a lots of help offered. This is what the guy was like after years of therapy, one shudders to think what he would have been like without any.

I'm all for treatment, counseling, and help but some people just can't be fixed. Not everything works all the time.

I'm not sure the therapy he has been receiving is actually been targeting the issues he is having. Therapy works only when the patient is receptive of it, and in this case, and if the therapy does not give him what he desire, which is mainly social acceptance by women, then the therapy he has is as good as useless.

If sex is a better means of communicating with a person like Elliot to understand that, then it should not be ruled out as an option. I do agree it must be done in a manner that does not endanger the therapist.

No one is locking those guys up. I'm not sure why you keep raising this strawman.

Mainly because you have been constantly saying these people are a danger to society?

Again, what do you propose we do with these people?

Legally, there's damn little we can do. In fact, in this case it appears every legal option was used prior to his rampage. What more do you propose we do?

What are your suggestions?

See below.

His sexual problems are a SYMPTOM, they're not the root of his problem. The root of his problem is that he thinks he's a god and should have everything supplied to him without effort,

Remember, he was in therapy for many years. There WERE people with "a long working relationship" with this guy.

MAYBE if someone had hired a hooker for him, got him laid, then said "OK, you're not a virgin anymore, did that really change anything? No? Want to discuss that maybe the biggest problem in your life isn't lack of sex?" it might, might have helped. Or maybe not. But giving this kid a sex life wouldn't have fixed his sense of entitlement or distorted thinking.

I don't think that sex therapy is as simple as giving him sex and removing his status as a virgin. Therapy works most effectively when the patient are responsive to the advice given by the therapist. If sex helps as some sort of positive reinforcement and a form of encouragement, it could be able to communicate to him to reduce his sense of entitlement and distorted thinking.

If not electroconvulsive therapy might be able to help.

How so?

Although there is a place for ECT in extreme, unrelieved depression I'm not aware of it having ANY use for personality disorders. If you have any such evidence please provide a cite.

I've read an report for RAMAS that suggest that ECT can be used for psychopaths, when they are suffering from depression. In the case of Elliot, it seems like he was feeling depressed over social/female rejection. The same report did suggest more surgical invasive treatment as well, so it is possible those kind of treatment might help people like him.

http://www.ramas.co.uk/report3.pdf

He WAS caught early. He's BEEN in therapy most of his life. It didn't work.

That's the very sad truth when it comes to mental illness and disorders. You can't always fix people. Sometimes, you can't even do as little as make it better.

That does not indicate that all forms of therapy has been used on him. Therapy can advance to things like psychosurgery if that is deem necessary. Until we have heard reports that he actually underwent those kind of treatment, I won't want to rule out that we have done everything we can for people like this.

Again, he WAS caught early. He's BEEN in therapy most of his life. It didn't work. This wasn't some poor, lost soul who slipped through the cracks. He's been in the system most of his life. There may be nothing that could have made this guy safe to be out on the street. That's goddamn tragic for everyone.

It is bloody tragic that (what seems to be) conventional therapy is unable to help him and everyone. But that does not indicate that all forms of treatment has been used on him.

Yeah, problem is that time interval was 4 days. That's not a hell of a lot of time. Especially since most people who viewed the videos thought they were satire.

Then doesn't that means the therapist fails to detect such dangerous symptoms? It's clear that he has been part of those forums that seems to espouse those kind of views for quite a while. And he has apparently uploaded those videos under his names long before he posted the "final" videos.

The problem here is that the vast majority of the time the people who post videos or manifestos don't go on to commit crimes. I don't think we want to live in a society where expressing distasteful opinions or viewpoints means a forcible lock up or enforced treatment for thought crimes. I don't want to see the zero-tolerance bullshit imposed on schools imposed on all of society. Hell, I don't even want it in schools, but that's another topic. We need better filters for finding the serious threats and letting the blowhards vent harmlessly. We also need to realize that a certain number of people, despite treatment, despite everything, are going to go on to do Terrible Things.

There is also the possibility that his therapist failed to detect and diagnose these problems and do his/her job. Until we have actual evidences that all forms of psychiatric treatments has actually been used, we cannot dismiss this case an example where these people are unfixable.

Again, this guy's problem wasn't just women. He didn't understand other human beings, male or female.

He seems to be able to understand all those "loveshy" type of people that he has been hanging around with on internet forums.

That aside - yes, there are many young men who are sexually frustrated and don't understand how to relate to women. They need help. They need other men to help them, not necessarily a female sex therapist because they aren't going to listen to a woman. This is one reason fathers/uncles/male mentors are so important to boys. They teach how to relate to women by their actions. Boys learn how to relate to women by seeing how the older men in their lives relate to women. In many traditional societies boys are taken away for a period of time for indoctrination by older men on how to conduct themselves in society, after which they are considered men and expected to adhere to a code of conduct. We don't have that any more. I think maybe that would be useful.

I'm not sure if other men is ideal for such young men from forums like "pickup artist". They have been attacking other men for being too successful in sexual relationship and they doesn't seem to be able to relate to people that has achieved success in forming sexual relationships.

I don't know, maybe if some of these guys had an older man they respected saying "Hey, kid, you've got the grooming part of it down pat, you dress sharp, you have good looks, but you're missing this vital part here, you need to work on this, and this, and this" it would help. Once I get past my initial disgust it's very clear these guys really are frustrated not just sexually but mentally. They can't figure out what they're doing wrong or how to fix the problem. I don't think a mentor is going to help all of them but it can probably help some of them.

I agree. If we can at least prevent one possible mass murderer from carrying out his plan, then it think this is better than what we are doing now.

I also think society overemphasizes sex way too much. Being compelled to say "yes" is NOT sexual freedom, sexual freedom is having as much right to say "no" as "yes" and that applies equally to men as well as women. Remarkable as it may sound to young, horny, frustrated permavirgins grown men do turn down offers of sex. I know this because I've made some offers that were turned down. We need to value celibacy as much as promiscuity. As a society we're getting past the notion that a woman's value is measure in how many children she's birthed, we need to get past the notion that a man's value is measured solely in sexual encounters.

I definitely agree. I think we are placing too much emphasis on men being deemed as losers if they have yet to remove their status virgins as young adults. It time we should seriously reconsider men's role in society as well.

[General Zod]

You have absolutely no basis to judge whether his therapy was targeting his issues or not. For all we know he was withholding information from his therapist in order to avoid treatments that might have worked.

[ray245]

You have absolutely no basis to judge whether his therapy was targeting his issues or not. For all we know he was withholding information from his therapist in order to avoid treatments that might have worked.

That's my point though. If the issue is not being able to identify his issues correctly, then we should not make an argument that all forms of help we can give him is exhausted, which seems to be the argument made by Broomstick.

[Broomstick]

You have absolutely no basis to judge whether his therapy was targeting his issues or not. For all we know he was withholding information from his therapist in order to avoid treatments that might have worked.

That's my point though. If the issue is not being able to identify his issues correctly, then we should not make an argument that all forms of help we can give him is exhausted, which seems to be the argument made by Broomstick.

We don't know either way. We don't know if he was withholding information. We don't know if the therapists were competent or incompetent. We don't know if he was diagnosed correctly or not. We will never know this because of medical privacy laws which I do in fact support. A person's medical problems should not be fodder for the masses.

You, Ray, however are proposing ECT and psychosugery a.k.a. lobotomy (granted, we don't use icepicks through the eye orbit any more but it is a descendant of that concept). That is extreme psychiatric action. It's like discussing quadruple amputation or hemicorporectomy. Aside from the detail that the appropriate use is extremely narrow, that is not done lightly (not anymore, thank god!) and is a long, multi-year, highly involved process to get approval for doing that. There is no way someone like Elliot Rodgers would ever consent to such a thing so the first step would be to get him declared incompetent - which will be very difficult indeed. Then you have to argue before the legal system that this is in his best interests. That's a long haul. It's not easy. It's deliberately not easy because the potential side effects of such treatments can be horrific.

Just as we don't know what, exactly, he had been diagnosed with, or what or how well his therapists did for him, or what information he gave or withheld, we have no way to know if such extreme measures would even be appropriate for a case such as his. It's not a matter of "we tried everything else, let's do this", there has to be some rationale that this would help. For extreme depression it was found that natural seizures and insulin shocks sometimes helped, thus the motive for artificially inducing them for extreme cases. But I don't think Rodgers' primary problem was depression, it was a personality disorder, in which case there is no evidence ECT would have any effect whatsoever so far as I know. Likewise for brain surgery - in a very limited number of cases it can help but the scope is very narrow, the potential for side effects downright scary, and I've yet to see anything about it helping a personality disorder short of so fucking up a person's brain they're reduced to zombie status, which certainly doesn't help the patient.

I understand, Ray, you want to be able to fix the problem. Unfortunately, at the present time we don't have a fix for some things. When we can't fix something this serious the best we can do is attempt to limit the harm done.

[ray245]

I would think that reducing such a person's ability to feel further emotional anger and depression (if brain surgery would work this way) would be necessary if we are seriously considering locking this person up for the rest of his or her life.

Elliot's videos seems to suggest he was unhappy with the way the world works to act against him, so it would seems to me that it's not really helpful to reinforce his unhappiness due to genetics. That someone being born wrong should experienced a life of pain and misery is just a horrible concept to me. It's not like such a person would be able to understand the problem with himself like most criminals do when they have their liberties being taken away.

[Kitsune]

Phil Plain wrote on it
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronom ... ailed.html