This is a post about personal responsibility, and about how it applies to only one gender and not the other.
What can aptly be called the sexual grievance industry teaches: ". . . sexual arousal is not an excuse for sexual assault. . . . people always have the ability to stop themselves even when they are aroused." See here. And: "We know that men are capable of being kind, caring people -- that is why we are sending them the message to not be 'that guy.' Sexually assaulting someone is a choice, not an uncontrollable instinct." See here.
And, of course, those points are self-evident. No reasonable person could possibly dispute them.
But compare those admonitions to men with feminist Amanda Hess' rationale for why some women make false rape claims: Rape culture, she claims, is the reason women falsely cry rape. Among the ways it manifests itself is when "the woman had desired the sex all along, but must defend her femininity by saying that she had been coerced into sex." See here.
Men who commit sexual assault = no excuses;
Women who make false rape claims = merely defending their femininity.
Some people claim I attack feminism. I don't attack feminism. I just quote it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
16 comments:
No,you need not say anything more. The quotes you provide are sickening enough without elaborating.
She must be ugly.
eeew, I just looked, she is.
Comments on the thread by Ginmar are ridiculous. She's the equivalent of a misogynist who thinks that women are always liars.
She says that 1. the fact that the video was taken at all is a crime
2. The girl may have been coerced even if the video doesn't show any struggle = rape
3. The girl may have consented then withdrew consent = ra[e
4. Even if the girl consented, she may not have known about the video and may have withdrawn consent had she known = rape
5. The prosecution "forced" her to watch the video, which then made her "crack" and falsely recant = rape (since women who were actually raped would have recanted rather than have the video be shown to other people)
6. The tape could have been edited = rape
When asked "what would make you believe it was consensual, given that she already said it was consensual: Ginmar says "After all this? Nothing would work."
I cannot imagine anything more bigoted and sickening.
To paraphrase Angry Harry: "what a piece of shit is feminism."
Cel,
Ginmar is the worst kind of bigot. She is given proof, that specifically refutes what she says, and then says that the proof is wrong.
False Rape Accusations are caused by Feminist Culture.
Many women who make false rape claims are merely acting out their victim fantasies.
The false accuser believes that the rape claim is a right and an empowerment of theirs.
Say Steven, I had a question bout your post on the Hofstra case (Lambs To The Slaughter). It was a very well-written post in good detail, and illustrated the problems regarding false rape. However, I was wondering what the source of your information is.
Also, did you get the email I sent you regarding a possible contribution?
...Did you read the next few paragraphs, where she says this isn't an excuse for lying about rape?
I think the cited article was trying to incite thought about rape culture, not make excuses for lying about rape.
12:21: Info culled from news reports cited at FRS when the story broke. All sources noted there.
Cel: we are backed up on email, give us time.
"I think the cited article was trying to incite thought about rape culture, not make excuses for lying about rape."
There is no such thing as "rape culture". So it is about as relevant as inciting thought about Santa Claus.
The Hofstra accuser didn't lie to protect her femininity from "slut-shaming" by an evil "patriarchy"; she lied because she got caught cheating by her boyfriend.
Anonymous - "I think the cited article was trying to incite thought about rape culture, not make excuses for lying about rape."
This is being overly generous. There is not such thing as a “rape culture”, and despite all that man-hating radical gender-feminists in the SGI have tried to dissemble to the public, women still, intuitively understand that EVERYONE take rape seriously – deadly serious.
Danmell Ndonye at Hofstra was not responding to some pressure placed on her via either some supposed “rape culture” nor a over-bearing “Patriarchy” No, she was acting merely to deflect the suspicions of her boyfriend [who you will recall had gone looking for her, and had found her in a condition which, in his own words to a reporter, told him that she had just had sex with someone else. You’ll “recall”, or I’ll keep reminding you – either way is fine by me].
Likewise, Biurny Peguero and Crystal Gail Mangum found themselves confront and facing to have to answer for their behaviors, did exactly what woman have always known they could do when confronted in such a way – they cried rape.
They did this, as has so many others in stories covered at the FRS, because they KNEW that they could easily invoke their female-privileged status as rape victims and get a considerable measure of (temporary) amnesty from the consequences of their own personal misdeeds. It IS every bit as simple as that. Always has been.
Just as woman have never needed permission nor encouragement from LE to make false claims, they have never needed feminist indoctrination, a “rape culture”, nor fear of Patriarchal “slut shaming” to cause them to false cry rape. No, they have a fundamental understanding that rape is always considered very seriously, and they can effectively use it as a smoke screen. Woman like Danmell Ndonye are do not fear for their reputations more broadly, but rather very specifically with regards to partners, friends, and family. Outside of those specific individuals who they’d prefer to hide their acts from, they are simply “self-actualizing” and becoming sexually “empowered”, just as feminism has taught them they should. They have little to fear from society “judging” them – just those close to them. The choice to make an FRA is HIGHLY “localized”, and is more likely to affect a woman who doesn’t even believe in this myth of a “rape culture”. [for instance, a traditional stay-at-home church-going wife and mother would feel she had more to lose (reputationally and relationship-wise) than would a more liberated young women with only a boyfriend, should her sexual peccadillo’s become exposed.]
The simple fact is that FRA’s come about primarily because woman believe that such a claim will be considered very seriously, and that they will gain sympathy. Woman intuitively understand that they, unlike men, have the ability to use claims of that crime to invoke “victim status” privilege. It seems many see it as a fundamental “right”, not unlike their right to invoke their 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
If their in a tough situation, and telling the truth is going to be difficult on them, they just invoke their “rape victim privilege”. It isn’t that the Government, LE, the SGI, the lie of “rape culture”, Patriarchy, nor even society at-large MADE them do it. No, all of these ALLOWED them to do it in one way or another.
From Marx and Antimisandry.com :
"Ker-ching!
I've noticed this too, when you quote feminists and ask them to substantiate themselves... they claim it is misogynistic! LOL"
This is always the case. For a feminist, as with all idealogues, to simply question them is to attack the almighty and unquestionable. It is the device that totalitarians have used for ages. "If you question me then you are against me and all that is good therefore you are evil."
Feiminism ironicaly, and quitie hipocriticaly, uses the "we are all weak women so we need special protection" card to make this argument bulletproof. Unfortunately it works most of the time.
By the way FRS is reffering to an article written by Amanda Hess that was published in the Washington City Paper fifteen months ago that mentioned Paul Elam's article "Yawning at Hoffstra." I started a thread about the article and started to post franticly on the Washington City Paper's post. Here is the AM thread:
http://antimisandry.com/false-allegations/look-they-already-after-our-lester-23283.html
Here is the link to the article in the City Paper:
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/09/17/false-rape-accusations-and-rape-culture/
I posted under the namd of "Bob" , my real name, in the posts there and I must say I had a lot of fun with it. Go check it out, it would be fun if we all could get back on her case again!
And, of course, those points are self-evident. No reasonable person could possibly dispute them.
I have read a feminist disputing them. Specifically, she claimed that an erection was prima facie evidence of consent. In effect, sexual arousal indeed is an excuse for sexual assault, if the target is male.
Cel -- don't have that information handy.
I actually went over to the Hess article, and have submitted one thing. It's still awaiting approval, so we'll see what we get.
What did I post?
www.falserapesociety.blogspot.com
Last I heard hess had left
Washington City paper.
If you want to debate her crazy a** you know how to find her.
P.S> a cock bib is a fine christmas present.
(that's what hess got before she left her paper.
I did not capitalize her name for good reason.
(think about it)
Post a Comment