Anybody who’s taken part in the art of debate more than a few times is familiar with a famous saying of Benjamin Disraeli: “There are three types of untruths: lies, damned lies, and statistics“. Anybody who’s debated feminists more than zero times knows that they spout plenty of all three. I’ll give a few examples, just to start off.
Lie: “The fact that a woman is expected to take on her husband’s name when she gets married is proof that men have always considered women their property.”
Truth: This isn’t quite how marriage laws worked. A more accurate assessment would be to say that said laws dissolved the man and the woman, from a legal standpoint, into one person—at least in theory. In practice, it was a pretty raw deal for men. Women in the days of coverture still influenced family finances, and a man was legally responsible for all of his wife’s actions. So if, say, a woman got her family into debt through careless investing, guess who went to jail for it, despite his being the only one who stood any chance of getting the family out of debt?
There’s another possibility at play here: Matrilineality (the practice of passing down a surname or property through women) is a dominant practice in American inner-city communities, where fatherlessness is quite common. These women, whether they realize it or not, are sending a message to the fathers of their children. It goes a little something like: “This child is mine, not yours. I don’t want you in this child’s life.”
Damned Lie: “We live in a patriarchal society, one in which men rule over everything and women are second-class citizens.”
Truth: Yes, it is true that men occupy a majority of seats in the Senate, on the Supreme Court, Head of State offices, and CEO offices of Fortune 500 companies. However, touting this as proof of Patriarchy is highly misleading. First off, no proof is ever provided that this state of affairs is due to discrimination against women. Secondly, it is true that those at the top of the food chain act in their own best interest, but they don’t care about the rest of those who happen to share their genitalia or skin color. Violence against men is far more prevalent than violence against women, men are far more likely to be homeless, and Barack Obama’s presidency has not destroyed racism in this country.
Statistic: “The average woman makes (52, 69, 76, or whatever the hell number you feel like putting here) for every dollar made by a man working in the same position.”
Truth: This figure is true, but only if you refuse to adjust for hours per week worked, risks taken on the job, exposure to the elements, and many other factors. Let Warren Farrell tell you the rest.
And so on and so forth. But, since it seems to be a favorite topic of theirs, I think I’ll tackle the Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics that feminists put forth on what is (for some deeply disturbing reason) their favorite topic: rape.
Lie: “Rape is one of the biggest problems the western world faces.”
Truth: How do you define what the Western World’s “biggest problem” is? Is rape responsible for widespread fatherlessness? Is rape responsible for the economy tanking? Is rape responsible for the illegal, expensive military actions the U.S. Government took against innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan? Is rape responsible for the erosion of the rights of Americans? Well, in the last case it is, to a degree. Which brings me to the next point:
Damned Lie: “We live in a rape culture, a culture in which men raping women is considered to be a normal state of affairs, as evidenced by rape jokes.”
Truth: Though I have no evidence to back it up, I think the most commonly-told rape jokes are jokes about prison rape. Men make up the vast majority of prison rape victims (it’s estimated at over 300,000 a year), and have a hard time getting anybody to take them seriously when reporting their own rapes. As for society condoning such behavior against woemen? Bullshit. Just look at the way the Hofstra boys, the Duke Lacrosse team, Julian Assange, and Dominique Strauss-Khan were treated by the media. Recently, the comedian Daniel Tosh allegedly made a rape joke, and masses from all over the internet ganged up on him. A feminist on Tumblr posted a picture of herself with a bandaged hand, which she had injured when she punched a stranger in the face for making a rape joke, not about her, but about a girl across the street; she was never charged with a crime, not even misdemeanor assault.
In addition to squelching freedom of speech, these feminists are also trying to erase men’s basic constitutional rights. Jessica Valenti, as we all know, has proposed removing a man’s right to presumption of innocence. The Obama Administration, at nearly the exact same time, passed an executive order requiring colleges to punish male students for rape on the basis of “a preponderance of evidence” instead of “guilt beyond a reasonable doubt”, and to forbid such students from speaking in their own defense, being represented by a bar-certified lawyer, or confronting their accuser–all of which are guaranteed by the United States Constitution.
Statistic: “1 out of every 4 women will be raped in her lifetime.”
Truth: Ah, here’s the doozy. I’m sure we’re all familiar with the source of this statistic: a study by Mary Koss that has been discredited countless times. Around three-quarters of the women she identified as having been raped did not consider themselves victims of rape, and almost half of them had sex with their supposed attackers after the event identified as a rape had occurred.
So, what do statistics collected from non-feminist sources say? Well, let’s try the FBI statistics. According to an FBI report, which did not account for differing definitions of rape, whether or not the rapes were convicted, or whether or not female-on-male rape was included, the United States had a rate of 29 reported rapes per 100,000 people in 2009. That’s not going to get us to 25%, but I’m feeling generous, so let’s look at the country with the highest rate of rape in the past decade–South Africa, with a rate of 116 rapes per 100,000 people in one year. Percentage wise, this is .1% of the population. Now, I’ll admit that I’m worse at math than anything else in the world, but even I know this isn’t even close to “1 in 4″.
“But wait!” the feminists are saying, “Most rapes are never reported to the police!” Well, I’ve heard a number of different figures on just how many. Some say 45%, some say 60%, and some even say 80%. But hey, I’m feeling EXTREMELY generous, so despite the fact that feminists are basing these numbers off evidence that is dubious at best, I’ll go with the highest estimate. .1 times 5 is…half of one percent. In other words, one-fiftieth of what feminists claim it is.
Now, I hear them whining that I missed the key phrase “In their lifetime”. Okay, since empirical data shows that rates of rape drastically decrease after the victim turns 45, whether they are male or female, in prison or out, I’ll just be accounting for a 30-year window. Sorry, feminists, but even my generosity has its limits. I’m not going to pretend that the wackos who rape grannies aren’t extreme outliers. This means that 15% of South African women will be raped in their lifetimes. A grisly figure to be sure, but then again, this is South Africa we’re talking about–it has the second-highest crime rate in the world. The rate of rape in the U.S. is one-quarter of that, so in our most generous of moods, it is correct to say that 3.75% of women will be raped in their lifetimes. I’m puzzled as to how that can be mistaken for 1 in 4.
So, to summarize: Feminists claim that the rape rate in the U.S. (a reasonably safe country, despite what you see on the news) is significantly higher than the actual percentage in a country with one of the world’s highest rapes of rate. They have inflated actual statistics beyond the point of reporting or gut bias, and have put them on flagrantly dishonest levels, in order to advance their agenda of stripping men of their constitutional rights.
All those surprised, please raise your hands. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
10 Posts in Total
donations either one-time or on a monthly subscription basis.
If you don't have paypal, check out the other options.
If you want to get some merchandise and sponsor us at the same time, consider the AVfM store.
100%Cotton:
Kyle Spier-Swenson:
the hermit:
vanguard:
dhanu:
If I recall correctly, one feminist (I forgot which one) stated that rape was so accepted, that even a man who was good in all other ways would commit it.
Feminist lies make bad laws and those who spread them are feminist chauvinist pigs. Feminist liars have been freeloading off of taxpayers, and vilifying innocent males, for decades. No more!!! http://tinyurl.com/77sbg9u
Sounds like Jessica Valenti:
http://www.cotwa.info/2012/07/rapists-in-our-midst.html
“Rape is part of our culture. It’s normalized to the point where men who are otherwise decent guys will rape and not even think that it’s wrong.
“1 out of every 4 women will be raped in her lifetime”
Feminists have been baking this lie in an oven of falsehoods for a very long time. However, the only statistical evidence that has ever materialized to back up this claim is the CDC’s National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS), which claims that “Nearly 1 in 5 women (18.3%) and 1 in 71 men (1.4%) in the United States have been raped at some time in their lives”:
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/
However, the feminists had to find a way to conceal the fact that, when rape is defined as loosely as it is in the NISVS, men report being raped by women exactly as often as women report being raped by men:
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/
http://i.imgur.com/Ps9wW.jpg
So, the feminists re-defined rape in such a way that no female can ever be a perpetrator of the crime, by requiring that the perpetrator penetrate the victim.
The reason that the number of male victims (1 in 71) is so much lower than the number of female victims (1 in 5) is that ONLY MALES ARE COUNTED AS PERPETRATORS! Female perpetrated rapes are not counted (though you can see them in the tabulated data).
Of course, the reality is that both numbers are artificially blown out of proportion by counting acts such as “excessive or coercive requests for intimacy” as rape (the document never specifies how many times a person is allowed to ask before it becomes a crime).
The victim-hogging mind-set of feminists is apparent from their need to marginalize all male victims (both victims of legitimate violent assault and “victims” of harassing or annoying “pleading”).
Male victims are never counted, because feminism is a victim-hood trade union.
Great article, Phil.
“We live in a patriarchal society, one in which men rule over everything and women are second-class citizens.”
Even when you look at the statistics which show that most of the individuals who are in the U.S congress or senate are men, one quickly forgets that they are elected members. How can it be a patriarchy, which gives the notion that women are oppressed by an elite class of men? Last I checked, the democratic voting process is available to both men and women, who in turn put these men into these positions. Therefore, if you use the term “patriarchy” than women and feminists are as much to blame for establishing it as anyone else. Of course, that term is just pure linguistic rubbish that describes any field of work that happens to be male-dominated. So what are fields of work dominated by women considered to be (like nursing and, soon enough, management of most businesses across North America with exception to the Fortune 500)? Matriarchy?
Feminists have yet to answer these questions and until I do get answers for them then what they say is just propaganda.
“We live in a rape culture, a culture in which men raping women is considered to be a normal state of affairs, as evidenced by rape jokes.”
Insinuating jokes reveal the existence of a wider culture of violence is ridiculous. Feminists are not supporters of freedom of speech though or empirical evidence, and will gladly infringe on our rights to say what we want in a free country.
I may not be able to be involved in much of the activism that a lot of the veteran members take part in, and for that I give my apologies. But, I do my best to inform young men I know of about the grim future that they will face if they don’t take the red pill. Being a citizen with this knowledge gives you a way to prepare for many things in life, especially when you realize just how bad it is going to get for men in terms of the declining economy, declining educational performance, and active oppression by feminists. I was talking with a friend yesterday about many of the same issues that come up here on AVFM. He is 22 and was never exposed to any of this before in his life and I covered everything from biased courts, our erosion of civil liberties, feminists and women placing advantage over equality, manipulation and propaganda aimed at dehumanizing men, proxy violence, etc. I spent several hours explaining all of this to him and entertaining discussion. He was amazed time and again at how true it all really is. I realized something too, and that is that a lot of this deeply resonates within all men, but it isn’t talked about because we don’t gather in social circles. However, once you come across another man and speak to him about it you will be surprised at how receptive he is toward it.
I do the same with the younger guys at the gym who talk about:
going to clubs to hookup
getting in debt to finance an expensive car to “get chicks”
Spending loads of cash on girls
I make friends with them and slowly work the subject in, and slowly they realize “hey, these freaking chicks are mooching me and we get little or nothing out of it”
From there I show them how the system is rigged against guys
I teach them to focus on themselves, develop themselves, have goals and reach them, rather than chasing tail which will only leave them in ruin
Some are too young, blinded by hormones or simply too dumb to accept this reality, but surprisingly I have met some kids as young as 17 who got it right away and completely changed their outlook on life
I was even doing this before I knew what a “MRA” was, I simply did it because I believed it was the right thing to do.
I have guys who years later come thank me for “saving them from hell” as they see some of their friends lied to, cheated on, mooched off of,manipulated, used up and in mountains of debt because of girls
An other really pernicious lie is that rape is a crime of violence (read patriarchal power which by feminist definition is always violent and tyrannical) rather than a crime of sex: http://www.drtraycehansen.com/Pages/writings_politics.html
Similar lies are told about domestic violence which is also done for ‘patriarchal’ power and control (NOT) but the rape lie is the real whopper. Once one buys the rape-is-violence-not-sex lie there is really no hope for men and no limit to the types of rapes/’rapes’ that women are notorious for.
Feminists are so inherently dishonest that what they claim is very often the exact opposite to reality. Take their claim that:
Men use sex for power. (and it’s the worst thing anyone can do)
The reality is that women use sex for power; and men use power (status, money) for sex. That women use sex for power (resources, protection and proxy violence etc.) is undeniable. How can they get it so perfectly wrong every time. That their declarations are very often the complete opposite to reality may give an insight into their psychology. Is it because they do lie to themselves as well as everyone else?
This backward understanding of the world is so reliable that a new system of epistemology should be developed. All we need to do is take whatever feminists declare and reverse it. There may not be a better path to knowledge.
I have never personally met a woman in my entire life, who has been raped.
Not a single one in 49 years.
I mean, it has not been my experience so far, that a woman would ever keep quiet about anything like this, if there’s even the slightest possibility of gaining some attention and sympathy from it.
I have however heard A LOT of women claiming that they know someone, who knows someone else’s aunt, who had a sister who’s daughter were once raped.
So..ehh..What are they like???
I’ve met 3. I know about three hundred women on a first-name basis. Really, they’re not any different from other women.
It was supposed to be a joke, without trying to belittle the problem, Phil.
But when you think about the rape hype, and the way this kind of crime is held above the murder of their kids or themselves in hideousness, you’d think they suddenly grew a third eye in the forehead, batwings or polka dots as a consequence.
A big problem is the wide definition of rape. Suppose the definition of rape did not discriminate based on sex, then I could claim to be a multiple rape victim. I’ve had experiences with women before (ex girlfriends) after I’ve had a several drinks. Note that I’m in no way claiming victimhood status here. I fully acknowledged that I chose to get buzzed, and understood the consequences, and even when one of the said ex girlfriends turned out to be a bit of a psycho, and I regretted the relationship, I wasn’t willing to twist that into rape. However, I could, were the sexes reversed.
I’ve actually mentioned this to feminists talking about rape, and how, as women, they were in a position to pontificate about rape that I couldn’t be. Whenever I’m told that my experiences don’t count as rape, because it was “only drunken fooling around”, I point out that women charge men for “drunken fooling around”, and get men convicted. Really, if you use the broad definition of rape, and apply it to men as well as women, I’m pretty sure a great many men could easily claim to be rape victims too.
I use the term ‘unwanted sexual attention’ when trying to capture some of the disclosures I have had from men about sexual experiences with female partners which were either non-consensual or involved sexual acts the men were unhappy to participate in.
One recourrent theme in these disclosures has been ‘I said to change what she was doing, because it didn’t feel good, but she either ignored me or went back to the unwanted action after a perfunctory pretence at change’
Rape, IMHO should only be used when there is unwanted penetration (oral, anal or vaginal) by a penis, hand or fist. If a dildo or other substitute is used this should be defined as sexual assault, and more importantly the first degree sexual assault should be for acts as severe as rape, with the same sentencing parameters. I suspect there are flaws in my logic, so comments welcome.
I guess my question would be: Why bother to make the distinction? If first degree sexual assualt includes penetration and the penalties are equal, what’s the purpose of a special category for just one of many such equally abhorrent criminal acts. IMO, it’s like saying there should be a distinct charge for punching someone in the guts and a different one for punching him in the face.
Seems to me only to encourage the whole “special victimhood” concept.
I can see what you are saying. I guess I am trying to hedge the legal argument that could arise that a sexual assault with an object could be viewed as less severe than rape, but that in most peoples minds a man who is anally penetrated by an object is not raped but is sexually assaulted. I wrote previously about a nurse colleague who witnessed the death of a young man in his A&E cubicle when he was bought in with a perforated bowel from the 10 inch dildo used on him. Had this young man survived, his assailants would have been charged with sexual assault, not rape, but would only have received a severe sentence for grievous bodily harm. As it was, the assailants were never identified as the lad died before any details could be obtained.
Redefining it all legally to various types of sexual assault with varying degrees of severity would be the most sensible, but you can’t always expect sensible from the law (and I don’t even say that cynically, just as a reality).
Sadly yes, I’m an incurable optimist for justice but a cynical realist about its actual application!
Sexual assault(as it exists now) needs to be completely discarded as a legal concept. Rape also needs to be redefined.
Rape should be only anal oral or vaginal intercourse against the EXPRESSED wishes of either party, or obtained through coercion where a power balance exists.
What currently results in claims of sexual “harassment” should pretty much be shit-canned except in the workplace by superiors. Or, in cases where a CLEAR refusal has been made.
“Do you want to hit the clubs after work Friday?”
“We’ll see.”
Should never be considered a problem at all. If it happens every week then it might be considered a minor inconvenience if the reply is. No thanks, I’m not interested” or something along those lines.
But, that would require both adults being expected to act like adults and make their wishes clear.
“Unwanted penetration by a penis” seems to exclude unwanted envelopment of a penis.
I have no doubt of your character or your intention but, I feel I must point out that your way of explaining your stance does allow for exclusion of men as victim except when the crime involves 2 men rather than a man and woman for what amounts to the exact same action.
You are a boon to our movement and no doubt an aid to the men at S4M but, I would ask you to reflect on how you make this particular statement and possibly why.
Also, crimes against a person usually are considered in severity by the quantifiable way they impact a persons life. This makes murder the prime socially unacceptable act as it deprives the victim of their life, but a physical assault that confines a person to a wheelchair could be considered much more severe and deserving of a stronger sentence than say a physical assault that results in a fat-lip.
Intention also is another factor. Intending to shoot a rampaging rabid animal and wounding your neighbour and having an argument with your neighbour and intending to kill him but only wounding him, while having the exact same end result are not remotely similar crimes. One is negligence the other is attempted murder. So, in comparison someone cannot be guilty of rape EVER if they are never told, “No” because they could be used to “starfish” and not even notice the difference.
Yes. That wording seems rooted in the presumption that the penetrator is always the one responsible for the action, and I would argue that it will only serve to continue that understanding.
Fair point Raven (& Tallwheel), thinking on it, I do wonder if the problem lies with continuing to use rape and sexual assault in legal contexts. What would happen if unwanted penetration/engulfment was defined as “sexual assault 1″ ?
Sorry for any offence caused, Not excusable on my part as I should be mindful of thinking out loud on hot button topics.
@KiwiHelen.
I was not at all offended.
I saw something that didn’t quite sit right with me and explained why. Having a feel for your character from the your comments figured you would be receptive to talking about it.
My personal stance is “Rape” should be a crime described as “Unwanted vaginal, anal or oral intercourse(with any object) where either participant makes clear their desire to not participate. My wording is clumsy but, the intent I have in mind is to include male on female, male on male, female on male and female on female actions held to the same standard legally.
@Raven,
Thanks. I too want to see unwanted sexual assault being recognised as gender independent. I am not sure that it will be easy to reclaim the word rape, hence my thought on changing it to a graded system
Actually, I’ve had two experiences similar to the ones you describe, where women who were 12 and 19 years my seniors, ‘took advantage’ of me in a drunken stupor, while their husbands where passed out somewhere else in the house.
This happened in my late teens, and roughly around 10 years later on the second occasion.
I would never claim victim status over something like that, ’cause even though I was drunk, I was perfectly aware of what was happening, and would never have engaged in something like that, had I been sober.
It was a mixture of drinks, youth, and very bad judgement, and not much else.
-And certainly not some of my fondest memories.
My thoughts exactly. I’ve had some drunken encounters (and one where a woman I met at a party had her hands down my pants when I had too much to drink… I was young and stupid. Well, younger, and stupider), but still had enough awareness to know what was going on, even if it wasn’t the best decision, and I did go into that situation knowing what could have been the result of drinking.
Hell, I’ve even had a girlfriend ask me for sex when I was tired. Feminists would call that (sexes reversed) coercion.
In no case would I have thought to press charges, or claim victimhood (I feel it would cheapen the experience of actual victims), but I do use the examples to point how broad the definition of rape has gotten, and to point out hypocrisy of accepting a broad definition to allow more women into the victimhood fold, but decrying it hen men use the same definition.
“Feminists would call that (sexes reversed) coercion.”
Have you ever tried saying no to a drunk woman, if she wanted to have sex??
You only do that once..
Trust me.
I was a courier for young women to take them to appointments for abortion counselling on a few occasions when I was working in a poor urban environment, and there were times when what these girls were talking about amounted to forced, non-consentual intercourse.
We never used the label rape, even if we felt it was, unless they used the term. Our job was to make sure these girls felt safe and non-judged by the people who were helping them get to their appointments. We were also expected to explain if they had quesitons about the tests they would be having (STD swabs, ultrasound etc) as to the medical reasons for their necessity. Last of all we were to explain why two separate professionals needed to interview them. It was interesting because many of them felt far more traumatised by this process than by their experiences of sex (even if their STD tests were positive), because they were certain they did not wish to continue with the pregnancy. The clinic I worked with was very good at getting these girls to get the subdermal implant after terminations, because it avoided their families finding their pill packets. It wasn’t a perfect solution, but it was a “least bad” one.
I doubt the figure of 1 in 4, particularly in the feminist white middle-class world. In some circles, I suspect it is higher than the 1 in 20 figure.
Would have pushing the feminist rape agenda helped these women? Probably not, I suspect that they would have not come to us for help if we had. The most I ever said to these girls about consent is “You have the right to say no.”
Good article. I was thinking about high level male businessmen the other day, and how women like to pretend this means men have power.
But, it’s completely the opposite. These men tap dance for the woman at home and tap dance for women in public (since women control nearly all the money and spending). Our whole feminized culture is based on female greed and materialism. The CEO tap dances for the board members, and both the CEO and board members are tap dancing for women, the ones who control spending and household decisions.
Note: Of course, women are lazy and entitled and don’t have to work at these heart-attack inducing jobs, anyway unless they think it would be “fun”.
My personal bid for awarding the status of “second class citizens” to a group: female victims of violence by women. This group must be kept quiet about as much as possible because awareness of the horrors perpetuated against these women and girls by members the “non-violent ‘gender’” will undermine the falsehoods of the “gender theory” fallacy.
People don’t bear “genders” they bear sexes. “Gender” is a hoax (except in grammar, where gender does indeed apply).
I’ve had far greater psychological damage inflicted by women on me than by men, even when I include my rather unpleasant ex. I’ve seen just how nasty women can be to someone who is “other”.
It stopped bothering me when I realised I had strength and value regardless of their judgement of me…but I do think this in some part explains why I’ve never really bought in to the ‘women as victims, men as perps’ schema.
You would think that if we had a legitimate field called “Gender Studies” then one wide-open area of research would be the many ways in which women and girls inflict both physical and emotional violence on each other, as well as on men.
I find that every woman I’ve ever talked to about this in any depth has had stories about being utterly savaged by her fellow women. Almost all have stories about being abused by a pack of women who decide as a group to bully them. Although I had one friend (who I eventually realized has a lot of misandrist attitudes that makes it hard for me to talk to her anymore) claim that women-bullying-women was mostly an American thing and not found in other countries like Sweden where she grew up, and she felt “rampant misogyny” was still at the root of it. Uhm, yeah, OK. I suppose that’s one theory. Another theory would be the radical notion that women are human beings and therefore just as likely to be vicious and nasty and psychotic as men are. Crazy thought eh?
Here’s some ‘humanity’ from Phyllis Chessler who is both an angry put upon feminist and a somewhat open minded ‘anti-feminst’: http://www.amazon.com/Womans-Inhumanity-Woman-Phyllis-Chesler/dp/1556529465
My ‘otherness’ has been obvious from a very young age, and my earliest memory of female initiated bullying is at about 6-7 years old, so I somehow don’t believe they were agents of the patriarchy!
I would love to see the research done on relational violence in girls, as it seems to be one aspect of female social hierarchies that evolves whenever women form a group. In my workplace, my boss and I regularly enforce the zero tolerance rule around bullying behaviour, but it is excruciatingly difficult to get a bullied woman to participate as a complainant in formal proceedures. This seems to be an aspect of female social hierarchy that we can’t crack
“This seems to be an aspect of female social hierarchy that we can’t crack.”
There’s actually multiple studies on this behavioral pattern.
Only thing is, you have to look at the studies of the canine families to see something similar played out. Not even primates display this kind of behavior.
“..and not found in other countries like Sweden where she grew up, and she felt “rampant misogyny” was still at the root of it.”
Lies, damned lies, and more lies.
I live over here, and it’s exactly the same thing we see. Vicious hyenas in packs from grade school, and well into their 40′s and 50′s.
You mean it stops that young? Seeing how the social interactions go in some of the older people’s service clubs I have my feeling that it never goes away fully
@Kiwihelen:
You’re probably right, but my experiences with older women is somewhat limited, so I wouldn’t know.
I never say gender. I feel like I’ve already ceded territory the second I say that.
“All feminist are liars and that’s all they are.”
I love to take the “all men are rapists” quote and turn it around on them.
This article by Phil in Utah is beautifully organized, succinct and has great utilitarian value as a handy reference and an aid for dialog and debate.
Thanks. That means a lot, especially coming from you.
Excellent use of statistics. I was even starting to get worried toward the end there thinking, “ohhh damn it, he missed something important and I’m going to have to be a giant dick and point it out” but nope, you had it covered by the time I finished reading. Great job.
You know what’s been getting me recently? Rape jokes. Rape jokes, they drive me crazy. Why? BECAUSE I NEVER HEAR ANY, except jokes involving prison rape which by the way isn’t fucking funny. I heard about the one comedian who made the (tasteless I’ll admit) rape joke earlier this year, and I heard all this complaining about “rampant rape jokes” and started thinking and talking to my friends, asking, “Do you know any rape jokes that aren’t about men?”
After scratching our heads and talking and comparing notes for a while, we could only come up with four:
1) A Benny Hill skit from the 1970s wherein a guy mis-spells the word “therapist” as “the rapist.” Uhm, sure, OK, that’s… sort of about women…? I guess?
2) Another Benny Hill skit from the 1970s which had a girl shouting “grape! grape!’ and a guy asks her “do you mean rape?” and she says “No there was a bunch of them!” OK, so, that’s spectacularly unfunny, but it’s example #2, and I guess that counts for something. The fact that we had to reach this far back to something so obscure is interesting though.
3) More recently I heard a joke involving knocking a girl unconscious with drugs or something to have sex with her. And I can count the number of times I’ve heard a variation on that joke in the last few years probably on one hand.
4) I did hear comedian Louis CK once remark that you should never rape anyone unless you have a good reason, like you’re really horny. Which is I guess tacky, although if you look at his body of work and the context it’s so obvious he was being sarcastic/sardonic I don’t think anyone mistook its intent.
So uhm, can someone clue me in on where all the rampant rape jokes are? Who’s telling them? Where, where? It’s hard not to think of this parody of “Jezebel”:
“Was that a rape joke?” Heh.
Seriously, where are all these rape jokes? I even Googled “rape jokes” and all I could get was essays on how offensive rape jokes are, and people either attacking or defending Daniel Tosh.
So anyway, where the hell are all these rape jokes we’re supposedly all casually telling each other?
The only “rape jokes” I’ve ever heard were nothing but gamer’s banter among each other (‘We’re gonna rape your team lol’, ‘Oh God I just got raped by a Level 75 Warlock in WoW’)
Comedian Norm MacDonald used to do a joke about rape, but of course it was prison rape perpetrated against a man.
When a feminist gets going about “rape culture” it usually becomes clear that just about anything relating to women’s bodies or men trying to interact with women falls under “rape culture”. So when they say that rape references are all around, they’re probably just talking to themselves.
I just wanted to add, one joke from the show “Arrested Development” Tobias said he tried to combine his profession as an analyst and therapist, but of course it didn’t work because together it spelled analrapist, with an emphasis on the second ‘a’, yet people didn’t see it that way.
Dean, you left this little Mel Brooks skit out of your list of rape jokes:
Oh god, I’d forgotten what a vicious misogynist Mel Brooks is!
Irony: that movie is now almost 40 years old (it came out in 1974). And we all know the culture is now FAR more misogynist and rape-tolerant and rape-encouraging than it was back then, right? [/sarcasm]
The big question that we face, of course, is how best to counteract those “lies, damned lies and statistics” and, more to the point, how to deal with their societal impacts. Dean Esmay has suggested a strictly fact-based wiki that can be linked here and I’ve been working to provide him with the necessary infrastructure to test that approach.
Much as I like the theory, however, I must admit to some reservations about its efficacy. Quite frankly, my own assessments and inclinations tend more toward the ideas regarding public perceptions and their manipulation put forward by Edward Bernays and perhaps most notably implemented by his early disciple, Joseph Goebbels. In that context, objective facts seem to matter very little, if at all.
Arvy: I am grateful for your help on that and I intend to pursue it more next week. But let’s make clear how I see it: one tool in what needs to be a very big toolbox. I view this as giving us a screwdriver, to add to the toolbox that also needs to include hammers, saws, nails, screws, wrenches, ratchets, pliers, planers, sanders, and so on. This is ONE tool, not THE tool.
Or, to put it another way, every doctor has something called a Merck Manual. It’s a huge compendium of diagnostic data references. You have probably rarely seen your doctor walk into the room and consult one, but I guarantee you (GUARANTEE) that the next time you go to your doctor’s office you ask “hey do you have a Merck Manual?” he’ll probably look at you funny and say, “yeah, of course, why wouldn’t I?” It’s like asking if he owns a stethoscope: of course he’s got one.
Those of us who’ve already taken the red pill tend to have absorbed a lot of the information we need to communicate to people but if you get stuck in a conversation it can be frustrating to say “fuck, where was that reference on male rape in the Congo again?” “Where was the reference on how Genocide often disproportionately targets men again?” “Where is the proof of the Sentencing Discount women get in the justice system again?” “Where’s the evidence on female perpetration of abuse again?” etc. etc.
You know these things are true, I know these things are true, but someone who’s new to the movement doesn’t necessarily know them and remembering where to point them is tough. A central repository becomes a go-to place for that. Just facts facts and more facts, no opinions, no bullshit, just references references facts facts references references.
This can be used a myriad of ways. One example: you get a poster that says: “Domestic Violence: Women Are Half the Problem.” Now, at the bottom, a little asterisk, in tiny print: “What exactly is this about? [link]”
It’s a tool for education and to back up claims easily. But we still need all that marketing stuff you talk about.
I’m very familiar with Bernais and all the propaganda stuff you talk about, and you’re right that facts aren’t always what changes opinions. But for those who open to convincing, or at least reasoned debate, facts at easy disposal can be crucial.
Like I said, one tool. Not a magic bullet, just a tool. Make sense?
Absolutely, Dean. I’m all for it and will back it to the hilt. Just saying, as you concluded yourself, that it shouldn’t be regarded as a magic bullet. Unfortunate as it may be, arguments based on “pure” fact and logic just don’t seem to have the impacts on public perceptions that we hope for and sometimes seem to expect as the just reward for our diligent efforts.
I suppose you might say that I myself am using that old manipulative political strategy of lowering public expectations, and maybe even your own just a little bit.
I know I certainly have a poor memory for such things, and having some kind of centralised repository of this information (and more, lets not limit ourselves just to the data that reinforces <x> of the standard arguments!) would be handy.
Even if it were the morally and tactically correct decision, basing our movement on the ideas of Joseph Goebbels would mean a field day for our opponents. PLEASE don’t do that!
They weren’t Joseph Goebbels’ ideas. Many of them weren’t even original with Bernays. He just elaborated some of them. But they are in constant use everywhere every day. The entrire field of commercial advertising, for example, is fraught with them. And we won’t even mention the field of politics and governance in general.
If men’s rights advocates decline utterly the entire concept of manipulating public perceptions in their own favour, they might as well just give up now.
P.S.: Done properly it’s not even evident to the opponents, or anyone else for that matter. Done improperly, of course, it can indeed be disastrous.
In support of Arvy: Bernays et. al. FOUNDED the modern science and art of marketing, and their techniques are still in use. Yes, as it happens, the Nazis made use of these techniques. So did the Communists. So does every large successful corporation, like McDonald’s or Sears. So does every big successful non-profit, like World Wildlife Fund or NOW or the NRA or [fill in the blank with your favorte or most hated big non-profit].
The fact is that Bernays et. al. called the whole thing “propaganda,” until the Nazis and other fascists put the stink on the word. Then the professional propagandists realized they had an image problem so they batted it around and came up with a new word: “marketing.” And then continued on with the same techniques, continuing to refine them over the decades.
Marketing=Propaganda, Propaganda=Marketing.
(Avoiding now writing another of Dean’s annoying dissertations on why attacking the word “feminist” will only get you so far; smart propagandists/marketers know that if you put the stink on a word, all they have to do is invent a new word).
Anyway, point is, yeah, Goebbels used these techniques. So do AARP and Burger King and Nike and and governments around the world and…
Thanks for the backup. Good explanation.
Much of it, of course, has to do with establishing a frame of reference for your intended target demographic. Especially (but by no means exclusively) under so-called “democratic capitalism” (an interesting concept in itself) that framework is almost inevitably a narrow one linked to self-interest as perceived by your target group.
The trick is in establishing perceptions of self-interest consistent with your own. Thus feminism, as only one example amongst many, must be made to appear as being in the interests of women while actually serving the interests of its primary instigators and sponsors. For now, we’ll sidestep the whole controversy about who the latter may be.
It’s a neat trick, but not really too difficult once you’ve made a careful study of the target group and its pre-existing and/or pre-inculcated tendencies and motivations. The bonus is that it’s usually quite safe as they’ll almost never see the forest for the trees, nor understand who is actually pulling the strings for their own reasons which may be very different indeed.
It certainly has nothing to do with any particular ideology. It’s just how things work.
P.S.: I sometimes think that righteous anger, justifiable as it undoubtedly is in many cases, causes over-emphasis (here included) on outwitting and beating people (feminists, journalists, etc.) at their own game. While perhaps satisfying for the indivual for the moment, that is often a game of small returns in the broader context.
It’s a bit like the courtroom scenario where the defendant (or other witness on the stand) becomes so obsessed with outwitting that nasty shyster cross-examining him that he forgets his real job of convincing the jury about the large facts of the case and winning their agreement, not his own argumentative acumen in dealing with a lawyer.
In that respect at least, I certainly like your fact-based links idea a lot.
Dear Feminists,
You know, you’re on to something. Playing with statistics that lack backing or are twisted to conform to an ideology can be fun! Did you know that 100% of men are raped, according to an informal survey? Note that this survey included instances of visual rape, because we can not discount the horror of female gaze… males’ bodies being looked at forcibly and without consent (and no, women were not asked if they were victims of visual rape, but that wouldn’t affect the conclusions anyhow). And if you think that it’s too broad a definition to include (only for men) rape by being looked at without first giving express written consent that has been examined by a notary, well, you are a rape apologist.
Thanks Phil. Feminist governance follows the same path as the most despotic regimes on the planet. Without exception they describe themselves and the world in terms that are the opposite to reality. Dictatorships that call themselves democracies. Free elections scoring >99% of the vote. Feminists just wanting equality. The patterns are the same:
First instinct is to always lie.
Never tolerate any criticism or debate.
Deny any and all faults.
Attack anyone with a differing view.
Rewrite history to support ideology.
Reward supporters and punish detractors.
Imagine an enemy to justify extreme actions.
Feminist governance is the same as that of the worst despots and dictators. It is regressive and dishonest. Even before feminism it was debatable whether the worlds’s political institutions had evolved sufficiently to safely navigate us through a dangerous future of advanced weapons and resource competition. With feminist governance being so retrograde and inherently dishonest, the prospects for civilization are even dimmer.
I also think of how there is the claim that rape is about power. In prison? Probably. In wartime? Yes, as illustrated in an article on anti-misandry.com titled the rape of men. Having deployed myself, I was warned by other vets that young boys were at the highest risk, but by the political officials and high ranking officers, who are acting on behalf of the political zeitgeist, they claim every woman was being raped.
But for the kind of rape feminist scream about being so prevalent in society? Not really, Phil mentioned that at 45 the chances of a woman being raped drop. According to the FBI the age range of most rapes was between 15 and 35 saying it is at least 10 times higher for women between those ages than for all other women. I’m also willing to bet that only reasonably attractive women get raped, though I’m sure no study has ever published that finding, not because it isn’t true, but because the backlash would be in the form of public humiliation from feminists with an organized mob lynching to soon follow.
This is important to understand because the feminist claim is that sex gives men power over women, and that any sex between men and women is rape of the woman. But the opposite is true because men will sometimes do anything for sex, anything the woman wants (even dance, I hate dancing). It is a tool she can use over him, and yet that’s not considered abuse even though sex is an accepted physiological need as highlighted on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Interestingly enough though if a man withholds affection from a woman, be it compliments or physical intimacy, that would constitute emotional abuse or neglect (neglect is usually abuse against children). So again, another myth brought to light and scrutinized for what it is.
I once got into an argument about statistics with a male feminist over at Men’s Health magazine. He didn’t accept the Kanin study. I pointed out the FBI data of false rape accusations at around 8-12% which is probably a gross underepresentation because there is a huge chance of false positives (woman regretting sex and accusing man of rape who then gets convicted for example). He told me that the chance of this happening is miniscule.
I then told him this:
“Look, we can sit around and argue numbers and statistics all day, the plain truth of the matter is that if a woman falsely accuses you of rape, no matter how unlikely you think it is you are quite simply FUCKED!
You are presumed guilty, you are perp-walked, your face goes into a registry (before you even get to trial) and you actually have to prove consent. That is a gross misscarriage of justice.
Try to tell me I’m wrong on this one.”
He agreed with me.
There is a lesson to be learned here, I think. Whenever numbers and statistics don’t work, you can point to the plain reality of the situation, something that happened recently, something that was featured on the news to make your point. If a man is not completely brain washed he will have to make a consensus.
Can the Obama executive order on such a grossly unfair ruling against male students not be challenged as unconstitutional? Where are the Republicans on this?
Democrats too. If only concerned groups would move past the political toxicity of confronting this misstep on Obama’s part and challenge it on a bipartisan basis.
Fact of the matter is that as private institutions, universities have broad discretion in areas that government areas don’t. Although this is probably in violation of sex discrimination statutes and other things, I’m afraid it’s going to take someone with serious money and legal power to challenge it.
I’ve said this before, but society’s attitude about rape needs to change. The over sensitivity to this subject defies all logic. Right now it’s considered second to murder as the most heinous crime, and some even think it’s worse. It needs to be brought back to reality.
There shouldn’t even be a separate category of crime called rape; it should just be considered a form of battery. Forced sex, really that’s all it is.
Quite honestly, I would rather be a woman with a fairly high chance of being raped in her lifetime than a man with a good chance of being killed on the job, killed in combat, or beaten to the point of being a cripple for the rest of his life.
How about no? What happens if YOU get raped? Rape is a horrible crime, deal with it. The problem we’re facing today is that feminists have diluted the term to kingdom come by defining pretty much any sexual interaction between men and women as rape (short of the woman herself aggressively pursuing the man, and she can always recant and say ‘lol I didn’t feel so well after the fact so I guess he raped me)
I’m not going to “deal with it”. Whether a woman has actually been raped or not, rape is just a card any woman can use when she needs to get an unlimited amount of sympathy. I’m sick and tired of it.
The bottom line is, there are always going to be false rape allegations and there are always going to be innocent men going to prison because of it. I’d rather see the small number of actual rapists serve short prison sentences than innocent men be incarcerated for years or decades over bogus rape convictions.
In any sane country it’s hard as hell to get a conviction and women can’t get a guy locked up on their word alone: The problem isn’t that “rape is overestimated so we should overlook it/give a slap on the wrist”, the problem is that thanks to feminists it’s damn easy to ruin some guy’s life since the law will be slanted against him.
Seriously, stop downplaying the gravity of the crime, that’s not the issue at hand at all and is a rather poor tactical maneuver.
I agree. If anything, in 95% of the cases:
- heterosexual rape = mitigated assault
- homosexual rape = aggravated assault
I don’t buy into any of the psychological drama women have invented around male-on-female rape. Men getting battered or raped by men is as a rule much, much more traumatic than women getting raped.
Plus, given the prevailing false allegation epidemic, I don’t care any more if women actually get raped or not. Rape as a false accusation now dwarfs rape as a crime. Some women still get seriously raped? Let women take care of that problem. They’ve made it worse by hollowing out the definition of rape which used to be a clear and unambiguous one.
Jack, let’s be fair here. Men are just as responsible as women for the psychological drama surrounding rape. It was Victorian men that invented the “rape is a fate worse than death” idea, and women haven’t let go of it.
Feminists pretend to be so progressive, but in many ways they’re deeply stuck in the past.
There are more false allegations of rape than any other crime. That’s never going to change, because it’s extremely difficult to know whether a woman is lying or telling the truth about rape. I’d be willing to bet more than half of the men sitting in prison for rape right now are innocent.
Rape should just be another form of simple assault and battery. This, in my opinion, is the only way to keep innocent men from languishing in prison for years and to avoid have a criminal record of being convicted of rape.
Regarding the last several posts, I have to ask, why would men being raped by men be more traumatic than women being raped by men?
Because of the homosexual aspect of it?
Couldn’t that be considered a homophobic “victorian male” inspired view as well? Just another ho-hum simple assault?
I admit “rape” is the go to word for any feminist’s getting the upper hand in any discussion, no matter how remote it is to the topic.
Yes. That needs to stop.
I know an actual female rape victim. I know an acutal male rape victim. I know an actual false rape accusation victim.
By FAR the falsely accused suffers FAR worse.
Most people seem oblivious to how traumatic it is, or even say it’s “almost as bad” when it is indeed FAR worse. That needs to be rectified, and victims given their due.
Instead of downplaying the very REAL trauma of rape, any gender, false accusers need to be taken to task, and punished to the extreme degree of harm they themselves inflicted.
“Regarding the last several posts, I have to ask, why would men being raped by men be more traumatic than women being raped by men?”
Perhaps, because an anus is not actually designed for sexual purposes and quite prone to injury. Even consensual anal sex if the participants are a bit to eager. Now, I could be way off base as I have difficulty placing myself in the role of a rapist but, I am assuming that they do not penetrate dry, unlubricated vaginas. So, it becomes a crime of degradation, possible exposure to disease or pregnancy and unlawful confinement unless an actual physical assault or threat of the same was used to facilitate the “rape” (I used the quotes because unless it involves someone unable to refuse or forced I do not consider it to be rape but regret). Whereas, anal rape(of either gender) is in addition to the above almost guaranteed to include a component of physical injury.
There are exactly zero victim services for male victims of rape and, widespread acceptance of making light of their suffering. Much like the delight expressed when men are sexually mutilated.
So, in the west it could be claimed quite reasonably that rape of males is worse for men. This does not in anyway mean that a crime committed against a woman should not be investigated and if warranted criminal charges laid. It means that with very little support for men, public humiliation for being a victim and feminists fighting tooth and nail to keep the money flowing in their direction alone it IS worse to be a male victim of sexual violence at the hands of a man or woman.
Things like, a man and woman sharing a bottle of wine then having consensual sex and her husband finds out, then magically the man although equally under the influence is a “rapist” or, the insistence that such events are rarer then let’s say the occurrence of actual rape boggles the mind.
What is at stake is a boatload of money poured into rape victim groups(only female victims of course) that is failing miserably to help affected people or alter the already low occurrence of that crime in most parts of the world.
Raven, I am all too well away of the “attitudes” toward male rape. That is indisputable.
To suggest that female rape is merely a “simple assault” and should garner lesser prison sentences as such because it’s over dramatized I must disagree with.
I am talking about “legitimate” rape here – not feminist bullshit. Infants and the elderly are not the only “real” rapes, while any women in between is lubed up and ready.
I have no disagreement whatsoever that the drama surrounding female rape needs to be racheted back down. It is insanely unhealthy to teach anyone they are “ruined for life”. That goes especially for “advocates”, books, movies, TV shows – it’s just out of control.
But to scale back punishment? No. No way in hell.
My son is a victim of a false rape accusation. He went to jail. He narrowly avoided a long prison term because he couldn’t “comply” with a brutal three year sex offender “treatment” as an innocent person. He was forced to register as a sex offender for 13 years, and would NEVER have been released from that obligation if it wasn’t a juvenile conviction.
His take on it? “As an innocent person, it’s a living hell, an endless nightmare. If I had been guilty? Not punishment enough”.
Constitutional Due Process MUST be restored(no more pandering definitions), rape shield laws abolished, and better ways of descerning “he said she said” (don’t believe in polygraph, but maybe when BOTH are subjected to it?) and finally, EXTREMELY harsh punishment for false accusers. I mean the SAME punishment their victims would have faced.
Boys are bad girls are good outlooks and outcomes MUST be recognized and abolished.
My brilliantine idea for establishing better laws? Allow both genuine rape victims (beyond a reasonable doubt) and genuine falsely convicted victims to weigh in on how these laws need to be changed to seek justice for actual victims.
ALL victims deserve to be respected and their voices heard. NOT JUST WOMEN’S.
Your experience and pain is unique to those who have been lucky enough to have been spared the horrors of false rape accusations. Would you kindly be willing to take part in a pre-recorded phone interview for my Mens Matters radio show in England?
“I have to ask, why would men being raped by men be more traumatic than women being raped by men?”
You should leave such questions – to which you know the answer as well as anyone – to the feminists and manginas who want to downplay the massive and incomparable tragedy of prison rape.
“Because of the homosexual aspect of it?”
No, because of the hemorrhoids.
Hemorrhoids? THAT’S your definitive answer?
Women are also anally raped. Are THOSE victims “more traumatized” than vaginally or orally raped women?
Were the Japanese men who flung hundreds of their wives and daughters over cliffs during WWII just silly “victorian men” who over dramatized the horror of rape?
Did you even read what I wrote?
As a mother I had to live the horror of fearing for my son during his detention. His accuser WANTED him to be raped in prison.
Don’t chide ME about the horrors of prison rape. I flew from Denver to Seattle twice a week to visit my son while he was locked up. I walked in to find his face bashed and his broken wrist untended. They said he could use it as a weapon.
At least he was’t raped. Knowing that is the only way I can live with what happened. Call ME a silly Victorian male, but I considered putting a gun to his head rather than letting him become someone’s “bitch”.
Yes. I think prison rape is horrible.
MY point is, however, downplaying female rape as “simple assault” and lowering punishment is NOT a road you should be going down. I
Women are also anally raped.
Fudge-fudge, muddle-muddle. I was comparing apple with apple. All things being equal, that kinda stuff.
If you want to know, I do want to see lower punishment for most sexual crimes, although for tactical reasons, like all MRAs worthy of the name, I want women to be given a taste of their own medecine and to get the same sentences for equal crimes. But I’d much rather have sexual freedom for both sexes than sexual repression for both sexes. I don’t belong to the morons who think it would be allright for the age-of-consent to be at 39 provided women over 39 who break the law *also* go to jail. And yes, I think age-of-consent laws and prostitution laws have something to do with rape and in a Society where the male psyche is attacked by sexual imagery all day long, rape defined as forced sex can have mitigating circumstances.
If I wanted a Society in which sexual crime is overpunished I would convert to Islam. I don’t because I still hope justice AND freedom can coexist.
“in a Society where the male psyche is attacked by sexual imagery all day long, rape defined as forced sex can have mitigating circumstances”
Jack – this is a society where the FEMALE psyche is attacked by RAPE IMAGERY all day long.
How can that NOT have some detrimental impact on women’s view of themselves, or their views of men?
At any given moment, since the “rape taboo” was lifted in the 1970′s, some channel on TV somewhere is featuring rape as it’s central theme 24/7/365. Oprah, Soap Operas, Law & Order, Doctor shows, lawyer shows, teen shows, children shows, even sit coms ( Edith Bunker gets raped, for God’s sake).
Magazines and books round out the cacophony with endless variations on the theme. There’s no reprieve from it!
How often do images or awareness of male rape surface comparatively?
We still laugh about a guy from Boston my daughter once dated, who drove MILES out of his way to avoid The South on a cross country trip with several friends to Phoenix, citing the “squeal like a pig” rape scene from the movie DELIVERANCE as the reason. That movie was from the ’70′s and STILL scaring yankee boys in 2000′s! American History X, and Tom Selleck in An Innocent Man both featured horrrifying prison rape scenes. I’m sure there are others, (those are the ones that spring to mind for me),and are few and far between, going waaaaaay back in time. Movies featuring WOMEN being raped? Simply too numerous to keep count of.
Other than a few references here and there, male rape is pretty much an unspoken subject. Men don’t seem to have any desire to feed that beast.
Out of sight, out of mind for most people.
It seems to be MEN that are the worst offenders when it comes to perpetuating the “bubba” jokes. Anytime any crime is committed by a male, there’s no shortage of male commenters chortling about dropping the soap in the shower.
When a woman commits a crime, there is always the usually “fry her” comments, but NEVER prison rape jokes, not from either gender.
If men were relentlessly bombarded with images of men being raped, they would probably be as over-hyped and hysterical as women are. At the very least, male rape would be aknowledged as much as female.
Most males don’t seem to want to put something like that out in the universe, and I don’t blame them. I can see where it could perpetuate it.
How about a poster that reads : “If men can’t protect themselves from rape, how can they protect YOU from it?”…or words to that effect. However honest that might be, I suspect that suggestion would go over like a turd in a swimming pool.
And you need to get back to that clear, unambiguous definition, in addition to making false accusers pay dearly for their crime. We’re in a mess not because of the sentences for rape, but because men are presumed guilty until proven innocent and because false accusers don’t get punished for it.
The basis of an illegal act is one that the law defines as illegal. As I understand it, rape first came about as an offence whereby an unwanted sexual act would result in the birth of an illegitimate baby. It was therefore not illegal to have unwanted sex with your wife since any baby that was produced would not have been illegitimate.
The feminists have been chipping away to expand definitions for years and will keep on doing so forever. There will come a day when men will have to be tagged and monitored from childhood onwards to ensure that any sexual approach or expression of desire is fully legitimized and that the targeted female is in no way pressured or coerced; that she is fully sober and not under the influence of drugs nor is she too tired before giving her written consent.
In such a day, probably most men will carry a sexual misdemeanor against their name and will be required to participate in specialist sex education training. Many will be obliged to take medication to help them control any inappropriate sexual urges that might threaten a fellow female citizen or a child in anyway.
For those who fail or are deemed to have failed to control themselves, they will be offered the option of castration which, in the worst cases, will be legally enforced upon them. You know what? When that day comes the white knights will still be out there defending such a regime.
It will create a dilemma though because the femocracy will be struggling to invent more terrors such as perhaps estrogen treatment of male babies to make them more compliantly feminine.
“There’s another possibility at play here: Matrilineality [sends] a message to the fathers of their children. It goes a little something like: “This child is mine, not yours. I don’t want you in this child’s life.””
That’s a nice narrative there. I guess it’s sarcasm, right?
The most vocal opponents to the notion that a woman and her offspring must take their husband’s name are women who’d rather raise their children on their own, away from their father. Also, note that women always say “MY CHILD” not “OUR CHILD”. They truly believe a man is nothing more than a sperm donor, who’s interchangeable and thus disposable.
“Jack – this is a society where the FEMALE psyche is attacked by RAPE IMAGERY all day long.How can that NOT have some detrimental impact on women’s view of themselves, or their views of men?”
This sounds like a variation on the “rape culture” idea. If there is such thing as a rape culture, it’s that our culture likes to overdramatize rape to the point of absurdity.
This attitude is extremely unhealthy. It encourages “slutwalkers” to take to the streets and revel in their supposed “victimhood” and allows for hysteria to ensue whenever a high profile person is accused of rape. This attitude also feeds into the “rape survivor” mythos, which continues the vicious cycle of exaggerating the gravity of the crime.
1. Lie: “The fact that a woman is expected to take on her husband’s name when she gets married is proof that men have always considered women their property.”
Correct. It’s not how marriage laws worked.
Rather, it is how property law worked. A wife was legally recognised as “property” of a man, specifically a “chattel.” Ergo, women were recognised by the State as being the property of man.
This view of a woman as a man’s property was reflected in the laws view that a man cannot rape his wife. Such a view was not overturned until the 70′s in South Australia (on appeal, after the trial judge had held that it was ok for a husband to rip out chunks of his wifes pubic hair and exercise force to procure sex from his wife).
Similar views have recently been expressed by Tony Abbot: “this idea that sex is kind of a woman’s right to absolutely withhold…. need(s) to be moderated, so to speak”
As such, feminists should not rely on the expectation that women take men’s last names following marriage to support their argument that men have always seen women as their property. Rather they should turn to the vestiges of property law, criminal law and statements made by what will potentially be the next Australian Prime Minister.
Never been prouder to be a dyke.
Pray tell, what is a raging dyke doing in a place like this?
“Property” or responsibility?
Women take on their husband’s last names, or their father’s.
Either way, women were the responsibility of a male.
Men can get rid of property easily, but not responsibility.
So there was a school article about rape the other day, and when I went to the english page the stats said 1 in 10 women in Norway are raped in their lifetime, and when I went to the Norwegian one it said even the numbers of accusations, not even convictions, was at about 8000 in total for a 5.5 million people country over the period 1999-2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voldtekt notice on the english page, all of the sources are english even thought they’re speaking about a different country, AND the one norwegian legit police site linked to doesn’t actually say anything on the topic.
So the moral is, when you wonder what the rape statistic is in a country, ask the police and statistical bureau of that country, not your local newspaper.