Feminists are illogical and not worth debating
Jun 9th, 2011 by Unamused
Contemporary feminism is exactly what you would expect to get if you took a bunch of overeducated, unattractive, power-hungry, man-hating women, gave them their own university department, and told them “all your theories are brilliant, we won’t allow men to criticize you with ‘logic’ and ‘science’ and other patriarchal constructs, and finally, we’ll pay you by the word.”
Remember the Toronto SlutWalk? The first one, before the societal cancer spread to other cities.
This is not what SlutWalkers look like. This is merely a hot Norwegian girl. Why? Because.
Do you recall what set off the sluts? Feminist blogger (and possible slut) “i am charli” spells out the need for the Sluts’ ill-advised Walk, in the post that introduced me to the slut-tastic phenomenon (here):
If you haven’t read it about it already, there was a cop from Toronto that recently spoke at a campus safety information session and said women can avoid being sexually assaulted by not dressing like “a slut.” … The fact that he said this proves that there is still a mindset about blaming the victim of rape or sexual assault.
Interestingly, according to the exact same feminist blogger, commenting at Unamusement Park (here):
Yes — unfortunately dressing sexier does up your chances of getting sexually assaulted.
I don’t think any one would disagree with you that dressing provocatively ups your chances of being raped.
Feminists are illogical and not worth debating.
Wait, she actually said that dressing hot ups your chances of being raped?
She’s totally victim blaming and needs to be exposed.
*le facepalm*
Once again you have quoted my blog and managed to totally take my words out of context. Yes I did say that dressing sexier ups your chances of being sexually assaulted – BUT only because I was pointing out how thats exactly the problem.
[Yeah. So was the cop.]
@Aoirthoir An Broc – read the whole post here – the post is called “My Clothes Are Not An Invitation To Rape Me” Trust me, I’m a HUGE advocate of doing away with victim blaming. I’m even a co-organizer of the SlutWalk we are having here! The guy who writes this blog has completely taken my words out of context.
[I think he's making fun of you for directly contradicting yourself.]
@Aoirthoir An Broc – here’s the post:
http://iamcharli.wordpress.com/2011/02/20/fyi-my-clothes-are-not-an-invitation-to-rape-me/
And this is what the WHOLE comment said: “Yes – unfortunately dressing sexier does up your chances of getting sexually assaulted. But the point you are missing is that thats the exact problem. I don’t care how turned on you are by what I’m wearing, you do not have the right to force yourself on me sexually.”
Don’t take my words out of context and then call me illogical.
[So... first, you said exactly what I quoted you as saying. Then you agreed with me that no one has a "right" to commit sexual assault, which is as obvious as it is irrelevant.
The context isn't helping, iamcharli.]
Unfortunately for you, I haven’t actually taken your words out of context. You meant exactly what you wrote above. You are simply illogical, and therefore not worth debating.
Anyone who is interested can read the whole debate in the comments section of my post.
[Here, iamcharli engaged in some classic feminist "shaming language," basically claiming that anyone who disagrees with her must be a bad person.]
IamCharli I read your post and I have to agree with Unamused, he did not take your post out of context.
Now I on the other hand did not mean what I said. Pointing out risky behavior is NOT victim blaming. So let’s review a few facts shall we?
* MEN are NOT raping.
* RAPISTS are raping. Rapists
* Rapists can be male.
* Rapists can be female.
* Rapists can be intersexed.
* Rapists can be trans gendered.
* Those that are NOT rapists, whether we are men, women, or otherwise, ARE NOT responsible for rape.
* The “only men can stop rape” meme is bullshit and responsibility transference.
* Risky behavior does NOT make a victim responsible for someone ELSE (a RAPIST, MUGGER etc) attacking them.
* The ATTACKER is soley responsible for attacking.
* Rapists aren’t going to give a DAMNED about slut-walks. Muggers aren’t going to give a damned about muggie walks. If someone has decided to become a rapist or a mugger or a thief or a murderer or a…. [insert wicked offender], a ‘anti-[insert offender]‘ walk isn’t going to sway them too bits.
* Since [insert offender]s have demonstrated they don’t give a damned about us, can find us anywhere, it BEHOOVES us as MUCH AS POSSIBLE to take matters into our own hands.
* I SHOULD be allowed to go WHEREVER I WANT. But I avoid certain types of people. I don’t hang around those types of people then act shocked when they hurt me.
* I SHOULD be able to dress HOWEVER I want. But I don’t dress certain ways around certain people and announce my having or not having money.
* If I flash money, I am NOT RESPONSIBLE for being mugged.
* That “not responsible” does me a whole helluvalotta notta good while I’m laying in the hospital having been on the receiving end of a violent crime.
* ANY of us COULD be the victims of a violent assault including rape NO MATTER the steps we take to protect ourselves…but,
* We ABSOLUTELY CAN REDUCE the risk we face by avoiding certain behaviors and practicing other behaviors.
* Finally as someone else responded to you on another post: You can ignore reality, but not the consequences of reality.
So you can stomp your cute little petulant feet all you want demanding how things SHOULD be. I AGREE that is how they SHOULD be. But that is NOT HOW THEY ARE. SO when someone with EXPERIENCE like a COP tells us some of the things we can do to REDUCE our risk, we might try living in the REAL WORLD and listening to him instead of trying to transfer our world of rainbows and puppy dogs to THIS world. Cause it doesn’t work that way.
I agree with the Slut (as an organizer of Slut Walk, it is ok I call you that, right? Let’s talk back the word, slut!). No one has a right to steal my vehicles when I leave them unlocked, with the key in the ignition. But unfortunately, my leaving my vehicle unlocked with the key in the ignition raises the chances of my vehicle being stolen. Therefore, I will organize a protest so that people know I intend on leaving my vehicle unlocked with the keys in the ignition. That will solve everything. :)
http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/01/23/18-awareness/
Believe me, Aoirthoir, I’ve tried all your arguments. They’re valid, but they don’t work, because feminism isn’t supposed to be a science (even a social science). It’s supposed to be a radical anti-male, pro-slut political movement.
Unamused,
I don’t write my comments for cows and mules. They’re not going to understand a thing I write. So it follows that I don’t write my comments for feminists either.
When I write I write them for thinking persons who have known all along that something just wasn’t right, but they could not put their finger on it or they thought it was “just them.” What you do, what I do, is that we expose people to the truth that THEIR truth IS the truth and they’re not alone.
Feminists can claim all the bullshit that they want. I’m not here to help teach a feminist how to protect herself from rape because as that cop found out she just won’t listen to reality. Instead, she should be able to just walk around oblivious to her surroundings and the existence of wicked persons shouldn’t effect her.
So we arrive at the situation we have here today. Females, particularly feminists, stomping their petulant little feet saying “I DONT NEED YOUR HELP” but then when someone DOESN’t give their help, she’ll sue them (as the case of the NYC subway booth workers demonstrates when a woman sued for being raped because they didn’t come out of their booths to help her, DESPITE them being FORBIDDEN to do so.).
When you are dealing with people that ignore reality TO THIS DEGREE, no there is no arguing with them. Instead you write so that OTHERS can be informed.
what could possibly be more misogynistic than deliberately trying to increase the chances of having young women be victims of sexual assault as these feminists are trying to do? i am the last person that will defend bar skanks’ honor and try to shield them from the results of their poor decisions putting them in dangerous situations, but at least i don’t encourage them to do dangerous things. doing what people like iamcharli are doing is just downright evil — no other way to describe it.
i am going to teach my daughter that acting intelligently to minimize the risk of bad shit happening to her is the smart thing to do, you know, because i actually care about her and want her to be safe. things like lock your doors at night, don’t walk home alone, don’t get into cars with strangers, buckle your seatbelt, don’t get blackout drunk, and don’t do other things that make you more at risk for being a victim of a violent crime.
Thank you, CLAR: teaching the next generation what used to be common sense is way more important than trying to hammer logic into the heads of brainwashed radicals, i.e. what I do all day.
As you say, gender feminism harms all women.
Clar, actually you clearly hate your daughter. [Warning. Sarcasm may be greater than it appears.] If you loved her like the Feminists loved her you would teach her several things:
* The definition of rape has changed.
* Rape is NOT someone actually physically forcing you.
* Rape includes sex with a lover whom you’ve perhaps said no to at first but then they wooed you into it…that’s COERCION.
* Rape includes saying YES when you MEANT no.
* NO means NO. Males agreed with that and so went by it, as they had for you know CENTURIES.
* So we had to come up with ANOTHER new definition of rape. Now anything less than AFFIRMATIVE YES, or YES MEANS YES is rape.
* This means in practice that MEN should ALWAYS get an affirmative yes from the woman. While they CLAIM women should ALSO get an affirmative yes, facts are they still WONT count anything less than an affirmative yes from the male as rape of him. (Remember ONLY MEN rape…despite the fact that rapes by women of men are under reported by at least 400 to 1 due to the incredibly victim shaming of male victims of female rapists.)
* Since Males agreed with this and we’ve decided to get YES as an answer (you know as we’ve done FOR CENTURIES), They had to come up with ANOTHER new definition of rape.
* NOW I’ve seen feminists claim that a male trying to ENSURE he has an AFFIRMATIVE yes, or he doesn’t have sex with the woman, THAT IS PRESSURING to the woman, COERCION and therefore, yup you guessed it, RAPE.
* Rape is determined NOT by the actions of the other person or your actions, but how you FEEL after the fact. Were YOU the aggressor? Did YOU suggest making out? Did YOU suggest going someplace private? Did YOU suggest getting naked? Did YOU suggest bumping bones?
Well NONE of this matters, if YOU FEEL you were raped. If you FEEL you were raped, YOU WERE raped. (YOU in these cases is ONLY females…)
I could go on with the list but you get the idea. So you see Clar, you HATE your daughter because you are trying to teach her to live in the real world, not a rainbows and kittens fantasy land.
/aoirthoirism.
but it is so damn entertaining to read. i personally don’t have the patience for doing it myself, but i love reading the sputtering indignation of these people over the internet.
Who is this [young lady], and why did anyone ever teach her to speak or write?
We really screwed up when we gave these [young ladies] the right to vote. Opening Pandora’s box, where all we have left is the hope — the feeble hope — that someday, women might behave logically and rationally.
Ya know, I’ve long toyed with the idea of letting those “poor oppressed people” (as feminists term blacks and radical Muslims) take over so we can have a society like they want: beating of women allowed, adultery by women punishable by death, and women barred from voting, speaking, or exposing themselves in public.
‘Cause you know, it’s all whitey’s fault anyway. :D
“This is merely a hot Norwegian girl. Why? Because.”
Best part of the post.
And it’s a good post.
One of the problems the feminists had with confronting rape was that they didn’t allow themselves the use of any of the anti-rape strategies that had boy germs on them. Anti-rape is a pretty straightforward (not always easy) process.
For the community, it means good police protection, preferably with enough plainclothes policewomen around to make a newsworthy arrest every year or so. It means prosecuting cases even if *gasp* the alleged accused reputed rapist who was only said to be a rapist by some redneck is an Afro-Deific-American. This workable, effective strategy had both White Supremacist and Police State cooties all over it, and it never would have won the approval of the Port Huron statement people. (One of whom has progressed from hippy to Cali elected official to officially calling for the extinction of white people.)
For the individual, it means a whole lot more than clothing choices. It means not hanging out with people who make you uncomfortable. Unfortunately, THAT means not ignoring your survival instinct, and NOT misinterpreting your own fear and discomfort signals as excitement.
Roller coasters are “exciting.” Well-chosen cologne is “exciting.” Spontaneous French-kissing in public is “exciting.” Guys who won’t tell you their last name, look nervously over their shoulder, use a body part as an epithet for women (when they’re NOT angry), and then after you’ve had a few drinks, suddenly become friendly and ask you to go home with them because they “left something there” are not “exciting.”
There are other words for them though.
I bet most sober women would agree with me, which is why I kind of think people should keep the concept A Night for Heavy Drinking separate from the concept A Night to Meet the Opposite Sex.
It is breathtaking that iamcharlislut actually does not get this.
Who gives a rat’s ass anyway? Go dress up all slutty, charli! You go girl!
When simple advice is mutated into “blaming the victim,” it’s time to move on down the road, and leave the charli’s of the world to their own devices.
Oh my god. I just read the whole iamcharli blog post for the first time. Garbage. Complete and utter garbage. What really killed me was this tidbit:
Since it’s pretty clear that iamcharli equates dressing like a slut with “not being ashamed and loving her sexuality,” I’d like to make a few points.
A. Dressing modestly does not mean you are ashamed of your sexuality. Privacy and shame are not the same thing.
B. Dressing like a 2-dollar trollop does not automatically mean you are comfortable in your body and proud of your sexuality. For LOTS of women, it’s a general indication that they don’t really think too much of themselves on the whole.
C. I think I speak for lots of women out there (more or less ALL the women who still believe there is such a thing as natural gender roles) when I say: I don’t want to be taught ANYTHING about my sexuality by my father. Not. His. Job.
Am I the only one that read this “Not. His. Job.” really, really slow?
I LOLed and when I say I LOLed I mean it. And yeah there are some interesting points being brought up. :D
@Joe: If we were only talking about charli, I would agree with you. Who gives a rat’s ass? The thing is, people like Charli are proselytizing to the young, impressionable ones that we should still care about.
When young girls turn into young women and start hearing this preaching of “You can do whatever you want with no consequences! Or if there are consequences, you were not responsible in any way!” it has a way of winning people over. Much like a child who has one parent who says “You can have all the ice cream you want” and one parent who says “No, you can’t.” Which parent is the child going to listen to and like better? Not the one who has his or her best interests at heart. Despite what Unamused says, I refuse to release this ray of hope that we can convince at least SOME feminists that they’re handing out poison advice.
The young woman’s habit of courting danger while she is courting men is inexplicable to some. I can’t explain it per se.
Instead, I’ll offer a powerful analogy that I hit upon one day on a long drive. Young women pick dates the way young men pick physical challenges. The “wildest” young women value quite the same characteristics in a date that the “coolest” young men value in a stunt bike course. They’ll probably describe their best experiences in the same way.
“He looks dangerous to some, but when you get to know him, he’s very sweet. I’ve never been scared around him, but there’s always a thrill.”
“It looks dangerous to noobs who haven’t been biking long, but if you know the course it’s totally awesome. I’ve never been scared doing that course, but there’s always a thrill.”
Now no one thinks young men (you know, the ones on their little brothers’ bikes, wearing their big brothers’ pants?) want to break their bones or, perish the thought, their backs. So no one goes to all sorts of rhetorical lengths to protect them from “victim blaming”. When guys leap off of small concrete edifices, land wrong, and end up in an ambulance, people may describe them as stupid or unskilled or unlucky, but not generally as masochistic. There are much more efficient ways to injure yourself.
We cripple our whole discourse by constantly assuming that there’s a mean patriarch behind a tree believing that wild young women want to be brutalized. No one could even conceivably want to be raped. Wild girls want to slip effortlessly between the brutes to find the guy who just looks and talks like a brute. I guess, in doing so, they’ll get kudos from other girls for admiring their courage? Dunno.
Point is, that mean patriarch probably doesn’t exist either. More likely, he’s the kind of person who thinks that, since you can warn young males not take bone-breaking risks, you can similarly warn young females. And if he does it pseudonymously, he won’t even lose his job.
The only reason feminists have seized on the Slutwalk cause is so they feel they have an enemy, even though all their ideas are mainstream (rather, imposed on the mainstream). Also, it’s an excuse to be sensational and dress up like a whore.
The problem is that feminists, despite their protests, don’t actually look at rape as something to be avoided. One only has to view one “Take Back the Night” rally or some such to realize that many of these women proudly claim to be “survivors” of rape (a nonsense phrase in and of itself) in much the same way as religious fanatics actively seek martyrdom and persecution. Rape, to them, is just a political cudgel to beat men over the head with. In fact, I’ve never seen any feminist activism on rape that didn’t boil down to shaming men in general, something that’s obviously ineffective if you actually want to prevent more rapes from happening.
Olave is a smartypants.
Annie L. is also full of good, chocolatey ideas. Certainly some feminists — the not-so-(gender-)feminist ones — are salvageable.
Nevertheless, what if we re-direct some (most) of our energy from convincing metaphorical parents (feminists) to stop giving out poisonous ice cream — I mean, advice, toward convincing actual parents to start giving advice?
Or, y’know, keep debating feminists, but just talk REALLY LOUDLY so no one can hear them.
@Aoirthoir–Always glad to oblige on the LOLs.
I’m curious about this bit on your post:
“* Rape is determined NOT by the actions of the other person or your actions, but how you FEEL after the fact. Were YOU the aggressor? Did YOU suggest making out? Did YOU suggest going someplace private? Did YOU suggest getting naked? Did YOU suggest bumping bones?
Well NONE of this matters, if YOU FEEL you were raped. If you FEEL you were raped, YOU WERE raped.”
I can totally believe it as feminist nonsense, but can you cite some kind of feminist literature/website where it says this? If I decide to drop this gem into a conversation, I want to be sure I can back it up.
@ Unamused — You raise a very good point, about approaching the actual parent versus the metaphorical ones (I accidentally typed “metaphysical ones” at first, which I almost left, just for entertainment value). I guess my bias towards the metaphorical parents has a lot to do with being a woman in her early 30s. A lot of those feminists I want to save are my real life friends. We were all on the same boat when we started college, but over the last decade, I woke up and they didn’t.
I started being anti-feminist probably close to 10 years ago, and I’ve only been waking up to the HBD thing in the last year or two. It was uncomfortable at first, but I’m getting used to it now, so I can’t stop hoping that maybe I’ll get through to some of my old posse too.
“I can totally believe it as feminist nonsense, but can you cite some kind of feminist literature/website where it says this? If I decide to drop this gem into a conversation, I want to be sure I can back it up.”
he’s more referring to ‘morning after regret’ rape where a female can retroactively withdraw consent. the only thing worse than that is shifting the burden of proof to the man to prove consent was given as in Sweden (which ironically has a rapidly increasing violent rape rate- exclusively from immigrants from non-western counties much like Norway).
feminists, much like blacks, have burnt through generations of goodwill/white guilt/chivalrous tradition in a little over a generation. the “gentleman’s patriarchy” of western culture that has been run by men for the benefit of women over the past 700-1000 years has been kicked out, but a race between demographics and economics is being held to see exactly which more oppressive (towards women) system is going to replace the current system that shits on all men (particularly non-elite, white, hetero men) from cradle to grave.
the fact that feminists like charli cannot see the writing on the wall is as predictable as it is tragic.
Annie L.
Clar summed up a bit what I am talking about. I don’t have direct links to these because I read them and move on. Some good resources are Feminist Fisting (Take out the Fist), Feminist Enlightenment (Take out the Nlightenment), Socialist Images (take out the ialist), Yeah Means Yeah (Substitute Yes for Yeah) a book by a feminist notoriously entitled and privileged (as the Feminists like to call it), and incredibly racist actually.
Search for things on their sites like “rape”, “sexual assault”, “was I raped?”, “is it rape?”. In almost every instance you will find persons saying that if they FEEL they are raped, they are raped.
In one instance a woman was upset, I’d say rightfully so, because she had agreed to a particular form of intercourse but not another. The young man in question in mid stroke it seems, altered his course…or something of that nature. Rather than calling the police and immediately getting a rape kit it seems she went out and had intercourse with other men because in her words “rape victims act out.” Then she waited two or three weeks to finally call the police.
Rightfully the Officer chose not to give her a rape kit. The expense of rape kits is in excess of $1500 each (or MORE) to waste one some two or three weeks after the fact when no evidence and no fluids are going to be found. But of course in typical feminist fashion, the officer was just a misogynist who hates women and denies all rape accusations ever.
Admissions like this made me start to wonder, just how often do officers face circumstances like this? Is it on purpose? Are they doing that deliberately so they can say we live in a “rape culture?” Because if we are in a “rape culture” then that allows them to place the blame on everyone BUT the rapist. And we know why they would want to do that, considering who typically are committing rape rapes.
This confusing retroactively withdrawn consent is such an issue and so many people just don’t buy it anymore, that they have to come up with excuses. But fewer and fewer people are buying it. So now the mainstream has come up with the term rape rape. We here would likely term that REAL rape.
An interesting question: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110324215630AAuumqO
I remember watching a news clip online where one of the founders of SlutWalk talk about what the cop said, and she twisted his words to make it sound like he was blaming woman for what they wear instead of saying there are preventative measures. I stopped watching after that.
I feel like someone’s already pointed out how incredibly stupid this is. I remember someone saying something like “You say you have a right to not get raped. At first glance, this appears to be a true statement. However, your behavior has lead me to believe you have confused ‘right to not get raped’ with ‘indestructible barrier protecting your vagina (etc.) at all times and in all places, allowing you to do exactly as you please without any consequences.’”
Wait, that’s not it. I think it was actually “Don’t ask rapists to respect your right not to get raped. They don’t care. That’s what makes them rapists. Just stay away from them. Since feminists have proven to be childlike in their reading comprehension skills, I suppose I should emphasize that I wrote ‘rapists,’ not ‘men in general.’”
Yeah, that’s the one. Now if only I could remember where I read that so I could give you a link…
As big as this debate has been, I’ll be damned if I’ve seen a single reference to John “YIPPEE-KI-YAY” McClain.
Unamused, is this a bad idea?
http://www.replikultes.net/medias/uploads/films/journee_en_enfer/une_journee_en_enfer_02_negre.jpg
That’s an excellent question, RR. Remind me to test that debate strategy sometime.
I got to the party too late to participate in your original debate with iamcharli, but let me put in my two cents’ worth here. I think you gave her far too much slack. Emphasising over and over that it is NEVER permissible for a man to rape, therefore the victim is never to blame. I take issue with the last conclusion.
Someone in the original debate compared women dressing like sluts to going into the forest and complaining about being eaten by bears. The fact is, these women are not just going into the forest. They are seeking out the bears and twisting their tails.
When iamcharli writes “I don’t care how turned on you are by what I’m wearing, you do not have the right to force yourself on me sexually.” she hints at the feminists’ true agenda.
Women learn early that their sex gives them power over men. Mostly this is never stated explicitly, and there is usually some degree of subtlety in their exercise of it. Feminists, sluts, have no subtlety. When they dress like sluts, they are not saying “I don’t care how turned on you are”, they’re saying “I know you’re turned on, but you can’t do anything about it, because I’m in control. Furthermore, you not only can’t force yourself on me, you may not even stare at me. You have to pretend not to be turned on. You have to act as if you don’t even notice. And I know how frustrated you are, and I love it”.
So, yes, when women deliberately set out to demean men and flaunt their power, sometimes they will get raped. The rapist is never justified, but the woman is not always blameless. They may not be inviting rape (that’s the whole point, isn’t it? – they’re inviolable) but they sure as hell are provoking it.
Bravo! It has been a pet peeve of mine for a long time when people deliberately do things to attract attention and then act all intruded upon when they get that attention. Don’t want to be stared at? Then don’t dye your hair bright pink/pierce your face in 10 different places/walk into a grocery store in your G-string and pasties. Want to be stared at? Drop the facade and just admit it you want to be stared at.
There is so much feminist/general leftist behavior that I could totally live with if they would just be honest about it.
@ AnalogMan: I think we agree they’re being stupid and irresponsible, and their parents should have taught them better. Your analysis of the root of their stupidity and irresponsibility (in power through sex, essentially) is an insightful one, and acknowledging it is more important by far than working out some “distribution of blame” among participants in a crime.
One should probably stop reading at this point.
Since we may be operating under different definitions of “blame,” I will present my definitional games: In discussions of crime, I differentiate between assigning blame and identifying causes. It’s essentially the difference between “deserves punishment” and “stupid, irresponsible, scarcely deserves our sympathy — but a victim nonetheless.”
The only time I assigned blame was when I asserted that a rapist is 100 percent responsible for his own actions (yes, even if the girl is a slut), and thus fully “to blame” (meaning “responsible for his participation in the immoral event”). If there were two of them, each would be 100 percent responsible for his own actions, and thus also fully “to blame.” (I think it’s clear they don’t each become “half to blame.” Blame is not additive.) None of this, strictly speaking, excludes the victim being “partially to blame” —
— but as a rule, I don’t (bother to) assign blame to people, like sluts, who aren’t breaking any laws and aren’t hurting anyone. (Sexual frustration is not an injury.)
“Don’t want to be stared at? Then don’t dye your hair bright pink/pierce your face in 10 different places/walk into a grocery store in your G-string and pasties. Want to be stared at? Drop the facade and just admit it you want to be stared at.”
Yup. This is the “MY EYES ARE UP HERE” argument.
“Yeah you’re EYES are UP there, but your BREASTS are down THERE.”
“Well I don’t want you looking at them!”
“Alright, well as long as we are telling each other what we are ALLOWED to LOOK at, my ELBOW is right HERE. Now fuck off.”
This goes along with the “don’t address me as such and such argument.” Since I make it clear that I will identify a person however they choose, I just don’t give a damned, there’s no reason to make this argument as me. You had the opportunity to tell me your preferred form of address, didn’t offer it, so fuck off.
“Hey, any broads want to talk?”
“I AM NOT A BROAD!”
“Uh yeah ok. Well then I wasn’t asking you, I was asking the broads.”
Or
“DONT call women broads!”
“Alright sure. But since we’re having the conversation about what we’re are or are not allowed to address other people by, DON’T address me as anything except Almighty God.”
“I WILL NOT!”
“Ah ok. Well then I won’t speak how you say I should either. Oh and fuck off.”
And yeah that works.
… Thinking I’d get kicked in the shins if I tried Aoirthoir An Broc’s strategy….
“… Thinking I’d get kicked in the shins if I tried Aoirthoir An Broc’s strategy….”
We call that misandry. Feminists love to claim that society is misogynistic. In reality the only ones truly misogynistic are feminists. As evidenced by the very subject of this post. You can’t go around telling women to ignore good advice which can REDUCE the likelihood that they will become a victim of violent crime and claim you are in favor of women. That kind of bullshit is just hateful of females.
The fact that you can say something to another human being and get kicked, without ANY action taken against the perpetrator tells you exactly which group is facing hate. Here’s a hint, it’s not women.
Anyone notice that broad stopped replying?
Your original blog post about Slut Walk made me research Slut Walk a bunch and write an English Paper criticizing it. Highest grade for a Paper I ever got. Only lost points because I messed up citations.
The neverator, what level of a paper?
Unamused, it is time you started taking guests posts like the one from neverator’s paper. Ze should send it to you so you can post it.
Glad to hear it Neverator. When it comes to liberals, their bark is far worse than their bite. Give ‘em hell.
Unamused:
We have different thresholds. I’m quite comfortable assigning moral responsibility for immoral acts even when they’re not illegal. So if someone does something stupid through ignorance (or stupidity) and pays the price, I can feel some sympathy. But if someone plays with fire out of sheer malice, and gets burned, I have no sympathy at all.
“Anyone notice that broad stopped replying?”
Who, me? I just didn’t have much to add…thought you guys had it pretty well covered.
Or did you mean iamcharli? In which case, yeah, I think feminists/leftists pretty much run away when they realize they can’t intimidate anybody with their name-calling.
- and another thing… re: Sexual frustration is not an injury.
Neither is being stared at. But stare at the office slut’s openly flaunted breasts and see how quickly it costs you your job for “sexual harassment”. The playing field is not level.
One could argue that rape is not an injury, either (I’m not). Have you read Roger Devlin on the subject of feminism? For my money the most insightful commentator on the subject. In one article he makes the point that rape has traditionally been regarded as a serious crime, even a capital crime in Western common law, because it is an assault on woman’s modesty; and society has a vital interest in protecting woman’s modesty.
Of course, to a feminist, woman’s modesty is just an intolerable patriarchial oppression. So for them, rape is simply a matter of an individual woman’s personal sexual preference. So, once again, it’s about womyn’s power. In their minds, that’s at least as serious as the traditional view, but somehow I’m less impressed.
For anybody interested, I highly recommend these articles by Roger Devlin. Apologies if I’m “teaching my grandmother to suck eggs” (as my father used to put it). Maybe this will be new to some readers.
Sexual Utopia in Power
Rotating Polyandry – and its Enforcers
In addition, Counter-Currents recently reprinted his “Home Economics” series.
“Who, me? I just didn’t have much to add…thought you guys had it pretty well covered.”
Yes we always do. But actual self-identified broads never have to run away.
“Or did you mean iamcharli? In which case, yeah, I think feminists/leftists pretty much run away when they realize they can’t intimidate anybody with their name-calling.”
Yeah that’s what I meant. You are right, they tend to silence themselves when they realize they cannot silence others.
@Analog–I read the both the Devlin articles tonight and I found him a really frustrating mix of brilliant, insightful points and what just seemed like outright woman-hating. At least, hating any woman who doesn’t quietly accept her place as subordinate to man. And it does seem to me that this hatred makes him a little fuzzy with his numbers. For instance, he says that 70-75% of divorces are initiated by women, and of the remaining 25-30% initiated by men, some of those men initiated them because the women drove them to it, so really even more than 75% of divorces are women’s fault. So, if a woman initiates a divorce, it is always her fault, and if a man initiates a divorce, it’s still sometimes a woman’s fault? Doesn’t really seem logical to me.
I thought a lot of his points regarding female infidelity and the non-natural state of monogamy to be really interesting, especially regarding the idea that women don’t expect to feel any desire to stray from their marriages, so they don’t put too much thought into the vow itself. I think if more people went into marriage with an awareness that it was possible they’d get bored down the line, they might take more active steps to prevent that boredom, instead of letting themselves quietly sink into a mire of unhappiness.
So, I’m reading along seeing these interesting points and then he feels compelled to throw in charming things like:
“Our author’s description of this ancient custom is delightful: ‘females are
considered a worthless burden so families pay men to marry them.’ Sounds
reasonable to me.”
Along with a bunch of other little things that make me say “Well, crap, I guess I can’t send my fence-sitter friends to this page, because he’s gonna send them screaming in the other direction.” My real problem with this type of writing is that it makes it really hard to trust the rest of what he says. Feminists spit out numbers and data all the time, and as we all know, a ton of it is skewed to suit their purposes. While Devlin doesn’t radiate feminist-style rage, he does seem to just ooze disgust for any woman who has the audacity to claim equality with her husband.
I found Devlin less useful because I’m married. Even if his advice is right, it’s too late for me. I’m done for.
But seriously, Devlin reflects a lot of the same anger that men’s rights activists often do. It is obviously a turnoff because no one can stand MRAs.
Best thing for right-wing men who are trying not to develop a really negative view of women is to read a lot of female righty bloggers. Helps to keep in mind that not all women are catty cultural-Marxist divorce hounds. (Can you even BE a catty hound?)
HBD Chick
Sofiastry
Modernity Sucks
Zilla of the Resistance
etc.
These women aren’t representative of most women but that doesn’t deter me. My point is to develop a reason to get along with and like women, not to immerse myself in the world of the 100 IQ female who watches 5.2 hours of TV per day (whatever it is).
It’s okay, even laudable for us reactionaries to conceive of the extraordinary as normal. That is my Overtired Aphorism for the evening.
“For instance, he says that 70-75% of divorces are initiated by women,”
This isn’t fuzzy at all. It’s true.
“and of the remaining 25-30% initiated by men, some of those men initiated them because the women drove them to it,”
Well they DID drive them to it. Wives are fucking annoying. You ever been married to a woman? Yeah I thought so. Come back and talk to us after you’ve had experience.
“so really even more than 75% of divorces are women’s fault. So, if a woman initiates a divorce, it is always her fault, and if a man initiates a divorce, it’s still sometimes a woman’s fault?”
This statement is incorrect. ANY time a divorce occurs you can bet it’s the woman’s fault. He’s just being generous when he says SOMETIMES in the remaining 75% it’s her fault so has not to hurt too many women’s feelings. That helps him look noble and get laid.
“Doesn’t really seem logical to me.”
I refer you to my statement above about your experience with being married to a woman.
“My real problem with this type of writing is that it makes it really hard to trust the rest of what he says. Feminists spit out numbers and data all the time, and as we all know, a ton of it is skewed to suit their purposes.”
Yeah but when feminists do it, it’s just pathetic. When a man makes shit up it either has a purpose, or is damned funny.
“Well, crap, I guess I can’t send my fence-sitter friends to this page”
I guess you better not send them to menarebetterthanwomen.com, perhaps they might like, womenarebetterthanmen.com better? The most common comment from women over there? “YOU MEN are taking this site WAY TOO SERIOUSLY!!!!!!!” (Note, I’ve corrected female rage based misspellings, egregious grammar errors, and sheer stupidity.) Of course the facts are that the only ones taking that site seriously are women considering men know how to make crazy shit up and laugh at ourselves. (Since we’re able to laugh at ourselves, it’s even easier to laugh at women..cause..DAYUM girl!)
“But seriously, Devlin reflects a lot of the same anger that men’s rights activists often do. It is obviously a turnoff because no one can stand MRAs.”
MRAs are fucking annoying. If I wanted to be annoyed I’d still be living with my wife. Most of their problem is they don’t do shit about shit. “WA WA she convinced me to get her pregnant when I didn’t want to have a baby wa wa now I have to pay child support.” What kind of thinking allows for a man to convince him against his better judgement to have a baby in an admittedly BAD marriage? That’s a trick question cause and I will demonstrate why:
Easter Bunny
Santa Clause
Good Marraige.
TWO of these things are FABRICATIONS. One of them delivers toys at the mall to kids of asshat MRAs to stupid to get out of a marraige BEFORE he got her preggos.
“Best thing for right-wing men who are trying not to develop a really negative view of women is to read a lot of female righty bloggers. ”
Ok MAYBE. MAYBE. BUT, the problem with this is, the right-wing women are TALKING. That’s just as fucking annoying as a feminist. ..Ok no its not but it was incredibly funny when I thought it.
“My point is to develop a reason to get along with and like women”
We have reasons. We’re men. Men are noble creatures gifted by the creator (or evolution or whatever other scientific mumbo jumbo you choose to believe) with an amazing capacity for what I like to call “putting up with shit from people who annoy the ever living fuck out of us,” be they MRAs or women or cats that interrupt us when we’re in the middle of trying to put the moves on some picture we just downloaded from “nastysexydisgustingshit.com”. I mean fuck sake, I don’t interrupt you fido when you’re licking yourself DO I??? MEOW. Fuck off. ALRIGHT FINE I’ll clean the litter box..
Aoirthoir An Broc and Unamused
It was a high-school paper, and my English teacher said she agreed with my argument and I made good point. Although I don’t feel good posting it because of sites like Turnitin.com searching online to make sure papers aren’t plagerized,, in case I could use the same arguments in a college paper. But if anyone wants to take a look, I don’t mind sharing it.
Aoirthoir An Broc,
Wow, and I say again, “Wow” you hit the nail on the head great response. I was in law enforcement. I worked security for years and I teach self defense and martial arts. If I may I would love to use your words. I always tell people teenage/college age women are the hardest to teach they think they know it all and all their “Rights” supersede reality. You can explain all day to your rapist why the fuck-me pumps, mini skirt, and halter top are not an invitation to rape you but your still gonna get raped.
Great post and great blog count me as a fan gentlemen! If only I was as eloquent as you.
Easter Bunny
Once, on Easter, my little nephew and I saw an rabbit behind my parents’ house. He was about five and I was glad he saw it because I always wanted to see a live rabbit at that age. He asked if it was the Easter Bunny. I told him it was the Easter Bunny’s brother. He ran and told his grampa he saw the Easter Bunny’s brother.
Santa Clause
A good pun, but I never saw that movie. I also liked “Sandy Claws!!!” from Nightmare Before Christmas.
Good Marriage
I’ve got one. Usually I have good reactionary’s code against bragging, but I also have a good right-winger’s duty to defend dusty old social institutions.
I have a complete inability to cover up who I am. This doesn’t mean most people take me for who I am. Depending on who I am interacting with, I am a huge dumb ox fit only for menial work, a scheming, frustrated mad scientist seeking to bedevil all good and right people, a creepy hermit, an arrogant, overbearing loudmouth, an invisible mouse, etc.
I pretty much married the first girl who could tolerate me. That was key. If I had been a better actor more people could have tolerated or even liked my persona, which would mean there would be more of a shock later when she found out I was a regular person.
My wife was a liberal even more recently than I was, yet she takes an active interest in HBD. She even permits me to pour out socio-political anxiety even though it contributes to her anxiety. She and I are within a few points, IQ-wise, so we have a lot to talk about. I tell everyone I just like her for her GPA. I tell her I like her for her body. Really I think mismatched IQs can cripple a relationship, sometimes in subtle ways that only appear several years into it.
Beyond that of course she is also a devoted wife and mother and a good cook. She talks sweetly to everyone except when her feelings are hurt, which happens from time to time because she has both a tough side and a tender side. Like a Twix bar. Mmmm.
Also she doesn’t complain when I cook and the result appears to be fish hamburger when it was supposed to be fried fish. Like, two pieces of fish which are recognizably fish shaped, rather than fish stew without the broth. She laughs at my jokes even (so does my son although he is only half a year old so it is not the same.)
If I hadn’t met her I’d probably an annoying MRA myself now, or an MGTOW riding around on a bike trying to get women to notice me so I could ignore them.
The Neverator, get that paper back from your teacher so SHE doesn’t post to those sites. Good idea. Also don’t send it to anyone. I mean I’m a great person but you don’t KNOW that. I could be an asshat who posts just because and then you cant do what you suggested. Which by the way is a brilliant idea.
Muay Tyson…
Sometimes listing the facts are better than what that cop in Toronto said when he used the word “Slut”. Had he said it something like I did, he would have gotten all of the objections out of the way. Not to say the feminists still wouldn’t have objected, anything that doesnt agree with their world view, like, you know THE FUCKING WORLD and REALITY, is subject to “deconstruction”. If a cop said what I said they would have said “why doesn’t he teach rapists not to rape…” ignoring the fact that rapists give fuck all about LEARNING to not rape. The fact that they have one of the highest recividism rates proves it. It also proves that rape rape is generally being committed by the same rapists over and over, a few, not “MEN”.
Olave De some french name:
“Easter Bunny
Once, on Easter, my little nephew and I saw an rabbit behind my parents’ house. He was about five and I was glad he saw it because I always wanted to see a live rabbit at that age. He asked if it was the Easter Bunny. I told him it was the Easter Bunny’s brother. He ran and told his grampa he saw the Easter Bunny’s brother.”
That’s just child abuse. Don’t you know? Even circumcising your son is now child abuse to these leftists.
“Santa Clause
A good pun, but I never saw that movie. I also liked “Sandy Claws!!!” from Nightmare Before Christmas.”
I was actually really referring to mall santas not the movies and actually to MRAs who are typicaly irritating as wives.
“Good Marriage
I’ve got one.”
Keep telling yourself that. No realy, because that does help one to believe it.
But, even though I believe you I only believe you for a couple of reasons, the ones you mention below. and because I believe you’re likely in the 50+ crowd. Though that is fast approaching the 60+. People of the generation I was born in (67 on) have about as good chance at a good marriage as they have at finding a woman that’s not interested in running to daddy government for everything. And that’s about nil.
It’s not just the liberals that are feminists. Remember Sarah Palin self describes as a feminist. Name a modern woman that does not immediately picture a man as the abuser when you mention that a person suffered child abuse growing up, despite the fact that 66% of child abuse is at the hands of the mother and I’ll show you the real Easter Bunny. Name one that wouldn’t make use of socialist systems, welfare, government thugs for minor infractions. ridiculous laws like Title VII and Title XIV. Name one that knows that the actual victims of violent crime are men not women. Name one that thinks we should have men’s shelters for men who experience violence at the hands of their wives or [in]significant others. Name one that doesn’t see that the problem with war is just the women and children that are refugees, but the men that are GONE because of war, thus creating the women and children refugees, as an equal problem. Name one that doesnt say sh’t like “women and men are EQUAL. In fact if ANYTHING women are BETTER…”
Now this is not to say there are no good women and no good marriages. That point is the entire system of government from just about the founding of Western Society is against men. Against the average man anyhow. Those in power, well they’ve always been in power. But the idea for instance that a man was legally allowed to beat his wife in western society, never happened. That’s all made up. Rather what could happen and still does is a woman can make an accusation and she is believe.
They would have us believe that we’re all rapists. Well if that is true then it would be quite dangerous to be a woman today. Facts are we’re not all rapists, just a handful of males are committing violence. But, these attitudes I’ve mentioned are so prevalent among women that it REALLY IS dangerous to be involved with a woman. not because there are no good women out there. But because by the time you find out you’re not with a good woman, you’re fucked. It’s too late.
So that means BEING VERY VERY CAREFUL. And in the context of easter bunny, santa claus, and a good marriage that I was speaking about earlier in relation to the MRAs, it means some simple shit like NOT GETTING HER PREGNANT when you’ve ALREADY LEARNED AFTER MARRAIGE that she’s not a good womam. Instead get OUT of the marriage. That’s not an idictment of actually good women. And keep in mind if we’re looking at as few as 10% bad women, that’s a huge risk.
“Usually I have good reactionary’s code against bragging, but I also have a good right-winger’s duty to defend dusty old social institutions.”
The old social institutions don’t exist anymore. At least not marriage. What does exist is a paper, a series of laws against males [and females], no fault diviorce, [un]family court, no proof needed trials, accusation only trials (in France during their rebellion this was called “The Law of the Suspect”, by being merely accused you were AUTOMATICALLY guilty), ever increasing pockets of lawyers, changes in laws with NO grandfather clauses. That is, you get married under 1950s laws. The laws change in the 1980s, but there is no clause that says, YOUR contract (which is what a marriage is/was) still applies to 1950s laws cause that’s what YOU agreed to.
So the OLD institutions..sure. The new are not the old.
“I have a complete inability to cover up who I am. This doesn’t mean most people take me for who I am. Depending on who I am interacting with, I am a huge dumb ox fit only for menial work, a scheming, frustrated mad scientist seeking to bedevil all good and right people, a creepy hermit, an arrogant, overbearing loudmouth, an invisible mouse, etc.”
Yeah me too. Maybe you’re an older, obviously less attractive (I say that cause EVERYONE is obviously less attractive) version of me!
“I pretty much married the first girl who could tolerate me.”
Yeah I was a Jehovahs Witness virgin. I got married to the first woman who said yes. Advice I got anytime I tried to figure out why our marriage wasn’t working? Personal study, prayer, door to door. Those don’t exactly help a marriage when you ignore the other issues. Doing things together AND working on other issues, sure, whatever those things are.
“That was key. If I had been a better actor more people could have tolerated or even liked my persona, which would mean there would be more of a shock later when she found out I was a regular person.”
I’m the same all of the time. Women know about it ahead of time. Still doesn’t keep them from telling me I’ve completely….COMPLETELY changed once we get together. What’s changed is that though I tell them I say all the same jokes, so once you’ve known me for 10 minutes YOU KNOW ME, they still expect knew material. Getting none, not thinking the old material is funny, they interpret their NEW reactions as MY having changed.
“My wife was a liberal even more recently than I was, yet she takes an active interest in HBD.”
Ok wtf is HBD?
“She even permits me to pour out socio-political anxiety even though it contributes to her anxiety. She and I are within a few points, IQ-wise, so we have a lot to talk about. I tell everyone I just like her for her GPA. I tell her I like her for her body.”
Yeah I’ve become convinced that one sign of a good woman is she is willing to hear things like that and actually believe them.
“Really I think mismatched IQs can cripple a relationship, sometimes in subtle ways that only appear several years into it.”
The stories….
“Beyond that of course she is also a devoted wife and mother and a good cook.”
Yup definietly in the 50s or 60s age group or greater. Only men know how to cook now. That is in the under 50s age group. Anecdotes won’t convince me otherwise.
“She talks sweetly to everyone except when her feelings are hurt, which happens from time to time because she has both a tough side and a tender side. Like a Twix bar. Mmmm.”
Twix bars are better, they don’t hurt our feelings. But yes…being nice is the key. We’re told by unnatractive women usually, that beauty is on the inside. Alright, well then TRY IT once. If you are going to have an inner beauty contest, it doesn’t mean just being an asshole all of the time and DECLARING that though you’re piled like a stack of aoirthoirs on the outside, on the inside you’re BEAUTIFUL, just because you say so. You ACTUALLY have to be beautiful on the inside, which means ACTUALLY treating people nice.
But you will notice that’s one of the things they complain about. Remenmber it’s not just warning women against certain behaviors that can place them in proximity of rapists that feminists are opposing. They think that it is ok for them to talk to people and treat people like shit and no one is allowed to object. Or worse, DISENGAGE. Which I do frequently. If you’re going to pull shit on me, I’m just not going to be around you anymore.
“Also she doesn’t complain when I cook and the result appears to be fish hamburger when it was supposed to be fried fish. Like, two pieces of fish which are recognizably fish shaped, rather than fish stew without the broth.”
She shouldn’t complain, except about this. And if that’s the case you shouldn’t complain about her either. I hope you don’t. You both SHOULD be able to express things that do need changed though. Like the diapers, if you are into that sorta thing which I suspect you are, for no reason other than I just made it up. Either way you’re a sick fuck, I mean diapers for god’s sake! What is wrong with you????
“She laughs at my jokes even (so does my son although he is only half a year old so it is not the same.)”
Half a year old? How old are you and how long have you been married and how long have you known this woman? Cause I suspect MRAness is on its way if you’re younger than I suspected.
“If I hadn’t met her I’d probably an annoying MRA myself now, or an MGTOW riding around on a bike trying to get women to notice me so I could ignore them.”
Who cares about women noticing us? Women notice men all of the time, because men are beautiful on the inside, we’re noble, holy, righteous, grand, we built EVERYTHING, we’ve created shit that gets us to the moon AND BACK, and we tolerate women which shows the depths of our willingness to tolerate the less than deities.
HBD = human biodiversity = intelligence, behavior and physiology vary between racial groups, often for genetic reasons
Oddly enough I just asked HBD Chick her age and she wouldn’t tell me. Now the shoe is on the other foot.
*ahem* I am 42 and my wife is 31. We’ve been married for 14 years.
Naw, I’m lying. The ages are right but we’ve only been married four years. I was going to say we had been married 16 years but I thought “hot” was better than “grodie”.
She’s from a small-town Catholic family so I think that gives her some old-fashioned value, like not kneeing your husband in the crotch when he leaves his work pants in the washing machine for four days in a row so they smell like a public shower and you have to put them on a special cycle to get the funk out. She probably got her cooking skills from her mother, who regularly feeds us shrimp scampi, chicken fricasee, etc.
As far as believing me, well, she doesn’t believe me when I say I married her for her body. She read my post and told me “I pretty much married the first girl who could tolerate me” made it sound like I was totally self-centered and didn’t see anything particular in her, but I assured her readers would understand. So basically she know when I am full of BS which is only a few times per day.
Well that’s a bunk theory. Right of the rip we can tell physiology isn’t different, we’re all the same. We just LOOK like we’re not. And behavior well “marginalized” people act JUST LIKE white people, hell they act even better, which is JUST like right? Intelligence…well..I can’t think of anything funny to me to say there.
Women.
I’m 42 also. 31? Good luck with that.
Men should be able to do whatever we want with our pants without being kneed in the groin. That’s one of those things about feminists that shows they are so full of sh’t. If a man even JOKED about striking a woman in her groin, that’s the worst thing ever, but a woman does it to a man, HOW IS IT NOT a sex crime??
Well get to work on the convincing.
Assuring her isn’t going to be enough. You’re going to have to explain to her that typical readers of these sorts of blogs live in something called THE REAL WORLD. So we understand silly extreme statements for what they are. I don’t look at an image of a fat man in a billboard and immediatly look for all the “hidden” messages the “advertiser” is trying to send me that I should be “repulsed” by this man, as one feminist blog recently did..and does on millions of other occasions.
Nor do I look for “real reality” when a man says he married the first woman that would tolerate him. Because we men are self-deprecating, but not in a hurtful way. When we do that we’re just being silly and going typically the opposite end of the spectrum. So if a man says “oh I just married anything that would have me” we generally mean “I love her to death and I would do anything for her, I’m thank for God, or The Gods, or Nature, or Society, or her Family, and most definitely grateful to her for being a part of me and letting me be a part of her and I hope she adores me as much as I do her. ”
But that’s cause we men are noble. And love isn’t just a feeling either so that love’s going to mean action on our part.
BS is a way of saying, “beauty by silliness”.
Unless it’s a woman’s bs. Then that’s just all kinds of gross. If you don’t believe me then just ask me and I will tell you.
We actually had a really good conversation about this post. She is a very realistic person while at the same time she has high normative expectations of people. I’m like that too. It basically means we are both disappointed in people a lot but at least we understand each other.
“It’s not just the liberals that are feminists. Remember Sarah Palin self describes as a feminist.”
I can’t believe Broc that you are so stupid. The idiotic Sarah Palin is a CAPITALIST at most or a LIBERTARIAN at least. There are plenty of social liberals or fake conservatives whom describe themselves as “conservative”. Don’t tell me you think TEA PARTY and FOX NEWS is genuine consevatism?
Everybody on the far-right and the traditional conservative blogosphere believes that most conservatives nowadays on the establishment are liberal “conservatives”.
That or you generally believe the news from left-wing outlets like NYTimes, Huffington Post and others whom are so far-left they call liberal “conservatives” as “far-right”.
“I can’t believe Broc that you are so stupid.”
Let’s find out what let you to the ridiculous conclusion that I am stupid.
I said ““It’s not just the liberals that are feminists. Remember Sarah Palin self describes as a feminist.”” All of which is true. You’ve appeared to take on the habit there Jimbo, of the liberal disdain for truth.
“The idiotic Sarah Palin is a CAPITALIST at most or a LIBERTARIAN at least.”
And being a capitalist or libertarian is bad why? Because it means that women don’t get to go running to daddy goverment with their false rape allegations, demands for the right to vote even when they’re criminals, and demands that they deserve money from a man merely for finding one guillible enough to enter into the now unholy sacrement of marraige?
“There are plenty of social liberals or fake conservatives whom describe themselves as “conservative”.”
Do you know what conservative means? Conservative with RESOURCES. It doesn’t mean you don’t believe for instance in fucking slave girls. Jefferson et al.
“Don’t tell me you think TEA PARTY and FOX NEWS is genuine consevatism?”
Let’s see. Almost all media in this country is controlled in whole or in part by one of three major corporations. Fox, though purported owned by Rupert “I like to make shit up and present it as news” Murdock, it like the other media outlets has a conglomerate of share holders, tracing back to each other. Which is why we see the same bullsh’it on each and every network.
But, I happen to trust Fox News because some nimrod on the internet says I do. Well, if you hadn’t told me diplip, I’da never known I trusted Fox. So let me get right on that.
“Everybody on the far-right and the traditional conservative blogosphere believes that most conservatives nowadays on the establishment are liberal “conservatives”.”
Yeah? Well how about we try this on for size. They’re not REALLLY conservative at all. Conservative means CAREFUL WITH RESOURCES. Once the Republicans gained power, they were very LIBERAL with OUR money. (And frankly they are too liberal with THEIR morals, but most certainly NOT ours, cause they love controlling that sh’t.) Government in a “small government” Republican term grew larger than it’s ever been in history. But here go folks, young man (or young broad) is going to school ME on what is conservative.
“That or you generally believe the news from left-wing outlets like NYTimes, Huffington Post and others whom are so far-left they call liberal “conservatives” as “far-right”.”
I ppint you to the facts I just mentioned about how ALL MEDIA in these United States are owned IN WHOLE OR IN PART by not many, not hundreds, not millions, but THREE MAJOR CORPORATIONS. NYT? Fox? HUFFINGTON POST…Huffington Post for fuck sake…? Yeah I BELIEVE them, when they are all saying the same sh’t with a different spin.
And you’re making the classic feminist mistake of telling another person what they THINK, FEEL, WHO THEY ARE, what MOTIVATES them, what they BELIEVE. Tell me, do you, like Sarah Palin, and the slut walkers, SELF-DEFINE as feminist? If not then why are you using their tactics dipsh’t?
Now as to the part of what I said that you quoted, I could just have well as said “It’s not just liberals who are liberal, after all Sarah Palin self defines as Feminist…” Or I could have said “It’s not just liberals that are lying sacks of sh’t, after all Sarah Palin self defines as Feminist…” Or any of one hundred other things.
But let’s just ignore the fact that I was making ONE SPECIFIC POINT, that of the uselessness of marraige for the modern man because of the inability of the modern woman to ACTUALLY COMMIT to a marriage (whilst simultaneously saying we MEN CANNOT commit…ha!), feminism being a major reason for that lack of commital on the part of women. INSTEAD, you have to presume that when I am making ONE SPECIFIC POINT, and only ONE SPECIFIC POINT< that I'm actually making all sorts of other points, that I"VE NEVER ACTUALLY MADE. Or that I BELIEVE A BUNCH OF SH'T that I NEVER SAID I BELIEVE.
There's another group of people who assume people meant something OTHER THAN WHAT THEY SAID, they're called feminists. Why do they do this? Because they couldn't insult people or make false accusations if they used THE TRUTH, or you know, JUST FUCKING ASKED someone how their opinion of a specific OTHER topic, instead of MAKING SH'T UP and ASSUMING.
SO congratulations Ubilno, you are in good company. Enjoy.
read this blog post and thought of you guys (and by ‘guys’ i don’t mean men – i just mean all of you that commented on this. wouldn’t want anyone to take it the wrong way).
http://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/why-men-should-join-slutwalk/
[U: The "Good Men Project" is pathetic. Real good men are anti-feminist.]
From the Good Men Project site:
So iamcharli’s fave group contradict’s the cop’s assertion, and iamcharli’s assertion, that dressing like you want sex may lead to sexual assault. What’s amazing though, is HUGO SCHWYZER’s assertion that, if a pattern is noticed by hundreds of people, and there is no study backing them up (or refuting them), then they are all wrong.
Talk about scientism.
Ugh. From iamcharli’s precious link:
And since all people everywhere are exactly the same, they also know that it isn’t true for anyone else either. I think this post inadvertently sums up the grand arrogance of leftism: All people are exactly the same…which means all people are exactly like ME. I would never rape anyone, so obviously, someone else who had the same knowledge I do would never rape anyone either. It MUST be a knowledge deficit!
Yeah… guess what… you’re not the guys the SlutWalk is trying to talk to, because you weren’t the rapists in the first place.
Nope. I’m sorry, your dick can’t have a conscience. Your dick isn’t sentient. (Yes, Aoirthoir, I know YOUR dick is sentient, but I’m talking to the mere mortals.)
No. If you DID suspect that, you’d be on a much more sensible track. Instead, you suspect that EVERYONE can (and wants to) reconcile their libido with YOUR ethics. Remember, if a Muslim in Pakistan rapes a woman, his libido is perfectly in line with his ethics.
Actually, even steel armor probably wouldn’t help a woman from a truly obsessed stalker, and a good deal less than armor would probably make a big difference with your average drunken frat boy. For instance, we don’t hear much about frat boys raping nuns or kindergarten teachers or Pentecostals. Shock of shocks, drunken frat boys usually “rape” drunken girls dressed like prostitutes at a frat party!
For the love of god, will you people just wake up and admit that a drunk frat boy is NOT THE SAME as a guy waiting in the bushes with a knife?
* Ahem *
ALL of my body parts are sentient, thank you very much. They all get along famously until we have to decide which foot to test the bathwater with. Then it’s squabble, squabble, squabble.
Okay, you don’t have to be a mere mortal. You can have sentient body parts too.
One of the important differences that the femino-left won’t admit to is, everyone is repelled by the guy in the bushes with a knife. Some women seem to actually find the idea of a house full of drunk (or soon-to-be-drunk) frat boys to be pretty appealing. This difference is pretty obvious to grouchy old bastids like me.
Binge drinking is a whole ‘nother thing, in a way, but in another way it isn’t at all. Binge drinking is part of the same eternal-adolescent cultural disease that’s killing us. Tell a college girl she’ll be defenseless if she passes out. What are the chances that she’ll hear you? If she does, it won’t help, because adolescents can’t seem to understand the difference between “blaming the victim” and educating someone to not be a victim.
:D
I agree with many of your points Annie L. I just wouldn’t marry you, because you’ve demonstrated already that you’re willing to talk.
It’s true. I’m a talky broad.
@Broc June 14;
Sorry Arfer, you lost me there. Please tell me you were drunk when you wrote that, because I think you can do better.
The intemperate language, ad hominems and general incoherence were too much, and I gave up before the end, but your definition of a conservative can’t go unchallenged. Conservative with resources? So, would you say that the stereotypical Jew who is tight with money is a conservative?
“It’s true. I’m a talky broad.”
There are time’s it is forgivable. Like when a talky broad admits she’s a talky broad. It’s really annoying when she denies it. That’d be a lie a movie with sound claiming not to be a talkie.
“@Broc June 14;”
Now I have to put my thinking cap on…
“Sorry Arfer, you lost me there.”
You mean like how you lost me when you completely misprounced and Anglicized my name?
I PRESUME when you say Arfer you mean Arthur. Aoirthoir is not Arthur, doesn’t mean Arthur, doesn’t translate to Arthur and is not pronounced Arthur. It is not Anglish, British, Welsh or any of those other pretend languages from the savages and heathens of the larger island. It is rather a proper Gaeilge name from cultured persons who saved your pathetic civilization for you. It is prounced any one of a hundred ways which you could have stumbled upon by shee accident of happenstance. But in your laziness you decided to revert to your race’s most comon use of that wonderful quality of assumtion. And we know what happens when you assume.
You sound really fucking annoying and you fuck up my name, that’s what.
“Please tell me you were drunk when you wrote that,”
Ok. I was drunk when I wrote that. Make you feel better there sparky?
“because I think you can do better.”
Have you seen what I look like? It’s really fucking hard to improve on perection shitfit.
“The intemperate language,”
Join the temperance movement, they gave us such wonders as prohobition, illegalization of prostution, illegalization of abortion, and the fucked up “right” of women to vote. This country’s been in a downward spiral ever since.
“ad hominems”
Cause I should respond to an ad hominem with logic, calmness and the grace of hmmm, Grace Kelly? ( http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2JnVkXGM7UA/TbcrZ1CPOZI/AAAAAAAAAgk/Po-KIYF47Q4/s1600/grace_kelly.jpg )
“and general incoherence were too much,”
Meaning you couldn’t comprehende what I saido? Listen there sparky, grab yourself a toothpick and some bon bons, sit down and reread it. When you realize you still cannot understand it, pity the fool that you’re one of those in the lower scoring brackets of IQ. No shame in that.
“and I gave up before the end,”
Translation, “I didn’t read, therefore I didn’t understand, therefore I couldn’t respond point by point by point logically, so I am going to give a fuck up of a critique, and just to prove it I am going to COMPLETELY MISINTERPRET what you said about Conservative GOVERNMENT …see watch here I go…”
“but your definition of a conservative can’t go unchallenged.”
No. You mean YOUR MISTRANSLATE of MY definition, because MY definition happens to be THE definition.
“Conservative with resources?”
Yeah sparky. With RESOURCES. It doesn’t mean you have to be all pro-christ, anti-abortion, pro-marriage, anti-fornication, pro-church-going, anti-alcohol-sales-on-sunday etc ad naseum that those who have kidnapped the Republican party are trying to make it. A POLITICAL movement for a GOVERNMENT that is CONSERVATIVE, is about SMALL GOVERNMENT.
“So, would you say that the stereotypical Jew who is tight with money is a conservative?”
Do I even have to comment? Sure why not? That “stereotypical Anglo” who is tight with her money, is tight with HER money. Her POLITICAL affiliation could very well be LIBERAL. But it’s not HER money she’s being LIBERAL with, it is OTHER PEOPLE’s money. Purported;y the GOVERMENT’s money because liberals seem to think this sh’t comes out of thin air, which since we’re on a fiat money system, well they are finally right. (By sh’t dipsh’t, I mean money, but not in the second case).
Of course the fact that you HAVE to challenge my definition which is (or at least WAS) THE REAL definition of the conservative POLITICAL party, with such a ridiculous NON-example demonstrates just why you don’t actually deserve logic, but instead ad hominems. OOOh and a brownie.
And how come none of you fuckers have gravatars?
I want a brownie!!! Or Oreos. Oreos would be ok too.
I’m only going to get a gravatar if I can use this as my pic:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f9/Nguyen.jpg
I would also use a picture of a chocolatey dessert for my avatar, provided it doesn’t have a dangerous name like “This Dessert Might Kill You” or some such.
I have a brownie for you, right here.
That’s what’s called a double non-tondra, cause I really do have a brownie.
Olave, any pic will do. If you want a dessert might kill you image:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_n-SkpOb8Fe8/TIqRUlWUyJI/AAAAAAAACek/EdMU_EXxv8M/s1600/banana.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_d0hGwjCPd3s/THhLsr_dZsI/AAAAAAAABTk/lTMD6GJd6Bg/s1600/pastrychefmonsters+014.jpg
Try those on for size. Pick one, not both cause that will annoy the shit outta me. :D
I gave up on the gravatar thing. None of the variations of Baron Lyaksandro Olave d’Estienne that I tried were available, i.e. there’s already a Baron Olave, an Olave d’Estienne, a The Baron d’Estienne, etc.
It looks like Annie L. took your advice though, Aoirthoir.
Replies to random comments from a feminist (I was going to go back and get all the names right, but there is no point as they are all essentially saying the same thing):
“When I write I write them for thinking persons who have known all along that something just wasn’t right, but they could not put their finger on it or they thought it was “just them.””
This would describe pretty accurately how most women become feminists.
“Thank you, CLAR: teaching the next generation what used to be common sense”
And when was this? Women were raped less often when? Do you have a reference that correlates how women dress with incidence of rape? Do you have a reference that shows that women were raped less often pre-feminism, or when men were men, or when women dressed modestly?
“* NO means NO. Males agreed with that and so went by it, as they had for you know CENTURIES.”
Again, when was this magical time? See, this is where you guys go off the deep end. You cannot deal with women demanding true equality. You want to control them.
“Clar summed up a bit what I am talking about. I don’t have direct links to these because I read them and move on.”
Hahahaha. How convenient.
“You can’t go around telling women to ignore good advice which can REDUCE the likelihood that they will become a victim of violent crime and claim you are in favor of women.”
You can’t show any evidence for this. Men have NEVER protected women from rape. Except by imprisoning them in one form or another. How about stricter sentences, actually prosecuting the rapists, taking the crime seriously, not eroticizing it in the media, not making the experience with law enforcement worse than the rape, and educating young males to respect women and girls?
“it sound like he was blaming woman for what they wear instead of saying there are preventative measures.”
It’s the same thing. Did the cops educate men at all? What did he say to men?
“And you’re making the classic feminist mistake of telling another person what they THINK, FEEL, WHO THEY ARE, what MOTIVATES them, what they BELIEVE.”
You are making the same mistake.
“Shock of shocks, drunken frat boys usually “rape” drunken girls dressed like prostitutes at a frat party!”
You all keep asserting this but where is the evidence?
Much of what Aoirthoir wrote is sarcasm, Isabel.
You want us to believe that husbands have never cared about their wives, fathers about their daughters, etc.?
Demonstrate that rapists aren’t “actually prosecuted,” and that the police/society/men/whatever don’t “take the crime seriously.”
If rape is “eroticized” in the media, it is probably because so many women have rape fantasies.
To claim “the experience with law enforcement” is “worse than the rape” is absurd and trivializes the crime.
You can’t educate (or legislate) human nature away. That includes sexual assault.
“ ‘it sound like he was blaming woman for what they wear instead of saying there are preventative measures.’
It’s the same thing. Did the cops educate men at all? What did he say to men?”
The rapists KNOW it’s illegal to rape women. They don’t CARE. Just like thieves know it’s illegal to steal things, but take them anyway. Police officers don’t waste their time telling thieves not to steal. Instead, they tell homeowners to lock their doors. This isn’t victim-blaming. This is telling the people who have the most to lose HOW TO DEFEND THEMSELVES, because there are people in the world who are PREDATORS, who do not care about your rights and who are not going to respect you, no matter what anyone tries to teach them. Wake. Up. Some people are just crappy people, not because no one ever told them right from wrong, but because what they see is strength and weakness and who makes an easy target. Anyone who cares at all about women’s safety is going to want to give them whatever information they can to help them protect themselves.
“ ‘Shock of shocks, drunken frat boys usually “rape” drunken girls dressed like prostitutes at a frat party!’
You all keep asserting this but where is the evidence?”
Do you also demand evidence that most skateboarding injuries occur to people who skateboard? That most sharks attack people in the ocean? When you hear hoof-beats at a horse ranch in Montana, your first thought shouldn’t be, “well, that could totally be zebras.”
If you need statistical evidence to prove to you that drunken frat boys “rape” girls at frat parties more often than they “rape” 50-year-old Sunday school teachers, then you have willfully shut down the part of your brain that processes logic.
Oh. Wait a minute. That’s right. That was Unamused’s whole point. Thank you, Isabel, for such a brilliant demonstration of his insightful post.
“You want us to believe that husbands have never cared about their wives, fathers about their daughters, etc.?”
I’m pretty sure husbands trying to protect their wives and fathers trying to protect their daughters falls under Isabel’s definition of men “imprisoning [women] in one form or another.” After all, your father wanting you to not look like a hooker is totally just like him locking you in a dungeon.
Aoirthoir, you are so full of it, this is exactly what am talking about.
“It’s not MEN that are raping women”
They are men, mostly anyway. Why not try to reach them? As long as you are speaking out to the public?
“Where’s the evidence that a drunken frat boy and a drunken coed having sex is rape?”
Annie I think;)
“which never really existed but SHOULD”
Why?
“From the beginnings of Western Civilization that’s when. ”
I wasn’t talking about rape laws but when were women protected from it? Have you shown that the incidence ha gone up because of feminism? I don’t think that is the case.
“so you’ve noticed that women are safest in civilized, patriarchal societies?”
Don’t remember saying that one. [Sarcasm: learn to recognize it. Points: learn to respond to them.]
“Finally understand that MOST rapees happen not by “your neighbor, husband, friend, coworker…” etc as we are led to believe. Rather, most rape rapes, actual rapes with intimidation, force, violence, beating and any variant, are the result of one sector of the populace. You know which.”
total crap.
[Actually, he's right: blacks are the problem.]
“Much of what Aoirthoir wrote is sarcasm, Isabel.”
I already forgot which comments were his. So much crap to wade through.
“You want us to believe that husbands have never cared about their wives, fathers about their daughters, etc.?”
not what I said.
[What you said is that "[m]en have NEVER protected women from rape.” If husbands/fathers/brothers/etc. cared about their wives/daughters/sisters/etc., they would protect them from rape. Pretty straightforward.]
Most “protection” seems suspiciously aimed at controlling women. For example now you are all saying “you don’t want our protection? You want to be independent human beings with rights and everything? Well it’s your fault if you are raped then” and practically gloating over the fact that women get raped.
[Cite your sources. Who said those things?]
Another way men “protect” women from rape is by having them wear tents over their face and bodies.
[Yeah, I don't like Muslims either.]
“Demonstrate that rapists aren’t “actually prosecuted,” and that the police/society/men/whatever don’t “take the crime seriously.”
This is so ignorant. I’m not going to run out and collect a bunch of statistics for you. EVERYBODY knows the deal here except you deluded sexists.
[Cite the stats or shut the fuck up.]
“To claim “the experience with law enforcement” is “worse than the rape” is absurd and trivializes the crime.”
Who claimed this? Not me. I also don’t think “all intercourse is rape” before you accuse me of that. I have a lot of disagreements with many feminists. That surprises you?
[Yes, you absolutely did claim that. You said: "How about... not making the experience with law enforcement worse than the rape...?"
Don't put words in my mouth.]
Everything you are saying is so simplistic it’s like arguing with creationists.
“You can’t educate (or legislate) human nature away. That includes sexual assault.”
Now you are defending it as natural, and saying we can’t do anything about it. EXCEPT women going back to being real women who depend on men.
[Wrong. I'm not "defending" rape as natural, I'm pointing out that it is natural, which makes you stupid for thinking you can educate it away.]
All you alternative-conservatives guys crack me up. You can handle gays, sex, you think you’re cooler than the uptight crowd, but you just can’t handle females as people. That’s where you draw the line. They need to be filling a role that revolves around YOU or you claim they are not real women. You are not women, but you need to define, and control them. You try to control with insults (feminists are ugly! They are jealous of hot women!) It makes you all – Jim Goad, Steve Sailor, etc every last one of you -come off as weak and needy because you need women to fulfill certain roles. You can’t even comprehend the existence of an independent woman who isn’t giving every man around a hard-on 24 hours a day. This is supposedly “natural”.
[Shaming language. Typical feminist.]
I love the “advice to women” articles, telling women to be feminine and wear high heels etc. All that feminine artifice is the opposite of natural. Suddenly “natural” isn’t such a hot thing.
Your mistake is thinking this (proper role of real women or whatever) has any basis in reality – it only confirms your neediness.
“If you need statistical evidence to prove to you that drunken frat boys “rape” girls at frat parties m”
Annie, you specified girls who dress a certain way. now you are changing what you said, by leaving out the part that relates to the OP. And yes, most rape victims are young, very young. And most of their rapists are people they know, including the relatives that are supposed to protect them. The brutality women experience just flies right over your heads doesn’t it?
I guess I did say that about law enforcement, but thinking about it, it is often true. Imagine being raped, and then having the cops treat you shitty, or being attacked in court over your”reputation”. That would certainly feel like a second rape.
Rape is NOT taken seriously as a crime. THAT is the real crime.
[Again, cite your sources or shut the fuck up.]
“This would describe pretty accurately how most women become feminists.”
Not really. Feminism really hit its heyday once women became middle class and didn’t have to spend so much time working. So with all this time on their hands they started thinking they were missing something and promptly demanded to be allowed the drudgery of work.
“And when was this? Women were raped less often when?”
Actually when it comes to rape, most of the rape allegations are made by a small number of women, over and over and over again. Typically these women are blindly ignoring the bad reputation of the company they keep, the parts of town they go into and how they conduct themselves. They entirely ignore their surroundings. (Note that’s for women actually raped, not making false allegations).
“Again, when was this magical time?”
From the beginnings of Western Civilization that’s when. The Keltoi, Gaels, Gauls, Teutons, Nordic, Romans, and pretty ALL of Western civilization outlawed rape FROM THE START. In Keltoi lands in particular the penalty for a rape was determined by the woman, up to and including “Glam Dicin”, headless. He could literally be KILLED, if she so chose, for rape.
“See, this is where you guys go off the deep end. You cannot deal with women demanding true equality. You want to control them.”
Bullshit. The only ones that believe in TRUE equality are MEN. See, we understand that with EQUALITY, comes RESPONSIBILITY. For instance the RESPONSIBILITY to not go into neighborhoods frequented by thugs, who murder and rape people on the street, then to be surprised when you find yourself in a position where they are victimizing you.
“Hahahaha. How convenient.”
Not convenient at all. Because let’s face it, I could show you statistic after statistic and you are still going to ignore them all. So why should I go to great lengths to save research when its just going to be wasted. Feminists aren’t interested in facts, their interested in what they FEEL.
“You can’t show any evidence for this. Men have NEVER protected women from rape.”
BULLSHIT. Men have been protecting women from rape, wars, violence for thousands of years, and dying in the process.
“Except by imprisoning them in one form or another. How about stricter sentences,”
Sure. If you are advocating for more black men (who commit most actual rape rape) to be in prison I am sure few here are going to object.
“actually prosecuting the rapists, taking the crime seriously,”
The crime of rape is taken VERY VERY seriously in Western culture. In fact it is taken so seriously that what we have is anti-rape culture which is good, but that often leads to anti-male culture. In these United States at least, there mere ACCUSATION of a woman is sufficient to cause a man to be arrested, jailed, put on the news, tried in the court of public opinion, lose his property, job, business, clients, family, children and pretty much everything.
The reason so few rapes are actually CONVICTED is that, fortunately, juries still require EVIDENCE that the rape occured. Now in those instances where the rape actually occured, her ACCUSATION is not evidence, it is an ALLEGATION. Thank the Gods that juries still require some PROOF that it just occured and we rarely convict people on just someone’s word. That is not to say her accusation is automatically false. But even when an accusation is true, we should still REQUIRE PROOF. In most instances, there just is not.
The other reason so few rapes end in conviction is because MOST rape accusations are IN PARTNER rape accusations. Juries and most people have a hard time believing that two persons will have sex thousands of times, and one of those times, three years back, counts as rape. They also have a hard time believing “she said yes but wasn’t really in the mood and so was lying and the man should have known this” as rape. They also have a really hard time believing that two persons drunk, means that she was INCAPABLE of consent but HE WAS CAPABLE of consent and rape…
In short, what is NOW defined as rape, is simply not accepted by many and even most people as rape. Thus the term rape rape was created.
“not eroticizing it in the media,”
A claim I’ve often heard but something I’ve never seen.
“not making the experience with law enforcement worse than the rape,”
You mean for instance like the one case that I read about. A woman was involved with a man. They were doing their deed. We went elsewhere which she had told him not to do. (Something I DO believe is rape….) She went out and had sex that night with several men (because that’s what victims do she said..) and had sex with several men over the next couple of weeks. Then THREE weeks later wanted a rape kit done…
Sorry but the police officer refusing to have a rape kit (cost in excess of $1500) done this long after the event is not law enforcement treating her worse than the rape. It’s just a fact that there’s not going to be evidence he can get.
“and educating young males to respect women and girls?”
Sure. Let’s educate everyone to respect each other and understand that those of us men that are not raping women, aren’t rapists. As far as teaching young males that do turn into rapists to respect women, there are two demographics that turn out 80% or more of those men. But you won’t want to hear that.
“It’s the same thing. Did the cops educate men at all? What did he say to men?”
He doesn’t have to educate men at all or say ANYTHING to them. It’s not MEN that are raping women it is RAPISTS that are raping women. The men that ARE NOT rapists don’t need a cop to educate them on not raping women, because they’re already NOT raping women. On the other hand the RAPISTS, have show they don’t give a d’mned what cops say, what women say, what the law says, or what MEN say.
“You are making the same mistake.”
Actually no. Most of the time when I say a feminist feels such and such or thinks such and such I am basing it on a feminist actually having self identified as thinking or feeling that.
““Shock of shocks, drunken frat boys usually “rape” drunken girls dressed like prostitutes at a frat party!”
You all keep asserting this but where is the evidence?”
Where’s the evidence that a drunken frat boy and a drunken coed having sex is rape?
“Much of what Aoirthoir wrote is sarcasm, Isabel.”
Or satire. Which is mocking commentary on moral issues.
“You want us to believe that husbands have never cared about their wives, fathers about their daughters, etc.?”
That’s exactly what they want us to believe. The entire belief in the patriarchy (which never really existed but SHOULD) is harmful to women is built upon this foundation.
“Demonstrate that rapists aren’t “actually prosecuted,” … That includes sexual assault.”
Good points all around Unamused. Here’s their “proof” that rapists aren’t prosecuted. Start with a number of ALLEGATIONS of rape. Assume ALL of them are TRUE. Move from there to the belief that ALL that should be required to convict someone (particularly a man) is someone’s WORD. Except this ONLY works in the case of rape. Follow this up with the belief that NO WOMAN would MAKE UP an allegation, or that such allegations are RARELY made up. From there make wild estimates that only 1 in 6 or 1 in 10 or 1 in 1000 (yes Ive seen that claimed) rapes are reported…. Move from there to MAKE things rape that NEVER WERE rape in the past (seduction, drinking TOGETHER, saying I have a headache but changing your mind…etc). Finally mix in that many rape allegations occur three or four or ten years later…
Now combine all of this with the reality, that we still have a system that requires evidence (Thank the Christian God for that!); Evidence, even when a rape did occur, is very difficult to come by if indimidation or coercion was used; Realize that most people just don’t accept MOST claims of in-partner rape (which by far make up the majority of rape accusations) and are skeptical because of custody battles, divorce, couple arguements and so on, making the claim suspect.
Finally understand that MOST rapees happen not by “your neighbor, husband, friend, coworker…” etc as we are led to believe. Rather, most rape rapes, actual rapes with intimidation, force, violence, beating and any variant, are the result of one sector of the populace. You know which.
So sure, LOTS of allegations (and purported rapes without allegations) but very few by comparison, convictions. In fact if a man is falsely accused, best to have a jury of all women, as they’re the most likely find an innocent man go.
—-
99.99999% of what Annie L said quoted for truth. Except I’m not going to quote because you can scroll up. The one part that might be a TAD off is frankly most drunken frat boys aren’t raping young drunk coeds. They are having consensual sex with them. (I reject the notion that if she is drunk she cannot consent but that if he is drunk he CAN consent…)
Here’s a question: Hunter gatherers have been shown to have less strict sex roles. That situation grows dramatically with civilization which is a relatively recent phenomenon. Add to that all the feminine artifice you complain that feminists have rejected because they are not real women. I really would like to know how you view artificial feminine dress, make-up and extreme sex roles as natural. Maybe natural in the sense that they exist in the universe, but not in the sense you are implying. It sounds like what you are really saying is “we want this, so it is natural” so okay what feminists want is natural too.
Isabel: so you’ve noticed that women are safest in civilized, patriarchal societies? Like how Japan (more patriarchal) is safer than the USA (more feminist)? Like how any white (civilized) nation is safer than any black (uncivilized) nation? Finally, a point of agreement!
“[Cite your sources. Who said those things?]”
Your blog, including commenters. I perused all the feminist tagged posts.
[Specifics. Prove or retract the following statement, as written: "now you are all saying 'you don’t want our protection? You want to be independent human beings with rights and everything? Well it’s your fault if you are raped then' and practically gloating over the fact that women get raped."]
“[Yes, you absolutely did claim that"
I already admitted it. See? I admit my mistakes:)
"[Wrong. I'm not "defending" rape as natural, I'm pointing out that it is natural, which makes you stupid for thinking you can educate it away.]”
You are the one who keeps focusing on education. I don’t even know what you are talking about. And I never said it could be “educated away”. I had a list of solutions.
[You are avoiding addressing my point.]
Who do you think the rapists are anyway? Who are these men?
“[Shaming language. Typical feminist.]”
Could you be more specific? Which words? [All the typical feminist bullshit after "All you alternative-conservatives guys crack me up."] I was describing my personal reaction. And it’s true. For example, on Jim Goad’s blog, a picture of some feminists will be posted and people (males) will comment on how ugly they are, how no one wants to fuck them, as if that is every woman’s goal, to have every guy in the world want to fuck her. Or a woman politician’s pic is posted and she’s analyzed as far as looks, weight, age and dismissed. If she is very forceful, she’s a dyke. ETC. It’s obviously sexist, pretty pathetic and glosses over some real horrors that women face. And yes, it makes men seem defensive and needy to me. I have always felt that way, that the more sexist a man is the more needy he seems. Yes it’s ironic in a twisted way, but so are many things in life.
“Here’s a question: Hunter gatherers have been shown to have less strict sex roles.”
Which ones?
“That situation grows dramatically with civilization which is a relatively recent phenomenon.”
What situation?
“Add to that all the feminine artifice you complain that feminists have rejected because they are not real women.”
Who of us made that claim? I care less what a feminists rejects. Her life is HER life.
“I really would like to know how you view artificial feminine dress, make-up and extreme sex roles as natural.”
Define natural. Because once you get large brains, self awareness, ability to contemplate about the future, Gods, and more, what is ‘natural’ can shift.
“Maybe natural in the sense that they exist in the universe, but not in the sense you are implying.”
Who is implying? Are you talking about statements made on another website?
“It sounds like what you are really saying is “we want this, so it is natural” so okay what feminists want is natural too.”
I really have no idea what you are talking about. But I can probably guess that what AOIRTHOIR wants you aren’t likely to guess at.
Unamused, unfortunately the West wasn’t really ever truly patriarchal. That would be rule by fathers. And women had a great deal of freedom in the west.
However they could afford it because Western men weren’t running around in packs raping women (as a group).
“You are the one who keeps focusing on education. I don’t even know what you are talking about. And I never said it could be “educated away”. I had a list of solutions.”
You sure about that? Because you asked specifically “Did the cops educate men at all?” As I pointed out, MEN don’t need to be educated not to rape because it’s rapist raping, and men that aren’t rapists don’t need to be educated not to rape.
“For example, on Jim Goad’s blog, a picture of some feminists will be posted and people (males) will comment on how ugly they are, ”
Sorry but that’s a different blog.
“And yes, it makes men seem defensive and needy to me. I have always felt that way, that the more sexist a man is the more needy he seems. Yes it’s ironic in a twisted way, but so are many things in life.”
Sexism is like racism. Two terms that have practically no meaning because so many things are labeled by these things.
—
“Aoirthoir, you are so full of it, this is exactly what am talking about.”
I’m so full of what exactly?
“They are men [raping women], mostly anyway. Why not try to reach them? As long as you are speaking out to the public?”
Dontcha love how she quotes PART of what I said (“its not MEN raping women”) but leaves out a vital and important other part (“its RAPISTS raping women”)?
Sorry but MEN, that are not raping women don’t NEED to be reached because we’re, you know, NOT raping women. The ones raping women are RAPISTS. Why not reach out to them? That’s not the question. The point you keep missing with a deliberate ignorance that only a feminist can muster, because it’s been pointed out to you several times, is this. RAPISTS don’t GIVE A D’MNED about women, the women they are raping, the men that aren’t raping women, the police or anyone else. In short, “reaching out” to them doesn’t do one bit of good.
““Where’s the evidence that a drunken frat boy and a drunken coed having sex is rape?”
Annie I think;)”
I already clarified my position. When two persons are drunk, it is impossible that ONE CANNOT consent and the OTHER can RAPE. Either NEITHER can consent or BOTH can. If having sex with a drunk person is rape, then women need to start being charged when they have sex with drunk men. Based on the modern definitions of rape actually (regretting it after the fact, sex with someone drunk, finding out he had a fiance etc) and the fact that modern definitions of rape MOSTLY do NOT entail force of ANY kind, it follows that men are raped at least as much as women. By women.
In fact since prison rape is an ACTUAL PROVEN fact, and prison rape rapes occur in far greater numbers than rape rape of females by male RAPISTS, it is a fact that males are raped in at least equal numbers and probably more numbers than women, and because of the absolutely low reporting, rape of males far and away faces a greater reporting to occurence differential than that of rapes of women.
“[patriarchy,] “which never really existed but SHOULD”
Why?”
Because Patriarchy is good for civilization. It is good for society, good for men and ESPECIALLY good for women. When governments have NO authority over a person, authority reverts back to local communities, run by men. Local men on the scene have proven far more likely to defend a woman and the community against rape, violence, theft and other crimes than remote Federalist systems where votes can be bought with Federal Reseve Notes in a fiat money system.
““From the beginnings of Western Civilization that’s when. ”
I wasn’t talking about rape laws but when were women protected from it? Have you shown that the incidence ha gone up because of feminism? I don’t think that is the case.”
I never made the claim that incidents of rape have gone up because of feminism. In fact it is my contention that rape was never as large a problem as feminists have claimed, either now, or in the past. I speak of course only of WESTERN civilization. I cannot speak about the cultures of the barbarians. (Note: barbarian doesn’t mean what you likely (or potentially) think it means…)
““Finally understand that MOST rapees happen not by “your neighbor, husband, friend, coworker…” etc as we are led to believe. Rather, most rape rapes, actual rapes with intimidation, force, violence, beating and any variant, are the result of one sector of the populace. You know which.”
total crap.
[Actually, he's right: blacks are the problem.]”
I am right. Sorry but the facts are that most actual rape rapes are committed by a group of men that belong to a 12% segment of the population (blacks). Of blacks, it is likely that a quarter or fewer are the ones committing rapes and other forms of violence (givr or take). Which means that the vast majority of rapes in this nation are being perpetrated by 3% of the population.
Jails don’t help these rapists. Jails don’t stop them as they WILL (80% or more chance) re-offend when let go. Education doesn’t help. Money doesn’t help. Jobs don’t help. Churches don’t help. Atheism don’t help. Several things would help, but we’re too civilized to do those things. Instead we’d rather pretend that most rapes occur by daddy and the school gym teacher in nice neighborhoods and we’d rather destroy their lives on an accusation that has no evidence whatsoever.
[Cite your sources, retract your claims, or get the fuck out.]
“You are not women, but you need to define, and control them. You try to control with insults (feminists are ugly! They are jealous of hot women!)”
I’m a woman. I don’t need to define and control anybody, though I find general awareness of sex differences to be useful in navigating reality. Of course, I’m also of the (never) humble opinion that nobody on the blogs you’re reading is trying to “control [feminists] with insults.” I think it’s more like “radical gender feminists piss us off, so what can we say that will piss them off?” It’s a way to decompress, lets off steam. Is it helpful for constructive debate? Well, no, probably not, but the idea that it’s some sinister plot to put women under the mean ol’ thumb of patriarchy is just nonsense.
“99.99999% of what Annie L said quoted for truth. Except I’m not going to quote because you can scroll up. The one part that might be a TAD off is frankly most drunken frat boys aren’t raping young drunk coeds. They are having consensual sex with them. (I reject the notion that if she is drunk she cannot consent but that if he is drunk he CAN consent…)”
Nope, we’re in agreement on this part too. I also think most drunken frat house “rape” is consensual sex. I just wanted to point out that most of the allegations of rape come from girls who were actually at the frat house getting drunk voluntarily. I’m stuck in the same semantics pickle you are; if I’d meant actual rape, I’d have left off the quotation marks and probably said rape-rape.
” ‘Where’s the evidence that a drunken frat boy and a drunken coed having sex is rape?’
Annie I think;)”
Gah! Don’t you put those words in my mouth! *spits* *gargles*
One of the things that perplexes me about gender feminist attitudes towards rape is that while they’re screaming about female rights and freedoms, they don’t seem to notice that what they’re actually doing is declaring women’s absolutely powerlessness. They are saying women can’t do ANYTHING to make themselves safer and therefore must depend entirely on something as abstract as a judicial system to protect them. I have never been sexually assaulted in my life. As child, this was because I was lucky enough to be properly protected by the adults in my life (male and female both). But as an adult, my freedom from sexual assault is at least partly (now, notice those italics, Isabel, because that word is important) the result of the CHOICES I made. I don’t feel powerless. I feel like I have a tremendous ability to protect myself, and not only because I’m a decent shot with a handgun, but because I can control the company I keep, the part of town I hang out in, the people I’m willing to be vulnerable (drunk) with, the signals I send out, and care more for my own safety than I do about whether or not protecting myself hurts someone’s feelings.
I made choices that have helped keep me safe. If I ever have a daughter, I (and my husband) will teach her to do the same.
“I think it’s more like “radical gender feminists piss us off, so what can we say that will piss them off?” It’s a way to decompress, lets off steam.”
Interesting observation. It’s why I run a men’s only forum. Then men can left off steam, say things they don’t really mean, and women won’t be hurt by it.
“Nope, we’re in agreement on this part too. I also think most drunken frat house “rape” is consensual sex. I just wanted to point out that most of the allegations of rape come from girls who were actually at the frat house getting drunk voluntarily. I’m stuck in the same semantics pickle you are; if I’d meant actual rape, I’d have left off the quotation marks and probably said rape-rape.”
Fair enough. In that case 100% of what you said was true. And yes drunken frat boys tend not to be having sex with 80 year old ladies at frat parties. It’s a shame too cause I’ve met some that….
“One of the things that perplexes me about gender feminist attitudes towards rape is that while they’re screaming about female rights and freedoms, they don’t seem to notice that what they’re actually doing is declaring women’s absolutely powerlessness.”
They know this perfectly well. See men don’t NEED to be EMpowered because we have power by virtue of our sex and gender. EM powered means to be GIVEN power, which is an outright statement that women don’t have power. The only difference between the feminist and the extremely controlling religous dogma is in what WAY women are to be controlled.
“I don’t feel powerless. I feel like I have a tremendous ability to protect myself, and not only because I’m a decent shot with a handgun, but because I can control the company I keep, the part of town I hang out in, the people I’m willing to be vulnerable (drunk) with, the signals I send out, and care more for my own safety than I do about whether or not protecting myself hurts someone’s feelings.”
I got to “I feel like I have a tremendous ability to protect myself” and I was going to add “you know, guns are the great equalizers of our society.” But you said it yourself.
Okay, you censored my *entire fucking post*, so I’m out. [insult] You can’t handle an intelligent woman who is not sucking up to you. And I did cite some sources [insult]. I’ve cited as much as others have.
[Let me explain it in a way you can hopefully understand:
If you come to my blog, and you're a bitch (definition 3a: "a malicious, unpleasant, selfish person, especially a woman"), then you get moderated.
You decided to be a bitch, as follows (emphasis mine):
Because you were a bitch, your bitchiness got moderated.]
“retract my claims”
Yes, you can’t handle a generalized rhetorical quote, yet I am too stupid to recognize satire. You are wimps who refuse to discuss with a feminist (the uncited, general term in the fucking OP for Christ’s sake.)
Why should I even bother reading the subsequent comments or attempt to respond to anyone when the insecure blogger has deleted MY ENTIRE FUCKING POST?
[I don't know. Why are you still here?]
“least partly (now, notice those italics, Isabel, because that word is important) the result of the CHOICES I made. I don’t feel powerless.”
yeah so what’s yer point? Who ever denied this?
“I think it’s more like “radical gender feminists piss us off, so what can we say that will piss them off?” It’s a way to decompress, lets off steam. ”
And then you plan to sit down and have a discussion? Also, the OP doesn’t say (nor do most of the posts) “radical gender feminists” it say “Feminists”.
[For someone who claims to have "perused" all my posts on feminism, you don't seem to have noticed all the times I've stated that the problem is radical gender feminists. Of course, they're also about the only people who still call themselves feminists, because normal women (and men) know that we've moved beyond equality: women have many more rights and privileges than men now.]
“Because Patriarchy is good for civilization. It is good for society, good for men and ESPECIALLY good for women.”
Citation?
“Local men on the scene have proven far more likely to defend a woman and the community against rape, violence, theft and other crimes than remote Federalist systems where votes can be bought with Federal Reseve Notes in a fiat money system”
Citation?
“In fact it is my contention that rape was never as large a problem as feminists have claimed, either now, or in the past.”
Citation?
“MOSTLY do NOT entail force of ANY kind, it follows that men are raped at least as much as women. By women. ”
Citation?
“Sorry but that’s a different blog. ”
But it’s OKAY to dis feminists in general in the OP and comments. Anything *I* bring up has to be documented on this particular blog. You guys are so logical when it comes to debating, haha. [Congratulations, you've learned not to be a bitch toward the one person with absolute control over commenting. At least, I think you've learned it.]
““Here’s a question: Hunter gatherers have been shown to have less strict sex roles.”
Which ones? ”
Pretty much all that I am aware of.
“Dontcha love how she quotes PART of what I said (“its not MEN raping women”) but leaves out a vital and important other part (“its RAPISTS raping women”)?”
And it’s not BLACKS raping women, it’s BLACK RAPISTS raping women, right?
“In short, “reaching out” to them doesn’t do one bit of good.”
citation? What about very young men and boys who participate in gang rapes? According to you they are all sociopaths. Do you have a citation for that?
“Sexism is like racism. Two terms that have practically no meaning because so many things are labeled by these things. ”
Just because some people have blurred the definition or exaggerated particular cases does not in any way suggest that racism and sexism do not exist. The examples I gave, such as judging a woman politician by how attractive and “feminine” she is, are unambiguously sexist.
“Jails don’t help these rapists. ”
Citations?
“prison rape rapes occur in far greater numbers than rape rape of females by male RAPISTS, it is a fact that males are raped in at least equal numbers and probably more numbers than women, and because of the absolutely low reporting, rape of males far and away faces a greater reporting to occurence differential than that of rapes of women.”
references?
Good luck Isabel. I tried too, but they don’t care to debate with anyone unless you agree with them. Maybe instead of claiming feminist are illogical they should look in the mirror. He censored half the stuff I commented and completely took my quotes out of context. However, good luck to you! =)
[You'll see above that all the quotes demonstrating her inability to argue were in context. She really did contradict herself without realizing it.]
Comment on a feminist site, disagree with their party line, even respectfully and watch your comments disappear into the ether. But, do the same thing to a feminist and watch her rant and rave.
Look sugah, if you want to comment you can visit my blog, I won’t moderate you. But I reserve the right to not think about having sex with you.
This is actually a common feminist claim. Tell you what I will eventually be at http://aoirthoir.com. I bet that I’m going to say a whole bunch of stuff that you’ll want to “correct” me on. Both of us can comment without citing our sources. I bet the fact that I won’t censor you, but merely disagree with the claims you’ve made about the fantasy world that we don’t live in, will be enough for you to claim about me, that I cannot handle intelligent women.
I’m not refusing anything. I am MORE than willing to argue and discuss with you. I do however reserve the right when you comment on my blog to alter your signature thusly:
“Aoirthoir is the most awesomest, even more awesome than the Awesom-O 5000. And I am a bad bad girl!”
This is another common statement made by feminists about people who visit and comment on their spaces. “If you dislike us so much why are you here!?” I always find it amusing because most of what is posted on feminist blogs is commentary that critiques all of the things feminists hate. Which leads one to ask, if you hate those things so much…why are you there?
Actually in Western Society, it could always be disputed that in certain areas men had more rights and in others women had more rights. We men had more rights in the sucky ways, like the right to die protecting the women, who had the right to be protected.
Sure: http://unamusementpark.wordpress.com/2011/06/09/feminists-are-illogical-and-not-worth-debating/#comment-3398
You have to scroll down the page to find it. It was in answer to the question “Why?”
Sure: http://unamusementpark.wordpress.com/2011/06/09/feminists-are-illogical-and-not-worth-debating/#comment-3398
You have to scroll down the page to find it. It was in answer to the statement “Have you shown that the incidence have gone up because of feminism? I don’t think that is the case.”” Cause, you know, I never claimed that the incidents of rape went up because of feminism.
Look if you are quoting me, why do you keep asking me for where I made those quotes? Just scroll up.
Sure it’s completely ok to dismiss anyone I want to dismiss. As to Unamused, that’s between you and him. Also I think you are confusing Unamused’s policy’s on his blog (for instance moderating you, moderating me…) with MY policies. On any space I’ve moderated, I moderate for only a couple of things. One is posting a person’s real world information without their consent. Two is making threats that appear in context to be real threats. Occasionally I ask people to take off topic discussions to another thread, and I request that fights go to Fight Club, a special place I set aside on my spaces specifically for flaming.
The point is, you’re conflating me, and my comments with Unamused and his policies. His policies are his and I tend to disagree with modifying a persons posts. But it’s not my space, so take it up with management not me.
Then you would be wrong. The Keltoi had very defined roles. It was called your Gaes. The same can be said for most of the European hunter gathererers.
EXACTLY. And black rapists are a small percentage of blacks.
Are you asking me to cite where I said that AGAIN? Really?
I made no claim about their sociopathic status. I simply said that those that are going to rape aren’t going to be “educated” by a cop in a speech or by other persons who are opposed to rape.
Sure it does.
No, that’s natural and frankly a damned good way to judge any politician, male or female. I don’t even watch TV anymore because I am sick and tired of looking at ugly politicians. Where is MY GENERATION’S John F. Kennedy??? And Sarah Palin as a close second doesn’t count.
If you’d like to find out about recividism rates, how hight they are particularly among violent sexual offenders, GOOGLE is your friend.
Sure: http://google.com
———-
Yeah that’s why myself, Annie and now Olave are debating, because we only agree with each other.
I won’t censor you. I won’t even censure you. In fact, you can have a slutwalk right on my website. http://Iamafeministignoringrealityandthinkbadrapistsshuoldjustnotrapemebecauseisayso.com
I had a look in the mirror. I saw a Caucasoid in his early 40s. If, instead, I saw over my shoulder a dirtbag holding a knife to the throat of my wife, sister, mother, or whomever, I would grab a heavy object (or my Benchmade DPT) and intervene.
Family men hate rape. It’s been that way for centuries. Tacitus claims that the pre-Christian Germans fought extra hard when their female relatives noted that defeat, for a given tribe, meant enslavement for the women, which meant rape. (That is a citation. Please don’t ask for a citation. Tacitus did not write that many books about pre-Christian Germans.)
In the English Civil War (17th Century), men without pikes, swords, or firearms took up pitchforks, flails and clubs to protect their farms from being pillaged and their female family members from being raped. (Thank link is a citation. Please don’t ask for a citation because I know even feminists can click links.) Point is, (A) the Clubmen were fighting men who did have swords, pikes, and guns, and (B) many of the Clubmen had very little property to protect. Their point in living, what kept them going despite their poverty, was the sanctity of their homes and the well-being of their families.
We are talking about REAL MEN here. If they didn’t have clubs and pitchforks, they would probably kill a child molester with their teeth. (No citation; that is speculation and I trust it because I trust my sense of history. I’ve heard of Tacitus and all three sides in the English Civil War, which is more than any gender feminist “Whites are the cancer of human history” has heard of.)
Nowadays you go to jail if you club a rapist to death. In contrast, if you teach a bunch of women to defend themselves with handguns, you get a salary. I’m not going to chew my way to the jugular of any rapist, but if I had the training, you better BELIEVE I would lead a class of women aged 18-80 in putting .357-caliber hollowpoints into the chests of sex criminals.
And gender feminists would say that would be “blaming the victim”. (I would instruct all my students not to shoot these women.)
Olave, your comment is so good I very nearly joined this debate. Then I remembered it is about feminism.
“But, do the same thing to a feminist and watch her rant and rave.”
I am reacting the way you probably would. See? Women are people. And I don’t have a “feminist blog” so what does that have to do with it? I was banned from I Blame the Patriarchy for sticking up for working class whites and at some points working class white men. I was called a racist, my posts defending myself were censored and I was told to look in a mirror and cop to my racism. I refused and was banned. What does any of it have to do with the present conversation?
“Also I think you are confusing Unamused’s policy’s on his blog (for instance moderating you, moderating me…) with MY policies. On any space I’ve moderated, I moderate for only a couple of things.”
I actually have no idea who you are and your comments are lame. You just make shit up. What’s the point?
“I made no claim about their sociopathic status. I simply said that those that are going to rape aren’t going to be “educated” by a cop in a speech or by other persons who are opposed to rape. ”
If they can’t be educated, then they must be sociopaths. What are the alternative explanations, genius?
“Yeah that’s why myself, Annie and now Olave are debating, because we only agree with each other.”
“I won’t censor you. I won’t even censure you. In fact, you can have a slutwalk right on my website.”
I won’t be visiting your website, believe me.
“And gender feminists would say that would be “blaming the victim”. (I would instruct all my students not to shoot these women.)”
Teaching women self-defense is blaming the victim? What are you talking about? And what do you consider a “gender feminist”?
And if all feminists are not being disparaged, as the OP implies, what type of feminism would be? It sounds like you *are* all talking about all feminists. So why not be honest?
“He censored half the stuff I commented and completely took my quotes out of context. However, good luck to you! =)”
Thanks Charli. Yes, these are common practices of dishonest bloggers I’ve noticed. He still hasn’t posted some of my stuff that had nothing to do with citations or insults to the blogger. [Not true.]
It has exactly what I said it does. Feminists often ban people that disagree with them. They also typically become offended when they are banned. I don’t become offended when I am banned, I just note that it is typical.
Now I’ve already clarified the FEW situations I redact or ban people for. Your comments being redacted on this blog, a blog I don’t control, have nothing to do with me.
Are my comments retarded also? Womanly? Gay? Another point about feminists is they will often complain about this or that ism, whilst practicing their own. But based on your statement about being called a racist and refusing to accept the label, perhaps THAT kind of feminist you are not. I’ve not decided.
But really, my comments that I don’t run this space and you’re taking to the wrong cat when you talk to me about your comments being redacted or moderated, aren’t “lame”. They are factual. Except come to think of it that might make them lame cause feminists tend not to like to deal in facts.
I don’t take typically narrow views of things either being one thing or another thing. I leave the definitions of who is and isn’t a sociopath to those with the degrees to diagnose such conditions.
I thought as much. So I will hereforth dismiss your claims that I am somehow “afraid” of “intelligent” women beacuse *I* “won’t” debate with them. I dimiss your claim because I offered you a plain opportunity to debate with me, on any subject. (Except the inferiority of Bostonian Irish to Cleveland Irish, as that is a well established fact worldwide, no point in debating it).
Yes. That is exactly the claim that many feminists have made. Women shouldn’t NEED to defend themselves, “ONLY MEN can stop rape”, and other such memes are continually created by feminists. YOU may not agree with those memes, but we’ve read them with our own eyes PLENTY of times.
Let’s see how feminist you are. Is Strauss-Kahn guilty of raping that maid in his hotel room in New York City a few months back?
Like feminists are honest? As far as the others I cannot speak. For myself, ALL of feminism is open to debate and disparagement. Feminism is quite simply hate of females couched as pro-female policies and rhetoric. Since I don’t hate females, I have no reason to support feminism and every reason to expose it.
But when you are offered an ability to debate without your comments being redacted or banned, you decline.
“He still hasn’t posted some of my stuff that had nothing to do with citations or insults to the blogger. [Not true.]”
Where is all that shit I wrote about “feminist shaming” for example? I quoted something from Jim Goad’s blog. What was wrong with that? If it’s posted I can’t find it.
[I'm not surprised you can't keep up with your own rambling non-arguments. Above you will find your comment where you mention Jim Goad's blog, which I've never heard of. By the way, when the "shit" you write includes insults, those insults will be deleted.]
“They also typically become offended when they are banned.”
haha this only bothers feminists I guess.
“and isn’t a sociopath to those with the degrees to diagnose such conditions. ”
What you said- that they cannot be educated because they just don’t care etc is THE DEFINITION of a sociopath. I cannot think of a single example of someone who cannot be educated from antisocial and criminal endeavors except sociopaths of some type (the definitions get fuzzy eg between psychopath and sociopath but being hopelessly unable to be empathetic and caring about others is their main defining quality.
“Let’s see how feminist you are. Is Strauss-Kahn guilty of raping that maid in his hotel room in New York City a few months back?”
how the hell would I know if he is guilty?
“But when you are offered an ability to debate without your comments being redacted or banned, you decline.”
If it is someone who just makes shit up, including statistics, yes.
“Feminists are offended when they are banned” does not extrapolate to “ONLY feminists are offended when they are banned.”
But “Feminists are dumb as shit when it comes to logic” DOES extrapolate to, “God I wish I had some cheese right now, cause I fucking love cheese. Oh wait, here’s some sitting right next to me…ima eat it.”
The definition of Cancer is [partly]:
And knowing that defintion I’m as unqualified to diagnose cancer as I am to diagnose sociopathy. So I’ll leave both sorts of diagnosis to the professionals with the degrees, training and medical licenses.
Perhaps there are violent offenders of every sort of violent crime that CAN be reformed. Just because there are those that can doesn’t mean that most can or will be reformed. Perhaps you’d like to take a walk with me down “Recividism Lane” in urban locale of “Repeat Offenders” to find out more?
Yeah? Coool. I love armchair doctors. I’m not one so I will still leave the diagnosis to the proper professinals.
Yeah sorry, but you no longer get to define yourself as a feminist. Next thing you know you won’t be denying that some women actually do make false rape allegatins, which is itself a “victim blaming” act according to feminists. Even though, you know, they’re not actually proven to be victims, just accusers.
Do you need me to clarify what I just said? I asked if he was guilty of rape. A TYPICAL definition of rape by feminists is “if you FEEL you were raped then you WERE raped,” which is a ridiculous definition. But there it is. So the fact that you do not automatically jump to conclude that he MUST have done it, means that you no longer get to be a card holding member of the feminist club. Please return your feminist card to the following address:
Not a Feminist Anymore c/o
Thank the GODS LLC
1313 JustWokeUp Drive
Real World 44444
Please include Thirty Two dollars for the cost of envelopes and stamps so that we may inform the proper officials of your now [somewhat] functioning brain.
Well 72% of people surveyed claim that I don’t make up statistics. The other 45% say they wish they had my hair.
Please do not send cash.
“I cannot think of a single example of someone who cannot be educated from antisocial and criminal endeavors except sociopaths of some type”
“the definitions get fuzzy eg between psychopath and sociopath”
That’s because neither of those are actual diagnoses:
“Antisocial personality disorder is sometimes referred to as psychopathy or sociopathy; however, many scholars make distinctions among these terms, though there remains no academic consensus as to their definitions. Currently, for this reason, neither psychopathy nor sociopathy are valid diagnoses described in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, and the ICD-10 of the World Health Organization also lacks psychopathy as a diagnostic disorder.”
“but being hopelessly unable to be empathetic and caring about others is their main defining quality.” “”I cannot think of a single example of someone who cannot be educated from antisocial and criminal endeavors except sociopaths of some type”
What you are saying is that for a person not to have antisocial personality disorder, they must have empathy for and care about EVERYONE. There are plenty of criminals out there, of all stripes, who love their children and their parents and their siblings, who have close bonds of friendship, an intense sense of loyalty TO THEIR OWN, but are still willing to make victims out of others. Hell, gangs wouldn’t exist if the members were all antisocial, because that kind of cohesion wouldn’t be possible if they had no empathy for anyone. This idea that everyone can and should be forced into sharing your personal code of ethics is absurd. People have their own ideologies and some of those ideologies involve the fact that other people are acceptable prey. This isn’t antisocial personality disorder. This is having a different world view. Unfortunately, here in the good ol’ USA, we not only have to share our WORLD with those people, we also have to share our streets with them.
“But ‘Feminists are dumb as shit when it comes to logic’ DOES extrapolate to, ‘God I wish I had some cheese right now, cause I fucking love cheese. Oh wait, here’s some sitting right next to me…ima eat it.’ ”
Bahahahahaha!
“Nowadays you go to jail if you club a rapist to death. In contrast, if you teach a bunch of women to defend themselves with handguns, you get a salary. I’m not going to chew my way to the jugular of any rapist, but if I had the training, you better BELIEVE I would lead a class of women aged 18-80 in putting .357-caliber hollowpoints into the chests of sex criminals.”
I would take your course, Olave!
“Do you need me to clarify what I just said? I asked if he was guilty of rape. A TYPICAL definition of rape by feminists is “if you FEEL you were raped then you WERE raped,” which is a ridiculous definition. But there it is. So the fact that you do not automatically jump to conclude that he MUST have done it, means that you no longer get to be a card holding member of the feminist club.”
First of all, this is completely ridiculous! I don’t know any feminists that would argue that point. I think you are getting your information from a shitty feminist because that totally goes against what we believe. I would have answered the DSK question the same way. How do I know if he’s guilty? The only people who know are him and the hotel maid. What we want as feminists is for our society to take her seriously and take her claims seriously. To investigate the situation. Which is why this next statement is also BS:
“Next thing you know you won’t be denying that some women actually do make false rape allegatins, which is itself a “victim blaming” act according to feminists. Even though, you know, they’re not actually proven to be victims, just accusers.”
Men and women who claim the were assaulted, but weren’t, just fuck shit up for people who really are victims of sexual violence. As a feminist, I do not think highly of someone who falsely claims rape. Rape is a serious thing to claim and it’s even more serious to label someone a rapist. And again, as a feminist, I’d never want someone to be falsely labeled a rapist because I know the gravity of those allegations, and the impact it can have on someone’s life.
Of all of the nuggets of truth Annie L. I want to pull out this one:
And this one
That’s all.
Of course it is obvious a man is writing for her [wink] :D.
Please to see I amused:D
“Of course it is obvious a man is writing for her [wink] :D.”
It’s true. My husband was ghost writing because I was too busy being barefoot in the kitchen…no,no…in the bedroom in stilettos* and lingerie…no,no…locked in a tower, chastely embroidering a cushion!
*j/k. Size 11 stilettos aren’t sexy.
“And gender feminists would say that would be “blaming the victim”. (I would instruct all my students not to shoot these women.)”
Teaching women self-defense is blaming the victim? What are you talking about?
Teaching women about dressing sensibly, avoiding high-crime neighborhoods, and taking care not to be alone around strange men is considered “blaming the victim” by the gendafemz. Why shouldn’t armed self-defense be? The cop who triggered the Toronto slutwalk was trying to teach women to protect themselves.
And what do you consider a “gender feminist”?
I’m borrowing the term from Christina Hoff Sommers, who writes:
“American feminism is currently dominated by a group of women who seek to persuade the public that American women are not the free creatures we think we are…. The “gender feminists” (as I shall call them) believe that all our institutions … perpetuate male dominance. Believing that women are virtually under siege, gender feminists naturally seek recruits to their side of the gender war.” (p. 16, Who Stole Feminism?)
If gendafemz started to talking about the right to keep and bear arms (RKBA to us rightists), concealed-carry weapons permits (CCW), Brazilian jujitsu (BJJ), etc., they would essentially be abandoning their argument that women are helpless. They would need to take a role in stopping rape instead of leaving it up to men. (And no, complaining about rape and stopping rape are not the same thing.) Female freedom sinks most of the gendafem arguments. If they noted that a majority of voters are women, they couldn’t complain about the government. If they noted that many men imprisoned for sex crimes and domestic violence had lines of women (sometimes literal LINES of women) waiting to conjugally visit them, send them letters, drive them home when their parole comes through, etc., they would have to admit that women have a role in sustaining our national ethics, or in failing to do so.
Gendafemz hate admitting responsibility.
And if all feminists are not being disparaged, as the OP implies, what type of feminism would be? It sounds like you *are* all talking about all feminists. So why not be honest?
It’s pretty clear Unamused has his sights set on gender feminism. This post is an exasperated followup to “Gender Feminism Harms All Women”. It’s common when people are exasperated that they economize on words. (Same is true for fear. “Hyenas are after me!” “You mean brown hyenas or striped hyenas? Why won’t you be more specific?” “Because I’ve gotta get back in car and get the engine started before – arkh! aiggh! bleehhhhhhhH!!!!)
Unamused also points out that people who fit the definition of equity feminism don’t call themselves feminists any more, because the gendafemz stole the word so effectively.
Yes they are.
Sorry but I will give precedence to my own experiences with feminists over your claims.
I agree. Spaces like feministing, feministe, scum manifesto, Gloria Steinem, NOW, and the vast majority of major feminist school os thought are saying these things. I agree with you that they are shitty feminists. Is there any other kind?
Really?
So you believe that a man should not be arrested until their is evidence of rape? And by evidence I mean EVIDENCE that CORROBORATES the female’s CLAIM.
Come now, you and I BOTH know that most feminist are not saying what you just said. MOST are saying he IS guilty. MOST are calling THE VICTIM (not the ALLEGED victim, not THE ACCUSER, not the COMPLAINANT, but THE VICTIM). Must claim that ANYONE who are suspicious of her claim, or insist her claim MUST have corroborating evidence, are VICTIM blaming. (Remember she is a VICTIM, not an ACCUSER, not an ALLEGED victim..)
“What we want as feminists is for our society to take her seriously and take her claims seriously. To investigate the situation.”
Bullshit. Rape is taken EXTREMELY seriously by our society. This is THE WEST. The WEST has ALWAYS taken rape seriously. We take it SO SERIOUSLY that we TAKE HER WORD FOR IT. But recently so many times her word has been PROVEN FALSE (women accusing cops of raping them when pulled over, and the CAMERA IN THE CAR, PROVES they did not, women accusing men of rape who were OUT OF COUNTRY at the time….). So people just NO LONGER AUTOMATICALLY ACCEPT HER CLAIM.
In the case of this maid, she has lied about some MANY things. Maybe she is just a victim of circumstances, maybe, just maybe she’s been preyed upon over and again and conviced by disreputable people to do things like LIE ABOUT BEING GANG RAPED. But if that IS the case, her testimony is STILL suspect because as a weak willed person who has SHOWN A WILLINGNESS to lie IN MANY INSTANCES, we can never be sure if this is YET ANOTHER CASE of her being a ‘victim of someone else’ controlling her. But if she isn’t that weak willed, then she’s lied enough in the past to call her OWN CHARACTER into question.
AND STILL on MANY feminists sites they are INSISTING that she IS A VICTIM. Kind of like how Tawana Brawley is STILL heralded as a victim of rape and the Duke Lacross boys are STILL trumpeted about as examples of wealthy white privilege and rape.
NONE of which happened.
<blockquote"Which is why this next statement is also BS:
“Next thing you know you won’t be denying that some women actually do make false rape allegatins, which is itself a “victim blaming” act according to feminists. Even though, you know, they’re not actually proven to be victims, just accusers.”
When I see feminists admit that a proven rape ACCUSER is the ACTUAL PERPETRATOR* of a crime, of ASSAULT and VIOLENCE upon the men or man she has accused, then I might change my belief. But the facts are, you are full of shit because most feminists do indeed call this victim blaming.
I agree. So do many men. Which is why so few men, even when we ARE sexually assaulted by a woman (happens at least as often as women who are sexually assaulted by men) we don’t file charges. Men are forgiving that way and honorable, unlike those who file most false rape allegations.
As a feminist, I do not think highly of someone who falsely claims rape. Rape is a serious thing to claim and it’s even more serious to label someone a rapist. And again, as a feminist, I’d never want someone to be falsely labeled a rapist because I know the gravity of those allegations, and the impact it can have on someone’s life.
I believe you. Really I do. And NO I am NOT mocking or joking. But iamcharli, you are not a feminist when you say these things. The things I am telling you I have seen from the majority of feminists I’ve read, ARE the things I’ve seen. I’ve seen feminists write, claim, ask and discuss the following:
1. If you FEEL you were raped, then you WERE raped.
2. Police officers who refuse to give a rape kit 3 weeks or 3 months after the fact HATE women, and are victim blaming. (No they are not).
3. Men who like women shaved MUST be child abusers because WHY would they like that if they weren’t and “one can’t help but to wonder how this is going to increase child molestation”. Uh huh…cause of course being attracted to a GROWN ADULT WOMAN is the same as that lying accusation.
4. DOUBTING an accusation is SUPPORTING rape (no it’s not).
5. Suggesting that women WATCH THE COMPANY THEY KEEP because some persons ARE SEXUAL ASSAULTERS, is “victim blaming”. (NO it is not it is victim making PREVENTION).
In fact on that last one a bunch of women got pissed recently that a cop suggested they need to watch how they dress (he called them sluts..ok yeah..bad form..but true words) because those who dress like [so-called] “sluts” are more likely to be raped. Even though this is TRUE, these women were so incensed that they created a thing called a “slut-walk” because, you know facts, don’t matter.
Ever hear of a slut walk?
So you cannot on the one hand claim that feminists don’t say these kinds of things, and yet, say them.
* And I mean a SPECIFIC proven rape accuser, not just in generalities.
“Yes they are.”
To each his own, I suppose. To me they always look like some kind of bizarre clown weapon. (I’ll leave it up to the reader whether that’s a weapon for use by clowns or on clowns).
On a more serious note…what happened to slander and libel? Aren’t those supposed to be crimes? Are those prosecutions just never made or are they made and the media buries them. If I were falsly accused of rape, you’d better believe I’d be suing somebody.
Oh Aoirthoir – I wish we could have this conversation face-to-face. I think, despite how Unamused has portrayed me, you would find that I’m not a crazy man hating feminist. In fact, one of my favorite quotes is, “You don’t have to be anti-man to be pro-woman.” I don’t want to be superior to men and I don’t want me to be subservient to women. And I like you – agree that there are some times that a woman falsely accuses a man of rape and that is so amazingly wrong on so many levels. I also think, that if you look past the headlines, you would find that there’s a LOT more to the SlutWalk movement than “if you feel you were raped you were.” We’re not just pissed because one man said women can prevent their own rape by not dressing like a slut.
I have a hard time articulating my thoughts about this the way I want to through writing. And I’m hesitant to say too much on this site cause I’ve seen what Unamused has done with my quotes. However, here’s my best shot.
While all those suggestions (don’t dress provocatively, don’t hang out with people you don’t trust . . . etc) are well intentioned, they give the wrong suggestion that women CAN prevent rape. There is a lot of common sense in those suggestions, but a lot of false hope too. While I agree there’s a lot of fashion common sense involved in dressing provocatively – crimes of fashion are not punishable by rape. While I’m all for taking self defense classes, I’m also for our society taking a turn towards teaching “don’t rape” instead of “don’t get raped.”
I realize this is something we will never agree on. But SlutWalk is also about raising awareness about victim blaming. For example it’s saying, be smart and don’t put yourself in a situation with people you don’t know when your drinking, BUT if someone is raped when they were with people they didn’t know that well and they were drinking, lets not be so quick to say, “hey you were drinking with people you don’t know that well, what were you expecting?” lets also say “No one has the right to rape you, no matter how well they knew you or what you had to drink and we are going to take this allegation seriously.” Because you know as well as I do that sometimes we put ourselves in situations that aren’t all that safe, but that doesn’t make it okay for someone to rape you.
And I have my own feelings about alcohol and how it effects your inhibitions and how this plays into sexual assault. This is a really delicate touchy subject in my opinion. It’s not black and white and it deserves a lot of attention and awareness right now.
SlutWalk It has a very provocative name, but so what. (If you care to actually read what I wrote I wrote a whole post about this on my blog.) Hopefully some of this made sense, but I think you’d find I’m not as “psycho-feminist” as Unamused makes me out to be.
[What I did was identify you as illogical, for contradicting yourself. Once again: none of your quotes were "out of context."
A quote is out of context when the context — the other words around it, in the original source — changes the (apparent) meaning of the quote. For example:
(a) Hypothetical source: "If wanting to prevent rape makes me a sexist, then I'm a proud sexist."
(b) Hypothetical source quoted out of context: "... I'm a proud sexist."
Quoting a sentence out of a longer passage is not taking that sentence "out of context" unless doing so changes its meaning. When you understand what it means to take something out of context, you may understand why I have not done that with any of your quotes: you actually meant to say the two things I attributed to you.
1. Because the cop said women can avoid rape by not dressing like a slut, this proves there is a mindset about blaming the victim.
2. Women can, in fact, avoid rape by not dressing like a slut.]
“they give the wrong suggestion that women CAN prevent rape.”
Women CAN prevent rape. That isn’t a wrong suggestion. Not with 100% effectiveness. Not 100% of the time. But they can. They can run, they can scream, they can fight back AND they can not be in the bad situation in the first place. Just like being a safe, defensive driver doesn’t guarantee you won’t be killed in an accident; it just improves your odds.
“(If you care to actually read what I wrote I wrote a whole post about this on my blog.)”
You began this comment talking specifically to Aoirthoir, so I’m gonna take a little leap of faith that you’re still aiming this at him when you say this. If you scroll back up to the beginning of this thread, in one of his first comments, he said this:
“IamCharli I read your post and I have to agree with Unamused, he did not take your post out of context.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity#In_the_United_States
The Libertarian Party opposes sovereign immunity. I reject the sovereignty of anyone but the individual.
I am a VERY VERY public person iamcharli. I am EASILY findable. I have a HUGE internet footprint. My phone numbers are public, my email addresses are public, my business is public, my websites are public, my skype is public and the organizations I lead are public. I am under a Gaes (religious obligation) to answer anyone that contacts me.
Except French people. They are poopieheads.
I don’t judge individuals on the words of another. I mock you as freely as I mock anyone. Unamused has nothing to do with it. I’m Keltoi, Gael, Nordic, Teuton so the idea that people should be “hurt” because of words is entirely foreign to me. Kind of like how good looks are foreign to an Anglo. I mean honestly! They go out in public looking like that!
One of my favorite sayings is “you have to be anti-feminist to be pro-woman.”
Look, I am not saying that there are not women that self identify as feminists that don’t claim these things. My impressions of feminism AS A WHOLE, come entirely from my personal experiences with and observations of feminists. My impressions of any INDIVIDUAL feminist come from my interactions with her or my OBSERVATIONS of her.
I assume you mean you like men. Good for you, so do I. As to false rape allegations, in the case of most feminists, they will admit that such allegations are wrong. THAT’s not where we disagree. We disagree on just how many are false. I believe it to be a lot more than most people. Especially since most rape allegations are in-partner. I don’t buy it. BUT, good that we agree false rape allegations are wrong. Truthfully in MOST discussions of this sort, the mere statement by a non-feminist would be countered OVER and AGAIN with “yes yes it’s wrong BUT IT RARELY HAPPENS…” Even if true, that’s not the point. SO you get props for for not DIMISSING another’s view.
That means of course that I am going to find ways to insult you.
Iamcharli, I have been on the receiving end of sexual assault. I’ll spare myself the details if you don’t mind. But I KNOW EXACTLY what the slut walks are about. You are free to protest and you HAVE THE RIGHT to dress how you want. WITHOUT being raped.If you dress a certain way, you cannot then complain if someone looks, BUT you ABSOLUTELY can complain if someone touches you without your consent.
However, unlike me, and other fine persons, a Rapist isn’t going to care that you said, “dont rape me”. That’s sort of the definition of a rapist.
At the same time as much as you protest, and you have your right, STOP PLEASE with the meme “ONLY MEN CAN STOP RAPE…” This is incredibly insulting. It shifts the blame from the rapist to MEN NOT RAPING.
Listen. ALL press is GOOD press. I do NOT WANT people saying good things about me. How interesting is that? As far as how you articulate I understand your position, I’ve ALREADY read you. You articulate just fine. It’s just that your position is wrong wrong wrong wrong. I am right right right right.
In any case, don’t think that because I’ve not stormed your blog yet, and riddled you with condemnation, insults and generally bemusing commentary that I’ve not noticed you. I just have smaller fish to fry first. I’ll get around to insulting your proper when I am good and ready. So, how about you lay off demanding that I hurl aoirthoirisms at you ok? Sheesh.
No. They give the impression that women can be proactive and in SOME CASES help REDUCE HER RISK of rape. I don’t shop in certain places. I don’t hang out disreputable persons. I don’t flash money. I have REDUCED my RISK of being a victim of a violent theft. That does not mean that I have PREVENTED it.
I’ll agree if the hope is “by doing these things I have GUARUNTEED MYSELF that I shall NEVER EVER be raped..” Sure that is false hope. But most of us on THIS END of the spectrum (gorgeous, fat, toothless Irishmen) are not saying that is the guaruntee. We are saying that you REDUCE YOUR RISK. There is however ALWAYS going to be risks. And whether you reduce your risk or not, the fault of a violent offense, lies squarely on the shoulders of the VIOLENT OFFENDER. NOT the victim. EVER.
Having said that the world is a dangerous place. Very few OTHERS are going to look out for myself the way I will look out for myself. So, I take steps to reduce my risk. THAT is ALL we are saying.
We ALL AGREE with you ONE HUNDRED PERCENT. IN fact NO WOMAN should EVER have to be raped. The problem is, rapists disagree with you and I.
With a gun? No? Good luck with that then sugah.
See that is where we disagree. Informing persons that cigarettes cause cancer is not taking a “don’t get cancer” teaching. It is taking a “reduce your risk of cancer” teaching. As far as society teaching “don’t rape”, we ALREADY teach that. RAPISTS (and their often single mothers) typically don’t give a damned.
Maybe.
Um, that IS what we are saying. The ONLY thing in this regards we MIGHT disagree on is the definition of rape. Is her merely being intoxicated rape? Then is it rape if HE is intoxicated? Is it rape if they are BOTH intoxicated? Should they BOTH be punished? Is it rape if they are lovers and have gotten intoxicated for years and had sex intoxicated and understood this to be consensual but suddenly he changes his mind (WITHOUT having informed her) and feels he was raped? If someone cannot consent when they are intoxicated then can we not say that they didn’t consent to drive, so they can’t be charged?
None of us are saying it is ok to rape. The fact that rape is wrong doesn’t prevent rapists from raping. Again that’s the very definition of rape.
I have my own opinions about it as well. ONE TIME, and ONE TIME ONLY I made out with a woman when I was drunk (and she was, and she was the one that asked me if she could…). And at that time only because I was so drunk I could barely see. ALL OTHER TIMES I have been even the least bit drunk I have shooed the women I was wooing out the door, EVEN if they TOLD ME FLAT OUT they consented. I follow this procedure because I know that being drunk there is always the possibility that I THINK they said something, which they did not say.
What you name your events is entirely up to you. I do not police peoples’ language.
Again I am not judging you based on what Unamused has to say. I have already read your blog.
In fact I rarely control people (well…nvm). MOST of the time you are going to find my commentary is OBJECTING to people trying to control others, trying to claim they thought or felt this…that they didn’t say they did..and so on.
As you have presented your position is how I ALREADY understood YOUR position to be. I also understand that there are others that have a MORE EXTREME position than you. I AGREE with SOME of your position. I DISAGREE with SOME of your position.
Keep in mind this following chant: Aoirthoir is always right. I am sometimes right.
“And I like you – agree that there are some times that a woman falsely accuses a man of rape and that is so amazingly wrong on so many levels.
I assume you mean you like men.”
I am relatively certain this is a missing comma error. I *think* what she means is:
And I, like you, agree that there are some times…
Yes that makes sense. In that case Annie, I, like you, like men. But I don’t like men the way you like men.
I haven’t finished reading your reply, but lets get one thing straight – I’ve NEVER said “only men can stop rape”. Never – I believe it’s a direct result of SO much of our society. I think it’s a community effort and that it’s a shift in thinking that will have to change. But I do not believe that men are the only one’s who can change this. Especially because it’s not JUSt women who are raped. There are a lot of men and boys who experience this too.
. . . now i need to finish reading your reply =) and yea i meant to write “And I, like you, agree. . .”
I think that chant would sound better if it was “Charli is never wrong. Aoirthoir is sometimes right.” =)
In regards to this:
“Is her merely being intoxicated rape? Then is it rape if HE is intoxicated? Is it rape if they are BOTH intoxicated? Should they BOTH be punished? Is it rape if they are lovers and have gotten intoxicated for years and had sex intoxicated and understood this to be consensual but suddenly he changes his mind (WITHOUT having informed her) and feels he was raped? If someone cannot consent when they are intoxicated then can we not say that they didn’t consent to drive, so they can’t be charged?”
I don’t have those answers. I wish I did. I think it varies from case to case which I guess in turn makes it even harder to figure out. Those situations are never black and white.
Let me be a little clearer – I don’t think we should just say “oh hay rapists! listen all of you have to stop raping okay?” and that they’ll get it. I don’t think the current “generation” of rapists are truly capable of changing. HOWEVER – the change has to start somewhere. There is so much slut-shaming in our culture. And I think that leads to other things, like thinking that it’s okay to do what ever you want sexually to a woman without her consent. It’s an entire mind set that has MANY factors that have many roots. But that change has got to start somewhere and maybe if we teach our young boys and girls to think differently about the genders that their future will be different. Maybe they’ll grow up with a better respect for sexual autonomy for all people. I could be crazy wrong here, but it’s worth a shot.
I also think that we put so much emphasis on female sexuality as being something thats owned. That once a woman has sex with someone she loses a little bit of her worth. That your virginity is something you give away to the “right person”. I think that if we didn’t give female sexuality such weight there would also be a lot less of the “drunken situations” you described above. Again – this is a mind set and slut-shaming has GOT to stop. (Part of our goal at the SlutWalk I’m organizing is to promote healthy sexual autonomy for both sexes.)
Listen, I know you try to be all tough with your snarky comebacks, but deep down your are a slut ally. I know it . . .
I believe you. That was not a statement about you PERSONALLY.
I agree that a shift would have to occur for rape to stop. Rape, would have to cease being of benefit to the rapist or the penalties of rape so catastrophic as to make the cost untenable to ever rape.
Yes. The numbers are very close to each other.
Usually I mean to write “And I, like you, like me.”
Ahhh!! Eve Ensler – one of the most loved feminist ever (among other feminists I guess) said this in a post she wrote for the Guardian on Friday:
“The events unfolding in the case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former head of the IMF accused of sexually assaulting a hotel chambermaid, are both surprising and surprisingly not surprising. The New York Times first reported claims that there were serious problems with the prosecution relating to the credibility of Strauss-Kahn’s accuser, who is originally from Guinea.”
Well look at that – “accused” and “accuser” are BOTH used in that paragraph. SEE Aoirthoir – there is hope!! I told you that you got your info from shitty feminist, they’re making the rest of us look bad! =)
You would be wrong of course. Since you are unaquainted with the proper pronunciation of Aoirthoir, I can understand your coming to such an egregiously vile conclusion.
When things vary from case to case, then we cannot have state or federal mandates that criminalize a gender. This is where common law courts come into play. Peers, of each, the accuser, the accused, sit in judgement. The punishment was determined by the accuser. No judgements are FORCED. The found guilty party then chose or not to pay. But through sheer force of honor, those found guilty tended to adhere to the directive of the judges (druid, jury etc). I speak in this case specifically of Keltoi law. The most noble and beautiful of all of this planets legal decisions.
Sure it does have to start somewhere. Here are some steps:
1. No governments. People who are righteous do not need governed. People who are wicked kill and harm in grotesquely far fewer numbers than ANY government in history. But those seeking to “govern” others (control, enslave, force to obey) use the fear of the wicked as the claim to why we need to be governed. DESPITE the fact again that governments have been responsible for far more outrageous violations of human dignity than ALL criminals combined.
2. No governments means no taxation, no theft of resources for imagined needs. Now resources go to whom they belong, local parties as needed.
3. LOCAL courts, run by persons who have demonstrated themselves to be of just character and righteous demeanor, ensure that actual rapes, get punished and false accusations are minimized.
4. Capital punishment is hardly needed since most capital offenses are one time events. Instead the victim (or victim’s family) sets the price for the crime.
5. Jails are needed only rarely. Jails have been demonstrated to not only NOT reform persons, but to make violent persons MORE violent, and non-violent persons to become violent. REVENGE is not working.
6. You abuse kids? Your right to produce more is terminated permanently.
Not in my culture.
Sure nothing wrong with that. This isn’t a ZERO SUM equation. Teach them all sorts of things INCLUDING to avoid hanging out with persons of low birth.
That sexual autonomy HAS to go both ways. That’s where the INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty part comes in. It also means not shaming boys, ceasing the endless messages that males are perpetrators of sexual violence (when females are as likely to commit sexual assault as males), that merely looking at a woman is bad, merely talking to her, asking her out etc.
It means if I work with you, you have a choice. Don’t wear low cut blouses, or don’t get upset if I am forced by proximity of you, to me in the converation, to look at the damned ceiling. It also means to cease these endless shaming tactics that so many feminists use. “He never gets laid…” “He lives at home with his mother in the basement…” etc. And yes I have seen these things from feminists OFTEN.
Now saying these things, if they do not apply to you, they don’t. Just as you are not (I presume) indicting me when you say what is wrong with ‘society’, I am not indicting you.
Sure, why not. I also think its worth a shot to teach daughters and sons to protect themselves. To go about armed. To go about in teams and to work together if they see someone bothering one of their own.
It is owned and it ought to be owned.
Why hang around with people like that? I don’t. I’ve been ALL OVER the country. I am a shape shifting Pagan so I can move in and out of groups of persons from many different communities. All of these attitudes, I’ve never seen them. TV and Movies and Media that is controlled by three major corporations doesn’t count. Stop watching that trite.
No there wouldn’t. In fact many of the drunken situations occur because both men and women like to use alcohol to relax, to give them the courage that they might not have to press forward with a sexual advance. The vast majority of the time, persons who have sex whilst drunk, do not feel they were violated. But it only takes a half of a percent of persons claiming they were violated, to make me want a contract before I fuck.
What does that mean it has GOT to stop?
What is actually slut shaming, and what is not slut shaming but is called slut shaming, is not going to stop. Neither are murders. Neither are rapes. Neither are robberies. Neither are a whole host of things.
Speaking with passion is not laying a claim to “being tough”. Resisting labels that apply to OTHERS and not to me, is not being tough. Speaking about FACTS is not being tough. Or “trying to be all tough”.
As to being a slut ally, I am an ally of humans. I believe in the TOTAL AND COMPLETE SOVEREIGNTY OF EVERY HUMAN BEING. I believe in the right of a female to make her claim of equal rights, and to DEFINE what that is. I believe the right of the male and female to make their Declaration of Rights (wherein each defines what are THEIR rights, not limited by persons who we never met from hundreds of years ago).
Some rights I believe in:
The right to TOTAL SELF DEFINITION.
The right to FULL BODILY AUTONOMY.
The right to SAY WHATEVER WE WANT.
The right to walk the earth ANYWHERE we choose.
The right to pay ONLY the taxes WE CONSENT TO PAY.
The right to form ANY relationship we want for ANY reason and to end those and enter others.
(this includes business relationship, familial, sexual, friendly, equal defense, communal…)
The right to NOT have to have my relationship validated at the whims of those who believe they deserve to govern me.
The right to NOT be governed because I do not NEED to be governed.
The right to AGREE with anyone I want.
The right to DISAGREE with anyone I want.
The right to SUPPORT those I disagree with if I choose.
The right to three wives, seven concubines and none slave girls.
The right for all of them to be redheads and not talk during episodes of Caprica.
I said NOT TALK during Caprica. Fuck sake.
These are some basics of my world view. So it has nothing to do with being a “slut supporter” any more than it has to do with being a “supporter of a person who is pro-life” or “pro-gay marraige (you know the ones that HATE gay men, because what fucking man wants to be married? Now the government has foisted upon all those gay men that didn’t want to get married but were being pestered by their lovers, the last removal of an excuse….job well done assholes)”
And I am not snarky I am just interesting.
When I see feminists as a group not immediately jump to the conclusion that a man committed an act he is accused of, then I will believe you.
As far as their being hope, there is. Men are getting fed up with being second class citizens and more and more of us are disengaging.
Fixed. (ALL consenting of course.)
I hate to break it to you dude but from that list, you might be a feminist . . . =) except for the part about concubines and that nonsense.
Just sayin’ . . .
See, there you go, demonstrating exactly why, no, sorry, I’m not a feminist. If feminists truly believed in agency as they claim, then when someone has stated plainly they are not a feminist, even when that person holds CERTAIN ideals in common with feminists (as we all often hold things in common), the feminist would not claim they might be.
I’ve been on your planet for some many years now. I’ve had plenty of time to examine these issues. And no, I am absolutely not a feminist.
As to the issue of concubines or slave girls, if women are consenting, why is such an issue at all?
Suggesting that you might be a feminist was *gasp* just a joke!
And I wrote that post before you posted that they were consenting concubines. . . and in that case I have nothing against women who willing choose to be sex workers (or concubines). To each is own!
:D Alright I’ll accept it as such. But I am sure you understand that not knowing that how it sits in my craw having been so often told who I am by others. And it is a tendncy to tell folks that they are feminists if they believe certain things.
Either way I hope it is evident that yes, there are things that we hold in common with feminists. And things we object from feminists. Some of those things we object to, not all feminists agree with and even some feminists agree with us rather than other feminists.
But the one thing we all agree on is that French are Poopieheads.
Fair enough. But I don’t have to respect them. Because honestly why should I respect anyone that even likes me much less wants me to fuck them. I mean *II* wouldn’t fuck me…that’s just gross.
:D
*facepalm*
Well it is gross.
So, I posted an ad for my shitty futon on Craigslist and it was flagged and removed. I suspect because one of those shitty feminists that Iamcharli was takling about. Here’s the text:
Title:(free stuff) Futon for Poor Decision Makers
Are you taking “Women’s Studies” in college as a major and growing ever disheartened at the inevitable cascade into lifetime poverty which your decision has thrust you?
Have you made the mistake of having children too soon and now your bank account is always at or below mine?
Do you often dream of having a really lousy sleeping unit to sleep on because you know if you spend even ONE DIME on a bed your mother is going to kick you out of her basement?
Well buddy, have I got the solution for you! A really terribly uncomfortable, sunken, EXTREMELY HUGE (this thing will fill up your mother’s basement AND your Uncle Freddy’s Foyay – see I can say foyer like I have more money than I do), stained, covered in cat furr (so you can prepare yourself for your future life as a cat lady/man) futon.
Cost? Come on bucko, we know you don’t have the dough, neither do I, that’s how I picked up the danged thing.
Conditions? Get a truck. Yeah I’m laughing at that thought too. If you had at truck, you’d just live in it instead of on the couch of your ex boyfriend.
When? Soon for the sake of all that is holy and righteous!
How? Call ###.###.####, be sure to riddle the answerer with some sort of appropriate ridicule for making the same decision you are about to make, picking up a really crappy futon. Then, if he laughs enough he might just give you directions to come pick it up.
By “HE” I of course mean “ME” but he was speaking in third person when he wrote this triteful but truthful advertIZ ment. (see again I can talk like I have money….)
Kind Regards
“Why shouldn’t armed self-defense be?”
because “101 ways to kick a man in the groin” is a more fun reading than “how not to dress like a ho”. grrrl power!
“You cannot deal with women demanding true equality. You want to control them.”
as if they have given reasons to the contrary.