Men's Rights Advocates Come Out in Support of Seal Beach Salon Shooter

Screenshot of Scott Dekraai (KTLA)

The shootings at Salon Meritage have mostly elicited reactions of horror and sympathy for the victims. But some men's rights advocates have been coming out in support of Scott Dekraai, the man who shot his ex-wife and seven others at Salon Meritage, where she worked as a hairstylist.

Dekraai had been fighting his wife Michelle Fournier for nearly full custody of their 8-year-old son from their 4-year, shotgun marriage, according to Belmont Shore-Naples Patch. The couple had joint custody of their son nearly split evenly: Fournier had him from Monday through Thursday afternoon, and Dekraai had him the rest of the time. But Dekraai wanted to spend even more time with him and he wanted "final decision-making authority" for his son. Dekraai had spent nearly $50,000 in legal fees trying to win his case. He argued in court that Fournier drank too much, but that argument wasn't successful. Just the day before his shooting rampage, the court-appointed psychologist recommended that the judge should not award him the full custody, Patch reported.

Since news of the story broke, men's right activists have been coming out in support of Dekraai (many of them, before reading the full details of the massacre), arguing that Dekraai's murderous rage was a righteous response to an anti-male court system, as noted by Jezebel and the blog Man Boobz.

Ferdinand Bardamu, a blogger at MalaFide, titled his post about the incident "Anti-Male, Anti-Father Divorce Laws Drive Man to Commit Heinous Rage Shooting Against Ex-Wife" He wrote:

...do I expect this horrific crime to inspire any introspection on the part of Americans, or any questioning of the role of feminism in poisoning the relationship between men and women? Nope.

Also consider that if the sexes were reversed, if a woman shot her ex-husband and an entire room full of men because she was getting shafted by the family courts and denied custody of her children, her plight would be lamented and her actions excused by the exact same people who are going to be condemning this guy. Expect this horse to be flogged to death and back for the next month or so as proof of systemic "misogyny" in American culture.

Comments from Dekraai sympathizers are flourishing in the comment threads on Bardamu's post and in a reddit MensRights thread that was already expecting blowback against advocates for Dekraai's actions.

A commenter named Remorhaz on Bardamu's post complained that Dekraai had chosen the wrong target for his rage:

The only way this or any offensive action will make a difference is if it starts affecting the judges and lawyers. King John did not sign the magna carta because he was a kindly just ruler, he did it with a sword on the back of his neck while watching a grinning man holding an axe who was busy trying on black hoods. In Mexico entire police forces quit because a few officers go missing. If that started happening then the law becomes meaningless as there is no one to enforce it. This will happen eventually due to bankruptcy so it might not play out as above but either the former or latter is required to solve the problem and some mix is likely - the latter inevitable.

Essentially men need to tell feminism to shut the fuck up, give it a vigorous slap across the face thus reminding it who is the biological superior, then order it back into the kitchen/bedroom. Grunt, oop.

Reddit commenter Bobsutan said he was surprised we don't see more violence like Dekraai's:

To be honest I'm not surprised the rates of violence aren't higher given how many men are affected by child theft and being sold into slavery via alimony/child support.

Reddit commenter TheRealPariah simply claimed Dekraai as one of the group's own right away:

He is one of us. You cannot throw men struggling out simply because they do something you disagree with.

Reddit commenter Aerik suggested the group had shot themselves in the foot with their thread:

ha. Brilliant. OP says to expect blowback, saying others will accuse him of being an MRA -- so you go ahead and beat 'em all to it and say he is one of you.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@laist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Emma G. Gallegos in News on October 15, 2011 4:30 PM 0 Comments

Comments [rss]

Nighthawk US

OK, explaining the behavior and the corruption in the family courts that leads to tragedies like this + calling out the fact that if a woman did this the media reaction would be different= supporting a mass murderer? Wow, talk about being utterly pathetic.

Not in a single one of the comments cited was the murder itself truly justified or endorsed, merely explained. I guess it is true what they say : First they will laugh at you, then they will fight you, then you will win.

As a long time MRA I do not endorse murders and if this guy was so serious about it he should of refused to make CS payments and went on a hunger strike or something. Committing murder in such a fashion is a blatant act of cowardice unacceptable in a free society, regardless if in such a society your facing systematic discrimination.

StayBank

Idiots!

AmusedByItAll

In answer to the quote in the story from a guy named "Remorhaz" --

1) Slap me and draw back a bloody nub up to around the elbow.

2) How's about YOU going into the kitchen your own darned self, making me a sammich and then rubbing my feet because I work every bit as hard as your sorry butt and make less money for more work?

AmusedByItAll

Honestly? By describing the marriage as "shotgun" tells me he didn't want the kid or the marriage to begin with. But, like many men, he seems to think that children are PROPERTY. The comment in the article citing custody orders as "child theft" is another indicator of how lame they can get. I am reminded again and again by those comments and attitudes that, up until the late 20th century, many states still had laws on the books that marked women and children as property along with the livestock. That mentality is still being taught to young men by their fathers and grandfathers and that is the problem.

The grim reality is that, even with the courts allegedly "favoring" the women who will end raising the kids while suffering financially and mentally, the men always argue that they are getting shafted. That is usually at the same time they are running off to the next woman they can find and bragging about "their kids" who they rarely find time to see.

This man was more angry that he didn't get his way in court and get control he didn't deserve than with the fact he didn't get the expanded custody he wanted. The court psychiatrist said he needed help and was not capable of what he demanded.

BaldheadedFoo

Men shouldn't support this nutjob but we do need to start organizing and working on the courts and politicians for equal rights in child custody, taxes, visitation, divorce settlements, judicial treatment and even speeding tickets. Women in the USA don't need special rights anymore. END IT NOW!

AmusedByItAll

Well, until pay and benefits are equal for men and women, the courts will be more generous to the women in those cases. And, FTR, I have never seen a court treat a woman better because she is female. Maybe traffic tickets IF the woman is 20 and has Pamela Anderson boobs... But that is not the norm.

In the states where those "equal rights for fathers" exist, the end result is that the children suffer. The assumption is that the costs of raising the kids will be split evenly and that BOTH parents will bear the costs based on visitation ORDERS. Reality? They get that order and then disappear.

Court says "keep the kids on the health insurance", all of a sudden the father "lost" his. Pay half the fees for school/classes/lessons? Amazing! He's not working. Pay half the co-pays/deductibles for medical bills no matter whose insurance is primary? "They're YOUR kids!" or "you didn't ask me if you can take them to the doctor for the chicken pox, so I'm not going to pay".

Yet, because the court order saying he has to pay those things is on file, the mother cannot get her kids qualified for any public program like reduced lunches or food stamps or whatever. That, even though the father isn't paying a dime!

I went through all of that in the "unfair" system and was told it didn't matter about the order because my ex said he didn't have it. So, which one of you believing in "equal rights" wants to pay the $100K+ I have in outstanding medical bills for my kid that the mean old judge said my ex didn't have to pay even though the original equal-split court order said he should?

BaldheadedFoo

women under 45 are usually better off than men financially these days. You contradicted yourself in the first two sentences of your response by admitting courts are more generous to women but then saying no they're not. which is it? Women are master manipulators always great at spinning things around to make themselves look like victims. And yes women do get breaks in the judicial system all the time. juries and judges are FAR more sympathetic to women, especially once the crocodile tears start dropping. Despite your case, there are many men who have to work two jobs or even move back with parents due to excessive child support/palimony orders. Women usually are granted custody of kids, unless she is an axe murderer (maybe), and then get all the tax breaks come springtime. men, on the otherhand, get a double whammy because there are no tax breaks even though 20% of your monthly income goes to supporting your kids all tax year long.

SP

That is if these men actual pay their child support obiligation. Alot of men just bull shit their way out of paying by saying they are unemployed and then go out and get an off the books job. I've seen that hustle many times where I live. They live in there mom's basement to put a front that they are broke and very often the kids suffer. All this nonsense to get back at the ex who some of these so call men cheated on.

Nighthawk US

SP I hope you know your opening yourself up to defamation of character. As before the depression only 10% of non custodial dad's where dead beats. Most of the time it was either because: They where literally poor, on disability or lost their job. And also because they where DEAD! Compare that to the 40% of non-custodial mothers who are dead beats because " they think they should have to pay CS". That is if a Judge even "makes them pay any CS" as a good number of non-custodial mothers get away with 0-50$ Child support. Heck there are even custodial fathers in this Country that have to pay child support to the non-custodial mother for the 1 or 2 days out of the month where she has visitation. The only one putting on a front is you, and no longer will bigots like you be tolerated. You should know better. As an African American you should know the moral ill's of slavery. As a German American I find this "Child Support" system to be as bad as the South's old "peculiar" institution. And as many African American men are in jail because of back CS as where wrongfully enslaved in times long past. I honestly don't know how your able to sleep at night.
------
P.S if your ignorant about who the German American's are I suggest you open a History book.

Henry__Chinaski

Quoting reddit commentors? Really?

Stou Sandalski

Yea... they also have an article about how someone went and bought a new iPhone... quality writing of newsworthy stories

Spokker

I'm a men's rights guy but what a stupid fucking guy to rally behind. He went on a massacre because he's bi-polar and insane. He should have been in a hospital.

MTkill_a_manJaro

Unbe-fucking-lievable. I'm all for guys who want to be in their kids lives and for responsible dads to have full custody if they show themselves to be worthy of it, but in this case the kid was clearly better off with mom. I'm pretty sure this shooting rampage wasn't the first sign or case of violence in his history.

sbhixon

Achem. Sir, I believe it is spelled; un-fucking-believable.

mallhonitor

I think there are some issues which need to be addressed when it comes to "men's rights," but that doesn't mean that people should rally behind a murderer.