#YesAllWomen: A viral message that forgets vital details

Missing from the conversation on Twitter? Elliot Rodger’s victims


In the movie Citizen Ruth, a dark comedy from 1996, an indigent, drug-addicted mother of many, Ruth Stoops, finds herself pregnant and alone in a court of law. She’s been arrested for sniffing patio sealant and is facing charges for endangering her unborn child. However, the judge presiding over the case tells Ruth that if she aborts her fetus, he’ll reduce her sentence. After a chance meeting with anti-abortion protesters in a holding cell, Ruth is convinced to keep her baby, and is received warmly into the evangelical Christian, pro-life fold. She’s also wooed by fervent pro-choicers, a pair of plaid-clad lesbians who serenade the moon.

The end of the film finds Ruth, the poster child of a debate she doesn’t understand, huddled in the bathroom of an abortion clinic, a protest raging on outside its walls. With $15,000 cash given to her by a rogue activist (I won’t reveal why, or what becomes of the unborn baby), she makes a desperate decision to try to escape before anyone can spot her. When she gets outside though, she takes one glance at the pulsating, pontificating throng—fists clenched, faces contorted—and realizes something remarkable: they’ve forgotten all about her.

She exits through the crowd, unnoticed.

This is, metaphorically, exactly the way the victims of Elliot Rodger exited the world.

On the weekend, George Chen, Weihan Wang, Katherine Breann Cooper, Cheng Yuan Hong, Christopher Ross Michaels-Martinez and Veronika Elizabeth Weiss were murdered near the University of California at Santa Barbara. Rodger, a privileged loner, misogynist and failed “pick-up artist,” decided it was time to exact revenge on a world that had denied him everything he felt entitled to: women, power, respect. The misogynist online screed he left in his murderous wake has—despite the fact he killed more men than women—ignited a feminist firestorm. And his victims’ deaths, like Ruth Stoop’s unborn child in Citizen Ruth, have given onlookers and activists a platform for political and emotional grandstanding. Meanwhile, his victims, like Ruth and other handy plot devices, have been conveniently forgotten.

The agent of this collective amnesia? #YesAllWomen.

It’s the Twitter hashtag—aka the great aggregator and diluter of ideas—that’s taking the continent by storm. It picked up steam originally as an indignant response to #NotAllMen, a now far less popular hashtag started to convey the somewhat obvious reality that “not all men” are woman-hating murderers. Its iterations range from the occasionally harrowing, to the mostly precious and inane: In the words of Australian actress Adelaide Kane, retweeted a total of 4,573 times, “Not ALL men harass women. But ALL women have, at some point, been harassed by men. #YesAllWomen.” Some other samplings, these ones described as “sobering” in The Atlantic, include:

“#YesAllWomen learn to say, ‘Sorry, I have a boyfriend’ because we are only safe if we are another man’s property.

“Because men joke about how girls always have to go to the bathroom in groups but they are the reason we do so. #YesAllWomen.” (And all this time I thought it was to gossip).

The argument behind the hashtag runs this way: Rodger was a misogynist and a consumer of hyper-masculine culture. Therefore, masculinity in all its gradations is to blame for his crimes. “If angry, sometimes violent, men are actively defining the entire gender,” Denise Balkissoon writes in the Globe and Mail, “every guy looking away is letting them get away with it. By virtue of existence, you’re in on it.”

It’s strange that the progressive voices usually relied on to rebuff typically conservative, intellectually vacant arguments—about marijuana as a gateway drug, Islam as an innate harbinger of terrorism, or Marilyn Manson as a catalyst in the Columbine shootings—have championed a culture-breeds-atrocity theory: In this case, the theory that reading a Maxim on the toilet here, and attending a men’s rights conference there, has convinced males they have a social licence to kill. The same rule, I imagine, does not apply in reverse. How many feminists would so readily pin radical feminist Valerie Solanas’s 1968 assassination attempt of Andy Warhol on the women’s movement? Culture is a neutral force, it seems, until the victims in question are female.

Speaking of Marilyn Manson, those who have embraced #yesallwomen would be well-advised to consider the singer’s response to Michael Moore’s now-famous question in his 2002 documentary Bowling for Columbine. What, Moore asks, would Manson say to the kids at Columbine High School about the 1999 shootings that took 13 lives. “I wouldn’t say a single word to them,” Manson responds. “I would listen to what they have to say.”

But listening seems out of fashion these days, maybe because we can’t stop talking — not even for a millisecond. (I refreshed the #YesAllWomen Twitter feed three times while writing this and my browser crashed twice.) Apparently there’s no better occasion than the aftermath of a mass murder to wax poetic about your distaste for public masturbators and sexist Happy Meal toys. Pay no mind to the six lives untimely ripped from this world in cold blood. They’re merely a springboard for a more sobering conversation about the bourgeois grievances of the Western woman.


#YesAllWomen: A viral message that forgets vital details

  1. ‘(And all this time I thought it was to gossip).’

    Oh surely you know better. That’s some 50s paranoid male nonsense!

    ‘There’s safety in numbers’ is one of the first things I learned about being female…..always go in two’s or more. Survival 101

    • I have asked – and have heard others ask – why women go to the bathroom together many times over the years; not once has anyone ever raised the safety issue.

      Maybe it’s true for some women all the time, and for other women some of the time, but in my circle it’s definitely not the normal reason. My own partner tells me Emma is probably closer to the truth.

      • Neither you nor your partner are qualified to know.

        • Given she is a woman, how is she NOT qualified? Or any of the other women I know?

          Been seeing this group behaviour since dances at junior high; there certainly wasn’t any danger there.

          Like I said, maybe some women – and I’ll take you at your word that you are one of them – do this as a safety precaution. But it is certainly not true of all (and, I doubt, even a majority); certainly no one in my circle. Unless you have stats on this, it’s all anecdotal and you can only speak for yourself and those you know.

          • I no longer even bother listening to your ‘mansplanations’….

          • Of course not. Careful, Em, your misandry is showing again.

            Point is, the tag to the claim was #YesAllWomen. Clearly, #NoNotAllWomen engage in this social behaviour for safety. That was Emma’s point – and mine. Please bear in mind, Em, as hard as it is for you to imagine, your experience as a woman is not the only one.

          • Since you have NO experience as a woman I’d say that again, you are just blathering for effect.

            I find it amusing that you even have the nerve to try. Actually, it’s sexist.

          • This ranks up there with your “Religious education is child abuse” comment…

            So, if I actually talk with women, get their take on things, and dare to report back on their findings, that’s sexist? So journalists can’t cover stories about people of the opposite sex? StatsCan has to have data about women processed only by women?

            By the same logic, then, Em, no woman can comment on whether a man is truly a misogynist because she herself is not a man and so cannot presume to know anything about that person.

            Give your head a shake.

          • Like I said Bram…..get a grip on yourself…before someone gets out the butterfly net.

          • I’ll see if I can get the room next to yours.

          • You done now?

            Good, maybe the rest of us can get on with the topic instead of reviewing your fantasies.


  2. Exactly. Thank you, Emma for being a voice of reason.

    If women want to change misogynistic behaviour, constantly tearing down ALL males is a sure way to lose them some of the allies they already have among us males. Much of what I’ve been seeing in the aftermath of Rodgers’ killing spree has been every bit as abusive of men (ALL men) as what they accuse men of. Many will think: “Why would I want to help someone who is crapping all over me?”

  3. Emma you are 100% right. Those who turned this into a feminist cause had no right to do so. It’s insulting to the dead and to REAL feminists. These people died because of GUNS and mental illness, a brutal and common combination.

    • Not to be picky…

      but half of the victims were killed by a deranged dude with a knife.

  4. Sometimes stating the obvious is considered radical. Many ‘feminists’ (exhibit 1 = emilyone!) live in an echo chamber populated by addled Marxists who have transposed ‘class struggle’ into gender politics, which doesn’t seem to work very well for most people.

  5. “If women want to change misogynistic behaviour…”

    It’s not up to women to change misogynistic behaviour.

    • OK; poor grammatical construct – let me rephrase: “If women want to see an end to misogynistic behaviour…”

      My point remains: Not all males are misogynists. Those of us who aren’t don’t appreciate being lumped in with those who are. I’ve seen a lot of really negative comments from women friends over the last few days; an “Oh, I don’t mean you” doesn’t really cut it. They need to target the actual offenders – not engage in misandry in retaliation.

  6. Wow. I think your article totally misses the point of the #YesAllWomen hashtag.

    I don’t think any participant denies the fact that the people who were killed in this horrible shooting are important and that it is horrifying that anyone would die that way. However, I feel your interpretation and judgements of #YesAllWomen is part of the problem.
    You say “The argument behind the hashtag runs this way: Rodger was a misogynist and a consumer of hyper-masculine culture. Therefore, masculinity in all its gradations is to blame for his crimes.” This is an incredible oversimplification.
    Obviously, reading a Maxim magazine, or whatever, doesn’t make men think it’s ok to kill. No one is saying that. But men’s magazines like Maxim, and women’s magazines like Cosmo, reinforce the idea that women’s value is based on their appearance, and their ability to attract male attention. Along with every other aspect of our culture. They perpetuate the belief that woman are objects that men are entitled to. This concept helps lead certain people to then treat women as such. The examples you give of claims made regarding marijuana, Islam and Marilyn Manson are rebuffed because they are absurd.

    And then you bring up one instance of a radical feminist who attempted to assassinate someone, and that somehow is the same as the millions of examples of male violence towards women. Like it all balances out in the end somehow. I hope you are aware of how naive that is.

    No feminist ever claimed that culture is a neutral force. I’m not sure where you came up with that idea, because it is pretty obvious that culture affects every aspect of who we are, both men and women. Women are speaking about their own experiences. We can’t speak about other’s experiences, because we haven’t lived them. Just as men can’t tell women they are wrong about their experiences with systemic mysogyny if they have never experienced it. That is where privilege comes in. Just because you are privileged enough not to experience something, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

    Your comments about Marilyn Manson, made me laugh, because the whole reason #YesAllWomen started was because women need to be heard. The people who are tweeting this hashtag are asking for people to listen to them. They aren’t going out and shooting people, they are asking to be heard.

    Finally your comment, “They’re merely a springboard for a more sobering conversation about the bourgeois inequities of the western woman.” is horribly offensive. I know that as a white woman, living in one of the most safe countries in the world, I am privileged. I know that the majority of the women in the world have it way worse than me. The chances of me being abducted and sold into slavery, or being stoned to death because I chose to marry the person I love, are pretty much nil. However, that doesn’t mean that gender inequality doesn’t exist in the west, and that it affects every single person. It doesn’t negate the fact that my human rights are being violated. We shouldn’t talk about gender inequality and misogyny in the west, because people have it worse somewhere else? That’s crap.

    No one has forgotten about the victims. All of the victims. We haven’t forgotten about the hundreds of thousands of women you have been killed. What we are trying to do is start a discussion so that someday there won’t ever be more victims. What happened to these people is a reflection of a larger problem, and it’s about time we started talking about it.

    • Shannonlee wrote:
      “Wow. I think your article totally misses the point of the #YesAllWomen hashtag.”

      You’re wrong, Shannon. I think Emma totally hit the bullseye on the hashtag….you are the one missing the point.

      you, and EMFP are the type of women Emma was writing about.

      You have both just proven her point.

      and I write that as someone who rarely agrees with her.

      • Well, I disagree with you. And I don’t know why the fact that you rarely agree with the author has anything to do with this discussion. She’s usually wrong, but this time she’s right?
        What point have I missed? Can you elaborate? What “type of woman” am I?

        • ShannonLee wrote:
          “What we are trying to do is start a discussion so that someday there won’t ever be more victims. What happened to these people is a reflection of a larger problem, and it’s about time we started talking about it.”

          Shannon, in case you hadn’t noticed…the “discussion” has been going on for quite some time; well before this particular tragedy. As for your reasoning that you are trying to prevent even more victims………it rings hollow. You aren’t trying to support action to prevent more victims, you are climbing atop the corpses of the latest victims of violence simply as an opportunity to bash men.

          You also wrote: “What happened to these people is a reflection of a larger problem, and it’s about time we started talking about it.”

          From your ranting….I would say that you in particular are the “type of woman” who never actually shuts up about it, no doubt due to your training and education in some useless academic pursuit such as “womyn’s” or gender studies.

          As for the type of woman you are…..well, I think your writing speaks for itself. You are the type of woman who will use whatever tragedy is at hand to spout off against men.

          And just to remind you of something. True, some men are complete and utter idiots when it comes to women…..but most of us are not. Some men, for whatever reason resent women, or see them as “not knowing their place”….but most of us are NOT like that.

          But SOME men…….are also responsible for another line in your commentary.

          You wrote:
          “I know that as a white woman, living in one of the most safe countries in the world, I am privileged. I know that the majority of the women in the world have it way worse than me. The chances of me being abducted and sold into slavery, or being stoned to death because I chose to marry the person I love, are pretty much nil. ”

          For the most part….the world you describe above, can also be blamed on WESTERN men who have long been dust. Sure, discuss any problems that remain in the West, but don’t you think it would be more beneficial to women everywhere if we focused on the REAL oppression of women.

          by the way….women are also capable, and quite willing to commit violence against men. It just doesn’t make the news as often, and men don’t report it.

          • Oh I see. You don’t understand any of the points I was trying to make, and instead view it as an attack on all men. You claim to know who I am, despite knowing nothing about me.
            Your comments are closed minded and uninformed, and do not deserve a rebuttal.

      • I agree that the article totally misses the point. The hashtag isn’t about blaming all men at all, and it isn’t about taking anything away from any of the victims of this attack, or any other. It’s obnoxious and juvenile when men are constantly saying “not all of us! not all of us!” when women point out that INDEED, ALL OF US have experienced harassment and or assault on some level by a man or multiple men. This constant defensiveness, rather than banding together to figure out a way to become a part of the solution simply shows the root of the problem with our culture. A problem that is exemplified in this poorly written, poorly thought out article. Feminists aren’t using this as an excuse to do anything. “not all men” is defensive and juvenile. “yes all women” points out that we have *all* experienced this type of unwanted attention for many years, we have been forced to live in a society that teaches us to live certain ways to keep ourselves safe because many men can’t control themselves, and we are simply asking for *everyone’s* attention in this matter to make some changes, and end the violence.

        • Re the “not all men” bit – most of the time, women commenting on offensive behaviour by males simply do not distinguish; they just say “Men do X”. It’s called “male bashing” and it’s a pretty common theme in certain circles. If you DON’T do those things, you get tired of being lumped in with the neanderthals all the time. And the “Oh, I didn’t mean you” bit usually comes across as condescending.

          Indiscriminate male bashing is also juvenile – and it loses you allies.

          • Hi.

            I just wanted to chime in briefly. I understand the defensive reaction men have in situations like these, because I used to be the same regarding race issues and the gut reaction to say “not all white people”. It’s hard to not do it.
            I would recommend reading this article (if you haven’t already) , written by a man, that explains quite well why it isn’t helpful.

          • Hi Shannonlee: My point remains. Male bashing creates a backlash that causes those who would normally side with women to draw back and remain silent – or engage in responses like #notallmen. I don’t use twitter – I think it’s for twits – but from the posts that have been making it to places where I do see them, a good many of the #yesallwomen posts seem to be just that: male bashing. Maybe those tweets are a small proportion – I don’t know – but they are the ones getting the attention. And costing you male support.

            I get what you are saying about the “not all ___” comments though; I’m white, male and from NL, in a biracial relationship. I hear a lot of crap from a wide range of people and often have to bite my tongue to keep from taking their heads off.

    • Thanks for your comment Shannonlee. That was perfectly said and an important counterbalance to this very upsetting article.

      • Thanks Melanie! Hopefully we can all open some eyes to our shared reality.

    • You make some great points Shannon. However, I’m not sure that I agree with regards to two of them.

      1) “Obviously, reading a Maxim magazine, or whatever, doesn’t make men think it’s ok to kill. No one is saying that. But…”

      Aren’t people saying that? Looking at the twitter movement, it seems very heavily aimed at an undifferentiated culture of misogyny that is conflated with “maleness” in general. If it was #AllWomen, instead of #YesAllWomen I’d have an easier time not seeing it as a negative response to male-identifying individuals who seemed to simply want to identify as — and represent — a positive aspect of their gender.

      Even everything that comes after your “but” seems to be a conflation of the negative effects of maxim and cosmo with these murders. You correctly refer to how culture objectifies women and leads men to treat them as such, but in the context of Rodger does “as such” not mean “to murder them”?

      (As an aside, I do believe that our popular discourse does facilitate violence against women, albeit not via maxim, but I’m trying to keep my argument within the text of the article for the above point.)

      2) The other point I disagree with is the notion that the victims aren’t being forgotten. Simple reading of the twitter content shows that they are; however, I would argue that the victims or the Rodger event itself should no longer be seen as linked to the hashtag.

      While the hashtag came out of the Rodger event, I would argue that it makes more sense to treat it as a discreet movement (see again my problem with the “#yes” part of the hash tag).
      There’s simply too much of a content bias of messages that are only related to the Rodger event through the theme of “misogyny”. –Women going to the bathroom in groups, for example — for the event itself to be considered still relevant to the hashtag.

      If we insist on connecting the #yesallwomen movement to six murder victims then it can possibly be read as a problematic appropriation of their memory; divorced from the event other than as a motivating factor, the movement can simply be read as straightforward and wonderful discussion of an important issue.

      I hope nothing I’ve written here comes off as insensitive Shannon, as I know that articles such as these can inflame sensitivities. I truly did enjoy reading your insights.

      • Hi Argle

        I think you do make some really good points. And I really appreciate your willingness to discuss.
        From what I have learned, the Yes in the hashtag came from #YesAllWomen originally being a direct response to the hashtag #NotAllMen. Chesa’s comment above discusses why people take issue with the defensive reaction of a lot of good men saying “not all men” whenever women discuss their experiences with gender inequality. It’s really just another less obvious way of silencing women and diverting the discussion back to men.
        But I do agree that #YesAllWomen has become a larger discussion, one that goes past the horrible act that triggered it. And in respect of the victims and their families, they should not be turned into martyrs for a cause. This has definitely grown into something substantial.

        Honestly, I didn’t know the victims, so I wouldn’t know where to start in remembering them, other than supporting all victims of misogyny, and doing what I can to make change.
        Regarding the comments about Maxim etc., I’m saying that one thing alone most likely wouldn’t trigger someone to go out and kill. If a person grew up in a gender neutral culture (if such a thing existed) and picked up a copy, their way of thinking would not immediately change and lead them to hate women. It is a product of the culture we live in. That person would probably find it to be offensive.

        By the way, you don’t come off as insensitive at all. You make valid observations, and this is how we all learn and change!

  7. What an incredibly passive article. In what way have you honoured the victims in this piece besides solely listing their names? In fact, you too have pushed them into the shadows by providing readers a surface and diluted survey of the issues surrounding the hashtag.
    I am horrified by the articles and commentary written by women that share similar undertones to this piece. This tragedy happened in the wake of countless accounts of abuse towards women, particular in the past month. Do you remember the hashtag #bringbackourgirls? This isn’t only about the Western woman. Open your eyes.

  8. Elliot Rodger told everyone why he did it.

    Pretty silly….not to mention arrogant ….to spend all this time arguing with him.

    • LOL Also known as Excuses, Excuses Inc….with the company slogan taken from Bart Simpson….”I Didn’t Do It, Nobody Saw Me Do It, There’s No Way You Can Prove Anything!”

      The mission statement is ‘Mansplanations for everything’

  9. I’m really confused about the uproar around this hashtag. I read the comments below and it does not appear to me that the people who have replied have utilized the hashtag. I did post something under the hastag to my twitter account the day after the violence in Santa Barbra, but it was not in response to the violence that I tweeted. I sent my tweet after reading the back and forths between people commenting on the articles I read, including those who agreed with the perpetrator. What kind of world do we live in? Where is it ever okay to agree with violence. I am a woman. I have been harassed by men in my community. However, I am surrounded by men in my life who have supported me, loved me and strive to be positive and supportive role models in their community. The four men and two women killed by this mentally ill individual have already been forgotten by the media. They share the perpatrators Youtube videos and manifesto to draw in readers and ratings and then blame this hashtag. If the writer of this article was truly disturbed, they would have used the column space to shine a light on those who have suffered and continue to suffer. Instead of endlessly discussing social media, why don’t we take a look at the inaction of those in power to stop these horrendous acts?

  10. Wow. I question if the author read the killers 135 page ‘manifesto’ where he clearly outlines his hatred for women as the reason behind his attack. It was blantantly clear.

    He also said he wants to kill men who get the girls, who he views as simply property, because they (young men) shouldn’t have the things he is entitled to instead. He also outlines that he has to kill his (male) roomates so he can use his apartment for torture.

    #YesAllWomen is important.

    • Could you be actually that stupid? You just argued against your own argument.
      Oh wait, you must be a feminist, so no logic. Nevermind.

  11. This whole article is a shame; a shame a magazine like McLean’s would publish it and even more of a shame that the author is female, essentially telling other women to stop their belly-aching??? Calling the #YesAllWomen hashtag “collective amnesia,” when its purpose is to shed light on how systematic & normalized misogyny is? We have not forgotten Rodgers’ victims, nor are we comparing our pedestrian experiences of sexism to their gruesome deaths. (Also, I thought this hashtag existed before the Rodgers killings? The idea certainly did.)

    It feels like Teitel herself is numb to the normalized sexism in our society. Is the point of this article to stop sharing our own experiences in a hyper-masculine society, to just shut up and grieve and be grateful no one shot us? Because….no thank you. That isn’t journalism, that is the rantings of someone completely engrained in macho culture, saying “ladies, please quiet down” when again NO THANK YOU why should we quiet down? Are our stories annoying you? Sorry/not sorry, Teitel.

    (ps. Boo-hoo your server crashed….because so many women were SHARING THEIR STORIES OF MISOGYNY VIOLENCE AND FEAR???? Please.)

    • No , its really you that is a shame for humankind. Using a tragedy to push your crazy feminist agenda is one thing, but using a tragedy which had nothing to do with feminism just shows how disgusting feminists truly are and jsut how low their level of morale is.

      It seems that you crazy feminists still doesnt realize how most people think about you, crazy man-hating bitches. But of course, you jsut wanna tell the truth, you dont really hate.

      • “had nothing to do with feminism”

        you don’t deserve a response

  12. Yes, it’s passing strange how many people want to discuss anything but misogyny. It’s racism, or autism or abuse or the lone nutcase theory, or the moon being in the 7th house….but never ever misogyny.

    Even when the man spends 140 pages telling us it is.

    • ^^^ this

    • Nah, its really just you feminists who think that way.
      Truth is he hated everybody, including men who “got” all the women. How could these “morons” do it and he, the superior being, couldnt? Hence, his killings.

      But it just showed once again how disgsuting feminists are and that they are willing to use anythign to support their hateful agenda.

      • “you feminists”

        Sobaaad you’re the problem.

  13. Are you telling me that feminists are crazy bitches? Cause that would be brand new information for me.

  14. I think it’s interesting that no one is talking about how the #YesAllWomen hashtag was only created for WOC. And yet the creator tweeted “I’m going to be tweeting under the #YesAllWomen hashtag. Let’s discuss what ‘not all men’ might do but woman must fear” Which she makes no mention that only WOC can comment. And yet Suey Park who claims they are friends, tweeted “#YesAllWomen has been co-opted by white feminists and male feminists, while harming WOC creators. Fall back.” This isn’t good. We should, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, age or religion stand TOGETHER in SOLIDARITY for actual change. Doesn’t the “All” in #YesAllWomen encompass EVERY woman? I think some people need to revisit the definition of “ALL”. Furthermore, now we’re supposed to use another hashtag that was created by a WOC, who apparently was run out of the initial #, even though the “creator” is a WOC herself. Something doesn’t quite add up. Damn shame, because the #YAW was breaking ground…

    • WOC need permission to comment? Suey Park is insane and her followers aren’t much better.

  15. I really don’t think you grasp what has happened from these deaths. It’s irrelevant how many woman were killed versus how many men. Read Rodger’s manifesto. His entitlement, believing that has has the right to sex with women for simply existing is what these women are responding to (he is far from the only man that feels and behaves this way). Those men died because Rodger was so misogynistic. If you were to ask Elliot why he killed men too, he would take no blame. Nor would he blame them for their deaths. – he would blame their deaths on women. He hated his roommates, because they made fun of him because he was a virgin. In his mind, he was a virgin because of women. Therefore, Rodger would believe that ALL women are responsible for their deaths. This #yesallwomen hashtag represents a conversation that should have been had a long time ago with every boy. Men must teach their sons – NO! YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANYTHING. Not a great career, not riches and not another human being just because you exist. Life is about working for things and relationships. Women are not a thing to be possessed. Good relationships happen naturally. Not because a man has a penis and a woman has a vagina. Which is seriously what some guys think, Elliot included. As for the #notallmen hashtag. Yes, women know that the majority of men are not like this. So why the #yesallwomen hashtag? BECAUSE there are men out there like that don’t respect women, we women are asking that good men to encourage positive relationships not sexual harassment and violence. Why do the good guys have to do this? Do you really think misogynistic men who devalue women with sexual harassment, misinterpreted religious values, rape and physical violence are going to listen to women? They don’t see us as equals. They tell us off for trying to have a voice. After reading all those posts you still don’t get the message, or ‘vital detail’. HELP! Sick men won’t listen to us! They don’t respect us enough to hear the words NO! or LEAVE ME ALONE! HELP US GOOD MEN! Put these jerks in their place so that women as a whole don’t have to suffer. If you read Elliot Rodger’s manifesto, you would realize that NOT ONE MAN that he knew personally and respected, put him in his place and told him how the world really works. No respectable man, not even his best friend (James) told him that his theories were asinine. NOT ONE. Maybe if someone did, there wouldn’t have been no victims. No, instead he went on to all these online websites FINDING SUPPORT FOR HIS PSYCHOTIC BELIEFS. It’s disgusting that he found so many supporters! The message of the #yesallwomen hashtag is this: THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK ON MEN, FAR FROM IT. We’re asking for the help of good, strong men of character. If things here could improve, it could extend to other countries in the world where women are more powerless than us. In order for Western women to help the women of greater misfortunes around the world, we have to get our men to speak up. I REPEAT: THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK OR A PITY PARTY FEST WHERE WOMEN ARE TRYING TO GET SYMPATHY. We need the help of good men to change the misogyny that still exists, because the truth is, women can’t do it alone.
    I agree that the victims aren’t being recognized as they should, and sadly, that happens a lot in mass murders. The victims of Columbine, Sandy Hook have died in vain. No one remembers their names, but everyone knows the names of the killers. There have been no changes to gun laws (despite all the actions people have taken) or interventions to help those with mental illnesses. Don’t let these six people die in vain. His misogyny, entitlement and mental illness is what propelled this. Let’s try to put an end to what we can.

    • “As for the #notallmen hashtag. Yes, women know that the majority of men are not like this. So why the #yesallwomen hashtag? BECAUSE there are men out there like that don’t respect women, we women are asking that good men to encourage positive relationships not sexual harassment and violence. Why do the good guys have to do this? Do you really think misogynistic men who devalue women with sexual harassment, misinterpreted religious values, rape and physical violence are going to listen to women? They don’t see us as equals.”

      Agreed. But much of what I’ve seen reposted (I don’t follow twitter, so I have no idea how representative the samples I’ve seen are) has been pure male bashing. That doesn’t help to win the “good men” to your cause.

      • Hi Keith. Me again. Last comment I’m going to make.

        I’m not sure why you keep insisting that we are “male bashing”, as you like to say, when we keep explaining that is not what this is about.
        Sure, there’s going to be a handful of women who blame all men for the problems in the world, and their tweets will reflect that. But the majority don’t feel that, and have explained that time and again.
        You are generalizing all of us, just as you claim men are being generalized.
        You have openly admitted that you don’t follow Twitter, and have only read a handful of tweets other people have reposted. So, can you at least admit that maybe you don’t have enough information to lead to an informed conclusion? There have been over one million tweets using this hashing. Isn’t it possible that the handful you have seen do not accurately represent the majority?
        Ultimately, this isn’t about you. It is about all the women who feel they aren’t being heard. And when good men hide behind defensive feelings, and refuse to help because they are not being included in the conversation, it perpetuates the problem. It’s really quite sad that good men don’t feel like they should help unless they get patted on the back for it. I mean, grow up.
        Sorry if I’ve offended you at all, but having to have this conversation over and over, instead of talking about real ways to make change, can be very frustrating.
        Thank you for listening.

        • There is a difference between not being included and being deliberately pushed away. Like I said, that’s the tone of the ones I’ve seen reposted to FB by some of my friends. I don’t need a pat on the back – but I don’t like being abused for something I didn’t do, either. And the “good men” backhanded compliment that usually follows is still an insult.

          140 characters doesn’t leave a lot of room for subtlety – so maybe they just need a better forum.

          I’m not about to change the way I treat women in general because of a few loudmouthed men-bashers – but I definitely think less of those who reposted and agreed with such crap.

  16. I’ll say this: A man would never dare to do to another man what a woman would dare to do. I have witnessed myself, my brother, and my best friend suffer the most violent attack in their life from a woman. I’m sure the reason was that they didn’t have any fear of retribution because “boys don’t hit girls”. Also, like always when that jealous, “who can turn on who” gene kicks in, in every instance it was over another woman.

  17. Wow. Great article. Loaded with common sense. It’s been a few months since I visited macleans.ca and this is a pleasant surprise.

Sign in to comment.