Did Society Owe Elliot Rodger Sex?

While there is a lot I want to write about the Elliot Rodger saga, time constraints require me prioritize some posts over others. So let us talk about one of the most common talking points of media feminists and their male supporters. I am sure almost all of you have come across one or more tweet, post or article that makes the following assertion.

Society did not owe Elliot Rodger anything, including opportunities for sex with women.

If this statement by so-called “liberal” feminists seems familiar, that is because it a rehash of one of the oldest CONservative tropes aka “Society does not owe the individual anything”. Often invoked to cover over glaring faults, systemic defects and outright dishonesty- it relies on shaming naive people into accepting their exploitation as normal. Of course, the low fertility rates (less new naive suckers) and the spread of information (especially the internet) has made this trope far less effective in the last few decades. This change has however not stopped people from trying to use it. Indeed, those who know of no other argument to justify their bullshit often tend to double down on the old one when they are challenged.

And all of this brings us to an interesting question about the dynamics of groups made up of sentient individuals. These groups, unlike those of insects or fish, are by no means inevitable. Infact, a quick look at human history and pre-history suggests that the kinds of large impersonal societies most of us live in today are the exception, rather than the rule. In a previous post, I had made the point that all groups made up of sentient individuals require a certain set of basic conditions to work over an extended period of time. All these basic conditions can be roughly summarized by one word- reciprocity.

A society that demands a lot from individuals without fulfilling its end of the bargain, both the explicit and implicit parts, become dysfunctional and fragile- especially if it cannot find more suckers to replace the ones burnt out by believing those lies and misrepresentations.

So how does that play out in the Elliot Rodger saga? Well, most societies make one peculiar, but often ignored, implicit bargain with its male individual members. It can be summarized as- “doing x,y and z or having a, b and c will almost certainly ensure you sexual access to a non-ugly woman”. Note that this almost always an implicit bargain and not an absolute guarantee. However it is fair to say that it is meant to be true for the vast majority of its male membership.

So what happens if circumstances, or large-scale social changes, make these implicit promises untrue for anything beyond a small minority of its male membership?

The short answer is that you get people like Elliot Rodger. The somewhat longer answer to that question as follows.. A number of large scale social changes such as women working outside the house, easily available oral contraception, social atomization etc has short-circuited many of the “traditional” ways for most men to appear as viable mates to most women. Now, this does not mean that women have lost interest in men. Indeed, the more desirable men have no problems getting tons of women to have sex with them.

These changes have however made many of the older “do x,y, z or have a, b, c to get women” either irrelevant or an afterthought. Society, at large, has however not been honest about these changes and still keeps trying the old stuff. While younger men are increasingly aware of the nature and extent of this gap between reality and official talking points, it fair to say that a significant minority of them have not gotten the message. Moreover, many of those who realize the nature and extent of this deception lose faith in the ability of society to make good on any of its other promises- explicit and implicit.

So while it is technically correct that society or women did not owe Elliot Rodger sex, it is also technically correct that he did NOT have to keep on playing by their rules. Functional contracts, you see, are a two-way street.

What do you think? Comments?

  1. blurkel
    June 2, 2014 at 2:37 pm

    Let’s turn this thought on its head. We know that men are getting bashed for avoiding marriage. Do men owe women matrimony and a financial base of support?

    I think the answer to both questions is obvious.

  2. webe
    June 2, 2014 at 3:15 pm

    Two-way street indeed. Any kind of social dislocation or microcosm thereof tends to roll back the last few decades of social accretions and artifices. A little war, or isolated survivors of a plane crash, and relations and roles revert back to “nature”.

  3. June 2, 2014 at 4:04 pm

    “doing x,y and z or having a, b and c will almost certainly ensure you sexual access to a non-ugly woman.”

    And that is the problem that I have with concepts like ‘game’ (mistaken for ‘self-improvement’), which is another form of capitalistic marketing and ‘magic pills’ that do not work for every individual. It is possible that learning ‘game’ or even paid-sex MAY have helped a guy like Elliot Rodger, but then again it may not have. Elliot Rodger hated alphas and had a feminist and traditional longing to find someone to love him for him and thought he was entitled based on his ego. This is exactly what RooshV was speaking of right here when he compared Elliot Rodger to feminists and the said article was a pure win…

    http://www.returnofkings.com/36397/elliot-rodger-is-the-first-male-feminist-mass-murderer

    The thing that feminists love running with (and even chicks like Anh Vu) is not only their own idiotic misunderstanding about the true motives and intentions of this disturbed young man. Feminists are using this as an excuse to further their cry-wolf ‘rape culture’ rhetoric, but they also choose to believe that this massacre is the result of what happens when men ‘objectify women’ and that men should teach their sons to not objectify women, which is something Elliot Rodger did not do to begin with. But if he DID view women as objects of desire (like the alphas and guys who P4P do) instead of longing for emotional connections, hating what he envied and allowing his ‘entitlement’ (ego) to destroy him, there’s a possibility he may still be alive today. Then again, he had mental issues and mental issues in men and boys has been ignored in America, thanks to feminists blocking funding for men’s issues as I’ve mentioned in my two articles about the kid. Unfortunately, this is where all this ‘game’ crap kicks in and creates a larger slew of men who have been failed by the system.

  4. June 2, 2014 at 6:29 pm

    yes, an individual woman doesn’t owe an individual man sex…

    …and an individual man doesn’t owe an individual woman his seat on the lifeboat…

    the hypocrisy displayed by feminists is undeniable…

    they expect men to adhere to 15th century gender roles but think they should e “empowered.”

    prostitution and drugs are illegal, but a man is a criminal if he doesn’t sign up for selective service in the US of A…

    anyways, it was kind of funny when you tried to portray guys like Holmes and Breivik as some kind of hero when they would’ve happily put a bullet in your face. And you do realize Mr. Rodgers would’ve done the same, after all, you’ve had several blonde women–even if you did pay above market value. He would’ve probably thought you were “exploiting their poverty” like every other male feminist…

    I don’t portray them as heroes or villains. My point is that people like that are inevitable given the circumstances.

  5. Ted
    June 2, 2014 at 7:54 pm

    No one owed Eliot Roger sex. True, but I am reminded of the Chris Rock joke from Bring the Pain about alimony. How a woman will go into divorce court, and tell the judge, “Your Honor, I’m used to this. I’m used to that. I’m accustomed to this.”

    “What the fuck is ‘accustomed’? Hey, you go into a restaurant, you’re accustomed to eating. You leave, you ain’t eatin’ no more! They don’t owe you a steak!”

    It was in the past that men were expected to be loyal providers as he starts a family. Thanks to the spread of out-of-wedlock births, a man must be prepared financially & mentally to raise another man’s kid right off the bat. So, he has to have greater financial resources. Although, alphas will generally not waste too much time on a single mom aside from a pump & dump. So, now the new expectation is that a “real man” should be prepared to deal with a woman and her kid(s).

    Secondly, looked at the promises not kept by corporate America. You have no job security. Any 401k or pension you have can be robbed or jettisoned at a moments notice. The bank can take your mortgage, and sell it off to another financial institution that can change the terms without notice. If you don’t want the hassle of a home, and choose to rent, you can still find your rents jacked up well over inflation, because your building is no longer owned by a traditional landlord, but by a real estate investment trust looking to get the highest returns each quarter. So, you have a building with 20 units, all occupied charging a rent of $1,000 each. But, the bean counters say that if you put the rent at $1,500, even with some people moving out, you can make your quarterly target, and get that bonus. When the building lays empty because no one can afford to rent, doesn’t matter. The geniuses have already taken their bonuses and walked off to a tropical vacation.

    With the girl you were hoping would stand by you through all those tough times.

    When all the obligations by institutions such as business, higher ed, government, have been abandoned, and the one remaining consolation – companionship, has now been placed out of the reach of average men, you really think men will show up? Most don’t go berserk like Rodgers, but they do drop out.

  6. evilwhitemalempire
    June 3, 2014 at 1:49 am

    People aren’t ‘entitled’ to lots of things but that hasn’t stopped feminists.

    Why should it stop us?

    Only idiots will keep on working without a realistic promise of remuneration (cash and/or kind) for their work.

    Entitlements = Implicit promises

  7. Isaac
    June 3, 2014 at 2:18 am

    Excellent and brilliant post. Eliot was at the bottom of the dating barrel and he snapped. I encounter more and more men who are dropping out of relationships. In the near-future we will have a huge tax-rise worldwide (especially the EU) so woman can go to meaningless government-funded jobs to get their “income”. The result will be the same.

  8. sth_txs
    June 3, 2014 at 3:01 am

    Looks like AD has a big hard on against ‘conservatives’. As a caring socialist hypocrite, I think AD should be offering his bunghole to fags like Elliot.

    The only good CONservative is a dead CONservative.

    • sth_txs
      June 3, 2014 at 2:29 pm

      I also believe people with socialist views should be dead as well. I hate statist of all types. Especially the hypocrite kind that is found on the left.

  9. June 3, 2014 at 7:37 am

    Eliot was a self-righteous believer in the First Set of Books:
    http://therationalmale.com/2014/01/14/the-second-set-of-books/

  10. P Ray
    June 3, 2014 at 8:01 pm

    Wonderful analysis. Women still want to be treated as special while wanting to be equal.
    Your blog is like the dark side to the wonderful world of harmony that “Lord Business” created in “The Lego Movie”

  11. June 5, 2014 at 12:09 am

    If society owes poor sick people free healthcare, then it also owes awkward virgins males free sex. Attractive Women must be forced to have sex with men who are not otherwise attractive to women.

    Time for a new communist manifesto.

    Gamma males of the world, Unite! You have nothing to lose but your virginity.

    Non-alpha males of the world, Unite! You have nothing to lose but your Celibacy

    • June 5, 2014 at 6:47 am

      …and how does that shit work?

    • June 6, 2014 at 5:14 am

      “Attractive Women must be forced to have sex with men who are not otherwise attractive to women.”

      • June 7, 2014 at 10:41 am

        The exact same way hard working people are forced to fork their money over to those that don’t. I call my system sexual communism. Karl Marx was all about Economic communism. I’m all about sexual communis. Just Substitute Capital for sex in Das Kapital and you have Das Sex. Beautiful isn’t. Just to prove my Gender neutrality, we also propose to force alpha males to have sex with Fat and Obese Chicks. .

      • June 7, 2014 at 10:52 am

        I’m not going to even get into how retarded that shit is. That’s equally stupid as emasculated, sexless chumps who believes in reinstating arranged marriages, which proves how much of bitches they truly are.

      • P Ray
        June 7, 2014 at 2:11 pm

        Just to prove my Gender neutrality, we also propose to force alpha males to have sex with Fat and Obese Chicks. .
        Actually, alpha males do have sex with Fat and Obese chicks.
        Those chicks then develop a deluded self-image, thinking the “pump and dump” means a “relationship” has occurred, and only much later wake up, in the mean time behaving like their shit doesn’t stink.
        And if they do get married, these “alpha widows” will make their (usually unsuspecting) husband’s life hell.
        There is a reason why the statement “fat girls are nicer” doesn’t make sense anymore.

      • June 7, 2014 at 2:52 pm

        Well said, dude. Some alphas just want extra notches under their belt, so they bang fat uglies. I mentioned a guy like him in my topic, “A Canadian Threesome”. Dudes have no standards and social media makes the problem worse!

      • June 8, 2014 at 3:53 am

        It’s wonderful that magnificent Gentlemen like you two critique my ideas so I can refine them further. Both of you Gentlemen will have a seat on the planning commission for sexual communism once the revolution is here. Our first priority will be on on getting unattractive dudes laid with Hot Bitches. Our second priority will be to make sure that the Fugly bitches are getting just as much pumping from the alphas that the Hot Bitches are. Happy Now? Mr. Odessa, this shit might sound and be retarded, but since when has that ever stopped humanity from trying shit out? Chill Foo!

      • June 8, 2014 at 8:32 am

        This is already happening. For one, unattractive dudes can always pay for low-grade play (not to say that all men who P4P are unattractive) and fugly bitches are already getting pumped up by a few alphas and thirsty, desperate men who spend all day jacking off on the internet, which includes overvaluing mediocre chicks on Facebook, Instagram, etc.

        “Both of you Gentlemen will have a seat on the planning commission for sexual communism once the revolution is here.”

        I wouldn’t tell any grown-ass person, male or female, to subscribe to regimes or advice telling them who they can and cannot sleep with, or allowing someone else to call the shots on their watch.

        Anyway, I’m finished with this one.

  12. P Ray
    June 8, 2014 at 1:58 pm

    I wouldn’t tell any grown-ass person, male or female, to subscribe to regimes or advice telling them who they can and cannot sleep with, or allowing someone else to call the shots on their watch.
    Where do you think women get the idea about which men are attractive? OTHER WOMEN.
    The reality is, women already have some of the characteristics of a hive mind.
    And that is why, they prefer to “freeze out” guys they’re not attracted to, rather than talk about them and pique other women’s interest.
    Women ignore the men they dislike, and complain about the men they like.

    Our first priority will be on on getting unattractive dudes laid with Hot Bitches.
    The chances of a woman being hot are nearer the closer they are to the age of consent.

    One way we know God has a sense of humour, is ugly jailbait …

    • June 13, 2014 at 4:46 pm

      “Where do you think women get the idea about which men are attractive? OTHER WOMEN.”
      -That as well as their own natural selection of which men makes them throb. The media also plays a part, which is why some women are gullible and dumb as dirt.

      “Women ignore the men they dislike, and complain about the men they like.”
      -BINGO! Chateau Heartiste says this in every one of his “Chicks Dig Jerks” series. I’ve said it before that they avoid on-point guys who have their shit together, unless those guys just avoid them (like why some black men avoid black women). So they make babies with or get attached to alphas and then, they try to find mama’s boys, manginas, wannabes and Captain Save-A-Hoes to try to pick up the pieces, put the puzzle together and be with those broads, when their minds, hearts, bodies and pussies start to get old, over the hill, sour and deteriorate. I’ve mentioned it here…

      http://homeiswherethehateis.wordpress.com/2014/03/19/top-guns-the-25-of-the-western-male-population/

  13. P Ray
    June 13, 2014 at 6:55 pm

    This was an interesting piece of information that caught my eye (some men/boys will benefit):
    Phil Brown
    Online Dating games…. Played by women

    1- I want the Captain’s hat.
    This is where the woman wants to lead the conversation. But when you let her she loses interest. If you tell her to proceed, she’ll be dumbfounded.

    2- I want a new Collie.
    The woman using this tactic will give you several verbal hoops to jump through, i.e. “Tell me 5 things about yourself that would make me interested.” or even better, “Tell me something no one else knows about you.” If you comply, you don’t get a flyball trophy. You won’t even get a biscuit.

    3- Want it Tax.
    The woman realises you want her. The price goes up the more you want it.

    4- The time delay.
    The woman says something like “I’ll call you tomorrow” or “I’m going to bed but I’ll reply in the morning.” She won’t.

    5- I have no contact details of any kind.
    This is because she has no intention of meeting anyone.

    6- The cock tease.
    The woman will be very forward in a sexual manner prematurely in the conversation. If you call her on it, she’ll accuse you of being only after sex.

    7- The Not Received file.
    She has given you her number but any texts you send are lost in transit. This is because she has no intention of meeting anyone, but forgot to play game 5.

    8- Cleopatra complex.
    This is where the woman is on a power trip. All men are seen as lesser beings. Insults begin from the word go, as this is the only way she can steal confidence.

    9- My bottle has a hole in it.
    This is where she’ll demand compliments. But like the bottle with a hole in it, she soon feels empty again.

    10- Status cloud level.
    This is where the woman has decided her social status is so high, you have no chance with her. She will brag about her job/popularity etc to get this across.

    11- I want a pony.
    This is where the woman hasn’t grown up. Deeply ingrained immaturity rules.

    12- Give me your number first.
    You’ll never hear from her again.

    13- I found a flaw.
    This kind of woman is biding her time, watching for something to disqualify you for. Anything will do. If she can’t find something, she’ll make something up.

    14- Content distraction.
    The woman asks a mundane question, distracting you with content and steering you off your purpose. Another stalling tactic.

    15- Sell it to me.
    This is where the woman asks you to sales pitch yourself to her. This stems from seeing men as lesser beings.

  14. Jack
    July 24, 2014 at 1:41 pm

    It is correct to say CONS because religions, many politicians, and some of the media use tactics for more power/control such as politicians using lies of religion and so-called family values to get more votes. I got caught up in the lies of religion for years even though I kept thinking I really did not agree with the sex-negative repression of normal sexuality preached by religion, and the sexual repressive beliefs of religion is the main cause I was a virgin much later than anyone in this post and yet I did not hate anyone or harm other people. I’m from a small very conservative extremely religious town that is still about school (get good grades to go to college is the lie told), sports (for the ego of the parents), and church (sex is bad and is for marriage only, don’t use contraception, porn is bad, bodies are bad, everybody “Has To” be married to have sex, you “Have To” go to church, are some of the lies told), and the view is you only have worth from their self-righteous perspective as a human being if you have a good job such as a doctor or lawyer. I have basically always lived in poverty and was a virgin, and yet I never hurt other people. I was very popular, good looking, strong, a football captain, got mostly straight A’s, went to a top Division I college, never had any sex because religion said it was wrong, instead of going to parties I studied, put in huge effort, went in debt because of college, and all of those years of sacrifices/suffering/effort getting good grades did not result in a decent job as schools said it would, and yet I did not harm anyone else. After learning about the lies of schools, then I learned about the lies of religion. I learned on my own by asking questions of what I really believed and doing research that the original word was not even about non-married sex, that millions of people are basing their sex-negative brainwashed sexual repressive belief system on the incorrect translations of words, and that pre-marital sex was not even an issue way back then. Regardless of the false opinions/beliefs of religions my core values include freedom (including sexual freedom)/sex (men and women being free to openly express sexuality)/fun (including enjoying fun sexual experiences), and I believe in the right/freedom to have non-married sex as a masculine man/use contraception/be grateful for watching porn/masturbation when I want to/and never getting married because I do not want to. Thus, I stopped religion because I did not share the same sex-negative sexually repressive values. I really regretted being a late virgin (much later than this story) because of religion, but I did not do harm to others. Religions say they want more freedom for themselves, yet religions tell people how they “Have To” live (especially sexually) and this is not freedom, it is power over people and control of people. In the extremely religious conservative part of the country I’m from traditional marriage and religion is the norm, and me leaving the church and never getting married is not common. Reading many so-called game blogs (that often turn into political rants and illogically hating on the women they say they want) that if followed can make someones game (meeting women) worse, I learned no one really cares if I get laid or not. Religions never really cared about me or my regrets of being a late virgin, all religion cared about was imposing their incorrect beliefs to control people. If I wanted to get laid or achieve any goal I had to do it myself. This kid could have used access to producers to be an actor of some kind, got into business, and gone to parties somewhere or had parties in some way. He had money to meet girls somehow, hire an escort (there is even escorts that are considerate to virgins), sold the car and paid for the highest of high end escorts, or even traveled to another country where prostitution is legal (this country doesn’t want to decriminalize it), or paid for a girlfriend arrangement, or found a girl anywhere in the world who will get married. The amount he put into harming other people, could have been put into doing a lot of fun stuff.

  15. P Ray
    January 10, 2015 at 2:30 pm

    Just thought this would be interesting supplementary material for this post:
    https://alphaisassumed.wordpress.com/2014/05/29/foreshadowing/

    it’s perfectly acceptable for a reliable, unexciting guy to marry a 31 year-old after she’s “found herself” for a decade or so. If he can’t get laid in his twenties, sucks to be him. If he wants to get married when he’s young, he’s probably a misogynist pig who just wants to tie some poor girl down with babies.

    Tell a king of the financial markets that he should consent to having stolen from him/share his assets for the good of society, lefties applaud and nod in agreement. Tell a queen of the sexual markets (a young woman) that she should share her assets for the good of society, and you deserve ostracism and/or death.

    I’m of the sincere opinion that no unmarried person of either gender is entitled to sex from anyone else. Were I to have told this to Elliot Rodger, feminists worldwide would have nodded in approval. Were I to tell this to Louis CK’s chunky friend, they’d want my head on a stick.

    We’ve every right to confiscate as much wealth as possible from the rich guy, no matter the years of his life spent training for and performing his job. We’ve no right whatsoever to expect that a woman spend so much as fifteen minutes with a guy she doesn’t think is cute.

    His valuable assets: everybody’s. Her valuable assets: hers and hers alone.


    The first two columns of Rodger’s diagram are accurate, the third not so much. Rarely will men of any status have the incentive to kill masses of women. This is a good thing.

    What’s far more likely is for the male column to wind up shorter than the female one. They won’t turn into crosses like Rodger, they’ll move to the Philippines, find a cabin somewhere in the Rockies, stop developing new social media networks, and somehow not have any wealth to tax. Women will assert their freedom to bang whomsoever they choose, and the men they don’t choose will just stop showing up.

    Which might be fine were the men they choose not so frequently objectively useless.

    For all the feminist talk of Rodger’s sense of entitlement, it’s women who feel entitled to the fruits of male labor: clean streets, indoor plumbing, televisions, and iPhones.

    All men wanted in exchange was sex.

    But if men aren’t entitled to sex, if a young and virtuous bride is an unreasonable demand, that’s fine. They’ll just stop giving women all the goodies to which they feel entitled.

    And that’s when civilization collapses. I suspect on some level, young women are beginning to suspect that.

    • January 14, 2015 at 5:40 am

      Some Young women beginning to suspect that? You’re being too generous!

      • P Ray
        January 15, 2015 at 5:25 am

        That’s why young women demand things of men:
        however,
        that is an indicator of how little she actually thinks of them.
        Women would not want to be a burden to a guy she cared about or was terrified of losing.
        She only needs “compensation” from the guy she’s actually not interested in.

  16. P Ray
    September 22, 2015 at 5:14 am

    Society doesn’t owe Elliot Rodger sex
    but
    apparently society owes every woman a fairytale wedding.

    No fairytale wedding unless future hubby got his tackle milked by his teen future wife …

  1. June 3, 2014 at 9:42 pm
  2. August 9, 2015 at 2:07 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: