Mass Shooter influenced by the "Men's Rights Movement"

[TampaAnimusVortex]

164. Maybe I should have been more specific.

Do you have any evidence for all the statements your making? But, if your going to base your argument on this page...

1. THE CLAIM Men’s rights activists often insist that men are victimized by sex crimes and abuse just as much as women are, if not more.
A. "often" - What constitutes often?
B. Which MR activists? ALL of them!?
C. The Wikipedia article on the topic references a number of studies, including a meta-analysis John Archer from the Department of Psychology, University of Central Lancashire, UK, who writes:

The present analyses indicate that men are among those who are likely to be on the receiving end of acts of physical aggression.[7] The extent to which this involves mutual combat or the male equivalent to "battered women" is at present unresolved. Both situations are causes for concern. Straus (1997) has warned of the dangers involved—especially for women—when physical aggression becomes a routine response to relationship conflict. "Battered men"—those subjected to systematic and prolonged violence—are likely to suffer physical and psychological consequences, together with specific problems associated with a lack of recognition of their plight (George and George, 1998). Seeking to address these problems need not detract from continuing to address the problem of "battered women."[35]

Is this study correct? It should require a great deal of examination by experts in scientific methodology to assess. I could be wrong, but I doubt you and I would qualify for the task.

2. THE CLAIM In another effort to show that men are discriminated against, many men’s rights activists assert that women attack men just as much as men attack women, if not more.
A. Is this true? Again, Wikipedia shows numerous studies both for and against - depending on the page visited.

3. THE CLAIM Close to half or even more of the sexual assaults reported by women never occurred.
A. Is this true? Again, Wikipedia lists a number of studies - all ranging from 2% to 90%. If you are going to base your beliefs on one of these, you would have to answer to why you picked that one.

As to your other statements...
----------------
1. MRA ideology in general is rationalization for their own perceived failings in life. -- No evidence presented.
2. It is a fact that PUAs are part of the Men's Right's movement. -- again, no evidence presented.
3. "but when <these> organizations promote hatred" -- again, no evidence presented.

And a question:
What specifically IS Neo-Nazi ideology? -- No response.
-----------------

Look... I'm just playing devils advocate here - but you really should be more fact oriented when discussing these issues. If your going to make declarative statements, then at least be prepared to defend them when challenged. Without factual support, your statements can appear emotional, biased, and non-objective - and even with facts, one must be careful to not cherry pick only the bits of the data that supports one's argument, but the totality of data. This is very difficult to do, especially so with emotional topics such as this one, which is why one must be extra-determined to drive in the spikes of logic instead of allowing one to be swept away with internal emotional biases.