No dates? Shoot a bunch of people. Santa Barbara Drive By.

[Llamalandia]

I'm trying to limit myself to one super depressing google search a day.

Fair enough. The articles you found are super depressing enough.

Well as depressing as that is no doubt one could find many (though likely not proportionally many) positive and uplifting stories as well. I mean, the world isn't all just a cesspool of hate murder and guns, there's all kinds of nice things too.

We just tend to focus on the negative because it's human nature, especially on the internet.

[Cannot think of a name]

Fair enough. The articles you found are super depressing enough.

Well as depressing as that is no doubt one could find many (though likely not proportionally many) positive and uplifting stories as well. I mean, the world isn't all just a cesspool of hate murder and guns, there's all kinds of nice things too.

We just tend to focus on the negative because it's human nature, especially on the internet.

This is a empty statement even by empty statement standards. I mean, you would have almost managed more meaning by simply ramming your head against the keyboard. I now get what you are doing with the smilies, it's all been an experiment to see how many words you can dribble into a comment box and still have the smilie be the most content in the entire post.

[Shie]

At least he didn't rape anyone. He was mentally ill enough to do it but still died a virgin despite trying so hard. This wasn't just about sex.

[Llamalandia]

Meh, sometimes people don't listen and more forceful means are necessary, not that I'm saying they were necessarily appropriate in this instance.

I'm sorry... is it just me (lol, no, it isn't), or are you seriously suggesting that something such as rape (be it male-on-female or female-on-male) is... necessary?

Just wanted to clear that up.

No no no. Certainly not. But sometimes saying punching the school bully for instance isn't inherently wrong. Or more nobly, fighting in war against an oppressive govt like in Syria. That's more what I meant Yeah, unless the human race is facing imminent extinction rape is wrong. Murder is usually wrong too, though if you say kill a child molester who walked on a technicality that really wouldn't bother me a whole lot. Not that I'm a huge fan of vigilante justice, but it is sometimes necessary.

[Cannot think of a name]

At least he didn't rape anyone. He was mentally ill enough to do it but still died a virgin. This wasn't just about sex.

Worst silver lining ever.

[Llamalandia]

Well as depressing as that is no doubt one could find many (though likely not proportionally many) positive and uplifting stories as well. I mean, the world isn't all just a cesspool of hate murder and guns, there's all kinds of nice things too.

We just tend to focus on the negative because it's human nature, especially on the internet.

This is a empty statement even by empty statement standards. I mean, you would have almost managed more meaning by simply ramming your head against the keyboard. I know get what you are doing with the smilies, it's all been an experiment to see how many words you can dribble into a comment box and still have the smilie be the most content in the entire post.

Just trying to cheer people up, but ok, I admit it's fairly vacuous. Was it really that much of an imposition on you though?

[Llamalandia]

At least he didn't rape anyone. He was mentally ill enough to do it but still died a virgin. This wasn't just about sex.

Worst silver lining ever.

At least he didn't kill even more people. How's that for a bad silver lining.

[Cannot think of a name]

This is a empty statement even by empty statement standards. I mean, you would have almost managed more meaning by simply ramming your head against the keyboard. I know get what you are doing with the smilies, it's all been an experiment to see how many words you can dribble into a comment box and still have the smilie be the most content in the entire post.

Just trying to cheer people up, but ok, I admit it's fairly vacuous. Was it really that much of an imposition on you though?

You cannot pretend that you're so far down your own rabbit hole that you've confused amusing yourself with cheering others up.

[Dakini]

At least he didn't rape anyone. He was mentally ill enough to do it but still died a virgin despite trying so hard. This wasn't just about sex.

Implying that rape is about sex...

[Llamalandia]

At least he didn't rape anyone. He was mentally ill enough to do it but still died a virgin despite trying so hard. This wasn't just about sex.

Implying that rape is about sex...

It can be but is far more often about power over another than any actual sexual gratification.

[Shie]

Worst silver lining ever.

At least he didn't kill even more people. How's that for a bad silver lining.

He didn't try hard enough, I don't think he d any social skills at all.

[Llamalandia]

Just trying to cheer people up, but ok, I admit it's fairly vacuous. Was it really that much of an imposition on you though?

You cannot pretend that you're so far down your own rabbit hole that you've confused amusing yourself with cheering others up.

Umm apparently I am because that's honestly all I was trying to convey. yeah, the world is a dark places sometimes but so what? Just because all the media wants to talk about is the bad stuff doesn't mean we all have to follow suit all the time.

[Tahar Joblis]

I actually was contemplating my own comment (look, someone has to) and decided to see if my google fu was up to looking into it. Here's what I found:

A shockingly similar shooting at an aerobics class in 2009
A 16 year old kid getting stabby in Conneticut after getting turned down for a last minute prom date.
Of course the Texas shooting the prostitute thing that NSG covered when it happened, actually. (seriously, that came up in a google search for shootings of this nature)
This Baton Rouge teen who got shot for refusing sex.
Australian lady, shot in the crotch for refusing oral sex.
Pregnant woman shot for refusing sex.

At this point I stopped looking. There's no real database for this, these came from fiddling with google search terms.

You could probably throw in a lot of the women who are murdered when they attempt to leave abuses partners. It's not the exact same thing, but I suspect the motivations are similar.

Do you know who's a closer match than looking at all the people who are angry for being rejected by a particular person and reacting to that? Or looking at abusers who respond with violence to people trying to leave them?

Valerie Solanas shooting Andy Warhol. It's not every day that someone who wrote out a detailed fantasy about exterminating half of the human race goes out and shoots someone in a dramatic way calculated to draw public attention.

Granted, Valerie Solanas only shot one person, and he didn't die. She didn't kill four people of her own gender and two of the gender she wrote about putting in concentration camps. There are lots of differences. However, it's quite a bit more similar than (for example) shooting someone in a moving car in the dark claiming you were attempting to get a refund of the money you paid them for sex, and most likely getting off because the jury was convinced that you didn't actually intend to shoot them, just the tires of the car.

[Dakini]

At least he didn't kill even more people. How's that for a bad silver lining.

He didn't try hard enough.

Why don't you two get a room where you can try to out-terrible each other?

[Llamalandia]

At least he didn't kill even more people. How's that for a bad silver lining.

He didn't try hard enough.

No i think he realized he was screwed and he could either end himself or have Santa Barabara's finest end his life for him. Either way he was pretty much out of time, fortunately.

[Shie]

He didn't try hard enough.

Why don't you two get a room where you can try to out-terrible each other?

This isn't funny, people were actually shot dead because his delusion was so powerful.

[Forsher]

I actually was contemplating my own comment (look, someone has to) and decided to see if my google fu was up to looking into it. Here's what I found:

A shockingly similar shooting at an aerobics class in 2009
A 16 year old kid getting stabby in Conneticut after getting turned down for a last minute prom date.
Of course the Texas shooting the prostitute thing that NSG covered when it happened, actually. (seriously, that came up in a google search for shootings of this nature)
This Baton Rouge teen who got shot for refusing sex.
Australian lady, shot in the crotch for refusing oral sex.
Pregnant woman shot for refusing sex.

At this point I stopped looking. There's no real database for this, these came from fiddling with google search terms.

You could probably throw in a lot of the women who are murdered when they attempt to leave abuses partners. It's not the exact same thing, but I suspect the motivations are similar.

Having read CTOAN's list (and clicked on the NSG link), I started thinking that this could be considered a twist on the classic "murder your former partner because they've found someone else" motive.

As to the crime more generally, it's horrible and sad but I will not be reading or watching that much about it; my curiosity pretty much extends to knowing that it's happened. As a result, I was quite surprised on reading this to find out about the dimension encompassed by the thread title's "no dates?". This really demonstrates the flaw with being satisfied with being aware of the crime because it's readily apparent that this motive's particular depravity is the most significant aspect of the crime. However, I did take issue with both the first image's original bit and, more obviously, the reply it received.

My problem with the former is that (the way I read it) is that the actions of a total whackjob whose crime was independent (i.e. not part of a wider network) led to Witton's being terrified. Fair's fair if she's local to the incident but for the most part the idiots who think the way Rodger did aren't likely to convert those thoughts into criminal activities. I agree with some of the comments above that I have read that the underlying world view isn't isolated to this incident and it's obviously not that different to a lot of other crimes out there but given the reasoning applies to a great many murders* I, living many thousands of kilometres away in a different social and gender context, do not see a clear reason for this particular event to be terrifying for those who aren't local to it.

The reply is, well, quite shocking. I was not expecting to read a comment not only endorsing Rodger's actions but one that basically serves as a call to action. If this had been the starting remark I don't think that I'd have assessed Witton's tweet in the same way. I hope it's a troll but I didn't (and still don't) read it that way. Factually erroneous, immoral, criminal and just plain disgusting.

In short, the crime is bad. The motive is worse and indicative of wider issues in society (as demonstrated by the reply to Witton) and the bit that Forsher focusses on is an irrelevant side-track complaint deriving (in all likelihood) from Forsher's removal from the event.

*I daresay most murderers feel like their actions are, to a greater or lesser extent, justified.

[Shie]

Implying that rape is about sex...

It can be but is far more often about power over another than any actual sexual gratification.

Rape is about sex. If somebody wants power they could get into a job with a lot of responsibilities.

I never understood "rape is about power".

[Dakini]

Why don't you two get a room where you can try to out-terrible each other?

This isn't funny, people were actually shot dead because his delusion was so powerful.

If it's not funny, why don't you two jokers stop fucking about and making horrible comments?

[Forsher]

It can be but is far more often about power over another than any actual sexual gratification.

Rape is about sex. If somebody wants power they could get into a job with a lot of responsibilities.

I never understood "rape is about power".

Rape is the forcing of one party's will on another. That is another way of writing rape is about the violation of consent. I think this is the basis of the power argument (I, rightly or wrongly, understand rape as a crime of consent that can, rather obviously, happen for a variety of reasons).

[Republic of Coldwater]

I took the time to watch his videos, and they are so freaking crazy, as he talks about "annihilating" everybody, and he is angry about the unfairness of society. Well, too bad, life is never going to be fair, someone will be better than one, someone will have a better time than you. I don't know how he has come to this, I cannot comprehend.

[Tahar Joblis]

It can be but is far more often about power over another than any actual sexual gratification.

Rape is about sex. If somebody wants power they could get into a job with a lot of responsibilities.

I never understood "rape is about power".

It comes from some work studying the motivations of rapists. Basically, interviews with rapists have suggested a constellation of motivations, leading to a typology in which some rapes are classified as "power rapes." Some scholars see sexual motivations as secondary, and under typologies where "power rape" is a thing, it's not an uncommon type of rape.

Some people have applied fallacious reasoning to infer that all rape is entirely about power and not at all about sex, which is bullshit, but has made an effective talking point.

[Grenartia]

1. Nobody is entitled to a relationship, if that's what you mean. I can date or not date any woman at my leisure. Just because say, a woman happens to think like this kid, doesn't entitle her to my time or energy. There's better women I can spend my resources on.

People aren't entitled to having their needs met? According to your train of thought, we may as well privatize everything and leave our children out in the wilderness.

Not if those needs involve forcing people to have sex/a relationship with somebody they don't want to.

1. Which is like saying that we should just hand robbers all out money, because in the past, not appeasing them has caused them to kill people for it anyways. Your argument is one of total stupidity.

2. And how exactly are you planning on enforcing this?

3. I have no clue what the fuck you're even trying to say.

1. Funny you should mention that. Scandanavian countries do a better job combating robbery by addressing poverty than America does by arming everybody else.

2. I'm not. I never said it should be a law either, so don't go putting words in my mouth.

3. Read it again, then, and tell me which part you got lost at.

1. Strawman. Has nothing to do with anything I've said. Also, if you'll look through my post history, you'll find that I'm more than fully aware of the superiorities of the Nordic Model (which the Scandinavian countries use, obviously). However, again, this discussion is not about the Nordic Model. This thread is about an entitled asshat who should've been locked up for his own good.

2. Then what's the point in talking about that? Without a law, nothing on that front will change.

3. Everything. It was phrased awkwardly.

There's no such thing as objective attractiveness. Its all subjective. In essence, all of what you linked to does is just show current trends, which can totally change over time (for instance, beauty standards for women 500 years ago, IIRC, was what we'd call "fat", and with rather pale skin). Those standards have completely changed.

Attractiveness is very much objective and is not completely arbitrary.

Our standards are actually very similar and have hardly changed for the past 10,000 years.

This paleolithic era fertility goddess(sex-symbol) statue has a waist that is smaller than her hips.


Modern sex-symbol Christina Hendricks has a waist smaller than her hips.

Except, no. The first picture's waist was larger than her hips. That is very clearly the case, and you're obviously being intellectually dishonest and misrepresenting clear visual facts.

There are 4 lights.

I'm sorry, that was uncalled for.

Almost everything you've been saying has been uncalled for, Shie. Your macho-bullshit is getting on everyone's nerves.

Confirming.

I don't know you enough to understand why, we'll leave it at "unsure".

Because I have different tastes perhaps?

I mean, you cannot reasonably think that I must have the same standard for attractiveness you do, right?

Of course you do. Its not like personal preferences are shaped by social experiences, and not biology.

Preferences for facial and body features, favorite colors, favorite foods, etc., are all determined by biology. Anorexic supermodels with large breasts and hips are clearly preferred by all men, as is the color blue over the color pink. And all black people obviously prefer watermelon and fried chicken over all other foods.

Heh, "taste."

Anyway, while it's immediately obvious that Shie is arrogant for claiming such unwarranted certainty as to the circumstances behind your opinions, I'm not sure it's necessarily less arrogant in and of itself to claim such unwarranted certainty as to the reasons why the shooter had difficulty dating.

Well, the thing is that while I do NOT find Christina Hendricks attractive, I am also not denying the fact she may be attractive to other people.

And by the same token, simply because the kid isn't attractive to me because of his personality, it doesn't mean someone may or may not find him attractive.

What I disagree however is to hand this kid pity simply because he wasn't attractive to several women and he was a virgin. His angst isn't an excuse to go and kill several people.

Indeed.

If I were a woman, and I knew him IRL, and he weren't an entitled asswipe, I would've slept with him, because I found him physically attractive. However, that is dependent on his personality, and if he was an entitled asswipe (as he was), and I knew that, I definitely would not have slept with him, and in fact, I'd have told him to his fucking face that is the reason why I wouldn't sleep with him.

If I'm going to sleep with somebody, they need to understand that having sex is a gift, freely given, and freely accepted, and that one is not "entitled" to it. If you can't handle that simple fact, then you should either get a hooker, or keep using your hands.

Probably for the best. Otherwise, we'd end up with the same result but him ranting about how the whores didn't give him a discount based on how charming and handsome he was.

Additionally, i suspect that a relationship would have also ended up tragically.

Probably would've ended with domestic violence and/or rape, due to the asshat's undeserved sense of entitlement to sex.

What I do not understand is why getting laid is so important to drive a man to insanity. I mean seriously. How messed up can you be when that is the worst of your problems?!

I agree, and when I was his age, I was also having difficulties getting laid.

Hell, I didn't even have a BMW. I had a piece of shit '87 Grand Am that had been totaled the year prior. Seriously, it could have been the trope pic for The Alleged Car, and I never thought murder was the answer.

And I got turned down by every person I had a crush on until I was 16. And even since then, I've been turned down by people I've had crushes on more than I've been accepted. I never once thought that murder was the answer to my problems. But I did get accepted every so often, and I didn't (and still don't) even have a fucking car, or even a license.

Being macho isn't bad.

Right now, we live in a different time where it's acceptable for girls to wear pants, we live in a time where boys don't join the army, and people are in-doors and vitamin D deficient. Our portion sizes have gotten larger and some people have gotten obese because of our sedentary lifestyles. I have high standards for males and females because our collective standard has dropped.

Here's what's good about our time, though. There's so many people of different cultures and different backgrounds that have come together and gotten to know each other. I love diversity and I think that immigration is a good thing.

What was good about the past?

Less children were born out of wedlock, there were nuclear families, the males were the breadwinners, and women raised children.

What happened to taking the wife and kids to a picnic where the sun shines on everyone who feels love?

Life's about doing things with someone where you don't have to think twice and you know it's all right. It's about holding a woman in your arms when the sun is out and forgetting that you're one person and become two. Being macho isn't about having sex with a lot of women, it's about one woman, your girl. In time, your kids. Being a man is about protecting your family and raising your kids with family values.

If this boy had the right upbringing and environment, he would've been better and wouldn't have shot those people down.

Can we like, do without the underlined sexist double standards? Also, you know, gender roles are shitty.

Being macho isn't bad.

Right now, we live in a different time where it's acceptable for girls to wear pants, we live in a time where boys don't join the army, and people are in-doors and vitamin D deficient. Our portion sizes have gotten larger and some people have gotten obese because of our sedentary lifestyles. I have high standards for males and females because our collective standard has dropped.

Here's what's good about our time, though. There's so many people of different cultures and different backgrounds that have come together and gotten to know each other. I love multiculturalism and I think that immigration is a good thing.

What was good about the past?

Less children were born out of wedlock, there were nuclear families, the males were the breadwinners, and women raised children.

What happened to taking the wife and kids to a picnic where the sun shines on everyone who feels love? Life's about doing things with someone where you don't have to think twice and you know it's all right. It's about holding a woman in your arms when the sun is out and forgetting that you're one person and become two. Being macho isn't about having sex with a lot of women, it's about one woman, your girl. In time, your kids. Being a man is about protecting your family and raising your kids with family values.

And just what in the nine hells does your false, overly romanticized version of a past that never existed have to do with a mass shooting?

This, too.

Define "right upbringing and environment."

A socially conservative Middle-American nuclear family with an Abrahamic religion.

Fuck no. Specifically for the underlined, which is irrelevant. Also, if you value "diversity" so much, why no same-sex families, and why only those from non-Abrahamic religions (or no religion at all)? And how exactly do you propose enforcing your pointless bullshit?

Or is this just you being edgy for the sake of edginess as always?

Define "right upbringing and environment."

had a loving caring family.

See, I can get behind this.

And you know what?
I agree. That's not a situation I consider very appealing.

They apparently do, and if it's what they want, then they should feel free to get up to it.

The reason a lot of people feel pressured into being the most sexually active and having the most sexual partners is due to toxic masculinity and shaming of males. (Even if a lot of them don't ACTUALLY want to join that 20%, they just feel obliged to in order to be a "Real man.")
MOST of them simply languish in a state of self-doubt and conflicted emotions, and i'm sympathetic. Those people need help.
But I guess this guy was just a fucking psycho.

A real man is chivalrous, a real woman is a maiden.

Again, more sexist double standards that hold individuals (and therefore, society as a whole) back.

A real man is chivalrous, a real woman is a maiden.

Guess I'm not a "real" man or woman, and happy about it.

Hell, I'm neither, too, and I'm still chivalrous (not totally as far as the double standards go, but I do apply things to all genders equally). No fucking clue what being a "maiden" entails, but its no doubt also sexist bullshit.

I'm the opposite of the reason, I don't believe that men and women should be promiscuous.

I think EVERYONE should have one partner ONLY, not have sex with many different people as this killer was led to believe.

People experiment, it is part of learning about your sexual preferences.

Exactly.

You made a claim about how a real man and real woman should act. Considering the fact that I am female, that means you are telling me how I should act, so while this is not about me specifically your ideas affect me, and thus I have a very good reason to want to respond.

Dear, if you're going to express your taste in candor, it's not sensible to be half hearted.

I'm not telling you how to act; I'm just stating a preference.

Where the fuck do you get off calling them "Dear" like they're your damn mistress? And how exactly have they been "half hearted"? You didn't do it before they told you they just happened to own a vagina, and the second they tell you that, you start "dear"ing them like they're your personal slut?

And yes, you have been advocating for changing how people in society should act. That's telling people how to act, and is far more than "just stating a preference".

First don't call me dear it's condescending. Second your preference is a preference for how I should act. I do not like the preference and stated so.

Firstly, my referring to you as "dear" was out of respect. In the same way how I refer to males who are my senior as "sir" women who I consider my seniors as "ma'am", and young males who are equal to me in worth as "buddy" or "mate". I hold women who I consider my equals in terms of respect as "dear".

Except, you know, referring to people you aren't romantically involved with, related to, or even close friends with as "dear" is condescending.

Also, they've already expressed to you that they're not a woman, and thus, referring to them as such is an inherently shitty thing to do. To say nothing of the fact that its unchivalrous. Or do you hold standards for others that you don't see yourself as having to follow?

You know, you really have to be trolling at this point to get so close to describing the exact opposite situation the shooter was in. The shooter was driving a BMW. His father is a movie producer. He was also pretty okay looking. I've definitely seen uglier, poorer and less-famous guys get into relationships before. If he had a reasonable personality to go with all of that, he would have been set, but as we can see from his video tirades, he did not have a reasonable personality.

If you read my further responses, I went on to explain his precise issues with scientific fact that explain why he's unsuccessful with the ladies and I'm not going to repeat myself.

Except, you know, Dakini's a scientist, and could probably point out to you exactly how your so-called "scientific fact" isn't credible in this discussion, if she felt like it.

If you read my further responses, I went on to explain his precise issues with scientific fact that explain why he's unsuccessful with the ladies and I'm not going to repeat myself.

As I stated before, it's about as scientific as phrenology.

No, I'm sooper cereal, youz guise! You can liek totally tell everything about a person's personality by feeling the bumps on their head! Its liek sooper cereal science, guise!

Attractiveness is very much objective and is not completely arbitrary.

Our standards are actually very similar and have hardly changed for the past 10,000 years.

(Image)

This paleolithic era fertility goddess(sex-symbol) statue has a waist that is smaller than her hips.

I'm not sure what definition of "waist" and "hips" you're using, but the statue's waist is clearly much larger than its hips.


edit: Also, in present-day societies the "optimal" waist to hip ratio in women varies considerably, being as high as 1.1:1 in some places.

I knew I couldn't be the only person who saw that.

If you read my further responses, I went on to explain his precise issues with scientific fact that explain why he's unsuccessful with the ladies and I'm not going to repeat myself.

I continued to read and saw further confirmation that you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about.

And there you have it, folks. Confirmation from a scientist that Shie's "science" is bullshit.

Additionally, i suspect that a relationship would have also ended up tragically.

Indeed. If he had found a woman who was willing to date him out of pity (as some have suggested one should have because clearly, women only exist for the benefit of men), we would probably be reading about a murder/suicide after an extended bout of stalking when the relationship ended.

Obviously, you're only saying that because you're a woman and you're selfish and want people to die.

I'm a milder version of that; I don't think this guy would've been saved by it, but I do believe that, so long as pragmatic considerations often take priority over the purely attraction-based components of the decision, how romantically popular someone already is otherwise may as well be one of these. I do not recall specifying the sexes of those involved in this, as I believe it could be a factor for either.



That's pushing it as it is either way, but it's not the same thing as saying only men were entitled to one. You were putting words in their mouths nonetheless.



And until or unless we actually have that for comparison, and the same users, involved in the same thread, aren't saying it, you don't know and are essentially putting words in their mouths nonetheless.

Both sides of the aisle have said it: you do not owe anyone a relationship out of pity.

How hard is it to understand that relationships are about two people where there's chemistry as well as other pragmatic and sentimental factors; not just some duty to please some poor idiot out on the street?

I couldn't be in a relationship where a woman drags me out of pity or some other emotional blackmail bullshit. I'd feel cheated out of my own freedom to choose.

Indeed. I refuse to be pressured into becoming romantically and/or sexually involved with anybody, purely because "they've never gotten any before". If somebody shoots a bunch of people because they "couldn't get any", then its their fault for being such a shitty person that they think that's an actual excuse to shoot people up. Not mine for not "giving them a chance". To say nothing of the fact that I shouldn't have to put myself in danger by "giving them a chance" if they're the kind of person who's going to justify mass murder and suicide by "being desperate".

Sooner or later, their toxicity (and anybody who'd think to justify murdering others and themselves by being desperate is inherently a toxic person) will drive me to leave. And if they're going to shoot people for "not going out with them", then they're probably also going to shoot anybody who tries to leave them.

A real man has sex with one woman, only.

Stereotypes can be changed with enough repetition.


I empathize with the boy but his deeds should not go unpunished.

He's dead. Are you suggesting that we put his corpse on trial?

Well, barring ressurecting him like Frankenstein, somehow turning him into a zombie, hijacking a Goa'uld sarcophagus, or hiring Jesus to Lazarus him, yes. Obviously. And when he's found guilty, we put him to death. Again.

No, we put his legacy on trial. He should be remembered as something nobody should become.

I see. Are we in immediate danger of him being remembered as anything else?

And even if we were, where's the legal precedent?

You still didn't prove it, I used credible scientific source materials, I used legitimate comparisons while you did none of that.

Okay, let's take a look at the "credible scientific source materials".

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/hase..._to_Harris.pdf

404 Not Found.

Yep, credible scientific source material right there.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1087598/



There is some evidence that masculine male faces are found attractive (e.g. Cunningham et al. 1990; Grammer & Thornhill 1994), however, several studies have shown that feminine faces and faces of lowdominance are also attractive (Berry & McArthur 1985; Perrett et al. 1998). This suggests male facial attractiveness judgements may depend on more than just cues to immunocompetence (‘good genes’).

So it seems women aren't attracted to just Manly Men faces, something you conveniently omitted in your Mad Men fanboyism.

Why should some females not showa preference for phenotypic signs in males that provide cues to higher-quality immune systems? In certain species with bi-parental care, high phenotypic-quality males invest less in each female than males of lower phenotypic quality. For example, in male pine engraver beetles (Ips pini) large males are found to leave the female and her nest (i.e. stop investing) sooner than smaller males (Reid & Roitberg 1995; Robertson 1998). Robertson & Roitberg (1998) note that larger males had a greater potential for further reproduction than did smaller males and therefore benefited by leaving earlier. It has also been argued that, in humans, males in possession of good genes should also invest more time in seeking further mating opportunities with other females than in parenting behaviour (Gangestad & Simpson 2000). It may be adaptive for females in poor condition to show a preference for males displaying cues to relatively poor heritable parasite resistance, as the greater parental investment they may offer may be of greater benefit to them and their offspring than the heritable immunocompetence acquired from high-quality males.

And the study seems to suggest Manly Men are more likely to be interested in finding as many females to shag as possible than being a good parent. Clearly something the modern day woman finds attractive in a mate.

http://www.ehbonline.org/article/S10...025-0/abstract

Page Not Found. Oh look, more credible scientific source!

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1690211/

(a) Subjects

Seventy-nine female, University of California undergraduates completed the experiment for a course credit (mean age = 20.51 years and s.d. = 2.55 years)

Oh yeah, a real diverse and accurate representation of women in general.

Took me long to post because trying to copy and paste text from PDF is a bitch.

So, you see, Shie, even IF your shit was valid for this discussion, it says nothing that actually proves your point. You're doubly wrong.

I've been rejected similarly, and have never actually had sex. If you get a license to kill, I get a license to mass murder.

I also got brutally dumped by my ex, and demand a license to rape.

Pretty sure no one gets nor should get such a license. I mean irl there are real licenses to kill though they usually aren't physical licenses like a drivers license for instance.

But the rape thing brings up an interesting point in that if he just wanted sex why'd he kill those girls as opposed to raping them? :eyebrow:

Sarcasm is surely an art form that is lost on you, isn't it?

And please, knock off your winky smiles. Every. Goram. Post. Really.

It's flippant, dismissive, and disrespectful to everyone posting in reply to you in all seriousness. It smacks of trolling, when you add it to your off-the-cuff 'oh god I am so cute' replies, and does absolutely nothing for your arguments.

Such as they are.

(This said with mod-hat firmly of in the corner somewhere, player to player, no official tone involved being as I am involved in the discussion. Should anyone have any doubts whatsoever.)

I know I've said basically the exact same thing to them before, but it clearly wasn't seen (or, if it was, heeded).

Also, Nathi, since you are recusing yourself from an official statement due to involvement in thread, can you at least put up the mod signal to get an uninvolved mod to make said statement?

Ok, try the self-preservation instinct if you can't grasp it as 'likely'.

And please, knock off your winky smiles. Every. Goram. Post. Really.

It's flippant, dismissive, and disrespectful to everyone posting in reply to you in all seriousness. It smacks of trolling, when you add it to your off-the-cuff 'oh god I am so cute' replies, and does absolutely nothing for your arguments.

Such as they are.

(This said with mod-hat firmly of in the corner somewhere, player to player, no official tone involved being as I am involved in the discussion. Should anyone have any doubts whatsoever.)

Well I can certainly use other smileys if you prefer.

Also not it's by no means every post, heck some post remain entirely smiley fre, though I admit those are more rare.

I generally just don't think the wink is that much of an indication of non-seriousness. I mean, when I'm not being serious I generally end with :lol: rather than anything else.

As I've stated before, its not the use of the single smiley. Its all the ones without context. Their unnecessary usage, again, as I've said before, undermines the non-verbal communication of the entire forum by rendering the smileys menaingless. Meaningless usage makes them meaningless.

So stop ruining this forum with smiley spam.

You know you're totally allowed to submit posts without the use of a smiley. The forum totally allows for that.

I know I just prefer not to. Smileys make me happy and I'm merely sharing that happiness with the world.

See directly above.

1. Or, you know, he should've stopped being such an entitled fucking asshat and learned to deal with it.

2. And? Doesn't mean he's entitled to dating/fucking pretty girls.

3. Not really. He wasn't that bad looking. Even if that weren't the case, that doesn't entitle him to "sympathy" or "understanding", because "poor Quasimodo couldn't find Esmeralda".

Just on the surface, I'd say him trying to "deal with it" didn't go so well. Telling someone to "deal with it" for anything other than a one-off outburst about something utterly insignificant is about the worst piece of advice you can give.

Maybe if people could look past the flash car, the condo and his rich parents, they'd see a young adult who was really fucking angry and in desperate need of psychological help. Maybe if people had of been more understanding of the fact that he was angry, not why but that he was, he wouldn't have tried to shoot up a sorority.

Yes, he was in need of help. And apparently, he was seeing a therapist, but said therapist obviously didn't see the signs. Which really reflects the shitty state of affairs of this country's mental health system (which I've seen first hand, and it truly is scary, frightening shit, that makes me genuinely worry for the physical, mental, and emotional health of this country). I've seen one mental health clinic that served kids and teens that brought in potential patients WITH THEIR PARENTS, and openly asked them, IN FRONT OF THEIR PARENTS if they've ever thought about running away, self harming, or even killing themselves. That's just fucking ASKING for shit to hit the fan, because obviously any kid who gets asked that IN FRONT OF THEIR PARENTS is going to answer "no", even if the answer is yes.

With shit like that, I'm honestly not surprised something like this happened. Shocked, yes. Surprised, fuck no.

Right, just sweep it under the rug like we do with any other problem we can't just blame on X evil cause.

Pretty much. What's the point? Murderers have been murdering from the beginning of time. We do what we can to police it. We can't stop it completely though. It happened. It's sad, but it happened and there's nothing you or I can do. The dead are dead. The rest just do what they can to keep going.

Heaven forbid we try to find the cause of shit like this and make changes to prevent it from happening again.

Well, I seriously doubt it was appropriate here barring some huge shocking twist in the story.

Jesus fucking Christ, what the fuck is wrong with you?

I find myself asking that same question. No reasonable person seriously says that shit.

Seriously what a deprived asshole.

He had a condo and a fucking BMW. Deprived, my ass.

*sighs again* I'm gonna be doing that a lot in this thread I think.

Look, I get that you probably live in a relatively safe neighborhood, but most of us don't and many of us would like it if we make a concerted effort to actually make sure communities don't go to shit. If you're going to suggest that we should stop, look at the dead, and then pick the fuck back up without at least attempting to understand and solve the underlying issues which are so very obviously our problem, then you can shove it buddy.

Umm wtf, what country do you live in Somalia? I mean I believe the vast majority of americans live in fairly safe and polite neighborhoods. Heck even the least well off in american society are orders of magnitude safer than say the richest Iraqis (excluding say perhaps innercity Chicago)

You're obviously a heavily sheltered, well-off, out of touch person. You obviously have no clue how the average person lives.

Jesus fucking Christ, what the fuck is wrong with you?

Well hey I mean what if we find out that say the people he killed had tortured him a few months earlier? That would certainly change my opinion of the situation I would think such a "twist" would cause any reasonable person to rethink which side was right and which was wrong. It's a hugely imrobable twist I admit but hey stranger things have happened. :)

Except, you know, if somebody tortures you, chances are, you've been kidnapped and are in their custody. And you won't be let out until you either somehow break out, or the authorities find you and take your captors into custody. And we know this guy wasn't in somebody's custody. And even if he was somehow tortured, and then magically let go by the people who tortured him, or he managed to break out on his own and magically avoided being tracked down again, it's STILL not justification for murder. You report that shit to the cops, not take it into your own fucking hands. To say nothing of the fact that if there was any torture involved, why didn't he mention it in his fucking manifesto or videos?

These things should all be fucking obvious. You're really grasping at straws here. Your statements are indefensible.

At least he didn't rape anyone. He was mentally ill enough to do it but still died a virgin. This wasn't just about sex.

Worst silver lining ever.

I've got a somewhat better one.

At least he can't kill anybody else anymore.

It can be but is far more often about power over another than any actual sexual gratification.

1. Rape is about sex. 2. If somebody wants power they could get into a job with a lot of responsibilities.

I never understood "rape is about power".

1. Except, it isn't.

2. Except, that's easier said than done. Also, the thing is, they want power, but little to no responsibilities. Looking from a perspective of ease of effort, rape is easier than getting a job with lots of power. It also allows for more control over an individual, and doesn't have any more responsibility than "leave as little evidence as possible" and "don't get caught". It only takes a few days, at most, to prepare to rape somebody. It takes years to prepare to get a job like you're describing.

These facts absolutely HAD to be obvious to you. I can't believe I had to walk you through a simple 2+2. I mean, for fucks sakes, getting on NS takes more effort than the line of thought I just walked you through.

[Pantokratos]

He looks as if he is of native American or Mexican descendant.

Where is the link of his manifesto?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Complaining about being turned down is totally the same as shooting them.

Meh, sometimes people don't listen and more forceful means are necessary, not that I'm saying they were necessarily appropriate in this instance.

How...

The fact you say this in context of being turned down, that people have to use "more forceful means" when enough people don't listen, is disturbing.