, 04.26.2018 08:36 AM

The women-haters

From next week’s column in the Hill Times.

Twenty-nine years earlier: it is around four o’clock in the afternoon, on a bitterly-cold Wednesday. I am a lawyer at an Ottawa valley law firm, and volunteering for Jean Chretien, who is also working as a lawyer, at the firm next door.  We are preparing for Chretien’s announcement, in just over a month, that he is going to seek the Liberal Party leadership.  And then the news starts to trickle in.

A “man” with a rifle has started shooting up the Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal.  He has wounded dozens of people – and he has slaughtered 14 young women.  Because they are women.

Stunned, we listened to Michael Enright interview a student at the school, Genvieve Cauden, on CBC Radio.  What happened, Enright asks her.

“We all go on the floor and we go under the desks. After, he shot people. He shot girls. I just closed my ears and closed my eyes. I didn’t want to know what’s going on. I received a shot in my head,” and then she paused. “But it’s not bad. It’s OK.”

“It just grazed your head,” Enright says.

“Yeah, that’s it,” Cauden says.  “After, the guy killed himself.”

The guy in Toronto, who was apparently following the precisely same Satanic, women-hating manifesto, didn’t kill himself.  As the entire world saw, he wanted a Toronto cop to do that for him.  The cop – amazingly, bravely – refused, and arrested the alleged mass-murderer without firing a shot.

After his arrest, the usual bullshit happened.  Politicians offering “thoughts and prayers,” instead of actual policies and measures to prevent something like Ecole Polytechnique and Yonge Street from happening again. Online losers, sitting in their mom’s basement and calling it Muslim terrorism – when it was decidedly neither.  Media lavishing attention on the alleged killer, instead of his many victims. 

The usual bullshit.

12 Comments

  1. doconnor says:

    Because of the gun policies put in place, he had to use a van instead of a gun and fewer people died then last time.

    To prevent it from happening again you have to examine the killer to find stages at which this could have been prevented.

    In the last 7 days two other people died in the GTA from reckless vehicle usage. Maybe it’s time to require maditory collision prevention in vehicles.

    • Fred from BC says:

      “Because of the gun policies put in place, he had to use a van instead of a gun ”

      Only in your dreams. Show me a jurisdiction where ‘gun control’ was either introduced or increased and it actually lowered the gun violence or murder rate. REAL evidence only. Hard numbers, legitimate analysis, results proven to be attributed only this ‘gun control’ you speak of and not other factors. Please.

      • doconnor says:

        I was referring to mass killings, which is a small fraction of gun deaths.

        Australia implemented tough gun control after the Port Arthur Massacre. From https://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/gun-control-australia-updated/

        “While 13 gun massacres (the killing of 4 or more people at one time) occurred in Australia in the 18 years before the NFA, resulting in more than one hundred deaths, in the 14 following years (and up to the present), there were no gun massacres.”

        While conventional gun murders are probably impacted more by other factors, with the large number in the US and none in Australia, it seems effective against mass shootings.

        • Fred from BC says:

          That’s nice.

          Here’s another quote from that very same study:
          ——————–
          The authors, however, noted that “no study has explained why gun deaths were falling, or why they might be expected to continue to fall.” That poses difficulty in trying to definitively determine the impact of the law, they write.
          ——————–
          Seems that the Port Arthur Massacre (Australia’s version of the Montreal Massacre) was an aberration, and that homicides had in fact been trending *down* for decades anyway (gee, just like they were in Canada). Homicide rates in Australia actually peaked two years *after* they introduced their gun control measures…and have been going up and down a bit but trending downwards JUST LIKE OURS. So no, your example does not prove anything about ‘gun control’ one way or another.

          Politicians, of course just love to be seen “doing something” about any perceived problems (real or imagined), and they will spend as much taxpayer money as they need to, to get those all important votes from easily fooled people.

  2. Misogyny is just as reprehensible as racism or any other kind of hate. It has to go. And everyone with a brain in their head has got to stop lionizing feminists, and feminism, and men like our WK and JT who know what feminism really is and proudly identify with it. Women are not objects and equal rights and #MeToo must be put on the forefront of public debate. I am proud of the strong feminist bent of this government btw. More please.

    • Forgive my hasty and completely incorrect usage of lionizing above. I don’t know why I thought it was synonymous with trivializing. Please read the above instead as: And everyone with a brain in their head has got to stop pillorying feminists,…

  3. Robert White says:

    Misogyny in CANADA has got to go. Today’s misogynist ilk seem to be emboldened by the organized misogyny on the Internet, and that’s why we need to step up to the plate with zero tolerance from now on. CANADA must condemn the hate by legislating laws with teeth before another incident is evidenced to convince the population that government does not care about women en masse.

    The Internet has weaponized misogyny via streaming & viral dissemination. And that kind of behaviour is intolerable on any level. Organized hate groups on Internet make the Internet abhorrent & dangerous for women, and the population as a whole.

    RW

  4. whyshouldIsellyourwheat says:

    Somebody once said:
    “Now, we don’t know now whether it was terrorism or a single crazy, or a domestic issue or a foreign issue. But there is no question that this happened because there is someone who feels completely excluded, completely at war with innocents, at war with a society. And our approach has to be, okay, where do those tensions come from?”

    “Yes, we have to make sure that we’re promoting security and we’re keeping our borders safe, and monitoring the kinds of violent subgroups that happen around. But we also have to monitor and encourage people to not point fingers at each other and lay blame for personal ills or societal ills on a specific group, whether it be the West or the government, or Bostonians, or whatever it is.”
    “Because it’s that idea of dividing humans against ourselves, pointing out that they’re not like us, and in order to achieve political goals we can kill innocents here—that’s something that no society in the world that is healthy, regardless of ideology, will accept.”

    The Trudeau Liberals have reintegration and deradicalization programs and support services for returning ISIS members. They aren’t locking them up.

    By why are so-called progressives viewing these misogynists who have committed monstrous crimes differently.

    Our public education system is failing boys, pumping them up with drugs like ritalin, to facilitate passing them through without educating them, and you end up with stunted men who are vulnerable to radicalization.

  5. Eric Weiss says:

    MRAs, Incels, PUAs and MGTOWs should be classified as hate groups and treated accordingly.

  6. Gord says:

    I’ve been thinking about this a lot, and it seems to me we have two problems in our culture that need to be addressed. One, a sense of entitlement among young (often white) men, who think that they should automatically be near the top of the social totem pole, and when that doesn’t happen, they lash out and look for someone to blame for the fact that they don’t have the job they want, don’t have the relationship they want, don’t have the life they want, etc. They become miserable not because their lives are so horrible, but because they believe they are entitled to something better than what they have.

    The second problem is “othering”. In looking for someone to “blame” for their lot in life, they always look to the “other” – be it Muslims, immigrants, or women. In any case, the “other” is always cast in the role of terrorist, job-stealing welfare bum, or feminist man-hater.

    I think I might have identified the problem, but I’m not sure what the solution is.

    • Fred from BC says:

      “I was referring to mass killings, which is a small fraction of gun deaths. ”

      That’s a fair point, and one too often overlooked.

    • Fred from BC says:

      “The second problem is “othering”. In looking for someone to “blame” for their lot in life, they always look to the “other” – be it Muslims, immigrants, or women. In any case, the “other” is always cast in the role of terrorist, job-stealing welfare bum, or feminist man-hater.”

      That’s true. Also true is that some members of those groups can blame “the other” for their own lot in life…only in that case, white men become “the other”.

      “I think I might have identified the problem, but I’m not sure what the solution is.”

      I’m not either, but I know that acknowledging the fact that *all* groups do this to varying degrees is probably a good place to start. Fair is fair…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*