RationalWiki's 2020 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2021.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $3500Goal: $3500

Talk:2014 Isla Vista killings

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This Crime related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.


PUAhate moderator writes for A Voice for Men[edit]

Is this worth a mention in article? [1] --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 17:48, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't think so. ЩєазєюіδWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 19:58, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
I guess it's relevant for the "various MRA sites and personalities switched into full defensive mode, dismissing any possible connection between Rodger's ideas and their rhetoric, and going on the offense, decrying the "politicization" of the murders by feminists" part but not enough for article space --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 19:59, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Looking at this article, I think the priority should be putting in some proper citations covering the key points - i.e. linking to the video & manifesto rather than merely talking about them in the abstract, & including a few links covering reactions from MRAs & incels (not all of whom denounced the killing). There are some relevant links in all three WIGOs. Once there's a bit more coverage of reactions, the PUAhate/AVfM connection may be worth mentioning, although that Reddit post isn't the greatest source to cite. ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 20:17, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
I agree, it would make the article seem biased if we used it as a reference. I guess I linked it here because it's interesting as a talking point, how interlinked these blogs are. We should definitely expand the actual shooting and content on Rodger though, I couldn't agree with that more --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 20:30, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Opening Rewrite[edit]

I honestly don't think that calling this a "misogyny-fueled killing spree" is accurate. The man had serious mental health problems, he refused his medication, he stopped his therapy 4 years before the killings, was diagnosed with high functioning aspergers at age 7 and he had severer abandonment and rejection issues. Narrowing this entire thing down to "misogyny-fueled killing spree" seems a bit off don't you think? Hobby (talk) 17:09, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Not really. The biology behind why a person takes the hate they feel and actually pulls a trigger is a serious question. But his motivation was clear. He hated women; felt entitled to sex; felt superior to all other men, but hated women who could not see that he was superior, etc. The killing is unique. the sentiments are, sadly, common. Had he written a 100 page manifesto about immigration, like the guy in Sweden did, we'd be talking about that.One tin soldier (talk) 17:14, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
So you're just happy with missing the entire point? I'm talking about abandonment issues, trouble connecting and loneliness and you keep coming back to misogyny. Do you not see how all of the things I mentioned are running themes in mass murderers? By the way, Anders Behring Breivik was the guy in Norway who killed 77 people. The page on him says "His objective was to kill as many of the next generation of Norwegian social democrats as possible, because he holds the party responsible for allowing large scale Muslim immigration." It does NOT say that he went of a politically-fuelled killing spree, because that would not be accurate. He was not fuelled by political hatred. He was a loner fuelled by mental health issues. Hobby (talk) 17:26, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Like the two things are mutually exclusive? WėąṣėḷőįďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 17:42, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
If you want to change the tone of the line, that's fine. But when you sweep very real issues like misogyny under the floor and talk only or even mostly about "mental health" than we lose connection to the debated that violence against women begins and ends with society's views on women, men's views that women's bodies are possessions; men's views that they have a right or entitlement to sex, etc. Yes, he was mentally ill. But a critical conversation that is coming out of this is about how society deals with women, views them, views violence against them, etc. WE can have another conversation on mental illness, but that's not the one that is as needed right now, with this set of facts.One tin soldier (talk) 17:39, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I defend the point that mental health was the cause behind this. Although I'll concede the point that I argue this entirely because Rodger's manifesto reminds me of my speech patterns when I forget to take my lithium and mania sets in and also of that talkative paranoid schizophrenic dude in the room next to me back when I spent that week in the insane asylum. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ Red rose 02.svg Masturbation masturbation pies pies Brian Cox 17:48, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I don't think any reasonable person is saying mental health is not an issue here. And if the crux of our article were "how do we stop shottings" is should be the first thing we look at - cause the guy who hates blacks, or gays or women but lives his life peacefully is totally different from the same "hater" who picks up a gun or bomb. But I don't think our article (at least not on this shooting) is really about how to stop shootings. I think this one resonates so much, and has such staying power because women stood up and said "i know that guy, at least before he started killing people. I've lived with the guy who thinks that he should have sex cause he wants it. I've dealt with the friend who decides i've "friend zoned" him; I have sat on the bus with the guy who thinks I'm a target for his attention no matter what i do to say 'no'." Sometimes, the facts of a case aren't the compelling story - but the reaction to the case are. In the 80s, it wasn't that OJ was found not-guilty, it was how the white and black world reacted. It wasn't that Rodney king was beaten - that happens all the time, it was that the community around him not only said "enough", they did so by rioting. To me, this isn't about "Oh god, another shooting" as much as it's about a door way to some really critical dialogues about men's (culturally, not individually) views of women.One tin soldier (talk) 17:59, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I think that even if he didn't latch onto MRA ideology (debatable whether he's an MRA; he has more in common with incels, and even MRAs think incels are batshit), all roads would still lead to Rome. Had he latched onto say, communism? He'd justify himself accusing his victims of being the filthy bourgeoisie. Libertarianism? He'd accuse his victims of being communists. Anarchism? They're filthy statists. Dark Enlightenment? The first step in bringing down the Cathedral.
But then again, I find that the misogyny is the least horrifying (but by no means it ceases to be wildly disturbing) part of the manifesto. I find the racism (especially the anti-miscegenation parts, but that's because I am a mixed race person from a family with a long story of race mixing) to be more disturbing. I mean, fucking goddamn hell, Rodgers calling black men "barbaric, wild and beast-like" and them having no right to date white girls was the most hateful piece of shit I've had the pleasure to read in a while. And some sexism on the top, the cherry on top the swastika-shaped cake. Go fuck yourself, Rodgers.
Even then, it's not the most disturbing part of the manifesto. No, that'd be his overblown God complex. I was just angry at the misogyny and racism, but when he began to talk about himself as a god whose mission was to punish mankind and talked about his fantasies of killing people slowly and painfully, it was the first time in a long while I was legitimately scared of something.
Sorry for that useless tangent in the second paragraph. I just felt that the racism was kind of not paid enough attention. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ Red rose 02.svg Maaaayyyybeeee you'll think of me when you are all alone 18:45, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
That is why i said, I'm not denying the mental illness at all. People who talk about themselves as gods don't anger me, they make me say "ok,it's seriously time to get you help". But for me, and for a large number of women, this is the, what, the straw on the camel's back that got us saying "enough is enough". (and yeah, the racism is way way scary. including his anti asian racism, even though his mother is asian, by all accounts...)One tin soldier (talk) 18:48, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict) So, a person who tries to kill off "the next generation" of a certain political party is not fueled by political hatred? Do you read what you write?
It's one thing to try to distance him from your favorite political movement, it's another to deny that the spree was motivated by misogyny.--ZooGuard (talk) 17:41, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Hobby has been pushing MRA talking points on this and other subjects for a while, doubtless just coincidence. The idea that it was "mental illness NOT misogyny" is also coincidentally an MRA talking point. I KNOW, WHAT ARE THE ODDS. Anything Hobby adds to or subtracts from the page would benefit from extremely close review - David Gerard (talk) 18:00, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Here comes the complete shutdown. "Lets just ignore him because I disagree". How about you actually look at the evidence. The man refused psychiatric help and medication, had social communication problems, he wrote about abandonment and rejection issues and was an isolated loner. Sorry for actually trying to have an intelligent conversation without refusing to acknowledge the other sides points. I guess that's something you are incapable of Dave, as I have frequently seen in YOUR edits. Hobby (talk) 18:05, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
You're still missing two things. One: Why was such an obviously ill person allowed a gun? Two: Why, of all the things a mentally ill person could do, did he choose to do what he did - in a nutshell, why did he target the type of person that he did, and did his use of certain websites influence his direction? It's not enough to say he was ill. There are millions of mentally ill people and they don't all issue manifestos and go on killing sprees. SophieWilderModerator 18:33, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I completely agree that he shouldn't have had a gun. That only reinforces the mental health failures. Also, mentally unstable people can be influenced in pretty much any direction. They are far more dangerous when they are isolated, socially awkward loners. Saying that he was pushed to these extreme actions because of a hatred of women not only ignores that he hated pretty much everyone, but also that he had a very serious god complex. He thought himself better than all those around him, yet people are trying to put some anti-women spin on this. He showed just as much hatred towards the men that women hooked up with as the women. For some strange reason however people seem to gloss over all of this and say that he just hated women. I am however perfectly willing to compromise. If you want to somehow mention Rodger's long serious of mental health issues and social communication problems along with misogyny then go ahead. Don't however propose to turn this page into another "MRAs are all dicks" page, as the issues at hand are far greater and far deeper than the simple surface nonsense people are focussing on. We need some half hearted balance for fucks sake. Maybe if someone here had read Chris Ferguson's piece on this it would be a lot easier to explain why this is ridiculous. Hobby (talk) 20:05, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
There are also billions of misogynists who get laid and live normal lives. Even if he had more 'self-awareness' and understood 'hey what i am planning is wrong, i shouldn't do this' he would still be as alienated and RWers would still consider him subhuman. Alliumnsk (talk) 11:26, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
I would even go as far as saying that there's more misogynists among those who get laid easily than among those who struggle with it. --Ted25 (talk) 03:08, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Hobby, if Rodgers had, instad of doing what he did, written a manifesto on how the Jews control the banking system, spent hours and hours on Stormfront or some similar site, and then shot up a synagogue, would you argue that andtsemitism was not a prome factor in the killings? Father Vivian O'Blivion (talk) 18:44, 12 June 2014 (UTC) This is all about semantics, apparently. "Misogyny-fueled killing spree" implies that misogyny was a major part of the killer's motivations, which is true, stop reading more things into it like "if it's misogyny-fueled, then it can't be mental-illness-fueled!" Of course it might also be mental-illness fueled, but that part is present in so many mass shootings, I don't know if it's more noteworthy than the misogyny part (though it is certainly noteworthy in its own right, so make sure to include it!). Nullahnung (talk) 18:50, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Wannabe copycat arrested[edit]

http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/police-man-threatened-kill-woman-uw/ngMPt/ --ZooGuard (talk) 10:05, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

The biggest reason for a shooting happening appears to be that another shooting happened before it "for inspiration"? Nullahnung (talk) 11:24, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
I don't understand. Is this a reply to something in the article, the article's comments, or my choice of section title? --ZooGuard (talk) 11:28, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Your choice of section title. If you're confused, you may safely ignore what I wrote. I didn't have much of a point to make beyond what I wrote. Nullahnung (talk) 11:30, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Why was this necessary[edit]

Had Elliot Rodger never heard of Cherry Blossoms or FilipinoCupid? It seems like this (i.e. multiple shootings) all could've been avoided, because he could've gotten all the love, companionship, and sex he wanted if he'd been willing to meet someone online and travel to southeast Asia. And yet no one has put out a bulletin saying "Guys, if you're thinking of pulling an Elliot Rodger, there are a couple sites you might want to check out first." Why has this been overlooked until now? Admittedly, he did have the disadvantage of being only half white, but still, he probably could've succeeded. To quote Neil Strauss, "As anyone who regularly reads newspapers or true-crime books knows, a significant percentage of violent crime, from kidnappings to shooting sprees, is the result of the frustrated sexual impulses and desires of males. By socializing guys like Sasha, Mystery and I were making the world a safer place." Landmartian (talk) 21:20, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

So the solution to male violence rooted in a feeling of entitlement to pussy is to marry off men with violent impulses to women from the developing world? It is well known that I have an occasional problem detecting sarcasm, so please tell me clearly if you are a. seriously suggesting this, b. making a joke, or c. trolling. Thanks. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 21:46, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
It's Landmartian, so (a). This is what MRAness looks like when it's trying not to shit all over the floor - David Gerard (talk) 22:40, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
While you're right that what Landmartian proposes ignores the root of the problem, he's not wrong in suggesting that it would've been preferable for the perpetrator to have sought a less extreme, non-lethal solution to their sexual frustrations instead of going on a killing spree. It's also not untrue that in some non-Western parts of the world, being perceived as Western can be a big help in hooking up with someone. Not that the latter is a particularly good or non-stupid thing, though. (talk) 23:12, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, it would have been preferable if he hadn't gone on a killing spree. No shit Sherlock. But that's got nothing to do with mail order brides. WěǎšěǐǒǐďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 23:42, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
The solution to the abuse of women justified by male entitlement is a less horrific manifestation of the abuse of women justified by male entitlement. Got it. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 00:39, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Now, now, no need to go strawmanning me. (talk) 02:17, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
He wasn't attracted to Asian women, so that wouldn't have worked for him. -- (talk) 10:38, 13 February 2016 (UTC)


In his so-called manifesto, he writes "To end my life, I will quickly swallow all of the Xanax and Vicodin pills I have left". Does anyone have any more info about his use of the aforementioned drugs? They could have a played a big role in him plotting and fulfilling the killings. -- (talk) 10:02, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Uhh, Xanax and Vicodin generally don't make you feel like planning a mass murder. --Ymir (talk) 12:31, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
That's what Big Pharma wants you to believe... ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 13:54, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
My point is that they can remove anxiety/hesitation/inhibition that can hinder you from doing it. For people with social phobia, anti-anxiety medication (like Xanax) can be very empowering, and, when you have a horrible narcissistic personality like Elliot's, all your ugly urges can be let loose. Plus, the execution of the acts of murder itself requires a degree of confidence, I imagine he could have been easily stopped when he was doing his first stabbings. -- (talk) 15:21, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Envy Was the Cause, Not Misogyny[edit]

In my view, the cause of the spree was not misogyny, but rather the perpetrator's enormous envy, envy of other men having relationships with women, while he never came even close to establishing one. Plain and simple, he was envious for other people having something, that he couldn't get. He mentions that feeling in his manifesto: "Jealousy and envy… those are two feelings that would dominate my entire life and bring me immense pain. The feelings of jealousy I felt at nine-years-old were frustrating, but they were nothing compared to how I would feel once I hit puberty and have to watch girls choosing other boys over me. Any problem I had at nine-years-old was nirvana compared to what I was doomed to face."

If you read his manifesto, you can see that it's full of the instances where he would burst with envy when seeing or finding out about other boys doing well with girls, especially what he called the "obnoxious slobs". At that point it was hate for sexually successful men, not women. To tackle that envy, at first he was fantasizing about denying all the other people sex by outlawing it: "This was when I formed my ideas that sex should be outlawed. It is the only way to make the world a fair and just place. If I can’t have it, I will destroy it."

Later on he, as he became more aware that he would never be able to accomplish that (if he ever truly though he would be) and instead he started theorizing about destroying the very object of his envy: "If I can’t have it, I will destroy it. I will destroy all women because I can never have them." He repeats the same thing in his retribution video: "If I can't have you, girls, I well destroy you." He equally addresses men ("And all of you men, for living a better life than me, all of you sexually active men, I hate you. I hate all of you. I can't wait to give you exactly what you deserve. Utter annihilation.") and the humanity as a whole ("...the day in which I will have my revenge against humanity, against all of you"; "I hate all of you. Humanity is a disgusting, wretched, depraved species. If I had it in my power, I would stop at nothing to reduce every single one of you to mountains of skulls and rivers of blood." He also complains about not being able to fit into his social group: "All those popular kids who live such lives of hedonistic pleasures while I've had to rot in loneliness for all these years. They've all looked down upon me every time I tried to go out and join them, they've all treated me like a mouse."

I mean, this just seems to me so wrong to say that this boils down to misogyny, especially given that this is supposed to be a wiki that discusses things based on reason. --Ted25 (talk) 20:14, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Nope. The idea they were possessions instead of people is Misogyny. It's not really envy to shoot the objects of your desire either because they won't let you purchase them in the way you want. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 20:27, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Even if he viewed women as "possessions" or objects instead of people (which is yet to be proven), it was not because he chose hold that view, but rather because of his mental illness. --Ted25 (talk) 20:43, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
You posted the screed that proves otherwise. Even then, high functioning aspergers is not a disorder that has any sort of those components in the DSM. Tens of millions of people live with it, and much more severe illnesses, without hurting anyone. Many actually help their community because they know what it feels like. Unless you can proved his medical records of a licensed clinical professional with the finding of cause then you are the one making some big assumptions on direct cause. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 21:44, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
How does it prove otherwise? Regarding the mental illness, it's not really clear whether he had Asperger's or not. But the bottomline is that he had serious mental issues (could have been extreme narcissism combined with social phobia and schizoid personality disorder, and so forth) that, together with loose gun laws, were the cause of that murderous event. --Ted25 (talk) 22:14, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure how it would prove otherwise than him thinking women are objects, it's your point not mine. It was clear what he suffered from because his parents opened up about his struggle, about his illness, and about his therapy. It's in the fucking article and has been across the news. None of your guesses of disorders have any sort of evidence which given your demands for proof, in the face of actual proof from his family you ignore, is stupendously baffling. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 22:27, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
You wrote: "The idea they were possessions instead of people is Misogyny". Where is your proof that he viewed women as possessions? --Ted25 (talk) 23:01, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
I know, and I know what you were trying to say, but it was to point out that could have been worded better.  :-) Firstly, let's get to the point about his illness since his high functioning Asperger's is a baseline fact in record while yours are guesses. Being able to change one's view with proof is a sign of debating in good faith which I feel is kind of lacking so far. If you won't change your mind with known concrete facts...we can't move forward. No point in spending one second more digging things out that won't convince you anyways. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 15:25, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
If I'm not mistaken, he was never officially diagnosed, and it was just what his father told the media. But, frankly, I wouldn't deny it, since it perfectly fits into my case. For his illness, Elliot was prescribed risperidone (which he never took), that, according to Wikipedia, "reduces certain problematic behaviours in autistic children, including aggression toward others, self-injury, temper tantrums, and rapid mood changes". That anti-psychotic medication was prescribed for a reason and should have made a hell of a lot of a difference, according to his father. --Ted25 (talk) 01:19, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Moreover, in his manifesto, he talks not only about his envy for other boys having girlfriends, but for other kids enjoying more affluent lifestyles than him. For instance: "If only my damnable mother had married into wealth instead of being selfish. If only my failure of a father had made better decisions with his directing career instead wasting his money on that stupid documentary. I couldn’t help but feel a bitter form of envy at all of the rich kids at the concert. They grew up in lavish mansions, indulged in excessive opulence, and will never have to worry about anything in their pleasurable, hedonistic lives. I would take great pleasure in watching all of those rich families burn alive." --Ted25 (talk) 20:58, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Elliot had a pathological hate for anyone, who was in any way more advantageous than him. This is a typical line from his manifesto: "At the entrance, father and I greeted Jack Ross, the son of Gary Ross. He was a spoiled brat of a sixteen year old, and to my embarrassment he stood taller than me. I immediately hated him on sight." --Ted25 (talk) 21:27, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

So what? His manifesto & video clearly show that he wanted to punish women in general (not specific women) for not making themselves available to him. Yes, this is envy; it's also very clearly misogyny. The fact that he was narcissistic, resentful & misanthropic about other things (as is often the case with misogynists) doesn't lessen the fact of him being a misogynist. ωεαşεζøίɗWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 22:41, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
I think it's more to do with unwillingness to accept what is in front of him. Look above about the kids mental health issues that the family has provided to the public versus the wild ass guesses based on the wild guesses of an armchair psychologist who never set eyes on their "patient" (quote: "could have been extreme narcissism combined with social phobia and schizoid personality disorder, and so forth"). -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 14:52, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, OK, you can forget that unfortunate line. I'm more than fine with the Asperger's diagnosis. I've extensively read and listened to what Elliot had left, and I can see similarities between his mental health problems and the ones I've been experiencing through my life (though I was never that far isolated and psychotic), which makes me want to get into the essence of the problem instead of throwing out labels. Saying it was simply misogyny is too of a superficial explanation and represents a feminism-centred view (not saying feminism is in any way bad). --Ted25 (talk) 02:22, 23 February 2016 (UTC)


""Not all men" is the defensive whine from men who take critiques of structural violence and injustice personally." This rubbed me the wrong way (I'm not really a regular contributor at all, so I just thought I'd bring it up). Not because it's supposedly wrong, but because it's factually correct and would be a good summary for demonstrating to the adherents of the "not all men" notion where their mistake lies. An insulting tone lowers that chance. I'd suggest changing the sentence into something like "The statement "Not all men" is born from the mistake of assuming that critiques of structural violence and injustice are targeted at individuals or are to be taken seriously."

Video on the topic[edit]

Great analysis of what happened: [2] (for those in the UK: [3]). --Ted25 (talk)


Was he diagnosed with a ASPD at any time? In my strictly dilettante opinion, it seems to me that many psychopaths seem to get a hang up about the opposite sex; let alone his incredibly high opinion of himself, alongside his failure to fit in anywhere (cos he was a creepy weirdo (yes, I know many psychos are charming superficially)). If so, could a lot of his manifesto have been bullshit designed to mess with people's heads? (For absolute clarification, I've no doubt he was a misogynist.) Scherben (talk) 22:38, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

No, he was not. --Ted25 (talk) 02:59, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

He was NOT diagnosed with Asperger's[edit]


The original CCN source states that his diagnosis was revealed in court documents, where your article's source for his lack of diagnosis is a family friend. I'll add a note, but overall the CNN source appears more authoritative. Petey Plane (talk) 17:36, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
According to this police document he was diagnosed with pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS). --Ted25 (talk) 05:48, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
It also says that his autism evaluation scores were "below the autism and the autism-spectrum cutoffs". --Ted25 (talk) 06:48, 30 May 2017 (UTC)