
Norwegian Men’s Rights Activist blogger Eivind Berge, known for his violent rhetoric and rape apologia, has been arrested for death threats against police.
Not too surprising, given that he once announced on his blog that “[k]illing at least one cop is on my bucket list.”
Here are some Google-translated details from a news account here:
The right-wing extremist and anti-feminist blogger Eivind Berge has been arrested for having encouraged and glorified the killing of policemen. The police have found both ammunition and textbooks in use of explosives at Berge.
The police regard the threats as an invitation to others to kill police officers, but also feared that he would commit the acts themselves shortly.
He was evidently arrested on Wednesday. According to this story — at least as far as I can tell from the obviously crude Google translation — he made a specific threat to kill a police officer this Saturday:
Berge also writes about how he was planning to attack a policeman with a knife on a Saturday evening:
“Then I used the trial to come forward as a good example for men, and I considered it to be worth 21 years in prison for premeditated murder.”
According to this account, Berge is being held for two weeks. He claims innocence.
Berge, as readers of this blog may well already know, is a fan of right-wing terrorist and mass murderer Anders Brevik. On his blog, he’s also argued (among other things) that “Rape is Equality.”
He’s glorified the murder of police on his blog numerous times.
Some examples, taken from the second news account:
“… attack on the police is something 100% in harmony with everything I stand for.”
“I maintain that police murder is both ethically and tactically correct.”
Some other examples, direct from his blog (each paragraph is from a separate post; click on the quote for the source):
I viscerally despise cops and wish them the worst. Killing at least one cop is on my bucket list.
If ever a victim of psychiatry, here is what I would do. I would first attempt to kill the cops or whoever tried to apprehend me. Failing that, I would feign docility in order to get out as soon as possible and then kill a representative of the industry as revenge. … killing cops is also very much a men’s issue. Every pig killed is also a blow against feminism, so men should be doubly elated whenever an officer goes down in the line of encroaching on our cognitive liberty.
This was his reaction to a news story about a police officer being killed:
Good news for men is rare in this hateful feminist utopia that is Norway, but today is a joyous day! Today I feel schadenfreude in my heart along with all the hate that feminism and resultant mate deprivation have instilled in me. One blue thug less on the streets.
From another post on the same subject:
The swine Olav Kildal died while trying to enforce our lack of cognitive liberty. This was a defensive, much deserved killing that cheered me up.
Here he threatens a female prosecutor:
To feminist prosecutor Anne Cathrine Aga I have the following message: The Men’s Movement is watching you, bitch, and we are seething with hatred against you personally and the police state you represent. Actions have consequences. Trials are still (mostly) public and they sink into our collective minds, where they form the basis of future activism. Hate breeds hate — that is a fact of life too smugly ignored by feminists. …
2011 is the year Norwegian men as a group emerged out of the blogosphere and into the battlefield. This in turn has led to a breakthrough for MRAs such as my good self in the public discourse, probably for the simple reason that the powers that be now realize ignoring us has deadly consequences. Men are angry now, and we have proven that we are deathly serious about resisting feminism. So the feminist prosecutors referred to above ought to wipe that smug look off their faces before it is too late. Clearly seventy-seven body bags wasn’t enough, but I am fairly confident that you will be sorry one day.
Aside from the explicit threats of violence, the violent and threatening rhetoric here is not unlike much of the rhetoric we see regularly on A Voice for Men and other MRA sites. AVFM founder Paul Elam, for example, told one feminist that:
I find you so pernicious and repugnant that the idea of fucking your shit up gives me an erection. … We are coming for you.
The blogger Emma the Emo, Berge’s girlfriend, has posted comments here in the past defending him. The news account quotes someone identified as Nataliya Kochergova, described as his girlfriend; I assume this is “Emma,” because what she told the media is similar to what she posted here. She of course denies that he planned any real violence. According to the article, she said:
There are not really threats. He has never had plans to kill someone, he has said several times in his blog. When for example, he says that “the police killings are an effective way to prevent stupid laws,” it’s a factual description and not a threat. Even those who love the police agree with it.
Berge, for his part, has stated publicly that if he had not met Emma, he probably would have killed by now:
At the time I wrote my last blog post, I believed I would probably become Norway’s first modern violent activist in peacetime. Celibacy enforced by a feminist regime had driven me to the point where I saw no other option. I would target the pigs who enforce feminist law, knowing I could realistically at least kill one of them before I would be captured or killed myself. Thus revenge would be assured and if I lived, my reputation as a violent criminal would make me attractive to some women. But then in the nick of time this blog attracted a lovely girl commenting as “Emma.”
This is why I take violent rhetoric from MRAs very seriously.
Meanwhile, on this side of the Atlantic, MRAs glorify MRA “martyr” Thomas Ball, who killed himself on the steps of a New Hampshire courthouse last year in hopes that his death would inspire MRAs to literally burn down courthouses and police stations.
Ball’s manifesto is still up on A Voice for Men in its “activism” section, including these passages:
So boys, we need to start burning down police stations and courthouses. … This is too important to be using that touchy- feeling coaching that is so popular with business these days. You need to flatten them, like Wile E. Coyote. They need to be taught never to replace the rule of law. BURN-THEM-OUT!
Most of the police stations built in New England over the last 20 years are stone or brick. Fortunately, the roofs are still wood. The advantage of fire on the roof is that it is above the sprinklers
AVFM tastefully omitted Ball’s specific instructions on how to make Molotov cocktails, but left this in:
There will be some casualties in this war. Some killed, some wounded, some captured. Some of them will be theirs. Some of the casualties will be ours.
For many more examples of violent threatening rhetoric from MRAs, I urge you to go through some of my posts here and here.


No, we’re platonic, with an understanding that this is an aromantic situation, for now. We’ve agreed to reassess., Duh. I keep forgetting platonic might not mean the same thing to you, sorry.for the ambiguity. It
The pick-up is partly compulsive, I admit. With my lead times, the time it will take me to get a ” Yes” will also mean that I’ll
Anyway, thanks for th e uncharitable imaginings and the baiting.
I’m pretty sure your “understanding” with your partner that running around doing pickup is A-Okay is every bit as explicit as all those women who consent to being PUAed, right?
Except that a few posts ago this partner didn’t even EXIST and your entire life was different, so I shouldn’t be nitpicking a fictional story so hard.
Shrug.
Cliff, I’m sure it’s only a mild understanding.
Wait a minute…this doesn’t make any sense….So, you all tell Steele to stop using the word “misandry” because it has an “institutional” component to it. He argues: no it doesn’t thank you very much, read for comprehension. And he will continue to use that word because HIS definition of it includes individual instances of hatred against men.
THEN, Steele says that creepy is a gendered slur. You all say that YOUR definition of creepy is not gendered.
I mean, didn’t he go on for a billion posts about how words can have several definitions? So, if the manboobzerz definition of creepy is not gendered then they should be able to keep using it and it will mean what they say it means…..just like you, Steele, say you are gonna use misandry and it will mean what you say it means.
Why is this even an issue for him. You all told him that the way you define creepy isn’t gendered so……..?
“The pick-up is partly compulsive”
This may be the only somewhat true think that he’s said so far today.
Are you an activist, Steele? Is this language policing that you come here to do your main form of activism or are there others? Is preventing women from making “creepy” a distinctly gendered slur at the forefront of men’s issues?
correction..you didn’t tell him to stop using it….y’all told him it wasn’t actually a thing and it didn’t mean what he says it means…sorry.
because he’s a gigantic crybaby.
a creepy crybaby
Not that I want to IN ANY WAY encourage you from continuing, Israeli Wannabe, but Holy Nonsequitur!
Aw crap. Blockquote fail.
u mad I don’t like your poisonous ideology?
The USSR is by far the lesser of two evils here, fascist.
Hah, that’s it? Check the actual evidence, dude.
I have. You’re wrong.
Well, no, I don’t, actually. Because those things are not equivalent. Only one set of them creates and reinforces real problems. That is the set that is bad. Like I said, honkies and racist slurs.
You don’t have to, of course. I would amend that to say that you should, if you want to be taken seriously, if you want to have a moral high ground, and if you want to ask others to amend their behavior with a straight face. Like I said, you really shouldn’t be asking people to do what you won’t.
The SPLC has the New Black Panther Party on its list of hate groups.
Another thing- “less bad” doesn’t mean “not bad”.
You’re still here, Steele? Yawn.
@VoIP Off topic (and by the way, I’ve been lurking a while and your posts are brilliantly informative), but can I just make the point that while the USSR might have been better than actual balls-out fascism, my family still died in their camps and attempting to flee them during the occupation of Latvia. That’s the sole reason I was born in the UK – my nana was a 17 year old who fled the Russians, couldn’t go with her family, got frostbite, spent two years in a refugee camp in Germany where she was repeatedly violated, then got sent to the UK and given a job in a mill despite not being able to speak a word of English. She learnt it because the woman on the next machine to her took pity on her and taught her one word of English a day. My nana taught her a word of Latvian a day too and they were both fluent in a year. Not to mention the decades of abuse at the hands of my grandfather (thankfully I never met him, but he did have PTSD).
Sorry to go off on a tangent but it’s important to me to make these points since most people don’t even know about the Occupation, let alone the effects on the Latvian people. I just can’t stand seeing people saying that the USSR was *far* better than anyone, because as far as I’m concerned, they’re genocidal fuckheads. That’s not to say that other people can’t be *even bigger* genocidal fuckheads but I’d just like that disclaimer that ‘not as bad’ still means that people were sent to die in work camps in Siberia for reciting traditional songs.
Sorry for the rant, this triggers me like hell. My nana’s the best person I’ve ever met.
Sorry, meant to lob this link in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_Latvia_in_1940
I have called girls and women creeps or creepy, I have heard others do so as well in daily life. I have never heard anyone other than an MRA even suggest that the term is gendered.
Case in point: I know I’ve posted this before, but
Woman. Called creepy. Repeatedly.
So, Steele, I think it’s about time you picked another word to argue about badly. How about “polyphonic”? “Cuttlefish”? “Endorsement”? “Sesquicentennial?” There are thousands to choose from.
What structures disadvantage men then? Because it’s not female-coded jobs (promotion bias, referred to in literature as ‘the glass escalator), it’s not family court (Men win a disproportionate number of custody cases after you account for the fact that men are not usually primary caretakers), it’s not the military (the ability to serve is a class advantage that justifies superior rights), and it’s not a single gendered oppression I’ve seen on another axis.
It’s certainly not the ‘dangerous jobs’ thing, because women want in on those; those jobs pay well, and are not really that dangerous (At least not in more developed countries). The majority of workplace deaths in the USA (All 43 of them last year, IIRC) are from *driving*, though I’ll grant it’s not the only harm.
Look, honky, I am taken plenty seriously by non-lackwits. The fact of the matter is that only one of these actually is an oppression. I can perfectly well ask with a straight face, and as a rule be taken seriously by non-lackwits.
This is that false equivalence thing again. There’s nothing racist about calling you a honky, because no matter how much I do it, only one of us is going to get discriminated against on the matter of race, and it isn’t going to be you. There is no oppression against white people for me to strengthen. Not racist.
To slightly expound on this, the front men of LGBT rights are almost all cis white dudes. The (black) civil rights movement had fairly high ranking figures who outright stated that the proper place for women was “prone”. Most working class representatives I’ve seen are, again, dudes (and the statistics are worse for women amongst the working class). IT’s almost as if men are privileged, on the matter of gender, yo.
What structures disadvantage men then? What structures blah men then? Because blah not female-coded blah blah blah
Not really interested in discussing this with you. You’ve clearly made your decision.
There’s nothing racist about calling you a honky, because no matter how much I do it, only one of us is going to get discriminated against on the matter of race, and it isn’t going to be you.
Sure. As with the misandry thing, I disagree with your interpretation of the word “racist”, but that’s not really the point here. The point is- and yeah, this is just my opinion- that you simply can’t ask “honkies” to not be racist with a straight face. Or “cis scum” not to be transphobic. Or whatever. Of course it’s not equivalent- I never said it was. But that doesn’t really change the fact that you should- again, in my opinion- hold yourself to the same standards you make it a point to ask others to.
Look, honky, I am taken plenty seriously by non-lackwits.
No, you’re not, not really. You’re angry on the Internet. You’re whiny, unpleasant, obnoxious and hostile. Sure, like-minded “non-lackwits” may agree with you in your various internet echo-chambers, and I suppose that’s fine if you’re just looking for a community, or something. But what the fuck do you do? Since I’m fairly sure you’re a privileged upper-middle class individual, my guess is jack fucking shit. You just like to bitch. Kind of like you all incorrectly claim the MRM does.
You also seem to be laboring under the delusion that I’m mortally offended by being referred to as a “honky”. I don’t really give a rip, because as you’ve said, the insult is not particularly strong in an objective sense, and in addition, well, it’s you. You’re just making yourself look like a petulant ass.
And I’m done talking to you; it’s a waste of time.
Oh and look, Steele is a racist (by the way of reinforcing racist structures, before you come at me, you twit). I remain utterly unshocked.
NO FOR SRS IF YOU PEOPLE DON’T QUIT USING IMAGINARY SLURS WE’LL USE REAL SLURS FOR ALL THE TIME THIS IS WHAT’S FORWARDING MEN’S ISSUES IN OUR SOCIETY. OH WHAT, HOMELESS MEN? FUCK ‘EM! WE GET TO CALL SOME WOMEN CUNTS!
So tell me Steele, what is the MRM doing to reduce suicide among men – apart from exactly the wrong thing*?
(*and by this I mean things that will actually cause men to die)
Oh, now this is really precious.
Steele, are you accusing someone else of not being a real activist? Seriously?
Oh, look! Look what Steele is saying about somebody who’s not him! ALL THE IRONY.