The Dark Knight Rises Movie Shooting: Healthy and Unhealthy Fantasies

Christopher Nolan’s “Dark Knight Rises” was set to be a triumphant success. The last in his three series of movies about Batman, and clocking in at nearly three hours long, the movie premiered at Midnight Friday all across America, in a blaze of publicity. Until a man named James Holmes, age 24, shot and killed 12 people (as of this writing) and wounded 58. Ultimately, fantasy is healthy if it lets artists, audiences, and a people work out real issues affecting them when open discussion is also possible. Fantasy is avenue for additional discussion, not a substitute for real, open, rational political discussion. But most of all fantasy is meant, and is mostly used, for fun. For a diversion. And there’s nothing wrong with that. People have loved, and enjoyed Sherlock Holmes, Superman, the Count of Monte Christo, and yes, Batman, for ages. If done properly, there is nothing wrong with watching a man fly, and believing it (for as long as the movie is running, anyway). Or a revenge tale within moral limits.

But that an (admittedly crazy) 24 year old White guy with an extremely high IQ would paint his hair red, carefully position his beat up old pickup truck against one emergency exit door, enter through the pre-arranged opened other door, and kill (again as of this writing) 12 people while wounding 58, many seriously, shows how out of hand Obama’s America has become. A generation of young White boys grew up wanting to be Superman or Batman. Now it seems the Joker has his appeal. Who the hell wants to be the Joker? He stands for nothing but endless destruction. At the end of the day, even the bad guys want a working hospital. And food that is not disgusting to eat.

Who is at fault? In no particular order, Obama, the entire Affirmative Action establishment, Jessie Jackson, feminists, the media, and the American people for taking the easy way out and not removing the former from public life through a hard, brutal political struggle that costs time and effort and more.

America has always had crazy people who shoot things up. Many of them, contrary to the media, are low-IQ Black men. Lee Boyd Malvo and John Mohammed killed 10 people, Omar Thornton, another Black man, shot and killed 8 White men at Hartford Distributors. [The FBI investigated for over a year if the victims were “racist” and “deserved it.”] Andre Turner, a Black man, shot and killed a White male and Hispanic Male at the SCE Irwindale facility. Shareef Allman, a Black man, shot and killed three Hispanic men and wounded six before being killed by police.

There is of course also, Major Nidal Hassan, a tribute to the military’s Muslim outreach, who shot and killed 13 people (14 including the unborn baby of one woman) and wounded 29 others.

So it is factually incorrect to label mass shootings as an exclusively White/Asian phenomena. Black men, Muslim men (the Ecole Polytechnique Massacre in Montreal was done by Marc Lepine aka Gamil Gharbi, raised as a Muslim and born to Muslim father, he was about as French Canadian as Mullah Omar), have a long and distinguished history of mass killing in the West, to rival that of White men. The media just doesn’t like to cover it.

Because mostly, the Media … HATES HATES HATES average White guys. And wants to make them look bad at every opportunity. Thus White guys are the nerdy, asocial mass-killers. And Blacks, Hispanics etc. are noble scientists and such brutally oppressed. Why, wasn’t Batman’s brilliant scientist played by Morgan Freeman? After all, when we think of science, don’t we think of Morgan Freeman? [Instead of say, marrying one’s grand-daughter? I cannot wait for the Woody Allen, Morgan Freeman movie they just HAVE to make.]

Blogger Half Sigma reports via ABC that James Holmes was dateless, with a female classmate citing her “female instincts” not to get close to him. No doubt those female instincts will operate differently now that he’s famous, and killed people. Anders Breivik is overwhelmed with female attention, as was Scott Peterson, Drew Peterson, and Joran Van Der Sloot. Was and is Van Der Sloot dangerous? Certainly. But Natalee Holloway and Flores Ramirez (and reportedly dozens of women in the Netherlands, Europe, Asia, and Latin America) could not get enough of him. Why, he’s even getting married, in prison. Women don’t find killers unsexy. See Breaking Bad, the Sopranos, Game of Thrones, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the Shield, Boardwalk Empires, Dexter, Twilight, Tru Blood, pretty much most of basic and premium cable TV. Quite the reverse. Women find killers “hot” since they express that most primal of primate dominance. Given that resource provision in a welfare state is unimportant, how else would women view men? Either as Alpha male winners, killer or not, or beta male losers (or even worse, omegas who should not even exist).

James Holmes was reportedly, a neuroscience grad from University of Riverside, who graduated with highest honors. He could not find a job, and was working at a McDonalds. He’s tall and good looking. He was set in May to give a presentation at University of Colorado-Denver where he was in the Phd program on the DNA markers of those prone to psychotic violence.

Meanwhile, the Obama Adminstration has set quotas on men (really, White men) in Math and Science. Males are to be strictly limited (again this means White men).

Was James Holmes forced out of the University of Colorado for being too White and male? We may never know. But certainly, being White, male, and applying for science related jobs after graduating with honors led to … McDonalds.

Being crazy is no impediment for being hired — as long as you are not a White male. See Dr. Deborah Frisch, of University of Arizona. See also, Ward Churchill, Chief Heap Big Fake Indian, University of Colorado. Heck one can be as nutty as peanut factory, and still be hired as an Astronaut. Just not as a White guy. That’s out.

So you have a very toxic combination. A man with a high IQ, denied any gainful employment or relationship with the opposite sex. [Guys who drank beer with him the night before at the local bar according to news reports thought he was smart and with a “swagger” but not weird or nutty, see the Fox News link regarding Holmes graduating with honors above.] America has become so debased, so hostile to ordinary White guys, that instead of say, devising his own bat-suit and rescuing someone, this guy figures he’s the Joker, and shoots a bunch of people he has never even met, dead.

Any society will always have mentally ill people. That’s unavoidable. Mostly when they become violent they go after, historically, important people. Presidents McKinley, Garfield, and JFK. Before that, attempts on Andrew Jackson. After that, attempts on Gerald Ford (history’s placeholder President). John Hinckley Jr. thought he would impress Jodie Foster by killing Reagan so he would date her. On every level, insanity. But most of the time, until the 1960’s, crazy people went after the famous and mostly, left ordinary people alone. Who could be famous killing Joe Average, after all? Its not much of an accomplishment to kill an ordinary Joe and Jane who don’t sit around like a Gangster waiting for a hit attempt.

So let us be honest, instead of delving into fantasy. The constant demonization of White guys, and destruction of heroism as a model, has real consequences. Guys with high IQs who are intent on killing people are dangerous. They get that way not from “turning evil” like a Joss Whedon character in “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” but because they are turned away from anything positive, socially isolated and alone while a lucky socially dominant few have everything (before he ever got famous, and with a massive drug habit, Russell Brand boasted he was having sex with 80 women a month). These guys study for years, graduate with honors, and end up at McDonalds. Wrong sex and color.

Life is an endless buffet, just watch it on TV. Only they can’t take part. Any wonder they choose a violent avatar to emulate in destruction? That they want to kill what they cannot have?

This is nothing new, men in China who are without any women or hope of one are killing kindergartners.

Obama, and the media, and feminists, and Democratic pundits have trumpeted the “end of White men.” Well, what exactly does that mean, in real terms?

Answer: James Holmes.

And the real threat is not guys on suicide missions, but those who use High IQs to kill, over and over again, at targets of their own choosing, to get ahead. Get denied that job? Start killing the applicants (for that and all other jobs) like the TV show on Fox Broadcasting “Profit”.

I want to be as clear as possible. The most dangerous man in WWII, was not Patton, or Rommel, or Yamamoto. No, it was nerdy, lanky, unassuming and part prima donna, J. Robert Oppenheimer. A high IQ unmoored by social ties, love, family, relationships, a job that is not demeaning (McDonald’s now is the sole province of non-Whites and the Whites working there are labeled “loser”), in short the usual ties that bind, is a man who is a potential weapon. One who can kill without even being known to kill. After all, no one knows who the Anthrax killer was. Not even today.

Batman’s fantasy of evil White masterminds, has up to now, been merely that, a fantasy, reflecting the time period of the late 1930’s when only White guys mattered, for good or bad. The argument made for anti-colonialism and things like South Africa’s “Black Economic Empowerment” (BEE) was that people without any stake will simply burn things down. But when they get partial ownership, they act like owners. You’ll barge around a rental, but baby your own car (as long as you have insurance on said rental of course).

If Obama’s anti-White guy policies, the media’s demonization of (particularly nerdy) White guys, and the legal discrimination against most non-connected Whites were deliberately constructed to create guys far more dangerous than James Holmes, they could not have done a better job. Of course, it wasn’t. Most took the prior investment in years past in social ties, family, obligations, jobs, to keep the anger moderated by the good things in life and an abiding faith in the system. But for those without it, the path is far more open. To anything, good or bad. They might be the Punisher. Or the Joker.

America has had unhealthy fantasies for over fifty years now. Partly a result of rising female social standing and income, partly a result of a consumer advertising and media society that caters to stupid female prejudices (against men not born on third base, i.e. not the dominant, alpha cad of their dreams), and partly of electoral spoils politics (Steve Sailer’s High-Low coalition of rich Whites and non-Whites allied against “the wrong sort of White people”), America has indulged in fantasy that is destructive.

America’s first fantasy is that demonizing White guys, and particularly nerdy ones, and excluding smart White guys without connections is cost free. It is not, and the cost of the Colorado shootings will be trivial compared to the amount of death and destruction high IQ White guys determined to get even without getting even identified much less caught will create. Guaranteed.

That’s a stupid fantasy.

Secondly the fantasy that science, math, technology, can be built upon a foundation of the politically correct, gays, women, non-Whites, is just that. A fantasy. Let us be clear. James Holmes had the capacity to maybe find a cure for Alzheimers. Yes he was crazy. But he was smart. Do you care if the guy who saves your father (or you) from a debilitating death is crazy? Meanwhile Trayvon Martin was never going to amount to much of anything. Ever. And neither will all those young Black man just like him.

Everyone, Black or White, male or female, straight or gay, is due the same legal rights, same human dignity, same obligations, and same equality under God. That does not mean they are all capable of the same things, and it is a fantasy to think that they are, just because they are possessed of the same humanity. James Holmes was never going to dunk a ball like LeBron James. But LeBron James will never do anything to cure Alzheimers. He’s not capable of even understanding the simplest class at UCR that James Holmes took and excelled in, by all accounts. LeBron is not evil. He’s just not capable of doing something he is not suited to do at all, in any way.

The human cost of not having anything good or rewarding for the Trayvon Martins of the world save for a very few, athletic success, is considerable. The cost for James Holmes is even higher. Literally any number of people you know, could die, in the future because society did not channel James Holmes into a productive outlet: neuroscience.

There is nothing wrong with the fundamentals of the Batman character. Bob Kane, and many others over the years, created him as a moral revenge story. Batman was wronged, but did not become a monster. Rather, he hunted the monsters themselves and sought to frighten them. He never killed, drawing a line that even the Punisher did not draw. Batman is not the problematic fantasy.

Rather, it is the fantasy that we can have no cost to marginalizing White guys (particularly the smart ones without connections) and that we can continue to have clean water, and air, and food that is safe to eat, and the power always one, by betting it all on the Trayvon Martins.

About whiskeysplace

Conservative blogger focusing on culture, business, technology, and how they intersect.
This entry was posted in beta males, breivik, comics, violence and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

55 Responses to The Dark Knight Rises Movie Shooting: Healthy and Unhealthy Fantasies

  1. Robert in Arabia says:

    One of your best.

  2. Jonathan says:

    “No doubt those female instincts will operate differently now that he’s famous, and killed people”

    Sadly true. Heck, even Luka Magnotta, the Montreal Cannibal who killed and dismembered his GAY lover is attracting female fans.

  3. fakeemail says:

    Whiskey, I think you’re making too many assumptions here. We don’t know jack about this guy, his motivations. He may very well be an isolated rambling nut like Jared Lee Loughner with a chemical imbalance. We don’t know that he was a product of the feminist-mulitcult society like Breivik or Sodini.

    Nor do we kno how smart he is. Many people can graduate with a science degree, but they aint geniuses who will cure alzheimers or split the atom. In fact, they can’t hack it in grad school. This guy was a fool. He was just 24 and at the moment he was stuck in a menial job. Big deal; his life was hardly ruined or over yet by a long shot. Smart people find ways to advance beyond McDonald’s without completely losing it. Some more thoughts:

    “America has had unhealthy fantasies for over fifty years now. Partly a result of rising female social standing and income,”

    The most unhealthy fantasy of which is pornography. This is a belief that I have: the huge appeal of pornography today is not simply due to easy access and the natural interest in sex. It is due to lots of betas who can’t get sex or wives and they are “consoling” their loneliness by sexualizing their defeat and watching the alphas nail all the hotties. Not good.

    “Everyone, Black or White, male or female, straight or gay, is due the same legal rights, same human dignity, same obligations, and same equality under God.”

    You must realize that the America of the Founders up till the America of the 60s did NOT bestow the same legal rights or dignity to all these parties above. And I’d argue that’s one reason it was the better place that you want to bring back.

    ” Batman never killed, drawing a line that even the Punisher did not draw. ”

    No, he and Superman both killed in their early years before the desire to make things less violent for what was essentially kids entertainment. And that was OK for kids entertainment. But then this gimmick was brought into the mainstream as some holy writ. The whole “if I kill the bad guy I’m just as bad” is an idiotic form of moral relativism that has little or nothing to do with reality. Nor does it have anything to do with classical western heroes and gods of yore.

    • That’s a good point about Superman and Batman, but the “don’t kill” stuff was done in a deliberate attempt to please the parents of young boys who could not get enough of “male empowerment” quite literally. Within its context, fight evil but don’t become a monster, I don’t argue with that decision. What is appropriate for a ten year old is not for a twenty year old, and vice versa, mostly.

      Porn of course, I do think you’ve nailed it.

      The guy was crazy. Clearly. But lots and lots and lots of crazy people function, all the time, without killing people. I can think of famous celebrities who are totally nuts yet function.

    • This last point about killing and kids’ entertainment actually explains about 90% of what’s ‘off’ about Nolan’s Batmans.

      He’s not making children’s entertainment. No single-digit-aged child should come anywhere near these movies (granted, Burton’s were as grievous in their way). Nolan’s trying to do something more akin to Michael Mann: “Last of the Mohicans” in terms of theme, with a milieu closer to “Heat”.

      So this vestigial superhero code, transposed into a moral universe far too grown-up for it, just transmogrifies into a bleak sort of Dostoevskean Idiocy. It also makes the plots needlessly more complicated than they should be. This goes to the heart of why these films are so sententious.

      • fakeemail says:

        Agreed. Nolan’s “intellectual” movies have all the intellect of a dull college sophomore liberal taking Phil 101. Nor does the man have a sense of story narrative or character development.

        His “realism” is laughable as there are more holes and unrealistic nonsense occurring in his movies that can be counted.

        He is an extremely talented in gimmicks and weirdness for its own sake that goes no where. And he is also good a ratcheting up tension, but again its without logical or emotional sense or trajectory.

        I will say that he is an “elegant hack” (as Rex Reed puts it) in that he has crisp use of lighting. And he has some germs of interesting ideas, but they are completely unprocessed and taken at their most superficial value.

        The two Burton Batman’s are FAR superior works. Those movies are more psychologically dark, ugly, and perverse than Nolan could be on his best day. Plus, Burton is an actual artist and storyteller. Not one without flaws, but an artist nonetheless.

      • asdf says:

        This movie sucked. fakemail nails it. The last one was decent mainly because of Ledgers performance.

  4. freebird says:


  5. Shawn says:

    Brilliant piece.

  6. chucho says:

    This morning, just below the lead article about the shooting, the Times ran a piece about the growing trend of people viewing hardcore pornography in public places like libraries and commercial flights. I’m not sure if the placement was done on purpose, but it’s hard not to make a connection between the collective shrug about the latter (“hey it’s a free country, don’t be a prude”) and the standard rebuttal to the former (“of course violent films have nothing to do with it/we’ve always had violence in culture, in the KJ Bible, in Shakespeare, etc”).

  7. Jim says:

    His own mother knew what was up as soon as she was contacted. Let’s wait to hear what she says.

  8. Langley says:


    You already know this.

  9. Just a quick note about Oppenheimer: I appreciate the larger thrust of what you’re getting at, but from what I gather, Oppenheimer was a pretty swaggering character. I’m not sure whether he was superathletic all around, but he did have a penchant for spur-of-the-moment hiking expeditions that sometimes saw him disappear for days on end. I remember, too, an anecdote of one of his hiking parties, stuck out in the middle of an apocalyptic lightning storm at night, him standing there like some carefree god barking orders, figuring which way down (correctly) to get out and survive. In any event, he wasn’t a sort of J. Alfred Prufrock character– much more extroverted and glamorous than that.

    –I don’t think Nolan’s a fullbore nihilist, but I found the Joker’s characterization problematic. In essence, the film asks us to take the Joker at his word: that he really, truly doesn’t care whether he lives or dies. In essence, he’s supposed to be a Walking, Talking Nietzschean Abyss.

    Now, that’s a terrifying characterization, but does it make sense? After all, in order for the plot to move, we have to believe the Joker *does* have some vanity, some recognizably human weaknesses. It’s a lot to swallow, to think Batman doesn’t get under his skin– Batman *does* get under his skin. But to acknowledge this would make this terrifying entity recognizably human and thus, less scary.

    The Phil 101 student in Nolan (and his brother) seems to want to keep the Joker back at this ‘pure’ stage where he’s essentially an Abyss instead of a person: Chaos personified. This sort of idea is stupidly ‘cool’, but you can see how dangerously attractive it might be to someone with onsetting schizophrenia. I mean, does history record a single death inflicted by someone trying to emulate a James Bond villain? Maybe some loony dictator might decide someday he’s Hugo Drax, but I doubt it. The Joker’s no more believable than Drax (hell, less believable, really), but offers a nightmare paradigm a psychotic can easily latch onto.

  10. cecil henry says:

    Great article here with very true insights. Thanks.

    Many people are thinking similar things.

    What i have noticed especially in Liberal newspapers is a tendency to repeatedly describe the killer as “a quiet graduate student’ or ‘a quiet, introverted student’ ‘a nice quiet guy’ but always with this undertone of ominous, pejorative contempt for those qualities.

    Something in these reports seeth with their own hate at a certain type, not BECAUSE of the murders, but in spite of them. I’m always a little surprised after awhile.

    Geez, no wonder he wanted to start killing.

    “Let’s get on with the conversation, don’t like nice–well good, cause I’m not offering any.”

    • Anonymous says:

      We live in a loud-mouthed extroverted society that hates and misunderstands INTROVERTS. Here is a famous article regarding the matter:

      “In our extrovertist society, being outgoing is considered normal and therefore desirable, a mark of happiness, confidence, leadership. Extroverts are seen as bighearted, vibrant, warm, empathic. “People person” is a compliment. Introverts are described with words like “guarded,” “loner,” “reserved,” “taciturn,” “self-contained,” “private”—narrow, ungenerous words, words that suggest emotional parsimony and smallness of personality.”

      Most intelligent and sensitive White Men are not big-mouthed extroverts and they’d prefer to keep to themselves; and that is a terrible handicap in a stupid society that no longer values a strong, silent type.

  11. ray says:

    the only piece i’ve read (and i’ve read plenty already) that cuts to the heart of what is actually going on

    it is amerika’s OWN DENIAL about what it has done, and very profitably and gleefully continues to do, to the sons of the nation, that caused the rage in this young man

    i was living near springfield, OR right after the shootings there, and tried to alert local Medea about WHY such a thing not only would, but must, occur and re-occur

    but amerika does not, and will not, hear it — she wants to continue power-shopping while stomping males, esp white males, and expects no blowback from fifty years of incredibly intensive gender apartheid

    i’ve witnessed the anti-male hatred that pervades u.s. campuses the past forty years — this bright and diligent young man was refused entry into the “american ID politics spoils-system” precisely and ONLY bc of his despised gender (and to lesser extent, his despised race)

    now i read people’s blogs, women report how they are crying crocodile tears over “another senseless massacre” — but these same persons are quite happy to single out men, esp white men, for constant degradation and disenfranchisement, yet simultaneously expect their police-state to protect them from the consequences of their OWN iniquity, hatred, selfishness, and proxy-violence

    i’d say i’ll hope amerikans and other western peoples will learn from such incidents, but i already know they will not — they’ll just ratchet-up the scapegoating , propaganda, police powers, and denial, b/c the truth threatens their Sistem

    nice job on this one, whiskey

  12. says:

    Interestingly enough, Van Jones (that black guy that Glenn Beck really hates) actually brought attention to the plight of these young white males while being interviewed once.

  13. Pingback: Linkage Is Good For You: 7-22-12: Holmes Killer Edition | Society of Amateur Gentlemen

  14. says:

    I seriously doubt that race had much to do with all of this, really. Not all roads lead back to race. The man probably just had some demons. He might simply be evil.

    I can also tell you that whether he’s weird, nerdy, geeky or otherwise, a man’s appeal to women is about ninety percent looks. Hell, some times I think they care MORE about looks than we do. Being handsome is the difference between being “smart” and being “weird” or “creepy.” Men are more honest about their attraction to beauty, but women, for some reason, feel the need to present themselves as being more noble and deep, less superficial. So, they insist that they’re attracted to men who are “funny” or “confident” and that looks don’t matter to them all that much. It’s the biggest con job in history and most of us have swallowed it hook line and sinker despite the fact that it’s obviously not true. As long as you’re not an obvious weirdo or psychopath, you’re pretty much good to go with the girls.

    Funny how most of my friends who were vastly more successful with women than I was were also a hell of a lot better looking. They insisted it was personality, particularly a little trait called confidence.

    Here’s a translation guide to all of you who are still in denial after reading this:
    Nice – ugly
    Shy – ugly
    Quiet – ugly
    Creepy – ugly
    Weird – ugly

    • whiskey says:

      The guy was tall and (to me a straight guy) good looking. What stands out is his inability to play the extrovert cocky-funny aloof a-hole that does not care about any particular woman because he’s got them all over him. Russell Brand, in other words. A man who is not (to a straight guy) very good looking.

      There have been numerous studies done showing height and attitude make up more of a man’s attraction to women than anything else. Height DOES matter, but looks less than you might think (outside of fitness). Women are more social/verbal and men more visual, in attraction. Ugly, scarred, but socially dominant men do better than “hot” but awkward men.

      As for race, well the guy could not get hired despite having great grades in neuroscience. One of the uglier stories is the hollowing out of US science by H1-B and foreign students, mostly Chinese and Indians, leaving little for native Whites. It is a spoils fight driven by White elites in things like marketing, finance, and operations (which remain mostly lily-White). You don’t see corporations shoveling in H1-Bs for corporate finance and marketing.

      • Matt Strictland says:

        We should be glad this guy was an impatient spree killer and we got off lightly for the most part. Too bad he shot decent Whites though

        Imagine a few years from now what someone with basic skills, maybe even learned off the Dark Net or wherever with some cheap used tech from E Bay and deep hate.

        I’ll let Angry Harry do it

        Technological Convergence ought to scare anybody spit-less

    • Conquistador says:

      I agree with you weishaupt. Looks are everything in life for both men and women. For some reason women understand and embrace this though they are loathed to admit it. Men need to realize this as well especially as America becomes more feminized and women call the shots. Whether you turn them on sexually will make or break your life.

    • Conquistador says:

      “They insisted it was personality, particularly a little trait called confidence.”

  15. Tripemaster says:

    weishaupt4, interesting comments.

    I’ve been following Whiskey’s blog for a while now and this is the first time I have left a comment. I am a fan of websites like and many others, and I am also attracted to this one, probably because like the aforementioned it has detailed discussion of female psychology. I live in Scotland. I also (supposedly) have Asperger syndrome.

    One thing that I find difficult when reading this blog, though, is that Whiskey may be writing about America (or England, or Sweden, or wherever) and it’s hard to know whether it applies to where I live. Certainly if you were to say “white males are mostly beta males” or something to people in a pub in Scotland they would probably respond with something like “Fit the fuck ye on aboot ye cunt?” … It really is hard to know whether the things that Whiskey says about sex, race, etc. apply to where I live.

    When I was a student, I could be getting a new female (either one night stand, girlfriend, etc or whatever) about every couple of months or so, at my peak. Things have declined since then.

    I have not done anything sexual with a woman since May 2011, except one incident when I was drunk in a strip club in August 2011 when I went there with a couple of Norwegians. However last night I got a female’s number in a bar, and she seems to like me. Now despite the fact that I have gone for about a year without doing anything serious with a woman… I just don’t find her very attractive, although I said that I would go out with her. She comes from the poorest part of my city, is not that good looking, and has a bad tattoo. So here I am, lonely for a year, and now a female finally comes along and I don’t even want to take the opportunity… what should I do?

    Also, who or what is a “beta male”? What is the definition? Also, 2004 was the last full calendar year in which I did not do anything sexually intimate with a woman (I was 17 then and had not had sex). Do you have to go for several years without doing anything sexual to be a “beta male”? Also, I think if I got more opportunities to meet females then I could possibly return to something more approaching the level during my student days, but my social life is simply not as strong as it was then.

    What should I do? Can I get a response from the man himself, Whiskey? Also, I must apologise for this being rather off-topic from the main subject (James Holmes and his shooting).

    • I’m not the man himself, of course, but on the subject of “betas”:
      The definition varies a lot. Vox Day seems to use “betas” to mean family men, and younger men who are faithful to their girlfriends. They work hard, strive to become good providers, relish the role of raising children, etc. Among Whites they are more likely to reproduce than any other (since contemporary White “alphas” tend to prefer lots of sex to starting a family with one woman, but retain the typically Eurasian future time orientation). The kinds of men who hardly ever have success with women are gammas and omegas.

      Lots of people seem to think Vox Day’s heirarchy is too complicated and stick to “alpha” and “beta”. The latter are utter losers whom women run from screaming, or simply laugh at. The alpha is very rarely out of bed. I’m exaggerating of course, but I have little use for a false dichotomy in which the vast majority of men don’t fit at all.

      So, in short, a beta is either quite a bit more or less successful with women than average.

    • My shorthand advice to men on how to up their success with women is:

      Don’t bother with “game” (psychologically manipulating women) unless the idea strikes you as super-great. Forget about chat-up technique per se, but don’t make any attempt to be nice either. Don’t bother trying to become funny or apathetic.

      Concentrate on becoming healthy and looking that way. Muscles make you look a little better and feel a lot better. Dress slightly more formally than average, for a given occasion.

      At a social event, face the middle of the room, speak little, observe a lot. Play it by ear when you see someone who catches your eye, just remember you don’t need to perform for her. Strong and silent men do quite well.

      It may help to have more or fewer of your own friends around you. I was a total washout for years after college, because I would try to meet women alone. I met my current wife when I was surrounded by my best friends. Just my own experience though.

  16. Tripemaster says:

    One thing I would also like to state is that although there is obviously a hierarchy of males in terms of desirability, women too vary considerably in terms of attractiveness.

    Significantly: fat, ugly, and otherwise less desirable women are probably going to be easier for a male to pick up than the truly “hot” women.

    A fat girl may, for example, be really into you (the male) and give you a really good time. I have been successful with many fat and ugly girls, but not so much at all with hot ones, especially the really hot ones, whom I’ve never had any interest from. That doesn’t bother me.

  17. zyzz says:

    Society has trivialized and hosed white men and so white men are going to hose society in return.

  18. stormy says:

    It’s a bit funny that you’re blaming Obama for the mass shooting, when mass shootings occurred under previous presidential administrations. In addition, as opposed to Anders Breivik, the guy doesn’t have a particular reason for shooting up the movie theater, other than the fact that he’s stated that “he’s the Joker.” He’s now asking for a lawyer and refuses to talk to the police, but he booby trapped his apartment so that it could blow up two buildings…indicating that he was planning on getting caught. The guy is a piece of work. Rather than say that he did this because women wouldn’t sleep with him, wouldn’t it be safer to say that women won’t sleep with him…because they know he’s the kind of freak to pull this crap?

    Rather than blame society, the media, or anything else, I think it’s safe to say that this guy is profoundly mentally disturbed. What he’s done is his fault alone. Let’s place the blame where it belongs. The victims and their families don’t deserve to be spit on this way.

    • whiskey says:

      Yes, women don’t throw themselves at: Joran Van Der Sloot (getting married in jail after killing two women), Anders Breivik, Scott Peterson, Drew Peterson, etc. Oh no, that DOESN’T HAPPEN. Except of course, it does.

      And of course he’s a lunatic. He wanted to kill people. But WHO he chooses is generally decided by society. IMHO, when some lunatic kills ordinary people instead of (as has been the case for the West since 500 BC) famous people, something is really, really, REALLY WRONG.

      Fatuously sentimental hand-wringing instead of real, hard thinking about what went wrong here does the victims a disservice.

      Yes, put crazy people in mental institutions, get rid of the Lanterman-Petrie-Short Act which outlawed in effect civil commitment and warehousing the crazy. But you will still have guys slipping through the cracks, and able to say, firebomb theaters and do other horrible things. It is better for SOCIETY to have them targeting the famous and powerful, than ordinary society.

      For roughly 2500 years until now, crazy guys intent on killing people have targeted the famous and powerful. Hoping to become famous and powerful themselves. See Robert Ford, the guy who shot Hickock. Until about now. Can’t you see how much of a radical change that is, and how indicative of how wrong this society has become?

  19. bs says:

    “…because they know he’s the kind of freak to pull this crap?”

    So how exactly do you reconcile your statement with the fact that hundreds of young women are penning their love letters and marriage proposals as we speak?

  20. Julie says:

    I concur.

    Severe mental illness and lack of connection to real live human beings (these guys seldom have even male friends) combined with easy access to weaponry (assault rifles – WTF??!!! why are they so easy to get?), and our popular culture treats violence and murder like a computer game or…like a Batman movie. Ever escalating, more and better FX; when it crosses over into real life we’re shocked, at least for a couple days. Then we forget about it until the next blowup.

    Now, who’s up for some WOW?

    • lol Well, it’s easy to fathom that a lot of manospheric commenters are grad school guys themselves, and even for the most “well-adjusted”, grad school can be an alienating experience. So I sympathize with the fact that a lot of these guys going about their rounds this weekend probably feel that a lot of extrovert Everymans are giving them the twice-over because they always seem to walk with their heads down, lost in thoughts about: curing Alzheimers? the Battle of Kursk? star Trek? mass slaughter? They don’t know . . .

      And now, with Obama’s ludicrous push to Title IXicize all of education, there’s an extra impetus to feel like society at large just doesn’t understand its intellectuals. And I’ll add that goes for Humanities too, which, if they hadn’t been de facto Title IXed long ago, would be under the gun. Guys there are almost uniformly more driven, more serious, and more erudite than girls; many of them cede grad school to the Marxist flakes because, esp. at that level, the universities are run as a Gramsci Project to churn out more Marxist trainers to lobotomize the upcoming generations.

      That said, our “Joker” clearly long ago ceded any of his neurons once given to serious work to churning out explosive booby traps instead. Ten years on Ibiza with Coppola’s Dracula’s brides (Monica Belluci is one!) wouldn’t have sufficed to screw the crazy out of him. And frankly, if the guys he was hanging out with (I’m not clear whether these were grad student acquaintances or McDonald’s employees) couldn’t catch a whiff of the crazy on him, that’s no tribute to their people skills.

      Obviously, a lot of “EQ” talk is just fluff to pamper the vanity of women who read magazines; but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a limited truth here. These grad school girls, whatever their faults, hypergamous or otherwise, may well have been clearsighted and sincere to find him wanting. Nicki Giovanni ain’t no Sappho, but she was right about the Tech shooter.

    • Twenty says:

      easy access to weaponry (assault rifles – WTF??!!! why are they so easy to get?)

      He didn’t have any “assault rifles”. He had a semi-automatic rifle, which is not an “assault rifle” by any definition — “assault rifles” being machine guns, and therefore heavily regulated and hard to obtain.

      You don’t know any better because you believe what the media tells you, and the media are either too stupid or too dishonest to get this right.

      Semi-automatic rifles are “easy to obtain” because they’re not particularly dangerous, very popular, widely used, and because we enjoy 2nd Amendment protections of our rights to keep and bear arms in this country.

      • Julie says:

        And easy to modify into an automatic.

        Although, I read they’re planning a “prayer vigil” for the victims. Gosh, I feel better now!

        I’ve wondered why, with all the arms-bearing citizens in our nation, there has not been even one attempt to deter one of these people?

        Praise the Lord and pass the ammo!

      • Conquistador says:

        Is it true he had an extremely large magazine? Like military grade?

      • I’ve never heard of a military-grade 100-round rifle magazine. Military rifle magazines are usually 20- or 30-rounds. Huge magazines aren’t known for compactness or reliability. A 100-round magazine takes five times as long to fill with ammo as a 20-rounder, and it’s at least five times as large.

  21. Alan Berg says:

    I would prefer that thousands of white guys commit mass murder than to go back to the days where they were allowed unquestioned dominance in society. If that’s the way your people need to vent about the world becoming less unjust, then so be it.

    Just like you don’t care about nonwhites, I don’t give a damn about you or your problem. Tough luck, buddy.

    • cecil henry says:

      Thanks for the advice. You have some unexamined biases of your own.

      Justice for me, not for thee, eh?

    • Given your last name, this is not surprising.

    • whiskey says:

      If non-Whites want me to care about them, they need to work at it. They need to have me invested in them. They need to GIVE me money instead of taking it from me to pay for kids at age 16.

      I happen to agree with Third World Nationalists who argue that their nations should not be just some resource extraction pit, that they must have their citizens and people get benefit, through partial ownership.

      Why shouldn’t White people have unquestioned dominance over their own societies? Isn’t it right for Africans to have that for their own? For Chinese and Japanese and Korean and Filipino to have that for their own? Why should Whites be less deserving of self-determination and natural rights? Why can’t White people in their societies have first place the way Jews do in Israel? Israelis don’t seek to rule Egypt or Iran, they just want to be left alone in their own country. Why can’t ordinary White people have that too?

      And I frankly don’t believe you would have White guys committing mass murder than violate PC ideology. My bet is that you are like me, a middle class White guy likely to be among the first victims. And like me you will have to choose:

      Die for your religion of PC and Diversity and other Multicultural nonsense proven to be idiotic and plain wrong …

      Or embrace rationalism, human nature, and the best of America’s culture construct a sensible, violence-minimizing society?

      After all, in Chicago alone, Black people kill more every week-end than this guy did. It is folly to think it will stay there in the ghetto (and indeed it has not). If like me you are a middle class White guy, both of us are likely victims of that sort of violence and it is in our rational self-interest to minimize that.

    • whiskey says:

      I’ll add that this is the typical feminist shrieking against unsexy men. White guys with unquestioned dominance in society produced:
      *The right to vote for Women, in the 1860’s, in places like Wyoming and New Zealand.
      *The greatest advances in medicine and science.
      *The rule of law not men.
      *A modern society with constantly falling death rates, infant mortality, and fertility.
      *The greatest rise in literacy the world has ever known.
      *General Global peace from 1945 to the present, the most peaceful period in human history.
      *The greatest rise in living standards for the global population, and the industrialized core, ever seen.
      *Men on the moon, and exploration of other planets.

      Frankly, since you sent this on a computer (invented by White men), through the internet (invented by White men), in a society protected by White men, and funded by wealth created by White men, you lack the courage of your convictions.

      You are not living in Haiti, or Rwanda, or Mynamar, or Nigeria, where White men are few if any. So you don’t really believe your words. Because your life does not reflect it.

      • Days of Broken Arrows says:

        Frankly, since you sent this on a computer (invented by White men), through the internet (invented by White men), in a society protected by White men, and funded by wealth created by White men, you lack the courage of your convictions.

        Hey, that’s my standard response to these types of people (usually feminists)! I still find it stops people in their tracks when going on anti-white guy tirades. The other thing you can do is tell people to look around them: what in the room wasn’t conceived, built, maintained and delivered by white man?

        Interesting blog post.

      • Tripemaster says:

        You didn’t build that.

    • Anonymous says:

      The world is not becoming “more just”; it’s becoming less white.

      Why shouldn’t white men have dominance in societies that were created by and for them? (and used to be 90% population in America and Europe not all that long ago)

      Do the Japanese have unfair “Japanese privilege” in Japan? The Mexicans in Mexico? Chinese in China? Arabs in Saudi Arabia?

      • Tripemaster says:

        The situation in Europe is different from that of the USA.

        Many concepts such as “white privilege” for example may be applicable to the USA but not necessarily to European countries. It’s not even that common for European people in Europe to refer to each other as “white” anyway.

      • It seems to me that “white privilege” is equally applicable to Europe and the US. The main privilege White people have in any place is that they are generally born into White families with White friends. White schoolteachers, White physicians, and White cops provide services nearby.

        It’s more or less the same as the “unfair advantage” that the smart kid has at taking tests. His “unfair advantage” is his mind. His “cheat sheet” is in his mind. Everyone wants to take advantage of him, but if they don’t do it through attacks on his self-esteem, his fair-mindedness will guide his actions and he’ll refuse. Students who cheat usually (not always) despise the person they are cribbing or stealing answers from.

        By the same token, the Mexicans (American SW), Blacks (American cities and SE), Muslims (W Europe), Romani (S Europe) and the like who complain of the “privileges” of being White have to do a little emotional/verbal/logical stunt to make this virtue into a vice. Imagine asking your neighbor to let you move into his house while couching the request as an actual criticism. Pretty rude? Now imagine it’s not actually criticism, it’s just a stream of insults dressed up as a “critique”.

        The Whites as a group are receptive for the same person the smart kid as an individual–their self-esteems have been shattered by low-level, long-term trauma. Individual Whites sometimes have high self-esteem, but as a group we act like a pimple-faced fat kid, fawning over any temporary positive attention we get, eager to please, unwilling to speak up for ourselves, inarticulate and knowing we’ll be abused if we ever mistake the of being articulate. The trauma of interracial crime, starting in the mid-1960s, went undiscussed because it went unreported, but it had massive emotional impact on naïve Whites.

      • Tripemaster says:

        So tell me how “white privilege” applies to, say, people on deprived council estates in Scotland, in cities like Glasgow and Dundee, with high rates of drug abuse, violence, alcoholism, unemployment, health issues etc? Most of the people in these places are white, yet they are probably amongst the least ‘privileged’ people you will find in any developed country (actually some parts of Glasgow have a lower life expectancy than that of Iraq).

      • I don’t know much about Glasgow. I’d certainly rather live there than in Iraq. I know the crime rate there is high by UK standards. I suspect the place is a cakewalk compared to Detroit, which is downright pleasant compared to a random town in southern or western Africa.

        The residents were born lucky enough to have the NHS, the right to legal counsel, and the right to a free college education in the unlikely event that they pass muster. They were born unlucky enough to be in the what may be the harshest place in the UK.

        As to unemployment in the UK, I confess ignorance. Can a young Scot with no uni and no tech/voc skills learn to type and get a job with Manpower? I have no idea. (I use that as an example because I have no tech/voc skills and my university education was so useless it got me nowhere; I am a good typist and that has gotten me almost every job I’ve ever had.)

        That said, lots of Third Worlders would gladly trade places with Glaswegians, because the nastiest Scotsman in the world is probably about equivalent to the nicest Afghan warlord. That is all “white privilege” is–the fact that Whites (poor, rich, or in-between), on every metric that causes people to migrate from country to country, are more appealing as neighbors than practically anyone. And you* and I don’t have to move an inch to live among them.

        * I’m making an assumption here, that you’re a resident of a White-majority country. It’s really just a rhetorical flourish.

  22. Unamused says:

    What a great post.

    Aside: no one should ever use the expression “… but not for thee.” Have you ever read it out loud? It sounds childish.

  23. map says:

    Check out this article:,0,2746583.story

    So the LA Times wrote an article about how stooopid the Batman shooter is. Apparently, Holmes worked as an intern at the computer laboratory at the Salk Institute at UC San Diego. He worked for 8 weeks under a “John Jacobson” who found Holmes to be a mediocre student. Jacobson claims that Holmes’ grades did not reflect the proper standards of the Salk Institute and, at the time, the Institute was not heavily recruiting from the best math and physics students.

    Here is Jacobson’s experience with Holmes. See if you can spot the flaw:


    In a video of a summer-end presentation, Holmes names Jacobson as his “mentor.”

    “That is not true. That’s almost slanderous,” Jacobson said. “I was never his mentor.”

    Holmes worked briefly for him over eight weeks that Jacobson described as very frustrating, characterized by the young man’s unwillingness to follow Jacobson’s suggestions — contrary to the usually engaging experience Jacobson said he’s had working with high school students.

    “My experience with him was quite bad,” Jacobson said.

    He said he set Holmes to work writing computer code for an experiment Jacobson had done involving a game of rock-paper-scissors, in which the computer always beats the human, no matter who goes first.

    The experiment was in Flash, which Jacobson said is best encoded using what’s called object-oriented programming. Holmes insisted on using what’s known as procedural programming, much more time consuming and complicated, Jacobson said.

    Holmes was, however, extremely receptive to compliments, which was “how I got him to do the little that he did,” Jacobson said.

    Did you catch it? Rock-paper-scissors is not a game where one player goes first, human or otherwise. It is a game where both players “reveal” simultaneously.

    So, Jacobson the Learned is calling Holmes stupid? Jacobson who created an “experiment” out of a game that he obviously doesn’t know how to play.

  24. Pffft says:

    “Literally any number of people you know, could die, in the future because society did not channel James Holmes into a productive outlet: neuroscience.”

    Totally lost me there. “Society” DID channel him into neuroscience. He was getting failing grades and flunked out of the program. Whether because he WASN’T actually all that smart, or because he was mentally ill, you can’t blame society. He MIGHT have found a cure for Alzheimers?!!! Puhleeze.

    Do yourself a favor and find some other poster boy for anti-white, anti-male, anti-intelligent discrimination, Whiskey!

    • The guy was smart enough to get a National Science Foundation grant, which is not handed out like candy. Yes, the guy was nuts. Plenty of guys go nuts and still function without killing people. See Heartistes take on the thing, another beta male rampage to quote him.

  25. Pingback: Manosphere blogger blames Obama, Jesse Jackson, and feminists for the Aurora theater shootings. Yes, really. « man boobz

  26. Phillip says:

    I have sister that is working on her PhD in Material Engineering at UCLA. When I talk with her or her lab mates a great deal of the conversation is about the research projects they are doing for major corporations. Really impressive stuff, with battery tech, CPU cooling, electronic hardening, nano fiber and the sort. I comment that they will have a really impressive resume by the time they graduate, a cool research paper toward their thesis, and I get cool stuff out of it being a tax payer funding their lab.

    Not so. The company makes a donation to the college, sets up a contract and funds for the research project, and they get sole access to the results. The students and professor had to sign non disclosure agreements. The research is not published, so it doesn’t count for their thesis. The NDA prevents them from putting it down on their resume. The company gutted their research and development lab, so the student can’t even hope to get a job with the company they did the work for. I as a tax payer get the privilege of funding the maintenance, operation, and equipment in that lab; along with paying the book keepers and auditors that are now required to track the materials that the company funded for their project to make sure it doesn’t cross with the tax payer funded research materials.

    Their only complaint was they had to work on a second project, so that they has something to publish for her thesis. I wanted to feel bad for them, but when I tried pointing out they were destroying their own future jobs, they didn’t believe me.

    I assume something similar happens for other science college programs, including neuroscience. So they have no resume, a college debt, and the HR departments for places that still have a R&D department see none of the experiences needed for the job opening. So they work for McDonald’s.

Comments are closed.