Shooting at Umpqua Community College in Oregon

[jonhowe]

People are mischaracterizing danno's point by stating that he blames women. However, young men are becoming increasingly marginalized - socially, economically, sexually, etc. In reality, it appears that there is a War on Men.

For the top, "alpha" males, life is just grand as it has always been. They get hired, they get the juicy promotions (even if less technically competent than their "beta" peers), they have plenty of friends, and they develop soft harems of women to have sex with. Pretty good deal, unless you're in the bottom 75% of men or so. Focusing on the sexual aspect, just as there is an economic market, there is also a sexual market of sorts. The "alphas" are the sexual equivalents of the wealthy, and with traditional monogamy going out the window, the "rich" have gotten richer and the "poor" have gotten poorer. Decades ago, the "betas" could still work hard, find a woman to marry, and live a life with at least some fulfillment, but that isn't so much the case today for a lot of young men.

The problem is that with unrestricted sexuality and greater economic freedom, women are more able to "date up," which leaves the lower men behind in the dust. An "alpha" will have drunken sex with Plain Jane because why not? Of course, he probably won't commit to her or even call her again, but Plain Jain made out like a bandit. The problem is that Plain Jane becomes accustomed to bedding a certain class of man, but these men generally will not commit to her since they can easily obtain more attractive women. Then Plain Jane will feel depressed and wonder, "Where have all the good men gone?" Meanwhile, John Doe is greatly attracted to Plain Jane, but she isn't in the least bit attracted to him since she has become accustomed to bedding "alphas." John Doe may technically be Plain Jane's equal and would be willing to commit, but Plain Jane holds on to the fantasy that Mr. Alpha will come sweep her off her feet. She only gives her attention to John Doe when she is getting older, is less attractive, and is looking for a provider for Mr. Alphas bastard spawn...but only after being pumped into oblivion by numerous "alphas" (what a $#@!ing prize for John Doe). Then Plain Jane gets bored with John Doe one day and divorce rapes him.

Unfortunately, plenty of men don't even get to have John Doe's experience, and they are resigned to playing World of Warcraft while masturbating with Cheeto-stained fingers since they don't have much motivation left. People seem to underestimate just how psychologically and emotionally damaging it can be for a young man to involuntarily be deprived of sex, love, affection, etc. It is no wonder that some of them finally go mad. At least back when monogamy was the norm, Mr. Cheeto would still have a chance to find a woman, since all of the women would have been shamed for sleeping around with "alpha" studs and would have needed to find a man before becoming an old spinster.

I guarantee you that if these shooters were living a rapper's life, having threesomes with hot babes at a pool party, going on a rampage would be the last $#@!ing thing on their to-do list. It isn't that women should be blamed; if anything should be blamed, it is cultural degradation.

And you know this from... what? Experience? Anecdotes? In other words, SOURCE?

http://www.vice.com/read/youre-singl...enough-men-253

For every four college-educated women in my generation, there are three college-educated men. The result? What Birger calls a "musical chairs" of the heart: As the men pair off with partners, unpartnered straight women are left with fewer and fewer options—and millions of them are eventually left with no options at all.

This "alpha vs beta" mentality is ALL IN YOUR HEAD. Some of the nerdiest most introverted people I know (including a former poster her, the guy who got me into Ron, for whom I will soon be "best man") are marrying some of the most attractive women I know. Maybe my experience is different living in a city, but if you have no options where you are, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE! Reinvent yourself and stop living in a basement.


(Note: By "you" I mean "one", not "you in particular")

[Philhelm]

And you know this from... what? Experience? Anecdotes? In other words, SOURCE?

Requesting a source for a conversation such as this rather than making a reasoned counterargument is a cheap gambit. Of course it would be impossible to source everything, not to mention to do so to your satisfaction, and we both know that. My conclusions are based upon a lifetime of personal observation, personal experience, general statistics, and simple deduction. I've been a kissless virgin, the guy banging your fiancée, been dumped for being a "Nice Guy," and have had an orgy, so have seen both sides of the equation to some extent. If you disagree with what I'm saying, then at least provide a reasoned counterargument. I really don't care for Internet sources since an argument can be found for practically anything.

http://www.vice.com/read/youre-singl...enough-men-253

For every four college-educated women in my generation, there are three college-educated men. The result? What Birger calls a "musical chairs" of the heart: As the men pair off with partners, unpartnered straight women are left with fewer and fewer options—and millions of them are eventually left with no options at all.

What are you trying to prove? Just as I initially stated, women will automatically disqualify a large segment of men as it is generally their imperative to "date up." Women who go to college and have careers find it harder to date up for obvious reasons. There are plenty of eligible men, even successful blue collar men, who are immediately disqualified because women more often judge a man based upon wealth and status, in addition to other factors. Conversely, most men won't give a $#@! if a woman is unemployed and living with her parents so long as she is attractive and sexually available. When successful career women complain about finding men despite being a strong, independent woman, they are projecting their mate qualifications onto men, but men don't really care about the same things. An MBA doesn't give a man an erection.

Have you ever extensively used online dating sites? I have. About 75% of the women are fat, unattractive losers with two to three bastard, baseborn, abomination crotch-demons ("They are my world"). Nonetheless, they will explicitly state that they are seeking a man who is tall, athletic, confident, ambitious, attractive, etc., etc., etc. Date up much? Of course, they won't find that man, since they are bottom 20% women seeking top 20% men, but average John Doe might meet her since he is so desperate to get laid, because a minority of the top men are busy having sex with a majority of the women, including Plain Jane who would have otherwise been a good match.

This "alpha vs beta" mentality is ALL IN YOUR HEAD. Some of the nerdiest most introverted people I know (including a former poster her, the guy who got me into Ron, for whom I will soon be "best man") are marrying some of the most attractive women I know. Maybe my experience is different living in a city, but if you have no options where you are, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE! Reinvent yourself and stop living in a basement.

Yes, "alpha" and "beta" are artificial terms, and I even put quotations around the words as I anticipated this reaction. To put it another way, there are top men that get the women and lesser men who fight for the bottom of the barrel women or who simply live a life of involuntary celibacy.

Of course a nerd can get an attractive woman once she goes into provider seeking mode. If she was accustomed to having sex with hotter men though, she will never be truly happy and it will probably result in a dead bedroom. She also probably won't do the sort of sexual things with her "beta" husband that she did with her "alpha" stallions. She may have sucked a hundred "alpha" cocks, but when her "beta" husband wants the same she just says that "she's not like that anymore," or whatever other excuse she may have.

[jonhowe]

Requesting a source for a conversation such as this rather than making a reasoned counterargument is a cheap gambit.

My counter argument was the article provided.

Of course it would be impossible to source everything, not to mention to do so to your satisfaction, and we both know that.

Is there ANY empirical evidence of this phenomenon, though? If it's so widespread, you'd think there would be.

My conclusions are based upon a lifetime of personal observation, personal experience, general statistics, and simple deduction. I've been a kissless virgin, the guy banging your fiancée, been dumped for being a "Nice Guy," and have had an orgy, so have seen both sides of the equation to some extent. If you disagree with what I'm saying, then at least provide a reasoned counterargument. I really don't care for Internet sources since an argument can be found for practically anything.

You are making these bold pronouncements about our culture and the causes of violence based purely on your personal anecdotes, and you want ME to provide more substance?

An MBA doesn't give a man an erection.

Maybe not an MBA, but show me a woman with a JD or PhD and we'll talk.

Have you ever extensively used online dating sites? I have.

Yes. Until I became a bartender for a few years and learned how to properly socialize with 'city' women, dating sites were my only hope.

About 75% of the women are fat, unattractive losers with two to three bastard, baseborn, abomination crotch-demons ("They are my world").

I thought we valued all life here? And 75% has not been my experience but to each their own. Have you ever tried to look at the MEN on the site? The percentages of fat/ugly/losers are high. Then there are the guys who just join so they can get off on sending dick pics to unsuspecting women. Do ANY of them say they are looking for someone equally as fat an ugly as them? NO! Everyone wants something better for themselves. Most don't get it. How is this new?

Yes, "alpha" and "beta" are artificial terms, and I even put quotations around the words as I anticipated this reaction. To put it another way, there are top men that get the women and lesser men who fight for the bottom of the barrel women or who simply live a life of involuntary celibacy.

And there are the top women who get the best men, and the lesser women who fight for the bottom of the barrel men. Do you not... talk to women at all?

Of course a nerd can get an attractive woman once she goes into provider seeking mode. If she was accustomed to having sex with hotter men though, she will never be truly happy and it will probably result in a dead bedroom. She also probably won't do the sort of sexual things with her "beta" husband that she did with her "alpha" stallions. She may have sucked a hundred "alpha" cocks, but when her "beta" husband wants the same she just says that "she's not like that anymore," or whatever other excuse she may have.

What? You sound like a paranoid schizophrenic here. What women are "sucking 100 cocks"? Not to mention doing that and then marrying nerds? This is not something that happens with ANY regularity and I challenge you to show me it does. Do you have ANY support to these insane things you are saying? Every empirical study I've read indicates that MEN have more sexual partners than women in life:

http://www.businessinsider.com/avera...artners-2015-4

[dannno]

I'm just taking things one step further down the logical chain. You proposed that maybe women wouldn't get murdered so much if only they were collectively willing to preemptively pity $#@! psychopaths. I'm suggesting that maybe psychopaths would get laid if they weren't psychopaths.

A lot of women love $#@!ing psychopaths, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. What women don't like $#@!ing are guys who have social development disorders. If they also happen to be psychopaths, or they become psychopaths because they aren't getting laid, they could be quite dangerous.

I don't know what the solution is - personally, I would have, if I could, hired a prostitute to have sex with Elliot Rodger without telling him that she was a prostitute. Just have her go up to him, say he is cute and take him back to some place that she says is her apartment, monitored with private security hanging out in one of the other bedrooms. It would have avoided the whole murder spree at least. It's hard to expect women to want to sleep with a guy like that willingly.

[dannno]

This "alpha vs beta" mentality is ALL IN YOUR HEAD. Some of the nerdiest most introverted people I know (including a former poster her, the guy who got me into Ron, for whom I will soon be "best man") are marrying some of the most attractive women I know. Maybe my experience is different living in a city, but if you have no options where you are, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE! Reinvent yourself and stop living in a basement.

lol, ok, rought numbers since you are showing a statistic that the ratio of college women to men is 4:3

The three most attractive females, of the four, will simultaneously $#@! the most attractive male, of the three, and leave the other 2 men in the dust. Of course, once you increase the numbers of students, you can see how this plays out - same thing, but with a much bigger pool. One of those two men might end up $#@!ing the least attractive woman, if either of them have any such motivation, or she could be a lesbian.

As far as money'd men, they could be beta bux. See where their marriages are in 10 years. But betas can also impersonate alphas to some extent, there certainly are no hard-fast rules here we are just talking about trends.

[Philhelm]

My counter argument was the article provided.

The article you provided merely supported my statement that women date up and that lower tier men are left in the dust. I even cited greater economic freedom as a factor.

The problem is that with unrestricted sexuality and greater economic freedom, women are more able to "date up," which leaves the lower men behind in the dust.

Women are obviously much more selective than men when it comes to mating, which means that as women rise in status the lower status men will be left to rot.

Is there ANY empirical evidence of this phenomenon, though? If it's so widespread, you'd think there would be.

That would be an insurmountable task, which is why you demand it, and which I have already addressed. You really think I'm going to spend hours looking for articles that you won't read or will simply dismiss? I hate lazy debates when people post a $#@!ing article as their counterargument. You've not once actually gave me any reasons for your disagreement other than to post an article supporting one of my initial arguments. Other than that, you are basically saying that I'm wrong, crazy, and a doo-doo head.

We could talk about how the overwhelming number of divorces are initiated by women (something like 80% - 90%); all of the stories from men about how their wives left them when they were in a period of unemployment; the fact that unemployed men living in their mother's basement are sexless while men have been banging unemployed women for millennia; statistics regarding cuckoldry; my wife who once banged a semi-celebrity DJ; a coworker who banged a Pittsburgh Steeler; all of the average Joes I see at the mall with hambeast girlfriends or wives; U.S. Department of Labor statistics about how there are more women in the workforce than men; statistics regarding the fact that there are more women attending college than men; how most if not all of these shooters were social outcasts with nothing to live for; how certain Internet dating sites conducted polls in which women deemed 80% of men to be unattractive; feminist articles encouraging women to explore their sexuality and marry a nice guy when they are in their 30's; etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.

You are making these bold pronouncements about our culture and the causes of violence based purely on your personal anecdotes, and you want ME to provide more substance?

I'm not arguing that it is precisely a cause for the violence, other than to say that male outcasts with nothing to live for are more prone to lashing out with violence. I would imagine that most of these shooters would be alive today, living productive lives if they weren't treated like $#@! by the rest of society, and if there was at least one other person in the world with whom they could develop some sort of bond or intimacy.

Maybe not an MBA, but show me a woman with a JD or PhD and we'll talk.

Whatever; you got my point. Regardless, most men (aside from you, I'm sure, just to be contrary) would much rather date a hot waitress than a sea-hag attorney. Sure, an intellectual woman would be great, but that is just a cherry on top.

I thought we valued all life here? And 75% has not been my experience but to each their own. Have you ever tried to look at the MEN on the site? The percentages of fat/ugly/losers are high. Then there are the guys who just join so they can get off on sending dick pics to unsuspecting women. Do ANY of them say they are looking for someone equally as fat an ugly as them? NO! Everyone wants something better for themselves. Most don't get it. How is this new?

Hyperbole. Suffice to say that there was a great number of women with grossly unrealistic expectations. Sure, men want the best they can get too, but they are not so deluded and tend to be much more desperate for sex if they are lower-tier males. Even an ugly woman can jump up on the bar and proclaim that she wants to have sex and men will respond; a man doing the exact same thing would get laughed at unless he is a literal rock star.

And there are the top women who get the best men, and the lesser women who fight for the bottom of the barrel men. Do you not... talk to women at all?

No, the top men bang the top women and the above average women, leaving the normal men to fight for the bottom of the barrel, and the bottom of the barrel men getting nothing.

What? You sound like a paranoid schizophrenic here. What women are "sucking 100 cocks"? Not to mention doing that and then marrying nerds? This is not something that happens with ANY regularity and I challenge you to show me it does. Do you have ANY support to these insane things you are saying? Every empirical study I've read indicates that MEN have more sexual partners than women in life:

http://www.businessinsider.com/avera...artners-2015-4

[/quote]

And you're a doo-doo head. Seriously though, there are plenty of women that have told me about their sexual exploits: threesomes, amateur prostitution, infidelity, sexual acts, etc. A lot of these women married nerdy men who are stable and can help support their bastard abominations since the biological father is in prison for a violent crime. This scenario might not be in the majority, but it is certainly prevalent enough it seems. Often times, these women "aren't like that anymore," so she might have been willing to have a threesome in the past, or give head, etc., while her husband asks for these things and is denied them (despite the fact that as the husband, he is presumably the man she is "in love" with and would give him her best).

[TheCount]

Seriously though, there are plenty of women that have told me about their sexual exploits: threesomes, amateur prostitution, infidelity, sexual acts, etc. A lot of these women married nerdy men who are stable and can help support their bastard abominations since the biological father is in prison for a violent crime. This scenario might not be in the majority, but it is certainly prevalent enough it seems. Often times, these women "aren't like that anymore," so she might have been willing to have a threesome in the past, or give head, etc., while her husband asks for these things and is denied them (despite the fact that as the husband, he is presumably the man she is "in love" with and would give him her best).

This is some straight-up MRA forum "woe is us" mythology right here.

[dannno]

And there are the top women who get the best men, and the lesser women who fight for the bottom of the barrel men. Do you not... talk to women at all?

Look, dude, I was just hanging out in the very same town that Elliot Rodger shot up last night, one square mile, about 14,000 college students. The dynamic we are talking about is VERY strong in this area. I overheard a conversation that I hear ALL THE TIME. A "plain jain" blonde girl, decent body, a little tall, not a particularly attractive face was complaining to her female friend that the alpha stud she hooked up with the night before completely ignored her when her and her friends went over to his house that night for a party. He was in his room the whole time instead of out socializing. She went into his room and he was acting stand-offish and uninterested. She went over to give him a hug and he said, "oh, you don't want to hug me, my shirt is wet." And she was like, "Uh, what?? ok..." She could see his shirt, it wasn't wet, even if it was she would have wanted to hug him so she just got totally confused, embarrassed and left his room.

Then she went on to list 3 guys who were interested in her and wanted to date her and not just throw her out like a used tissue - then what did she say? "He's my weak spot! I can't help it.." and "I'm not going to talk to him ever again!!! At least not first..." I lol'd a little (oops) when she said the last part, insinuating of course, that any time he calls her she will go $#@! his brains out and give him another taste in hopes he actually decides to settle down with her. Of course that is never going to happen. She will go probably go through this for years before finally settling with a beta bux. Hopefully she will be appreciative of her beta bux, some women are - but many are not.

Am I blaming women? No, but they should be aware of the dynamic they are participating in, and so should men. It keeps things honest and allows all players to make more rational choices.

[Philhelm]

lol, ok, rought numbers since you are showing a statistic that the ratio of college women to men is 4:3

The three most attractive females, of the four, will simultaneously $#@! the most attractive male, of the three, and leave the other 2 men in the dust. Of course, once you increase the numbers of students, you can see how this plays out - same thing, but with a much bigger pool. One of those two men might end up $#@!ing the least attractive woman, if either of them have any such motivation, or she could be a lesbian.

This also explains why women can have fewer sexual partners. While, in your scenario, the Alpha has three sexual partners, each of those three women only have one sexual partner. The Alpha essentially created a soft harem in which the other men are left behind.

[dannno]

The article you provided merely supported my statement that women date up and that lower tier men are left in the dust. I even cited greater economic freedom as a factor.

I wouldn't cite greater economic freedom as a bad thing - I would cite our unfair divorce settlement system that pays women to divorce their beta bux husband and turn him into a cuckhold for more alpha $#@!s - I would cite our welfare system that pays women to raise children without a father figure. You could also cite society's push to have women in the workplace rather than raising children - but the freedom of a woman make a living isn't something that should be perceived as negative.

[Philhelm]

I wouldn't cite greater economic freedom as a bad thing - I would cite our unfair divorce settlement system that pays women to divorce their beta bux husband and turn him into a cuckhold for more alpha $#@!s - I would cite our welfare system that pays women to raise children without a father figure. You could also cite society's push to have women in the workplace rather than raising children - but the freedom of a woman make a living isn't something that should be perceived as negative.

I was simply acknowledging that with greater economic freedom, "beta" men who would have fulfilled a provider role are no longer as useful, thereby allowing the women to have fun with the "alphas" who won't commit. This also means that career women set their sights even higher when seeking a mate. This works in conjunction with less societal shaming for sexual promiscuity which would have inhibited this phenomenon to some extent. The losers here are the "beta" men and women who want commitment but can't get it.

[dannno]

The losers here are the "beta" men and women who want commitment but can't get it.

I really like to emphasize the second part of your statement here, but the funny thing is a lot of people don't hear it - while the entire statement just sounds to some like men complaining they can't get laid, us men who have gone through that to some extent often have to watch these women go through the painful agony of trying to get commitment out of their alpha men - in the mean time, the guy is going through painful agony in his balls and his head and is totally ready to commit to a girl like her. It's extremely frustrating to go through that, it can be dehumanizing to watch someone right in front of you who seems to want the same thing you can provide while they can provide exactly what you need while pretending you don't exist in that regard... making the same mistakes over and over.

Second part to my story from last night - the girl she was talking to was a little more attractive. Her advice to her friend was, "just have fun..." In other words, plenty of girls know the game, they know what they are getting into and so they just play along because it is enjoyable. I have no problem with that.. but back to what I said before, if both women and men were more aware of this dynamic, it is possible that some of those girls who can't just "have fun" $#@!ing alphas because they have stronger desire for commitment might actually look to their betas a little sooner, and hopefully, be more appreciative to them.

Stefan Molynuex said something recently to the effect, when responding to something about, "well, what will happen if women with children stop getting support from government?" his response was, "well, I guess women are going to start having to be a lot nicer to men!"

[Danke]

I'm surprised to see dannno on line today:


http://news.yahoo.com/amber-roses-mo...192613775.html

[dannno]

I'm surprised to see dannno on line today:


http://news.yahoo.com/amber-roses-mo...192613775.html

I was at one last night. Hotter, younger girls, less lesbians and trannies.

[RonPaulIsGreat]

Most of this is caused by government. These pathetic pussy beggar guys would $#@! just about anything. However, the skanks that naturally would run to them, don't anymore because they don't need them. .Gov will subsidize these skanks when they pop out yet another kid that has all the cards stacked against them (GENETICALLY, and ENVIRONMENTALLY) and give them food, housing, heat, etc...... So, the skanks go $#@! the men that focus on "working" out, drugs, alcohol etc... They look good because they have no real employment and work out, or they are drug dealers and or partiers and skanks supported by .gov love them some drugs and alcohol.

A Natural environment would have these skanks and their offspring begging in the street, because no one that earns their own way gives two $#@!s about leeching hoes however, .gov, puts em up relatively nice, and they can continue breeding, committing crime, partying forever. These skanks would eventually realize $#@!ing scum because its fun is a bad idea, and the 5 foot 4 dork working at a factory would look much better. So, in essence it would push down "looks" and "FUN" on the list of importance and push up "EARNING A $#@!ING LIVING", and Stability.

.Gov loves whores, thugs, criminals, and alcoholics, and that is who benefits from the welfare state 95% of the time. Sure, you can point to the occasional hard case, please everyone knows who actually is benefiting. It's not the good girl, or the good guy, it's the scum.


However, most of this scum, doesn't have to be scum, it's just .gov created the perfect environment for scum behaviour. Sally given a non-welfare based, non-party girl idolizing society may have been a nurse with a boring as $#@! husband in a different universe.

[Danke]

Most of this is caused by government. These pathetic pussy beggar guys would $#@! just about anything. However, the skanks that naturally would run to them, don't anymore because they don't need them. .Gov will subsidize these skanks when they pop out yet another kid that has all the cards stacked against them (GENETICALLY, and ENVIRONMENTALLY) and give them food, housing, heat, etc...... So, the skanks go $#@! the men that focus on "working" out, drugs, alcohol etc... They look good because they have no real employment and work out, or they are drug dealers and or partiers and skanks supported by .gov love them some drugs and alcohol.

A Natural environment would have these skanks and their offspring begging in the street, because no one that earns their own way gives two $#@!s about leeching hoes however, .gov, puts em up relatively nice, and they can continue breeding, committing crime, partying forever. These skanks would eventually realize $#@!ing scum because its fun is a bad idea, and the 5 foot 4 dork working at a factory would look much better. So, in essence it would push down "looks" and "FUN" on the list of importance and push up "EARNING A $#@!ING LIVING", and Stability.

.Gov loves whores, thugs, criminals, and alcoholics, and that is who benefits from the welfare state 95% of the time. Sure, you can point to the occasional hard case, please everyone knows who actually is benefiting. It's not the good girl, or the good guy, it's the scum.


However, most of this scum, doesn't have to be scum, it's just .gov created the perfect environment for scum behaviour. Sally given a non-welfare based, non-party girl idolizing society may have been a nurse with a boring as $#@! husband in a different universe.

[Philhelm]

I was at one last night. Hotter, younger girls, less lesbians and trannies.

Fewer. Fewer lesbians and trannies.

[alucard13mm]

...

lol... Some interesting points. This is very interesting video on how the lack of pussy is the cause of strife in some parts of the world lol. Some countries need to invest in pussy infrastructure.

[TheTexan]

I would just like to thank all of the brave Officers who put an end to this tragic, pointless, mass shooting.

Thank you, Police.

[timosman]

From http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/ore...ing-witnesses/

[Sola_Fide]

Perfect example of how government intervention produces immorality. Baal is the great evil of our time.

[devil21]

From http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/ore...ing-witnesses/

I read there was a drill at that same school a week prior. That's probably a staged photo taken during the drill. It's obviously against SWAT protocol to have the guy covering your 6 pointing his own gun at you! LOL

[DevilsAdvocate]

Douglas County Commissioner Chris Boice told CNN that the shooter is in custody. It was not immediately clear whether the shooter was injured.



http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/01/us/ore...ing/index.html

That's weird, because a word search of that article turns up 0 instances of the word "custody". In fact, that article now reports that the shooter is dead. Any reference to the fact that he might have been taken into custody has been lost down the memory hole.

It's now being reported that he committed suicide.


http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-no...g_douglas.html

He ran off and exchanged gunfire with officers, then shot himself, the state medical examiner confirmed Saturday. He died at the scene.

And then there's THIS $#@!! WTF IS GOING ON????



http://theconservativetreehouse.com/...d-and-deleted/

The huge propaganda campaign that's being launched with this. The multiple different versions of the story. The strange contradictory accounts of the guys character (Conservative who hates Christians???)

You guys...I can't believe I'm saying this. But I'm starting to believe conspiracy theories. And if this is a conspiracy, what else is?

[timosman]

That's weird, because a word search of that article turns up 0 instances of the word "custody". In fact, that article now reports that the shooter is dead. Any reference to the fact that he might have been taken into custody has been lost down the memory hole.

It's now being reported that he committed suicide.

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-no...g_douglas.html

Here is the earlier version of the CNN article from the wayback machine, it says the shooter is in custody.

https://web.archive.org/web/20151001...ing/index.html

Preliminary information indicates 10 people were killed and more than 20 others injured in a shooting at Oregon's Umpqua Community College on Thursday, said Oregon State Police spokesman Bill Fugate.

Douglas County Commissioner Chris Boice told CNN that the shooter is in custody. It was not immediately clear whether the shooter was injured.

ATF agents were on the scene and canine teams are en route to search for explosives, fire arms casings and ammunition, a spokesman said.

Earlier, authorities told had said they were responding to reports of an active shooter at the Roseburg college campus.

Roseburg is a city of about 22,000 people located about 70 miles south of Eugene, Oregon, and some 180 miles south of Portland.

The school itself is up on a hill outside the city center, according to Rick Francona, a CNN military analyst who lives nearby. Francona said that logging is a big industry in the region, which is fairly rural but easily accessible from Interstate 5.

"This is so out of character for this whole area," he said.

A picturesque campus in the North Umpqua River Valley, the school prides itself on a "a peaceful, safe atmosphere, and year-round recreational activities," according to its website.

It's not a traditional institution of higher learning, as the average age of its 13,600 students was 38 during the 2013-2014 school year. Only 740 of those were full time, 2,437 were part time and more than 10,000 fell under the umbrella of "community education."

It first began teaching classes out of rented facilities in 1961. Elton and Ruth Jackson donated 98.5 acres to house the campus in 1965.

[liveandletlive]

Perfect example of how government intervention produces immorality. Baal is the great evil of our time.

good grief. thats obviously a parody and not a promotion of government dependency.

[Lucille]

Fewer. Fewer lesbians and trannies.

LOL

[Sola_Fide]

good grief. thats obviously a parody and not a promotion of government dependency.

Even if that one was a parody, there have been several other ones that were serious.

[jonhowe]

lol, ok, rought numbers since you are showing a statistic that the ratio of college women to men is 4:3

The three most attractive females, of the four, will simultaneously $#@! the most attractive male, of the three, and leave the other 2 men in the dust. Of course, once you increase the numbers of students, you can see how this plays out - same thing, but with a much bigger pool. One of those two men might end up $#@!ing the least attractive woman, if either of them have any such motivation, or she could be a lesbian.

As far as money'd men, they could be beta bux. See where their marriages are in 10 years. But betas can also impersonate alphas to some extent, there certainly are no hard-fast rules here we are just talking about trends.

Women are not robot automatons. Nor are men. You are just projecting your own sick fantasies on an entire gender.

Very sad.

[jonhowe]

From http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/ore...ing-witnesses/

Police clearing science room 15. Seems reasonable after a shooting.

[jonhowe]

Women are obviously much more selective than men when it comes to mating, which means that as women rise in status the lower status men will be left to rot.

And there's nothing they can do? They can't elevate themselves in any way? They're just born like this? It's society's fault? Why are we content to say that people can fix their own problems when it comes to politics, but not sex??

That would be an insurmountable task, which is why you demand it, and which I have already addressed. You really think I'm going to spend hours looking for articles that you won't read or will simply dismiss? I hate lazy debates when people post a $#@!ing article as their counterargument. You've not once actually gave me any reasons for your disagreement other than to post an article supporting one of my initial arguments. Other than that, you are basically saying that I'm wrong, crazy, and a doo-doo head.

YOU are the one passing judgement on literally half the planet off of a handful of anecdotes and personal experiences, and trying to explain away a MASS SHOOTING in the process. Sorry that I want you to back them up with something other than a claiming you've had a threesome.

my wife who once banged a semi-celebrity DJ; a coworker who banged a Pittsburgh Steeler;

HAHAHA! Ok, now I get it. This isn't a debate I can win. This is an angry cuckolded husband who hates women because he married a bad one.
Sorry you're a bad judge of character, buddy.

Whatever; you got my point. Regardless, most men (aside from you, I'm sure, just to be contrary) would much rather date a hot waitress than a sea-hag attorney. Sure, an intellectual woman would be great, but that is just a cherry on top.

The 'fitness' of the women in my law school classes was quite impressive, actually. It was an eye opening experience. It's almost like people who work hard to better themselves intellectually tend to do so physically as well.

Hyperbole. Suffice to say that there was a great number of women with grossly unrealistic expectations.

But MORE than men? Have you looked at porn lately?

No, the top men bang the top women and the above average women, leaving the normal men to fight for the bottom of the barrel, and the bottom of the barrel men getting nothing.

All your women-hating aside, this is where we really disagree. Even here in NYC you mainly see "like with like", be it in dating, hooking up in bars, or in marriages. Sure there's some old/ugly wall street guys with 20 year old model wives, but even in the rich areas like where I used to work it is the exception, not the rule.

And you're a doo-doo head. Seriously though, there are plenty of women that have told me about their sexual exploits: threesomes, amateur prostitution, infidelity, sexual acts, etc. A lot of these women married nerdy men who are stable and can help support their bastard abominations since the biological father is in prison for a violent crime. This scenario might not be in the majority, but it is certainly prevalent enough it seems. Often times, these women "aren't like that anymore," so she might have been willing to have a threesome in the past, or give head, etc., while her husband asks for these things and is denied them (despite the fact that as the husband, he is presumably the man she is "in love" with and would give him her best).

Sounds like you're friends with a handful of awful people. Look at your OWN life, stop blaming women for your problems (and mass shootings).