Bennett Gets it Wrong Again

by W.F. Price on July 26, 2012

Bill Bennett decided to weigh in on the Aurora shootings and accompanying heroics, using a Hanna Rosin article as his reference point. Bennett gets it totally wrong on a number of points, which is about what you’d expect from a guy who relies on feminists to divine the motivations of young men.

First, he talks about what the men who died “believed.” I don’t think people have time to examine their beliefs when confronted by a man with an assault rifle in a crowded, dark theater. In these situations, you don’t think so much as act. The young men who shielded their girlfriends were simply doing what came naturally to them. One man, a guy who ran for it, had different instincts. However, if you asked him what he “believed,” he may well have given the same answer as the dead men. Beliefs don’t count for much in times of crisis, which I suppose is the root of the saying “there are no atheists in foxholes.”

Here’s what Bennett says about “belief”:

As Hanna Rosin so eloquently pointed out in a recent article, calling it chivalry would be a tremendous understatement. By all appearances, these men believed that a man has a responsibility to protect a woman, even to the point of death. They believed that there are things in life worth dying for and the innocent woman sitting next to them was one.

They believed, to put it simply, in a code of honor. They put the lives of the women before their own, an old fashioned notion to be sure, but certainly an honorable one (if you have any doubt, ask the survivors)…

Old fashioned my ass. Take a look at Matt McQuinn (on the right), the Celtic American with the lip rings and earplugs. That young man was no fuddy duddy who ascribed to Bill Bennett’s Victorian sense of propriety. No, he’s a modern-day example of the Gaelic warriors who have earned a reputation over the ages for their scorn for death and willingness to make the ultimate sacrifice. In other words, it was in his blood, and Bennett insults him in suggesting otherwise.

The same applies to the other young men. They were solid men; the kind that families and communities have always relied on when the going gets tough. It wasn’t because they held some belief or political position, it was because they were men that they acted as they did. It is simply what men do, and that’s why they deserve honor, which Bennett is incapable of bestowing on anyone.

No, instead of honoring these men, Bennett continues to measure them according to their utility to women:

After his death we learned that Blunk had an ex-wife and two children living in Nevada. He was scheduled to visit them to resolve marital issues. This isn’t to take anything away from Blunk or the other two heroes, but to illustrate that, in spite of shortcomings, men can still recognize what it means to be a good man and act like one.

This above words illustrate exactly what’s wrong with the attitude in regards to men in our culture. Bennett suggests that because the man is separated from his ex – through no fault of his own for all we know – he must be flawed. And then, of course, he redeems himself by being useful to a woman — by taking a bullet.

The implication is that women have inherent value, but men do not. This is a cultural issue, and one of the greatest flaws of our society. I’ve been all over Europe and Asia, and only in the Anglo world are men considered to have value only in their utility, like so many tools. It is a toxic attitude, and explains why our women have such contempt for our men. If a man has no inherent value, how could a woman ever love him when he is not providing her some material benefit? Of course, this is not really why women love men, either, so it leads to all sorts of dysfunction and unhappiness in our women, who can’t understand why they don’t love the men in their lives simply for being “useful.”

These people have it backwards. Men are not men because they are useful to others; rather, they have value because they are men. If it were only for our utility that we were men, then why couldn’t a donkey be a man? How about a machine?

More from Bennett:

This is especially important given the state of many men today. Record numbers of men aren’t working or even looking for work. Record numbers aren’t marrying or even acting as fathers to their children. These men need heroes to imitate whom they can relate to in everyday life, not just make-believe superheroes who catch their imagination for an hour or two. They need heroes like the Aurora three.

While much of the media obsesses over the psychology and motivations of this deranged killer, we should hold the Aurora three high. It is only by telling their story that this code of honor will survive for future generations of men.

How are these three any different from the “record numbers” of men Bennett refers to? As Hanna Rosin suggests, Blunk was kind of a loser who couldn’t support his family:

On the Today show interview, Jansen Young, the girlfriend Blunk saved, mentioned that Jonathan was thinking about re-enlisting in the Navy. She attributed that to his undying heroism, but it may also have to do with the fact that he, like a few guys in the theater, was working at Target and surely not making enough money to support one family, much less two. Young, meanwhile, had just finished getting her veterinarian degree, becoming the latest in an onslaught of women who have taken over that lucrative profession, which was not very long ago dominated by men.

These young men who died are the same ones Bill Bennett and Hanna Rosin denounce so regularly, so she is surprised that they would still act as they did. I suspect that Rosin simply sees masculinity as a set of credentials, and when men act according to their nature without going through a “man school” or something like it, she simply can’t fathom it.

This is really what feminists like Rosin and Bennett don’t understand. Men do not need to be taught or pushed to be men. They do not need to be shamed or cajoled into it. It is simply what they are, and it is a glorious thing.

{ 63 comments… read them below or add one }

Morrisfactor July 26, 2012 at 11:04

Surely William Bennett is one of the biggest asses out there.

No wonder the educational system is failing boys and young men.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 69 Thumb down 1
Mojo July 26, 2012 at 11:20

At the risk of making myself unpopular:

The Aurora Three were not heroes, but fools.

No woman is ever worth you ending up in hospital, prison or the morgue.

All this shows us is that fools who persist in their folly wind up dead.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 95 Thumb down 10
Georice81 July 26, 2012 at 11:27

Our first instinct is to flee no matter what. The fact that these young men did not do that is a reflection of how well taught they were to put their impulses behind and stand their ground to protect others. This is a good testimony as to their upbringing. To me they are heroes and yes we need heroes like them nowdays.

The real problem I have with Bill Bennett and others like him is how they are afraid of praising men completely even those that very much deserve it. One one hand he praises these heroes and on the other hand he tears them down by reminding everyone about their shortcomings. It is as if though there is a certain sense of cynicism as to the true heroism of people especially men. Yes, I believe this is a byproduct of the feminism that we see today.

What I would’ve said was “Bravo young men!!”. This shows that in spite of all we see and hear the young men in this country are good and when encouraged and left alone can do wonders similarily to what their fathers and grandfathers did in previous generations. In spite of all the feminist rhetoric one hears nowdays, it was men who laid their lives down so that others may live. This needs to be applauded and women (as well as men) need to re-examine their assumptions with regards to genders and the so-called equality. It doesn’t take much to teach young men to be brave and to be leaders. It doesn’t take much to teach young women to be good wives and mothers. Let’s not mess with something that works. Encourage men and don’t tear them down. Encourage women but not to the detriment of the men.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 20 Thumb down 20
Eric J Schlegel July 26, 2012 at 11:35

He is right when he says that “men are not being fathers to their children”, and I mean their sons, particularly. Not enough of us are working to instill, in the minds of our young men, contempt for the idea of protecting women. We are not doing enough to shame women and girls for relying on men to perform those outdated roles. My friend proudly once said “never depend on a man for ANYTHING”, my reply being “neither should a man ever help a female person” and I recieved a tense look of shock from her, as if I had some kind of chip on my shoulder. The idea of the shoe being on the other foot is alien to them and they have a hard time getting their minds around it. “what? I can’t use my vagina to get what I want? does not compute…”
But I disagree with the idea that what a man believes is not relevant; how you train and condition your mind WILL inform your actions when in fight-or-flight mode. One must think carefully beforehand what he would do when such a situation occurs. No, men are NOT naturally protective of womyn; this is another cultural bias which had it’s beginnings long before feminism. Alpha males have always used codes of conduct to control lesser betas in order to gain breeding rights, and it is still held up today. It is all the brainwashing that these men recieved in their life that caused them to sadly end their lives for the sake of a female. If only they had been raised to value their own lives as men they might be alive today. If only they had been pulled away from their moms and the dependancy on her approval early enough, they would not have ended up as dead white knights.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 4
Zorro July 26, 2012 at 11:35

Bennett is a big fan of Rosin, having once before referred to that scumbag fembot as “insightful.”

Can someone please explain to grandpa that his input is no longer needed, T-Rex is long dead and we no longer grow electricity on farms?

The man is an embarrassment. I think the only reason CNN publishes his vapid spew is because he is long known to be a Republican, and he is openly stupid. Liberal media love stupid Republicans to broadcast their stupidity.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 56 Thumb down 0
Ron July 26, 2012 at 11:41

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 41
Keyster July 26, 2012 at 11:48

A few thoughts:

Bill Bennett is and always has been considered a 3rd tier, at best, conservative pundit/commentator. He is actually pro-men and his “The Book of Man” is a celebration of the contributions men have made to civilization through history…if you can look past the condemnation of the state of men today. Does he have a blind-spot for the sorry state of women these men are expected to marry? Yes, most people do…as if there’s no connection whatsoever. But if MRA’s won’t shine a light on it, who will?

Men have been utilities for society, women and children since time because – – 1) It’s their nature., 2) It’s practical, since they’re the most capable. Women have been utilities that birth and nurture our young, men do everything else. This is nothing new under the sun, and if you’re just realizing this – – welcome to the manosphere!

Rosin, Bennett nor any of us were in the theatre that day. We don’t know the position of the shooter relative to the “herioc three” and their girlfriends. Not having the instant opportunity to run, they may have simply slouched away from the shooter over their girlfriends, to avoid his line of fire. They each had a matter of a few seconds to react. What would you have done? Stood up and taken a bullet face on, rather than in the back huddled over a woman? I doubt, if given the chance, there would have been any men that dared to galantly confront the shooter. The first reaction is disbelief, shock and then panic.

A man writes an article about men bravely saving women and its instant controversy; such are the times. A few comments left by feminists, that “their were female heroes too”, were met with hundreds of deriding replies skewering the feminists and feminism in general. They didn’t stand a chance. That would have never happened 5 years ago. It’s always good to see.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 7
Eric July 26, 2012 at 11:55

Price:
‘Men do not need to be taught or pushed to be men.’

Excellent point. One of things that has been completely lost in all this post-shooting analysis is that these men acted like men—without any advice from loudmouths like Bennett.

The media analysis however is failing by not pointing out the reactions of women in the aftermath of Colorado. Most notably the sense of entitlement Rosin displays: specifically that men simply owe their lives to women without any corresponding social obligations on the womens’ part.

For example, I’ve heard nothing from the Feminist Orchestra denouncing the recent articles about women fantasizing over the shooter. Or, no soul-searching over what value women really have to offer society that makes them worth dying for. Nothing at all about the raw deal men like these Aurora heroes, like Blunk, were getting at the hands of the ‘Fair Sex’. No, everything has been geared to shaming men for not living up to the level of martyrdom; and assuring the grrrlz that thugs make better partners than heroes, anyway.

Even after death, these heroes are being used again by the feminists, this time as a distraction from the real issue.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 1
Uncle Elmer July 26, 2012 at 12:05

Bill Benitt. He’s big. He has jowels. He is an importint jurnolist. He shaims men. He can git aproval from feminists.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 3
Turbo the Drycleaner July 26, 2012 at 12:17

I guarantee Bill Bennet would have run screaming if he were in that movie theater. Shortly after pissing his pants.

Its like that poem by Wilfred Owen where he describes witnessing a young man die from poison gas. If you had really been there, you wouldnt be eager to fill another young mans head with lies about how honorable it is to die for someone elses cause.

Only the biggest cowards can encourage other people to die that way because theyve never seen it or its effects. Theyve never been in a life or death situation or witnessed a young man they knew and cared about die a horrible death for some yuppies ‘code of honor’.

In the end, you dont get any honor for dying. You just get used as Feminist propaganda. If youre in that situation, dont follow an impulse. Remember what were saying here and run away.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 49 Thumb down 1
Wilson July 26, 2012 at 12:28

Ah, another well-paid woman veterinarian…after the End of Men and the End of Women that follows one second later apparently comes the Rise of the Cats.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 1
namae nanka July 26, 2012 at 12:34

BRIFFAULT’S LAW:

The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.

There are a few corollaries I would add:

Past benefit provided by the male does not provide for continued or future association.

Any agreement where the male provides a current benefit in return for a promise of future association is null and void as soon as the male has provided the benefit (see corollary 1)

A promise of future benefit has limited influence on current/future association, with the influence inversely proportionate to the length of time until the benefit will be given and directly proportionate to the degree to which the female trusts the male (which is not bloody likely).

http://www.stickmanweekly.com/ReadersSubmissions2009/reader5546.htm

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 0
zed July 26, 2012 at 12:49

Maybe, but they were glorious fools.

We need to change our society so that kind of foolishness is honorable again.

Nice epitaph, and saying for one’s gravestone –
“He was a glorious fool – a fool for sure, but a glorious one.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 1
Keyster July 26, 2012 at 12:53

I’m gonna go out on a limb here and surmise that any grown man who prioritizes going to see the official opening of the latest Batman movie at 12:00 on a weeknight , is not really engaging in a manly endeavor in the first place.

Bill Bennett should be asking why grown men felt compelled to be the first to see the new Batman movie, when they should have been home in bed, getting the rest they needed to work and provide for their wives and children. Where’s the shame Bill?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 2
revver July 26, 2012 at 13:01

OT: The explosive growth of Californias prison system:
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1670315/photo-essay-reveals-the-explosive-growth-of-californias-prison-system#3

plus: sociologist in hot water for publishing findings which show heterosexual parents being best for a child’s mental well-being:

http://chronicle.com/article/An-Academic-Auto-da-F-/133107/?cid=pm&utm_source=pm&utm_medium=en

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
Philip Landon July 26, 2012 at 13:02

Nothing is more important for the future of men as developing a positive identity irrespective of the state and women’s needs.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 1
Mojo July 26, 2012 at 13:13

@ Ron

“@Mojo

Maybe, but they were glorious fools.

We need to change our society so that kind of foolishness is honorable again.”

It’s “honorable” now, in case you missed the point of this article.

It’s an honor based on your willingness to become a meat shield for another human being because she has a vegina, bobes and POWER.

It’s an honor that dehumanizes.

Fuck your honor. Lay down your own life, leave the rest of us alone.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 1
TFH July 26, 2012 at 13:17

As Hanna Rosin so eloquently pointed out

Talk about a doubling down on groveling….

There is no depth of pedestalization and groveling that the likes of Bill Bennett will not stoop to.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 3
zed July 26, 2012 at 13:35

“As Hanna Rosin so eloquently flatulated, allow me to add my flatulence to hers.”

This goes beyond groveling, this amounts to –
“We men are worms, here to undeservedly bask in your magnificence.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 0
TLM July 26, 2012 at 14:04

I once heard Bill Bennett say a slogan along the lines of “if mommas not happy, no ones happy” “if mommas happy, everyones happy”. Its an incredibly gay thing for a ‘man’ to say, but it sums up the Bennett life mantra. Loser Movie Analogy Alert: As Morpheus said, they set an age limit on unplugging someone from the Matrix. Bennet is one of those guys. Too far down the rabbitt hole to ever change his thinking.

@mojo
A woman that lives up to Proverbs 31 is certainly worth the sacrifice. I understand that is a tall order in todays crop of self centered sluts and bitches. And you may have not come across a chick like that yet, you”ll know it when you do. But your tone comes across as rather omega/beta. You dont want to be ‘that’ guy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 5
universe July 26, 2012 at 14:19

As Hanna Rosin suggests, Blunk was kind of a loser who couldn’t support his family:

Rosin

On the Today show interview, Jansen Young, the girlfriend Blunk saved, mentioned that Jonathan was thinking about re-enlisting in the Navy. She attributed that to his undying heroism, but it may also have to do with the fact that he, like a few guys in the theater, was working at Target and surely not making enough money to support one family, much less two.

– Blunk, possibly left with diminishing options due to amoral artificial affirmative action quotas favouring females, something Rosin likely is personally acquainted with, was contemplating enlistment in what may have been an option Bennet would likely subscribe to for real men – put your life on the line in service to protect people you don’t know and whom no one cares if your life is expended through doing so.

Bennet

They believed that there are things in life worth dying for and the innocent woman sitting next to them was one….
This isn’t to take anything away from Blunk or the other two heroes, but to illustrate that, in spite of shortcomings, men can still recognize what it means to be a good man and act like one.

– Acting like a man means that while being as innocent as the next person (or female, to indulge Bennet) in a shooting melee one must therefore die.
Dying for some unknown female today, quite likely corrupted into thinking ill thoughts about males in general, is simply not worth one’s blood. Three young men died to protect the lives of females – those most likely to benefit from the silver platter treatment afforded to them by state control which forces automatic sacrifice upon young men of today and those of the future.

Young men, protect those whom you know and love. If you wish to extend your self sacrificially as an act of love for those whom you don’t know do so at your own choice. Try not to be goaded into dying for someone other person’s Victorian notion of fair play.
What’s it going to be Bennet? Either you support real equality where no one sex is more important than the other which would take away the tax-payer assisted leg-up for females only or admit that the perverted chivalry of your own doing and generation is contributing to the slow strangling of the male youth that you wish death upon?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0
anonymous July 26, 2012 at 14:23

By all appearances, these men believed that a man has a responsibility to protect a woman, even to the point of death. They believed that there are things in life worth dying for and the innocent woman sitting next to them was one.

Let see sex-reversal test:

By all appearances, these women believed that a woman has a responsibility to ____________ a man, even to the point of death. They believed that there are things in life worth dying for and the innocent man sitting next to them was one.

What can you fill in the blank in the above quote, that you truly believe women know it is their responsibility to a man in this society?

Again, let’s review the quote:

By all appearances, these men believed that a man has a responsibility to protect a woman [i.e., women are weak creatures in need of men's protection. What is the responsibility of women to men?], even to the point of death. They believed that there are things in life worth dying for and the innocent woman [You are already guilty of being a man. You better do your penance by showing your ultimate utility to the inherently innocent womyn] sitting next to them was one.

All this article reminds the reader, is “The Manipulated Man”, a book by Ester Villar. By all appearances, the three men had not read the book.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0
Eric July 26, 2012 at 14:23

TLM:
“I understand that is a tall order in today’s crop of sluts and bitches.”

It’s an order that can’t be met. Our culture doesn’t produce women worth sacrificing for in any way. Men who make these kinds of sacrifices do so in the full knowledge that they did right for its own sake. The ‘fair sex’ of today has nothing but contempt for heroes, as they hate all men.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 2
American July 26, 2012 at 14:42

This mass shooting is kinda like the columbine shooting, these guys were f@#ked up severely on prescription drugs.
welcome to the new matriarchy where young boys are hooked on prescription drugs by mommy before they are old enough to stand up for themselves.
I have read that statistically its mommy that wants the drugging of young boys while daddy doesn’t want his children all f@#ked up.
But now that the new American matriarchy has “Neutered” the voice of the father, welcome to the new barbaric, violent, chaotic matriarchy where children are drugged before they are old enough to stand up for themselves.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2
Mojo July 26, 2012 at 14:44

“@mojo
A woman that lives up to Proverbs 31 is certainly worth the sacrifice. I understand that is a tall order in todays crop of self centered sluts and bitches. And you may have not come across a chick like that yet, you”ll know it when you do. But your tone comes across as rather omega/beta. You dont want to be ‘that’ guy.”

If you say so, chump.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 7
American July 26, 2012 at 14:54

Keyster, the new American matriarchy has broken and crippled many young American men. The new American Matriarchy has created legions of broken, lost young men who are sickly dependent on their mothers well into their 30′s.
Folks, the war on the hetero-patriarchy is a tragedy for a few generations of Americans, and the new “Broken patriarchy” will be a huge, huge financial liability for the few Americans that are not broken.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
American July 26, 2012 at 15:01

Folks, the millions of broken, lost, psychologically crippled young American men, that are the casualties of the gender-feminist war on hetero-males, are going to be a huge financial burden on America that we are just now starting to see. welcome to the Train wreck we can call “the Broken Patriarchy”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 2
Andrew S. July 26, 2012 at 15:06

I will vote for Romney and continue to vote mostly for republicans. but pieces of shit like Bennett don’t make that choice very easy do they.

I’m not one to say that the Republican party is clearly better than the democratic party is in regards to men, as they both are beyond broken, I just think there are a few on the right that won’t throw every man under the bus and maybe a few that don’t the kick out of throwing men under the bus like pretty much the entire left does.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 5
woggy July 26, 2012 at 15:23

William “White Feather” Bennett is at it again.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader July 26, 2012 at 15:47

Keyster, don’t try to pass mangina Bennett off as any sort of supporter of men. His “Book of Big Boyz” is nothing more than an extended manUP lecture in my opinion. Bennett is just as gynocentric as any feminist, and he’s a prime example of why “traditional conservatives” are enemies of men.

Bennett’s the kind of slug who endorsed Bradley, and VAWA, and the reauthorization of VAWA. He’s the Fox News version of Joe “don’t ever hit the gurlz!” Biden, and while I don’t know if Bennett was systematically abused the way Biden was by his older sister, it would not surprise me. Bennett is a mamma’s boy, always has been, and probably always will be, so his manginaness comes from his childhood.

As more and more young men are raised by single, feminist, mothers we’ll see dinosaurs like Bennett growing ever more angry and confused – because the younger men, having seen deeply into the true nature of women will just laugh at Bennett and his pedestalization fantasies.

Bottom line on the Aurora shooting: that theater chain prohibits licensed CHL holders from carrying sidearms into their movie theaters. I expect that more than a few men will either not go to that movie chain, or will ignore the “no guns” policy in the future.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
willis July 26, 2012 at 15:51

Masculinity comes out when it is needed. In this day and age, it is only needed when exigent circumstances arise.

No amount of complaining will get women to appreciate men for being men. Women have always, and will always, only appreciate men for what men can do for them. In the past, the utility of men was so self-evident that nobody questioned where men’s value came from. Now, however, men’s value is only apparent in situations like that in Colorado.

The solution? If men are to become valuable to women again, if traditional family structures are to be re-established, the world must become a dangerous place. Women must live in fear and be in need of protectors and providers. Until that happens, we will remain in the morass of cultural confusion and angst that is the product of female safety and male uselessness.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 1
Rebel July 26, 2012 at 16:08

Bennett has probably assumed too much. The three guys who jumped in to protect their g/f never thought they would die from it. When they did their move, the simply attracted the shooter’s attention and he shot them right there. Bad luck for those three men.

Had they stayed in their place or ducked under their seat, the shooter might have aimed someplace else.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
zed July 26, 2012 at 16:16

Bottom line on the Aurora shooting: that theater chain prohibits licensed CHL holders from carrying sidearms into their movie theaters. I expect that more than a few men will either not go to that movie chain, or will ignore the “no guns” policy in the future.

I was a bit surprised that this incident did not kill the movie, but it seems to doing quite well and coming close to setting box-office records.

Unfortunately, most people will always take the wrong lesson from an incident like this. At a recent showing in my city, the theater hired a private security company to set up a metal detector at the door. Never mind that the Aurora shooter did not walk through the front door with his guns, and instead they came in through an unsecured emergency exit, the response is to make absolutely sure that no one goes into a theater with the slightest defense against something like this happening again.

If this was a false-flag operation to stir up more gun-grabbing sentiment, I think it backfired. I was in a gun store today, and there was a very attractive young woman in her early 20s buying her first gun. The guy behind the counter said that sales this last week have been “brisk.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
American July 26, 2012 at 16:45

Many guys here continue to blame women for the disastrous war on the hetero-patriarchy.
In my experience, Some of the loudest gender-feminists i have ever met were gender-feminist males who did not like hetero-males, and “gender-feminism” was the perfect pretext to attack hetero-sexuals.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 4
Geography Bee Finalist himself July 26, 2012 at 17:00

Does Bill Bennett ever get it right?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
livingwell July 26, 2012 at 17:22

Hell No. I’ve been that guy that followed the rules, created the safe, smoothly operating environments used by women. Paid a great deal in taxes and stood up for women; Just the fool this obese, undisciplined , gambling addicted coward speaks of. I’ve been kicked in the teeth enough by this new fem-centric, man hating culture to ever do that crap again. Sorry dear Bill, but you don’t know the the half of what most young men today feel about their new roles, and this incident in Colorado will be looked at as an anomaly in the years to follow. F…U Bennett.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0
JFinn July 26, 2012 at 17:27

If women weren’t such cowards, they could have assembled a 6-person charge to overcome the shooter.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
Leone July 26, 2012 at 17:27

“the innocent woman sitting next to them”

LOL! That “innocent woman” has likely had 75 dicks in her by now!

Bill Bennett, I’ll bet you $100 even you don’t believe your own B.S. Oh, sorry…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
Russell July 26, 2012 at 17:30

Women’s hypergamous instinct to devalue the average male and the advantage this gives to the powerful (both men & women) is the root of the cultural maladaptation of male sacrifice for others.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Laura Grace Robins July 26, 2012 at 18:03

“They believed that there are things in life worth dying for and the innocent woman sitting next to them was one.”

The use of innocent really jumped out. Innocent woman? Ummm, says who? In a situation like that, a man is no less innocent. Bennett is implying that men are not innocent and therefore disposable. I’m sure there is also a double meaning here–no doubt Bennett sees women as innocent morally too and probably assumes the saved women were pure angels who deserved to live on that merit alone.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
gilgamesh July 26, 2012 at 19:14

There has to be information on these women floating around somewhere. I’d love to see what they’re really like.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Realman July 26, 2012 at 20:01

The question I ask myself regularly is, how did I and all the other Spearhead visitors survive the epic dawn-’til-dusk, cradle to the grave propaganda machine that is western feminism when so many didn’t ?
Why is it so obvious to us here that, in answer to the question, ” would you lay down your life in defence of a woman ?” the rational response can only be a deafening, ” no f*cking way !” ?

The reasons are complex but largely rest on the fact that certain life experiences prepare some of us to notice BS when we see it and to seek an alternative to the steady stream of lies we are fed relentlessly by governments, academia, the public indoctrination (sorry, education) system, and the MSM. Never underestimate our opponents. They are extremely well organised, highly motivated and flush with tax-payers funds. Their single focus is the utter annihilation of men, while we are preoccupied with an extraordinary diversity of survival demands required of those who live real lives. It’s a David and Goliath struggle, but it is the most important project in the proud history of western civilisation.

Vermin like Bill Bennett are but pathetic distractions to our noble endeavours and should be dismissed for the feminist dupes they are.

Onward to battle, gentlemen. Our children’s future depends on our success. I can think of no better motivation than this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Rebel July 26, 2012 at 20:33

Holmes came in through the emergency exit door.

Who let him in?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
American July 26, 2012 at 21:30

There was a kid in my high school who is now in jail for murder. The perverts that run the local newspapers didn’t report to the public that his mother used to beat the F@#k out of him every day, and that may have been a factor that he himself resorted to violence.
“Pervert Journalism”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Anonxcf July 26, 2012 at 22:43

I disagree. They understood there was a risk that they would be shot doing anything but dropping down- and even that incurred a risk.

These men were heroic. Men sacrificing themselves IS noble, men being expected to be utilitarian tools is disgusting. Expecting those men to throw their lives away is, well, evil. But being thankful that they made those choices is not wrong.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5
Anonxcf July 26, 2012 at 22:46

Edit: I disagree with “Bennett has probably assumed too much. The three guys who jumped in to protect their g/f never thought they would die from it.”, but there was a lot of extra posts.

I’ll also add in response to “Holmes came in through the emergency exit door. / Who let him in?”

He let himself in. He took a seat in the front row. Then, once the movie began, he walked to the front emergeny exit door, propped it open, and exited. A natural assumption might be that he wanted to smoke. What he actually did was walk to his car, suit up, back up to the exit door, and walk on in.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Jim July 27, 2012 at 00:30

I stopped watching ANY cnn or ever visiting their website a looooonnngg time ago.

Seriously if you are a Man I don’t know how you can even give that network a second of your time.

If all guys did this it would give the vermin that run these networks a lot less power….if not put them out of business.

If anyone doubts what I am saying go look up how they covered the Duke Lacrosse case….and remember that they would do the exact same thing to you.

If you care about Men’s rights at all these networks next to lawmakers are your biggest foe.

It’s like a 24 hour misandry commercial.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Poester99 July 27, 2012 at 03:56

I once heard Bill Bennett say a slogan along the lines of “if mommas not happy, no ones happy” “if mommas happy, everyones happy”. Its an incredibly gay thing for a ‘man’ to say, but it sums up the Bennett life mantra

He certainly seems like he was only one or two (female sibling) beatings away from being just like Joe Biden

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Geography Bee Finalist himself July 27, 2012 at 06:09

Out of sheer curiosity, did Bill Bennett ever sincerely apologize for HIS saying that if all African-American fetuses conceived were subsequently aborted, the crime rate would go down?

If I remember correctly, he used the overused excuse that his remarks were “taken out of context.” Now let’s suppose that the three men gunned down were all black. I guess Bill Bennett would have a problem with his previously held views.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Maigo July 27, 2012 at 07:22

As ever it seems no one is providing the information that is really of interest. I don’t care what these guys were/weren’t doing with their lives, the important question is what are these women that were saved doing with theirs? One has received a veterinarian degree? Fine but will she go on to have a career in that field or give it up when she meets a man that will pay for her? What are the other women doing with their lives? I want to know whether these women were ‘worth’ saving. What will their continued existence provide to society and the wider world?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
stallywood July 27, 2012 at 07:30

If I as a man, have to die for a vagina to be appreciated, I want no part of it. If women are so capable and strong, etc….when are we going to hear the heroic stories about one of them saving the live of one of us poor useless males? I have no problem with a man helping another person, even too the point of his own death, but I do have a tremendous one with the expectation that I do this, in order to be a REAL man, and the hypocracy that women do not have to do anything, and are considered to be more worthy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
ahamkara July 27, 2012 at 08:02

“it leads to all sorts of dysfunction and unhappiness in our women, who can’t understand why they don’t love the men in their lives simply for being “useful.””

I think you nailed it right there. The corollary to that is that they decide they can’t love a man who isn’t useful enough (i.e. isn’t providing enough material gain). As many of us know, this is a bottomless pit – women who are looking for love there will never stop digging until they have destroyed everything they have that was worth loving in the first place. Let’s not stand by and watch our daughters destroy themselves and the people around them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Mikediver July 27, 2012 at 08:14

The answer to the question of, “when the preachers will ever get off the women are angels and men are scum rant?” is, never. Like Bennett they are too steeped in the philosophy/world view of men = bad women = good to even think there is an alternative. I don’t believe that it is a conscious seeking of money/collection plate offerings from women. Never attribute to malice that which can be fully explained by stupidity.
Elsewhere in this blog (not on this thread) or on another (perhaps Dalrock’s) I recently read a comment that has resonated with me for days. The comment was along the lines that the traditional/social conservative believes that all the women are angels searching for a nice guys to commit to and with whom to settle down, and that the cads and thugs (read PUA) are tricking the women into believing that they are nice guys so they can get into their panties and then abandon them. I think the alternative theory of social interaction is the one put up by the PUA community that all women are sluts/skanks looking for thugs and cads to have monkey sex with then stick some beta schlub with the bill, and that nice guys have to trick the women into believing they are thugs and cads to get into their pants. The question I ask is which theory most closely fits the observable facts?
By the way, I respect the reflex action that caused the three men to give their lives in defense of the woman next to them. However, I agree wholeheartedly that we have to stop thinking of ourselves as men being disposable utilities for women. I have taken the conscious decision not to help any woman in anyway except those I know personally and know they would do the same for me. This has limited my help to family members (we know how women are.)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Kyo July 27, 2012 at 08:30

@Zed – Another thing I noticed about the story was that initially it was being reported as Holmes indiscriminately firing away (and thus it was a ‘good’ thing that none of the victims had weapons, or it would have beenmore of a bloodbath), but now I’m hearing that he actually pointed at people and shot them.

The latter scenario means that had anyone in the theater had a gun, the incident could have ended after Holmes had shot just one person, or even before he shot that person. But that doesn’t fit the anti-gun narrative, now does it?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
zed July 27, 2012 at 09:31

@kyo,

This whole story stinks like a dozen rotting whale carcasses. We’ll likely never know the true story, but some accounts I have read indicate that instead of the shooter sneaking out, arming up, and sneaking back in, someone inside the theater let the shooter – fully armed – in. I have also heard accounts that the tear gas grenades came from 2 different directions.

To me, this has “fast and furious” written all over it – or the Reichstag Fire – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire

I have no idea what to believe any more. This rumor circulating around that the Department of Homeland Security has recently purchased 450,000,000 rounds of .40 caliber hollowpoint ammo makes me wonder who is zooming who.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM) July 27, 2012 at 10:26

http://hawaiianlibertarian.blogspot.com/2011/10/those-who-are-responsible.html

Those who funded feminism and effected the long march through Western Civilization by disparaging and marginalizing the great works of Classic Western literature — like Homer, Dante, Shakespeare and the Bible — and replace them with Women’s Studies curriculum and liberal progressive doctrine promoting cultural Marxism to instill a mentality of entitlement to support class warfare and wealth redistribution ideals as the new morality.

Who are these people? The Federal Reserve private banksters who implemented the ten planks of the communist manifesto; who created all of the wealth transferring bubbles: the dot-com bubble, the real estate bubble, the marriage bubble, and the college student loan bubble.

By funding higher education, they ensure that the professors promote a curriculum that support Central Banking’s role in society, supporting their fiat dollar monetary policy, and the creation of meaningless, overpriced degrees that dumb down the students and trap them in debt in exchange for credentialis not worth the price of the parchment they’re printed on.

And it all goes back to the basic goals of these elite who promoted cultural Marxism to destroy the family to remake society for their benefit.

Thanks to these bastards, we are all screwed.

While the openly liberal, left-wing useful idiots play their role in advancing this agenda, the right wing media pundits and talking heads play there role as well. Here’s how they contribute to this agenda:

*By making the following section of his comment a list, I think the meaning is very easy to discern, so I only offer minor grammatical editing here:

1. deconstruct the great books on university campuses
2. tell men they need to man up
3. dumb down the entire schools system
4. tell men they need to man up
5. ass-rape men in divorce court
6. tell men they need to man up
7. send men to die on foreign shores in foreign neo-con wars
8. tell men they need to man up
9. drug boys with ritalin/adderoll for being boys
10. tell men they need to man up
11. encourage women to give their a-holes and ‘gina-holes early and often to douchebags
12. tell men they need to man up
13. destroy the classical, heroic character in their neo-con movies, replacing them with ass-cocking gay cowboys
14. tell men they need to man up
15. print money from thin air and inflate and deflate bubbles to seize a man’s home and property
16. tell men they need to man up
17. encourage women to become fat, whiny bitches
18. tell men they need to man up
19. publish, promote, fund, and finance ass-cockers like tucker max who film secretive taping of ass-cocking sessions without the girl’s consent (tucker max rhymes with goldman sachs), repeating tucker’s lies that he is six feet tall in the neo-con mag, the weekly standard.
20. tell men they need to man up
21. transform the church from an institution where a man could once go to meet a virginal, exalted wife, into a front for the divorce industry, where single mothers with three children from three ass-cockers go to rope in a beta male to pay for the ass-cocker’s spawn
22. tell men they need to man up
23. castigate, attack, and impugn men for acting like men
24. tell men they need to man up
25. transform the noble, exalted university into a nursery, ruled by neo-con women exalting ass-cockers, asscocking, and good grammar, exiling and deconstructing the great books and men, and rewarding the servile future nannies of the nanny state with fiat dollars delivered fresh from ben beranke’s helicopter
26. tell men they need to man up
27. remove all men from the publishing industry, so that priscialla painton of simon and schuster sodom and scheister can publish tucker max rhymes iwth godlman sax’s stories on how he asscoked a girl (somone’s future wife who will asscock her future huspband in divorce coutrt as revenge for having been assocked by a neocon) and taped it secretly without her consent. Remove all men from the publishing industry and replace deep, profound, real great books for men, with twilight vampire asscocking female rape fanasty “romance” novels.
28. tell men they need to man up
29. conceive of a hundred government programs to criminalize men and force them to hand over their assets to women
30. tell men they need to man up
31. financially incentivize womem to file for divorce, promising them that their former husdband will have to pay for all their future assocking sessions, and that they get the kids/house/car/assets
32. tell men they need to ma up
33. fill the law schools with fat, embittered, burned-out, nasty (in looks and spirit) post-asscoked lawyeresses, and replace Moses’ and Zeus’s law with Bernake’s Banker laws which exlats theft via the inflation tax
34. tell men they need to man up.

lzozoozozol

what aalalz am i mizssing here:???

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4
Durasim July 27, 2012 at 13:24

As Hanna Rosin suggests, Blunk was kind of a loser who couldn’t support his family

She attributed that to his undying heroism, but it may also have to do with the fact that he, like a few guys in the theater, was working at Target and surely not making enough money to support one family, much less two. Young, meanwhile, had just finished getting her veterinarian degree, becoming the latest in an onslaught of women who have taken over that lucrative profession, which was not very long ago dominated by men.

Of course, Rosin will shit on the dead in order to parrot her “End of Men” campaign. She is not too subtle about reminding us that the self-sacrificing hero was really a low-wage, menial loser and deadbeat dad and that the girlfriend he sacrificed himself for was way beyond his league. I guess she thinks that martyrdom for women was the highest thing he could achieve.

None of these life details are meant to detract from the men’s heroism. They are only meant to make it more poignant, and even beautiful.

Yeah, Rosin. I’m sure that you think it’s beautiful when failed, obsolete males realize that their true purpose is to sacrifice themselves for their female betters.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Masculist Man July 27, 2012 at 20:28

I was in a gun store today, and there was a very attractive young woman in her early 20s buying her first gun.

An armed woman now that is scary. She may use that as a husband/boyfriend killer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Masculist Man July 27, 2012 at 20:35

Jim, perhaps you should see my blog: http://mensrightsboard.blogspot.com/

We’ve gotten some stuff done.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
ActaNonVerba July 27, 2012 at 23:06

I don’t know much about Bennett. He seems like a synchophatic Christian Zionist neocon slug. Anyway, about specifics…

1) BENNETT: “They put the lives of the women before their own, an old fashioned notion to be sure, but certainly an honorable one (if you have any doubt, ask the survivors)”

So, by Mr. Bennett’s reasoning, if you doubt the properness of a person’s self-impairing or self-destructive action, just ask the person or party that benefited and that’s proof enough. So, using Bennett’s would-be reasoning, let me write out a couple sentences using similar logic: a) They put their love of smoking before their own health, an old fashioned notion to be sure, but certainly an honorable one (if you have any doubt, ask the tobacco companies) or b) They put the lives of others before allowing leaving their doors unlocked when they went on vacation, an old fashioned notion to be sure, but certainly an honorable one (if you have any doubt, ask the thieves)”.

2) BENNETT: “After his death we learned that Blunk had an ex-wife and two children living in Nevada. He was scheduled to visit them to resolve marital issues. This isn’t to take anything away from Blunk…”

Wouldn’t feminists be HOWLING about “slut shaming” if this was mentioned about a separated wife for any reason? Rhetorical question.

3) PRICE: ” I’ve been all over Europe and Asia, and only in the Anglo world are men considered to have value only in their utility”

It appears white men are really up against it beginning with their mother’s indoctrination starting in infancy. I have never lived in a culture where men could, even partially, just be men. I think it would freak me out at first.

4) PRICE: “Men are not men because they are useful to others; rather, they have value because they are men.”

Amen. Given the distribution of hardship vs reward, the who needs who approach, saying men are only valuable in how useful they are to women is like saying men are only valuable in how much they do for their pet hamsters (exaggeration acknowledged).

5) PRICE: “This is really what feminists like Rosin and Bennett don’t understand. Men do not need to be taught or pushed to be men. They do not need to be shamed or cajoled into it. It is simply what they are, and it is a glorious thing.”

Amen.

Maybe it’s cause I just worked out and am in a good mood, but, I found this article very uplifting. I found myself feeling like one of the more vocal religious followers while reading it: “Ummm-hmm….say it preacher……Amen…yes…Oh Lawdy yes”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Nacho July 28, 2012 at 11:14

If you are going to accept the truth about gender then you need to accept it all. If you acknowledge an unpleasant truth about women (hypergamy for example) then you need to be able to accept an unpleasant truth about men (men have less biological value then women, sperm is cheap, eggs are expensive).

Gender stereotypes exist because they are usually true. Men do not have “inherent” value and a woman who treats men like they are expendable is just acting in accordance with nature.

Men and women have divergent (and sometimes opposed) reproductive interests and strategies. Men want to maximize sexual access and women want to maximize access to male resources and the protection of the high ranking males from the lower ranking males. There is nothing moral or immoral about this. It just is.

Feminism is a very effective male resource extraction and protection strategy. Trying to make a moral case against it is futile. Feminism serves the reproductive interests of women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
JoeS July 28, 2012 at 18:09

Nacho, you may as well say don’t make a moral case about anything. Especially specious is to go to from saying that “eggs are more valuable” to saying “men have no inherent value.”

Men need to reject feminism. The more men systematically reject feminism, the more women will be held to account. Those who advance selective amorality and talk about “futility” are probably those who benefit from the current system and wish to demoralize those of us who wish to protect and ensure the things that men of decency value.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
SMC July 29, 2012 at 11:07

Absolutely.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: