Hate Bllod Text Black

Rape culture is hate culture

Rape culture is a narrative.

Whether it’s one reflecting fiction or fact I’ll leave alone for the moment, but even the most earnest proponents of the claimed reality of rape culture cannot deny that rape culture is a cultivated narrative in the public political discourse and the public zeitgeist of western civilization in the 21st century.

Some feminists will claim rape culture is nothing less than a factual representation of the apparently real public environment of sexual predation against all women and girls. Ignored in this definition is the fact that women are not the only victims of rape. It discounts the rape of children by clergy, the rape of men by men, the rape of men by women, the rape of juveniles by their teachers, including female teachers, and the rape of male prisoners by female prison employees, both in adult as well as juvenile correctional facilities. No, for the most earnest proponents of so-called rape culture, it’s a description of male sexuality, and in fact male identity, as predatory and criminal. And it is the confining of female identity into the tiny enclosure of permanent victim, and helpless inanimate object.

Rape culture is a belief, not simply in the innate evil in all male human beings, but in the perpetual childhood and lack of agency in women. And this cultural narrative persists in a world in which rape is, by a wide margin, the least frequent type of violent crime tracked by law enforcement agencies. For the stats on that I refer you to the US DOJ statistics.

My personal characterization of what the narrative of rape culture is will probably raise objections from it’s proponents, those who believe in the narrative that rape culture is a concrete reality and not simply a fabricated cultural narrative.

Prempting such complaints, I will refer to the writing of one Susan Brownmiller. Brownmiller is a feminist and an author, and among other places, her essays are published in the Huffington Post. And, when she is published by such current online journals, it is always with an obligatory reference to her 1975 book “Against Our Will” [1]. Written in ’75 yes, but continuously referenced every time Brownmiller is published in the HuffPo and elsewhere.

The content of that 1975 book is relevant to our culture’s current narrative, specifically, the component we refer to as rape culture.

Here is an excerpt.

 

Indeed, one of the earliest forms of male bonding must have been the gang rape of one woman by a band of marauding men. This accomplished, rape became not only a male prerogative, but man’s basic weapon of force against woman, the principal agent of his will and her fear.

His forcible entry into her body, despite her physical protestations and struggle, became the vehicle of his victorious conquest over her being, the ultimate test of his superior strength, the triumph of his manhood.

Man’s discovery that his genitalia could serve as a weapon to prehistoric times, along with the use of fire and the first crude stone axe. From prehistoric times to the present, I believe, rape has played a critical function.

It is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear.

According to this, for a man, his genitals are not a physical connection to sexual identity, or spirituality as manifested in some pagan religions. It is not even an integral part of himself as a physical being. No, in this narrative, a penis is an implement of pain and damage. It’s a weapon.

A more vicious and cruel imagining of human beings as other, and as enemy, it’s hard for me to fathom. But, it gets worse.

Rape, according to Brownmiller, is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear. All men, against all women, in a process of concsious and purposeful intimidation and cultivation of fear.

These are ideas from Brownmillers’ writing, which almost every time she has article or an essay published in HuffPo and elsewhere, are promoted.

Brownmiller’s definition then is integral to every mention of rape culture.

Understand this. Rape culture is a product of hate culture. Its nothing less than a conscious process of constant imputation of malice by which all feminists keep all men and boys in a climate of permanent accusation.

[1] http://www.susanbrownmiller.com/susanbrownmiller/html/against_our_will.html

  • AVFM seeks app writer volunteer

    Are you an MHRA? Can you write apps for iPhone and Android? Are you willing to do that for AVFM on a special project? Please contact us.

    A Voice for Men seeks a volunteer with solid app writing experience to help us develop an app that will be linked to the AVFM brand. If you have the qualifications and are serious about following through, we would love to hear from you. Your efforts could be of great assistance to this website and to our cause. Please contact Paul Elam at paul@avoiceformen.com for more details...

  • Wikimasters, Editors, Translators, and Writers Wanted *Apply Now*

    Fight Wikipedia censorship! A Voice for Men and WikiMANNia are working to increase knowledge of men's issues through two wikis: the AVfM Reference Wiki for scholarly references, and WikiMANNia for general-interest men's issues. Volunteers needed for writing, proofreading, and organizing. Some knowledge of the German language will be helpful but *not* required.

    Please write to editorial_team@wikimannia.org...

  • Tawil

    @JTO: “Rape culture is… nothing less than a conscious process of constant imputation of malice by which all feminists keep all men and boys in a climate of permanent accusation.”

    A perfect summation.

    • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suz

      You beat me to it.

    • aphoriac

      The whole feminist take on rape is ghastly, twisted, dishonest and dehumanising. However, it hides under the cloak of compassion and that is why it is so insidious and dangerous.

      I’ve been responding to an article on HuffPo by the ‘Feminist, Writer and Satirist,’ Soraya Chemaly, entitled ’50 Actual Facts About Rape’

      In response to her mention of the use of rape in wartime, I posted: –

      “In the Bosnian war, the most extreme, vile and hateful political and military leader and propagandist was the female Serbian president, Biljana Plavšić. I don’t think she had any greater problem with the murder and rape of Bosniak women than she did with the murder and rape of Bosniak men. I also hope that no one has forgotten that American women participated in the murder, rape and torture of prisoners in interrogation camps in Iraq. The overall commander of these camps was Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, a woman. The commander of Bagram camp, where some prisoners were tortured to death, was Captain Carolyn Wood, also a woman.”

      She replied: –

      ““There is not doubt that women participate in systems of sexualized violence. This is how patriarchal violence works.”

      In other words, all victims of sexual violence, whether male or female and whether the perpetrator is male or female, are really victims of ‘patriarchal violence’. We also know that ‘the partiarchy’ is made by men and for men and all men are participants in it to a greater or lesser extent. This gives rise to the logic that a male victim of female violence isn’t so much a victim of the perpetrator; he is more a victim of himself. In the sense in which we normally use the term ‘victim,’ he cannot really be said to be a victim at all. This is feminist humanism!

  • Skeptic

    Thankyou JtO.
    As I’ve said previously and will keep on saying feminism with it’s screwed up hysterical concepts of ‘patriarchy’ and ‘rape culture’ is nothing short of emotional terrorism against males.

  • Codebuster

    It [rape] is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear.

    Feminists’ obsession with rape is nothing more or less than subconscious projection. It is feminists telling us that of all the many different types of men that exist, the only types of men that they notice, the types that they think matter, are those that they imagine to be rapists. It is feminists telling us that any other kind of man does not count because he is invisible to them. It is feminists revealling an aspect of female sexuality and fantasy. And because feminists are projecting, it implies that feminists in power would, if they could, become among the worst tyrants in history.

    Consider the entirety of the excerpt that JTO quoted above. This is the juicy stuff of women’s porn – their romance novels. Talk about projection.

    • John A

      50 shades of rape

  • http://gloriusbastard.com/ JJ

    Ialso never hear them talk about those poor souls in Africa; rape as a weapon of war.

    These men have their town assaulted; the thugs/”revolutionaries”/guerillas take these men and hold them down while each of them take their “turn” raping the men of the town/village. Often maiming them as well.

    It is a form of humiliation against the whole society he is from himself; an annihilation of their women’s belief in their men’s ability to protect them. And the terror of their family in knowing that any of them could be next.

    In this case they are right; rape is a weapon. They should know; thy use against us in prison if and when we fail to pay support after they have our jobs taken away. But it is men on men; feminist porn. Also, it forces many African women to “fall out of love” with these men “if he can’t protect himself she says, he can’t protect me and a family (from armed men in groups mind you, IOW-Hes weak); feminist porn.

    Also, it is Muslim men on Christian men; also feminist porn through fear of liberal ideology and that a Muslim has no trepidation in taking it to them physically.

    Like the old adage says-careful what you wish for.

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      “Muslim men on Christian men?” Excuse me? As someone who’s studied that particular faith for a few decades, I would have to question a source for any assertion that that is a commonplace religious weapon for that particular faith grouping.

      Speaking of which, I’d like to point out to JTO’s reference to rape of children by clergy, at least so far as clergy in North America is concerned that is significantly less common than the rape of children by schoolteachers. For all the much-ballyhoo’d scandal of Catholic priests molesting children and having sexual relations with teens, study on that has demonstrated that Catholic priests are no more likely to do that than clergy of Protestant denominations, and that the Catholic sex scandals were not about the crimes so much as the coverup by Church authorities. Across all mainline Christian sects, Catholic priests are no more likely to do that than Protestant clergy are–and in any case, going back to JTO’s point, clergy of all types are less likely to do it than schoolteachers are, yet oddly enough, we rarely attack schoolteachers and others who often find themselves in positions of power over children. I thus found that reference rather jarring; it might well have said “boyscout leaders” or “hospital workers” instead (those being two other places where the problem sometimes occurs), and it would have stuck out for me as “why pick on them in particular?”

      Anyway I wound up doing some background checking on that quote by Brownmiller, as a few men’s sites I’ve seen carry hateful quotes by feminists that turn out to be misquotes or out of context, and I like to make sure we do our due diligence here. From what I can tell, however, according to multiple sources that’s definitely a real quote by Brownmiller and is a belief system central to her belief system, and that of many of her acolytes — this one for example:

      http://womst201.pbworks.com/w/page/4304996/Susan%20Brownmiller%20presentaion

      The fact of the matter is that this whole narrative on rape is just plain wrong. It even carries with in the implicit assumption that women can’t rape with their vaginas and men can’t have vaginas thrust onto their penises against their will. This assertion is fundamentally wrong, and more of us should speak up about it.

      Despite my one quibble, the thrust of JTO’s argument is correct: “rape culture” is mostly a product of an ignorant, pseudoscientific hate cult that gets human sexuality completely wrong and demonizes half the entire human race. I’m amazed how many people have been so blase for so long in accepting this hateful bullshit.

      • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

        The main reasons the Catholic Church is criticized more than Protestant denominations are that (A) it’s the biggest single denomination, thus the biggest target, (B) it’s more hierarchically structured than others, which means the hierarchy itself presents a bigger and more obvious target than (most) Protestant denominations, and (C) the deep Protestant cultural roots of the UK and US have always been friendly to Catholic-bashing. IMNSHO.

        I was molested by a public schoolteacher. There is ample evidence that school districts around the US cover up molesters. The problem is that there is no one single unified national school system, just as when some Methodist preacher somewhere goes bonkers, well, it’s just that preacher and his little corner church and not all Methodist preachers everywhere who have to answer for it and “the Methodists” don’t have to “cover up,” they have full deniability: “well we don’t know that guy.”

        The fact is that Catholic priests are all men (as you know) and they’re all now subject to pedophile jokes, even though they’re no more likely to be pedophiles than anyone else and LESS likely to be pedophiles than schoolteachers. So whatever else you think about the Catholic Church, bear in mind what you’re saying about those MEN every time you make that sweeping statement about them.

        Just my perspective.

  • dejour

    The issue is that the search for gender equality can rely on one of two models:

    a) gender role model – men and women are groomed for different roles by society. There is no conspiracy, it is simply the result of men and women exerting social pressure on boys, girls and other adults.

    b) oppression model – there is a male conspiracy to keep women down.

    Obviously the majority of feminists support “b”. But how does the oppression happen? When talking about racial groups being oppressed, the oppression might happen via slavery, apartheid, war, police enforcement, etc. But it’s unclear how it happens to women (mainly because it doesn’t). In a struggle to make up facts to conform to theory, feminists have said that men collectively use sex to oppress women, they use rape to oppress women and they use domestic violence to oppress women.

    Since the oppression model relies on oppression to be true, feminists will react very angrily if you suggest that rape culture isn’t real, or that domestic violence is a two-way street.

    • aphoriac

      There’s a third model, which most closely matches reality and, as such, must be the basis for stable social and personal relations between men and women. Broadly speaking, men and women are different, and these differences are sexually determined. The differences incline men and women towards different identities and roles. However, men and women have common characteristics associated with being human. Although expressed differently, these characteristics are the same in men and women. A sane and satisfactory dispensation is built on the understanding that what matters is the common underlying characteristics that define what it is to be human. Men and women can have their biology, and any identities that arise from that biology, and have their humanity as well because their biology merely determines their sex, not their humanity. The equality between men and women is at the level of their humanity. The sex-based differences don’t matter. A woman will be happy and fulfilled when she recognises that the way to express her humanity and to have her humanity recognised, acknowledged and respected is to be herself. She need do nothing else. The same applies to men. The feminist notion of gender is a red-herring. Feminists do not speak to the experience of sane women because sane women know they are not just gendered, they know they are sexed. Their sex is personal to them and integral to them, they like it that way, and they don’t want any fucker telling them what it is. This is the essential stuff. Everything else is mere detail. There is such a thing as a smart feminist. There is a small group of them who have realised that although gender is a construct, it is a construct of sex, and sex is not a construct.

  • AntZ

    “Rape culture is a product of hate culture. Its nothing less than a conscious process of constant imputation of malice by which all feminists keep all men and boys in a climate of permanent accusation.”

    Very true.

  • Keith

    Indeed, one of the earliest forms of feminine bonding must have been the gang murder of one man by a band acting on behalf of a woman. This accomplished, rape became not only a female prerogative, but her basic weapon of force against men, the principal agent of her will and his fear.

    Her forcible entry into his thoughts, despite his physical protestations and struggle, became the vehicle of her victorious conquest over his being, the ultimate test of her superior nurturing is the triumph over his manhood.

    Women’s discovery that her genitalia could serve as a weaponized commodity to prehistoric times, along with the use of fire, stone axe and trade. From prehistoric times to present, I believe, rape has played a critical function.

    It is nothing more or less than a conscious process of emasculating intimidation by which all women keep all men in a state of isolated fear.

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      Ha. Good one. Now go even deeper, and try this bit of pseudo-logic in yet another manner:

      Indeed, one of the earliest forms of feminine bonding must have been the gang rape of one man by a band women who discovered that erections are not voluntary, especially among young men, and may easily be forced by sticking a finger in the anus and massaging the prostate, so they might hold him down and engulf his penis with their vaginas as an act of group violence to force compliance to female will. This accomplished, rape became not only a female prerogative, but her basic weapon of force against men, the principal agent of her will and his fear.

      Her forcible engulfing of his penis, despite his physical protestations and struggle, became the vehicle of her victorious conquest over his being, the ultimate test of her superior sexual power being the triumph over his manhood.

      Women’s discovery that the fundamentally involuntary nature of erections and hip-motion during copulation in prehistoric times was, along with the use of fire, stone axe and trade, the principle upon which civilization was built. From prehistoric times to present, I believe, rape of men by women has played a critical function.

      It is nothing more or less than a conscious process of emasculating intimidation by which all women keep all men in a state of isolated fear.

      You see, by modern definitions, backward and pseudoscientific as they are, female sexual responses are all fundamentally involuntary and acted-upon, and vaginas are merely “holes,” whereas males have 100% control over all their physiological sex responses. The very idea that we accept that somehow it’s EASY to insert an erect penis into an unwilling vagina says a whole lot about our culture as a whole, and not even just hateful feminist cultists like Brownmiller.

    • JinnBottle

      And very possibly an ugly past of female-on-male gross *physical* as well as mental-spiritual assault exists. There is a considerably large contingency among anthropologists, including Frazier and Robert Graves, who believe that the myths of Dionysos and his Bacchantes is based on a prehistoric reality of “colleges” (!) of women who roamed the woodlands of Greece and elsewhere before – and considerably long after – the arrival of the Aryans and their civilizing patriarchal culture. On certain nights of moon phases, seasonal celebration, etc, they, the women, would get loaded on various leaf preparations from semi-toxic plants and trees, pick out a lone wandering male (according to Graves and the Dionysos cult myths, these were often the despised male homosexuals), kill him (again, according to myth, stoning was the method-of-choice), rip him limb from limb, and sometimes devour him.

      Frazer’s and Graves’ findings have often had doubt cast upon them by modern anthropologists. Still, if there’s any fire at all where that smoke is – and if feminists weren’t too lazy and/or obfuscationist to know or tell the *full* story of “The White Goddess” – you wouldn’t hear them quote Graves quite as oft and easily as they do.

  • Kukla

    I love when feminists complain about rape culture in the West when there is nothing of the sort here. If these femifascists want to see something like a rape culture they should take a trip to the Congo or Papua New Guinea.

    The fact that these morons can sit there in their safe homes/offices/workplaces and complain about rape culture HERE is absolutely offensive. What a bunch of stupid cunts.

    • Theseus

      I too have searched for this mysterious tribe of western men that “normalize”, joke about, and encourage rape. Strangely though, like the Sasquatch, they are extremely elusive (note: I have yet to obtain any footprints, hair samples, or film footage). However I am assured by feminists that this tribe exists in large numbers. I will have to keep looking.

      To date, all that I have been able to locate are large clans of males that are disgusted by the idea of beating or raping a woman, and are extremely intolerant towards one of their number if he happens to joke about it. To my chagrin, these males also have an unfortunate cultural tendency to turn on each other when a female member of their tribe says: “Boys sick ‘em”!! Further study into this strange phenomena is warranted.

      • Tawil

        @Theseus: “I too have searched for this mysterious tribe of western men that “normalize”, joke about, and encourage rape. Strangely though, like the Sasquatch, they are extremely elusive (note: I have yet to obtain any footprints, hair samples, or film footage). However I am assured by feminists that this tribe exists in large numbers. I will have to keep looking.”

        Lol, very funny, and absolutely true… where the fuck are they? In all my years I have never once heard a man “normalize” or encourage rape. I think you are going to have to set up one of those hidden cameras like the ones they use to photograph the Loch ness monster or Bigfoot…. and perhaps a microphone to catch one of these typical ‘guyland’ conversations.

        • Theseus

          Shit! Wouldn’t that be great? We could set it up like one of those cryptozoology documentary flicks – complete with blurry shaky footage of one these “rape culturists” like the Robert Patterson Bigfoot film.

  • UKMan

    OT….but well worth a look.

    Abusive Australian woman gets thrown off train by group of men: http://bit.ly/SfWTS0

    Check out the comments too.

  • http://none universe

    Here we go again.
    Another facet of femaledom obsessing over their bodies.

    If it isn’t the billions in world currency spent to adorn themselves in ever so couture apparel. Or the similar amounts spent disguising their true facial appearances. Then countless more then spent on shaping hair. How much more spent on shaping and adorning finger nails (finger nails!, for God’s sake. What morons)? What about the money spent on those SHOES. A lot of money spent obsessing over bodily attention and appearances.
    And let us not forget who sometimes pays for some of these things. This has been covered but nowhere near its need. Another time.

    Then comes the $$ spent on weight reducing dietary regimes. Even for some who don’t even need such plans.

    Next stop, the trendy meeting places to stretch and maybe even raise one’s heartbeat for moderate periods of time (when mere walking, stretching or running outdoors would suffice). And the money spent on the garb to do all of the above. But it’s done with the herd who equally obsess over their own appearances and that of their herdmates.
    (I’m working up a sweat myself right now making this list. This could go on indefinately and all who are still reading so far get the idea, but two more things).

    Then there’s all the money spent on romance porn whether it’s 50 Degrees of Excitability or classic Passing With The Wind types where liberties are taken and bodies are ravaged to secret delight.

    Let us not forget the body obsession performed with Ana-rexia and Her Sister. And all the money spent on these two to conclude that it ‘isn’t their fault’.

    In order to wrestle with the obsessing Our Bodies, Our Selves (OBOS) crowd one would be reminded of the amount of individuals involved with all the above.

    Clearly those engaging in the bodily enhancement obsession are in the numbers majority. It’s difficult to determine the numbers. Now, for the female oriented porno consumer take the numbers buying the 50 Shades obsession and add about another 5 + million more. Those practicing with the sisters of starvation and purge are far fewer in numbers.

    Then there is this: “And this cultural narrative [rape hysteria] persists in a world in which rape is, by a wide margin, the least frequent type of violent crime tracked by law enforcement agencies.”
    – Some proponents of the patriarchal rape theory are the OBOS crowd – those who would likely follow anything as long as it promotes female concerns, regardless of the true facts surrounding them and even that which refutes their chosen obsession. This crowd appears to comprise yet another majority but this one is politicized. And, psychoticly, again, regardless of the true facts of a matter.

    Some proponents of ‘rape culture’ narrative happen to be the unfortunate victims of actual, forced, angry, humiliating, non-consensual sexual intercourse. Nowhere in numbers similar to the OBOS herd or the Ana/sister types. Yet some victims of the real long-held definition of rape have rightly moved on from their injury. The ones who consistently harbour the incident and those who agree with this lifestyle are likely those who keep emotionally perpetuating the pogrom on every male alive, innocent or not. Self justifiably projecting their indiscriminate paranoia and mistrust upon the entire population. A minority of damaged psychees. All the while offered solace to their hurts while countless others suffering insults to their own humanity are easily discarded in favour of themselves. In this apparent age of false ‘equality’ where feminists demand for themselves things that no other group of people before them had so freely given it appears that those who are really promoting hatred are they themselves the proponents of the rape culture narrative.

    Then, these same, carry on with their demanded “right to murder” countless infants. Hypocritically sick. Not anyone of these any better than those whom they criticize. These same have long assisted in perpetuating “the patriarchy” that have assented to their convoluted demands.

    • Bev

      I would submit that rape crises centers while offering sympathy and support fill victims heads with the feminist line about “a fate worse than death” and in some cases would delay women getting on with their lives. The rape culture needs victims and feminists like to be able to produce them even if it means turning women into perpetual non recovering victims. Collateral damage?

      • http://none universe

        Yes, Bev, and this may not be too far from the truth.
        Exploitation, anyone?
        ‘D be nice to have a foil inside helping to end that particular ‘cycle of abuse’.
        Do ya think this would assist in stopping the erstwhile collateral damage of hatred directed toward male babies, boys and men?
        Volunteers?

  • keyster

    Before the dawn of civilization rape was a common occurance among our species, although it wasn’t thought of as violent force or even what caused pregnancy in women. It was just something that spontaneously happened, without much fanfare or even dinner and a movie.

    Once society became “cultured” and decided to control male behavior to protect bloodlines and property, realizing that pregnancy was indeed the result of sex – – men, fathers, brothers and other proxy enforces began defending vaginal access; men were chosen by elders to mate with females. Eventually women themselves were slowly given selection powers that are 95% in effect today worldwide.

    Much like American black grievance groups point to slavery to keep white-guilt thriving, feminists point to pre-civilization sexual power men had over women – – which has now shifted to women not only having selection power, but now complete reproductive power as well…”social policies of the 50’s” notwithstanding.

    Reminding men that they were once rapists, (and some still are) keeps men off balance, catagorized and guilt ridden. This leads to social and government pressure to enact and enforce Social Justice policy which will give women even more power over men, or at the very least keep them under control.

    • Tawil

      I don’t know about this ‘common occurance’ fantasy. Were any of us there to eyewitness it? That’s why I can correctly call it a fantasy. Even among living primates there exist mating dances full of complex signals, heirarchies and rules that amount to what we may call culture, even if rape occurs sometimes. And in those primate cultures the females have agency in the sexual dance.

      That said I’d grant that rape would probably have happened more than it does now, though still contained to a large degree by early human culture. And that is the thing here, understanding the difference between culture and civilization- culture did not come in at the same time as civilization, and they are not one and the same. Even meerkats have culture.

      Leaving aside the Me Tarzan – You Jane interpretation, I’d wager instead that rape has had little place in human culture for at least 1 million years – not that we will ever know for sure. Before that, who knows…

      • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

        We already know from extensive study that human beings are pair-bonders and have been since long, long, LONG before the dawn of civilization, and we pair-bond more readily than MOST other species, including any other primate in the world.

        What you posit as fantasy is better documented than you think and may not go far enough: rape may well have become more commonplace AFTER the dawn of civilization. Prior to the agricultural revolution, humans were relatively few in number and there was generally little competition for resources and humans almost always paired up. One of the well-known and uncontroversial discoveries about agriculture that has been known for decades by scientists who study these things is that when societies transition from hunter/gatherer to agricultural, their population explodes, but NOT necessarily because they have more abundant food. Rather, a startling physical transformation occurs: females begin entering menarche at a significantly earlier age, and their fertility increases dramatically. Study on hunter/gatherers shows that females enter menarche several years later than they do in modern societies, and furthermore, something else odd happens: hunter/gatherer women VERY rarely get pregnant while lactating. Lactation is an extremely effective form of birth control for them, and, they typically breast feed for 3-4 years. Which means that in hunter-gatherer societies, women typically have one child every 4-5 years. Once they go agricultural, something weird happens: they not only start having babies much earlier, BUT, they are FAR more likely to become pregnant while lactating; lactating slightly lowers their fertility but only slightly, and thus being pregnant while still nursing is common (and incidentally, weaning at this point often happens earlier as the mothers often feel pressure to nurse the newer infant and thus to wean the older one sooner than she otherwise might).

        The irony is this: there is a widespread assumption that agriculture brought an explosion of human population because it created greater food abundance, what it actually seems to have done is caused a population explosion because it completely changed human fertility. Agriculturalists overtook hunter/gatherers (and herding nomads) not so much because they had more ready supplies of food, but because they began reproducing at an exponentially higher rate and completely overtook them by huge numbers. (Indeed, an irony is that until 20th Century medicine advanced, hunter/gatherers were generally taller, stronger, leaner, less infection-prone, and longer-lived overall than agriculturalists were; when we gave up being hunter/gatherers, we traded having more babies for shorter lifespans and more health problems).

        What’s most remarkable about much of this discussion is that almost no one outside of anthropologists and archaeologists and paleontologists knows these things, although among ancient archaeologists, anthropologists, and paleontologists who study precivilizational humans, these are such well-known assertions they aren’t even controversial and don’t even typically require citation, the documentation is so large it’s like noting that Neanderthals are not direct ancestors to us: everybody knows that so you don’t have to source it in a paper if you say it.

        • Tawil

          Dean, thanks for the interesting account of the impact of agriculture – that it was the increase in female fertility rather than increase in food that caused the population explosion. Makes me wonder if an intensified feeling of female security afforded by the stability of agricultural way of life is reason for the increased fertility.

          The point you make about humans being pair bonders is particularly relevent, along with cultural and perhaps even genetic imperative to engage in complex courtship behaviour. This behaviour didn’t arrive with big cities and “civilization” and is seen in pre-agricultural and pre-literate societies too.

          • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

            Yep. Humans have a surprisingly elaborate set of courtship behaviors most of them are not even conscious of and yet are found across pretty much all cultures. One of the odder ones: typically, when two people are in the early stages of expressing interest in each other, both of them (male and female alike) will turn one of their feet inward in a sort of shy gesture. Virtually all males look away a lot while talking to the girl they’re interested in while the female’s eyes usually stay rivited on him and she tends to make gestures to get his attention (like twirling her hair). If there’s mutual interest, typically at some point early in the courtship discussions, both will find some ways to display the palms of their hands to each other. (I’m not shitting you, it’s cross-cultural and been observed all over the place). Odds are you’ve done all the above with a woman and not even noticed you were doing it.

            That’s all what biologists call “courting” behavior–not a culturally trained thing, it’s stuff that appears near-universal. But it’s also behavior of a species where the two sexes are both courting and expressing interest in different ways–not a brutish “look, woman, must stick penis in hole right now!” (And vaginas are not “holes” by the way, but that’s a different rant.)

            There does seem to exist a strain of thought that until “civilization” came along, we were all rapey murderous brutes. No, that’s not what the record shows.

            By the way, there’s a lot of theories as to why females are substantially more fertile in agriculturalized societies. Some of it may be behavioral as you suggest–a sense of safety leading to certain biological triggers coming earlier. There’s also several other theories, with one of the stronger ones being that it’s dietary. Hunter/gatherer diets are wildly different from the diets of agrarian cultures. Quite radically different, both on the macronutrient and micronutrient level. The shift is remarkable and has even been observed over the course of just the last century or two, where previous hunter/gatherer cultures started becoming “westernize” in diet and lifestyle–suddenly, they started seeing an explosion of diabetes, they got shorter, they got more tooth decay, they gained body fat and lost muscle… change the dietary and exercise patterns and those former hunter/gatherers within a generation don’t just act different, they LOOK different. Their health problems also change dramatically too.

            None of this is to say we need to shuck off civilization and pick up spears and foraging for our food, the point is, the dawn of “civilization” literally CHANGED US PHYSICALLY as well as socially.

          • http://none universe

            I would tend toward agreement with your wondering considering the conjecture with this and other cross talk.
            That a correlation exists between an increase in female fertility and food security. My understanding of human female biology is that ovulation will not occur during an absence of overall fats.

            Hardly an apt comparison but the population of small field animals grow lean during unusually prohibitive weather patterns and larger when nature provides abundance.
            Links proving these points either way are not yet necessary but useful if factual consistency is the mark we wish to leave.

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      I’m repeating myself somewhat, but, the belief that before civilization rape was commonplace and unremarkable is probably incorrect. We know from study of pre-civilizational, hunter-gatherer societies that this isn’t true. The notion of the “caveman” routinely raping any female he felt like is just plain wrong. Leaving aside the fact that human beings rarely if ever lived in caves, the fact is that male rape of females is not a “pre-civilizational” trait and mate-selection was not some new power granted by what we call civilization. Extensive study of pre-agricultural, pre-literate societies shows that there are a number of ways in which humans paired up to mate, but what was always typical was some form of courtship and pair-bonding. The parents might or might not be directly involved, but humans are by nature pair-bonders who occasionally indulge in a bit of “cheating.” There is no reason to believe that rape was common in prehistoric societies, and overwhelming evidence to believe it was not and almost certainly could not be so. Brownmiller and her ilk get this spectacularly wrong, but so do a lot of other people. I would urge consulting actual work by anthropologists on this subject; I doubt very much that there has been any time since the appearance of Homo Sapiens Sapiens that rape has been a common occurrence rather than an occasional thing that crops up under various circumstances, and it’s not just something males do to females, regardless.

      Indeed, it is QUITE possible that widespread religious and social rule against rape came into existence because civilization had to cope with something that pre-civilizational humans knew very little about because they didn’t encounter it anywhere near as often as people who were suddenly living in crowded cities bumping elbows with lots of strangers.

      Although it’s almost impossible for anyone to be 100% wrong all the time; Brownmiller is likely correct in the assertion that rape is (often) an act of violence and power assertion. But she gets so much else wrong it’s hard to know where to begin.

      • OneHundredPercentCotton

        I’m wondering if that particular rape myth is tied to raiding pillagers and plunderers. It’s not uncommon in modern humanity, doubtless it was back then as well.

        We have the biblical story of very harsh punishment toward a rapist, Joseph, recorded in Genesis, which was a false rape accusation.

        • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

          A gang of plunderers killing the men and running off with the nubile women certainly was and is still sometimes a reality, but even that requires your civilization to have reached a point where there’s some sort of conflict in place where there’s a serious shortage of other resources (like food or water) and enough people and organization to put such raiding parties together. Eventually when there were enough humans around and organized and sophisticated enough to make it a Way Of Life it certainly entered the picture, but I think you’re already pretty late in the human experience before we reached that stage. As a species we were really spread pretty far apart and numbered only a few million or so spread all over the globe. There just weren’t that many people on the planet 50,000 years ago, even running into other humans you’d never met was pretty rare until comparatively recently, you know? By the time the Bible stories you mention were written, we’re talking what, maybe 3,000 years ago? The earliest of what we would call a “civilization” (which started right around the Tigris and Euphrates rivers if I recall right) was only 10,000 years ago. Compared to the emergence of Homo Sapiens Sapiens (our species) that is practically only 5 minutes ago. We were around for hundreds of thousands of years before that, and there weren’t all that many of us. Just one set of naked apes among the other animals, with some pretty sophisticated tools (spears and sharp rocks) and some pretty good organizational skills thanks to language that let us organize effectively. Which was good, our ability to organize ourselves and work collectively was the only thing that kept us alive, since we were weaker and slower than almost any other animal we fought, or hunted. ONLY our ability to cooperate intelligently made us powerful and able to survive. And a species that builds its survival mode on being clever and cooperating and coordinating things? That’s not a species built on brutal males in constant savage competition to rape weak females. That just doesn’t even work as a model–if we worked like that we’d be more like gorillas. And we just aren’t.

        • Bev

          Actually if you know anything of Viking history while the early raid generally resulted in slaughter of everyone later raiders found it more profitable to take everyone prisoners to be sold into slavery in the Byzantine empire.

      • keyster

        My point was that rape wasn’t even considered rape; there was no good or bad or power and oppression of women over it. Sexual intercourse just was. Much like today, regardless of whether a woman felt like have sex or not, if the man was interested she most likely succumbed to his advances.

        In context of the tribe one man might have impregnated more women than the others, but no one knew exactly whose child was whose. Again, they didn’t even understand that sex caused pregnancy. And the tribe was family, children raised by the “village” or the women folk. There was no concept of mother and father of family unit, until they understood sex corrolated with pregnancy.

        In ancient pre-civilization times, sex was no big deal until civilization (govt and religion) made it so. The woman didn’t feel violated as much as inconvenienced for a few minutes.

        It was protecting bloodlines that made rape such egregious behavior – – not the woman’s feelings towards it. Now the concept of rape is power for women, as they control the selection process.

        • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

          There’s probably some truth to some of that, I don’t mean to be argumentative, BUT, fatherhood appears to have been EXTREMELY important to pre-agricultural hunter/gatherer societies and we have evidence that human males were taking an active participatory role in nurturing youngsters as much as a million years ago; study of Hunter/Gatherer shows males spend as much as 5% of their waking hours holding or cuddling infants, just for example. That would not be “male expression of material instinct,” that would be PATERNAL INSTINCT.

          Now it is true that there have been found Hunter/Gatherer groups that practice some form of serial marriage and maybe fathers didn’t always know who their children were, but one of the things that seems constant among humans, including premodern “savage” humans who are still running around wearing furs and using spears is that human males LOVE CHILDREN. This is remarkable, and unlike most other primates.

          If you think I’m just building a case for fatherhood, I’m not; if you want I’ll root around and find some references for you on how there’s enormous evidence that males were taking a *huge* interest in children hundreds of thousands of years ago. Human males LOVE children, at least most of them do, and human males actually change, BIOLOGICALLY AND HORMONALLY, when they are around pregnant females.

          We’re just way more a pair-bonding species than a lot of people seem to think.

  • gwallan

    Rape Culture was a 1975 movie primarily about prison rape.

    • Tawil

      Very revealing history thanks gwallan.

      [quote] It was surprising to discover the origins of “Rape Culture”, and the first use of the term. It related to the work of a group of men, in prison fighting “Rape Culture” in the prison system as prisoners… It all started in 1973 when the Washington DC Rape Crisis Centre provided support to a group called “Prisoners Against Rape”. This was a group of male prisoners in Lorton Prison Virginia, who were actively working to address the rape that men suffered in prison. Those rapes were carried out by one prisoner against another, and even by guards against prisoners. The sexual assaults were known about by the prison authorities but they did nothing to intervene or protect prisoners. The threat of sexual assault was used as a control measure and even facilitated.

  • Bev

    Some rape culture!

    Figures for the US.

    In 1973 the rate was 2.5 rapes per 1000 women
    In 2009 the rate was 0.3 rapes per 1000 women

    http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/rape.cfm

  • jus7tman

    I have a problem with us, the voices of men, using the phrase “Rape Culture” as valid terminology. We are validating and endorsing the misandrist terminology by using it!

    Is there not a better name we can use? False Rape Culture? Male Criminalization Culture? Rape Accusation Culture (I like this one).

    We really need to change the words. Taking back the words does not work.

    Other terms that need to be replaced:

    1. “Gender Feminism”. Better name: Misandrist Feminism

    2. “Gender Raunch”. Better name: Misandrist Raunch, Feminine Raunch

    I cannot over-emphasize how important words and language are, and I think we all know this fact. Let us work on eradicating misandrist terminology!!

    • gwallan

      See my link to mediahound’s aricle above.

      In its original form rape culture was fundamentally about the use or enablement of rape within establishments – in this case prisons – to control a given group. Today we see churches and other institutions having problems with historical sexual abuse. They are part of the same package. Note that most of the victims of institutional abuse are male. (The current Victorian(Aus) inquiry into sexual abuse in the Catholic chuch showed 95% of the victims to be male.)

      Rape culture did not start out as misandrous. It remains an adequate description of a culture that has existed within large uncaring organisations/institutions which casually tormented faceless, defenseless human beings.

      Unfortunately it’s meaning has been significantly twisted.

      • Bev

        In it’s original form rape culture was fundamentally about the use or enablement of rape within establishments – in this case prisons – to control a given group.

        Has anything changed in US prisons?

    • gilgamesh

      Let’s call it “feminist-approved rape” instead.

  • JinnBottle

    “I have read ‘Mein Kampf’ and I have read ‘Against Our Will’, and I am at a loss to say which, in all the annals of hate literature, is the most venomous and toxic.”

    – Prof John Gordon, “The Myth of the Monstrous Male”

  • Sasha

    This – below – is the text of a reply I left to a British article on this subject in 2011…

    “I don’t believe there is a serious rape problem in the UK.

    If rape was commonplace in the UK, and if we had a rape culture, rape would be a common practice; people would routinely and casually talk about raping or being raped by someone. People would discuss what styles or methods of rape they prefer. Public figures would speak in favour of rape. These things don’t happen.

    In terms of crime, rape falls somewhere on the spectrum between serious robbery and murder. The number of people who commit rape is a tiny percentage of the population: the vast majority of people are not criminals.

    Rape is a rare, and isolated, crime – and that is not to say it is not a serious crime. As one commentator has said: “beyond the physical harm the victim suffers, rape erodes trust; like any crime, it arouses fear.”

    I am struck by the reasoning often presented about ‘unknown’ crime. That we don’t know how many rapes are unreported, or the rate of men who are raped, and which, the language of informal logic, is an example of argumentum ad ignorantiam, or ‘the appeal to ignorance’. Imagine someone saying: “I don’t know that UFOs are not visiting Earth, or that aliens are not watching us, and so I presume that this happens, and has happened, a lot.” This is a logical fallacy.

    Clearly I cannot put myself into a woman’s shoes, or she mine. However, when we bandy around inflated statistics, when we look at every man as a potential rapist, and when we condemn different opinions as ‘promoting’ or ‘enabling’ rape, we are creating an environment of suspicion. This suspicion, like crime, erodes trust and arouses fear.

    I find it very difficult to know what to say to someone who believes that 1 in 3 British women have experienced rape in their lifetime.

    According to the 2001 census, there are 49 million adults in the UK: 30.3 million women and 29.6 million men. According to the 1 in 3 figure, 10.15 million UK women have been raped.

    So if approximately 2 per cent of men are gay, (and presumably they do not rape women), then we can take out 592,000 men from the calculation, so we’re down to 29,008,000 men in the frame. We should also probably take out the 3.3 million disabled men of working age.

    That’s 25.7 million men left.

    So if each rapist rapes only one woman, and there are 10.15 million rapists in the UK: that’s just shy of 40 per cent of all men: are we seriously claiming that more than 2 in 5 of all UK men over the age of 16 are rapists? That’s the entire population of straight, able-bodied men outside the South East.

    If we were to say there are only a few bad apples, and that every rapist has actually raped four separate women, then a still staggering 10.15 per cent, or 1 in 10, straight men have raped a woman.

    That’s a bit more like it: now we know that the equivalent of the entire straight, male, able-bodied population of Scotland (2.1 million) plus Liverpool (299,000) and Newcastle (267,000) have raped four women.

    So either every third straight man one meets is a rapist, or we have an entire country, plus two major urban centres, worth of serial rapists, or we’re somewhere on the spectrum in-between the two?

    With respect, I would suggest that this does not pass the test of being convincing to a reasonable person.

    Rape is a serious crime for which the penalties are severe. Victims should be treated with compassion and dignity.

    However it is simply not acceptable to arouse fear between men and women and erode trust by inflating and exaggerating the incidence of what is, thankfully, a rare and uncommon crime.”

    • BlueBlood

      Great comment, Sasha. Anyone with any form of critical thinking skills would read that and think to themselves, “Yes, rape hysteria is absolute madness; do people not think about statistics and numbers before repeating them, and (worse) publishing them?”
      Unfortunately, feminists read the same comment and think to themselves, “Damn right, Sasha. I think the ratio of 1:3 rapists to males might be underselling it a little, though.”

  • John A

    To get ordinary people to hate, you must make them fearful, you must make them angry. That’s how the feminist haters get away with it, they say the fear is justified, the anger is justified, but they’ve just make it up, or exaggerated it.

    You can feel the hate dripping from Brownmiller’s poison pen, her promotion of fear, her promotion of anger, her final solution of hate. Is She from the Third Reich of feminism?

    • andybob

      “Is She from the Third Reich of feminism?” Mr John A

      John Lauritson certainly thought so. This legendary gay rights activist (anti-feminist and personal hero of mine) wrote a famously scathing review of “Against Our Will” in ‘Gay Liberator’ in 1976. Here’s a quote:

      “In her ravings Brownmiller raises the spectre of Hitler’s Third Reich…for it is she who is in the camp of the Nazis…It is Susan Brownmiller who has the fascist sexual outlook, with its extreme sex-negativism, its demand for “sexual purity” (an official Nazi slogan), its intolerance of sexual nonconformity, its use of rape hysteria as a justification for political repression.”

      Mr Lauritson is particularly appalled by Brownmiller’s unscholarly approach to her topic.:

      “Brownmiller must realize her case is weak, for she writes:

      “But does one need scientific methodology in order to conclude that the anti-female propaganda [i.e., pornography] that permeates our nation’s cultural output promotes a climate in which acts of sexual hostility directed against women are not only tolerated but ideologically encouraged?”

      One must reply that, yes, one does need scientific methodology. One does need to base the determination of truth on evidence, not on papal authority, rumor, revelation, or hysterical emotion.”

      Even in 1976, leaders of the gay rights movement considered hate-mongers like Susan Brownmiller as a threat to civil liberties.. He concludes:

      “A serious threat to the gay liberation movement, and to other progressive movements, is posed by the current wave of rape-hysteria, with the concomitant demands for censorship and denial of due process and civil liberties. Some of our worst enemies are posing as gay liberationists or feminists, and we have got to unmask and repudiate them.

      Susan Brownmiller is exactly such an enemy.”

      Mr JTO has made a sterling contribution to “unmask and repudiate” this most destructive and dishonest charlatan.

    • http://none universe

      “To get ordinary people to hate, you must make them fearful, you must make them angry. That’s how the feminist haters get away with it, they say the fear is justified, the anger is justified, but they’ve just make it up, or exaggerated it.”
      – Then to get ordinary people to side with you, to have their fears assuaged, you must give them the proper and fuller discourse to do so.
      Then feminist hate mongers won’t get away with the exaggerated fear and anger no matter how erroneously and self-righteously justified.
      Meet massaged assumed fact (feminist) with real fact. Through the likes of us.
      Then to bolster the position, meet opinion (Brownmiller, et al) with opinion (Andybob’s supplied John Lauritson).
      Somewhat later than sooner this is going to happen.

      Brownmiller’s and company writings are from the first reich of evil.

  • MrWright

    I ran this site by Elam and he sent me an email saying he thought it was a good read.

    Ladyblogger who has some pretty interesting takes on feminism and men’s issues.

    Her post on rape is pretty good.

    You weren’t raped. You’re a whore. Join the club.

    http://judgybitch.com/2012/10/22/54/

  • OneHundredPercentCotton

    Looks like a newly emerging feminist lie is the latest FACT:

    31 states do not have laws preventing parental rights for rapists!

    That’s right, Americans! 31 states will allow that knife wielding rapist that impregnanted you in an alley attack to now claims parental rights of YOUR child!

    …or so the claim goes.

    Of course, upon further investigation, it seems in the cases of “rapists” getting parental rights what’s NEVER mentioned is the “rapist” was in a consentual but legally-under-aged relationship better known as “Romeo and Juliet” or STATUTORY RAPE – not….rape-rape, or legitimate rape, or….any other kind of actual criminal rape.

    • Theseus

      I guess I’m a rapist then. I had a girlfriend in high school that was a junior and I was a senior. She was 2 months shy of her 16th birthday when I first slept with her. I was 18.

      I can’t believe the absolute hypocrisy these fembots engage in. They constantly talk about the danger of fear mongering, inflammatory rhetoric, and “fear of the other”; then they engage in exactly the same behavior that they claim to abhor.

    • John A

      Does that include women who abuse under-age boys? Doesn’t the story go; 30 y/o woman has sex with 15 y/o boy, gets pregnant, gets nominal sentence, then gets child support from boy? You can just feel the equality…

      • Theseus

        Great point!

  • siderealspace

    “Rape culture is a product of hate culture. Its nothing less than a conscious process of constant imputation of malice by which all feminists keep all men and boys in a climate of permanent accusation.”

    Wouldn’t you hate someone who raped you? Wouldn’t you?
    Just because you have never been raped, it doesn’t mean rape doesn’t exists.
    Everybody is in danger of being raped; men, women, boys, girls, you just pointed that out, and it couldn’t be more true.
    But men are not scared of being raped on a daily basis, when they’re walking down the street at night, apparently. This doesn’t seem like a constant threat to you, for what I can read here, since you even question the rationality behind the fear.
    I wish I could say the same. I’m tired of being afraid. I truly am. No woman wants to be afraid. Should I blame feminists for making me paranoid? Or should we blame people who can’t respect other people’s integrity?

    Are you scared of being robbed when you walk down the street at night? It is a possibilty to be robbed, isn’t? And even if you have never been robbed, you can not say, for sure, that you will not be a victim of it.
    Are we going to say that it is an irrational fear?

    Is it our fault that you don’t consider rape as a constant threat? No, it is not. If you don’t consider it as such, you can not expect everyone to do the same.
    You should ask male survivors of rape if they ever leave their houses forgetting that rape is a threat. Or male prisoners if they consider rape as an irrational fear. For them it is a fact, so it is not a creation of evil feminists.

    You complain about women considering you all potential rapists, yet, you consider feminism as a misandrist movement, a threat to your rights.

    We know not every man is a rapist, but since rapists don’t come with a neon sign on their foreheads announcing themselves, there is no way of knowing it. It happens the same with muggers, we can not tell if someone is a mugger, therefore, we should take precautions.
    This is what we’re told since we are little. We are told not to talk to strangers (male strangers, because some men are fantastic at perpetuating male stereotypes of violence, and the fear of being raped is known, amongst many other things, by being afraid of someone who can use physical strength against you); we structure our lives to prevent being raped.

    Yes, rape culture is a culture of hatred, but mostly it’s a culture of fear. Who creates the fear? Evil feminazis? No, it’s created by people who can not respect other people’s integrity.

    Rape is used as many things, as you can see in male prisons (someone posted the origin of the term Rape Culture above, I appreciate the information very much).

    Just because it’s an “uncommon crime”, or “it only happens to 1 out of 6 women” it doesn’t mean it’s right.
    I beg you not to underrate the power of rape.

    Why are you not afraid? Maybe because you are not told since you are little children that even when you grow up, you’ll be facing men who can’t control their actions. My father taught me this. I wouldn’t call him a misandrist. I would call him someone who knows the harm that patriarchal system has done to us all, turning you all, as you accurately say, into monsters at the eyes of women who are afraid of a reality that strikes us, apparently, more often than men.

    Rape culture hurts everybody, but saying that rape culture is not something that exists, because no man who rapes a woman uses his penis as a weapon is not helping anybody. It would be moronic to claim that female sex offenders don’t take advantage of male stereotypes of “strong and incapable of being harmed” to get away with their crime.
    You, on the other hand, saying that we should not be afraid of being raped, are perpetuating this. Apparently, rape is not a constant threat to you, I suppose that most of men don’t consider women harmful or powerful enough to consider them a threat.

    For the record, I am fully opening myself to criticism here.
    I can not consider myself a feminist, that is a name too big for me. I am, on the other hand, very interested in educating myself on the oppression that men face every day in our society. But don’t say that we are not being rationally afraid. Rape shouldn’t exist in the first place, but it does. We can not, men and women, expose ourselves to it just because not everyone is a rapist.

    You should be scared, but then again, it doesn’t seem like a problem to man if they are outside of jail.

    I apologize for my English, it’s not my first language.

    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

      There is so much terribly wrong with this post (and your others). I won’t dig in to every detail. All I can really say is crack a history book. Repeated characterizations of different groups being evil caused fear, not so much what that group actually did. And where it concerns men, who is doing the characterization of them being rapists? Who is pushing all this fear? You know the answer, if you are even remotely honest.

      Also, the level of collective fear says absolutely NOTHING about the actual severity of a problem. Men are socialized not to express fear, and now you interpret that as a guideline on how we prioritize problems.

      Your problem is not English. Your English is just fine. Your problem is that you are over valuing fear without even beginning to consider its true origin, or indeed its actual presence in the population. Most women know they are much more likely to encounter protection from men than harm. They do not for the most part walk around with their hands in their purses. fingers wrapped around a can of pepper spray or a .38 special, certain that every other male on the street is going to rape them.

      Maybe your problem is that you don’t know what rape culture is, as defined by gender ideologues.

      Rape culture hurts everybody because rape culture, as in a culture that promotes, glorifies and normalizes the sexual assault of women, is the biggest load of shit that has been foisted on the general public in the last 50 years. Rape happens. A culture that promotes it does not and never did, unless you include the sanctioned and tolerated rape that happens to men in prisons and in war. Rape culture that targets women is a total myth. And it is the promotion of that big fat lie that has a minority of women walking about in fear, but most of them aren’t. They know better. They know it is bullshit.

    • Sasha

      Don’t you worry at all about ‘feminist’ being a ‘name that’s too big for you.’ I can assure you that a great many very ‘small’ people use it quite easily.

    • Skeptic

      Sorry to have to tell this to you siderealspace.
      Your mind has been well and truly raped (most probably by feminists) who have planted false fear creating ideas in you with their anti-male propaganda.
      The “1 in 6 women have been raped” idea you quote is pure textbook very exaggerated feminist bullshit.
      And naively you swallowed it as if it were true.
      So YOUR integrity has been violated by mind-rape.
      I suggest you get help to overcome the unnecessary paranoia which has resulted.
      Sorry, you, like many other people got fooled by feminist lies, but look on the bright side – now you can stop living in so much unnecessary fear and begin to enjoy your life much more.

    • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

      ” Should I blame feminists for making me paranoid? ”

      Yes.

      “Apparently, rape is not a constant threat to you, I suppose that most of men don’t consider women harmful or powerful enough to consider them a threat.”

      All of the hosts of “a voice for men radio” have been sexually assaulted. I suffer from apparently permanent agoraphobia and PTSD from what happened to me.

      We are all aware that rape happens and that it can happen to us.

      But living in a constant state of fear is not living. In some ways I’m grateful that I’m an unworthy victim of rape according to the feminist narrative because I don’t have a group of people constantly throwing my victimization in my face and reminding me just how vulnerable I am to the victimization I experienced.

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      ” Should I blame feminists for making me paranoid?”

      The answer is yes.

      Yes. And you should also be angry with them for it, because they’re abusing you.

      Although you should blame white knighting conservative tory-type traditionalists too, since they play the same game, many of them.

      You have no idea how many people here are victims of sexual assault. None. What I went through: do you even think to ask? I’m a man, so why should you, right? Apparently, those of us who are male, or who just like Typhon choose to reject the feminist narrative, we are unworthy as victims. We don’t deserve your compassion or your sympathy, because we don’t matter and we are unworthy. And treating us like malevolent predators, in the worldview you espouse, that’s just fine. Do you like being treated like a predator? Shall we treat you like a predator? Or should we try to keep talking to you civilly, like a human being, as we are doing here?

      Here’s the thing with fear: other than an immediate fear when something is imminent, something that you KNOW is about to happen, that is rational. Fear of an imminent threat that makes you avoid it immediately, that is good. But after that? Fear controls you. Like Frank Herbert said:

      “Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”

      Here’s the truth: those rape statistics you site? They’re wrong. Mostly, they’re lies. We can explain that to you in detail if you want. But you have to want it. And you have to let go of the mind-killer that won’t let you, that tells you to clutch onto this fear that controls you.

      I’ve been through some shit my dear. Some of it I can tell you about, some I can’t. But I choose not to live in fear, even though statistically, as a male, I am actually TWICE AS LIKELY to be the victim of a violent crime as you are, and FAR more likely to be a victim of sexual assualt than the cultural narrative. I know this to be true, I can demonstrate it to be true, and I can tell you about multiple things that HAVE happened to me.

      But I will not fear, and those who want you to be in fear? They’re abusing you.

    • http://none universe

      “Wouldn’t you hate someone who raped you? Wouldn’t you?”
      – Don’t know. But would you?
      And would you project your hatred onto all males (infants, boys and men) innocent of rape? Even both on behalf of women who haven’t been assaulted or raped?

      Over the course of my life I have been assaulted, assaulted to semi- unconsciousness and threatened with assault by numerous aged males. These events even outside of competitive or scrub pick-up recreational sport where more injury, albiet minor, had been sustained. In all events I resolved my travails into a proper perspective – thoughts toward the individual and circumstance first rather than maligning the whole sex or gamesplayer (even though many have given reason to do so).
      In spite of all that and more I still believe in bringing proper attention to pro-male non-feminist men’s rights/issues. (I know thug or bully culture when seeing either). Only a miniscule number of males had caused damages but I’ve associated with an utmost overwhelming majority who haven’t.
      In short, I got over the more serious events by attempting to understand what occured and why. Then forgave – which took anywhere from second, minutes to several months at most. As such, I do not hate anybody.
      I didn’t make a political pronouncement of my collection of ordeal. Not only because I did not want to (“that’s life”) but also because of realizing that I couldn’t make any political deals anywhere. And besides one or two other people nobody could really give a crap anyway. Unlike most women. Living before, and now during the outgoing reign of feminist tyranny who’ve many long years of being protected from harm.

      I could continue pursuing other statements of your posting here but have not the immediate time, so won’t.

  • Roger O Thornhill

    I have a Shepherd’s Crook if anyone would like to borrow it?

  • MGTOW-man

    I once saw, on an animal documentary, that of a gorilla taking liberties with an uninterested female gorilla. Indeed, The narrator used the words, “he rapes her”.

    Thus, if he was raping her, then rape is natural. It is a part of our natural heritage, make-up, instincts, behaviors, evolution, and so on.

    Remember, men are not to blame for nature. Men are just as subject to the forces of nature as are women.

    Before anyone misunderstands me, I am NOT in favor of rape. I said the above comments to remind everyone of just who is in charge: nature…who directed most things (until feminism started trying to replace it with something synthetic).

    The concept of “rape” , apparently, is a human invention.

    As a civilized person, I agree that we should stick to this invention. I believe rape is wrong—that is—truly forcing someone to have penetrable sex against their spoken (or communicated) will.

    But we must remember that rape can happen to more than just women.

    And “date rape” as he said/she said, with no proof whatsoever, is a stupid reflection of those women living in a perpetual state of oblivion, in which their feelings mean more than all other things combined. If he really raped her, he should be punished. But we shouldn’t be taking merely her word over his and automatically banishing him to “guilty”. This is another example of how those feminists do not think men should have rights.

    One of the other reasons I commented here is to shed light on trying to be a civilized society—setting ourselves apart and above that of lower animals.

    With that in mind, I ask this: If we are trying to be civilized, why then do women not have to participate? Take for example, DV. Out of merely punitive and controlling reasons, women hit men a lot. Then, they tell men, “it is not civilized to be violent.”

    So, according to the female who hits men as described above (or refuses to help stop it), women get to be civilized too—even though they do not have to substantiate their civility; men are the only ones who must prove their worthiness.

    If not hitting is a move toward being civilized, then why do women not have to set the example too, to be just as non-impulsive, just as mature, just as equal—especially since they want to lead us?

    Clearly, this is but one example, out of thousands, in which women claim, “you can’t, but I can”. It is a refusal of TRUE equality. They want a special, their-version of equality… aka pretend equality, (but that we have to take seriously even though it has no serious substantiations).

    The same can be applied to women raping men, boys, other women, and other forms of sexual abuse from women… “You can’t, but I can”.

  • OneHundredPercentCotton

    Last year VP Joe Biden claimed that the number of rapes in Flint, Michigan had more than DOUBLED from 91 in 2008, to 229 just two years later.

    But Glenn Kessler, Fact Checker at the Washington Post, checked the numbers and decided in fact, “rape has gone down.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/bidens-absurd-claims-about-rising-rape-and-murder-rates/2011/10/20/gIQAkq0y1L_blog.html

  • Sasha

    This article’s illustratede with a photo which is very pertinent to this topic….

    http://socialistworkercanada.com/2012/11/07/why-mens-rights-groups-are-wrong/

    …ah, the good ol’ rape culture…and Warren Farrell! Who’d a thunk it eh?

    (by the way, I’d encourage people NOT to comment on the piece, it just draws attention to it…:-)

  • Emelio Lizardo

    Blazing Saddles (Mel Brooks, 1974)

    Hedley Lamarr: [frowns] “Number 6″? I’m afraid I’m not familiar with that one.
    Taggart: Well, that’s where we go a-ridin’ into town, a-whompin’ and a-whumpin’ every livin’ thing that moves within an inch of its life. Except the women folks, of course.
    Hedley Lamarr: You spare the women?
    Taggart: Naw, we rape the shit out of them at the Number Six Dance later on.
    Hedley Lamarr: Marvelous!

    By virtue of being objectified as sex objects, women obtain great value which enables them to avoid being a-whomped and a-whumped and to party later.