To rape or not to rape…

That is the question. Most men have never even had to think about how to answer this question. The answer seemed obvious. However, it now looks like the government will be putting men in the precarious position of figuring out how to answer that in 2012. It also looks as though if men make the correct decision, women will have actually just lost a right that many currently enjoy; a right that men will continue to enjoy. More on that later. First, some background on how men and women have come to this quandary.

For those old enough to remember, feminism, decades ago, contained what was thought of as a radical branch.  These “wackos” were seen as extreme and small in number. They were hateful toward men and were frequently quoted in books and seen at protests with signs claiming all men were rapists and  batterers.  No one really paid any attention to this “little” group of women.  Most of the attention went to those women that (allegedly) promoted equal rights.  While no one was paying attention, the small, hateful group slowly began to promote their agenda and have affected a substantial amount of legislation.  These “wackos” have successfully convinced their fellow women (and their white knights) that, yes indeed, essentially all men are batterers and rapists.  Now they have hatched their true agenda’s implementation.

The same feminists I just spoke about have now succeeded in expanding the definition of rape.  This can be seen in two recent developments.  The first is the rape definition the CDC used for its recent survey about violence.  This definition of rape includes attempted forced penetration.  No other crime statistic adds attempted crimes.  In fact, I didn’t have much success searching for attempted murder rates by state even though murder rates by state were an easy find.  This CDC definition also includes sex when a woman is drunk or on drugs.  By using these incidents in the definition of rape, the CDC says 1 in 5 women have been raped over their lifetimes. 

Amazingly, the CDC does not include in their rape statistics men who were forced (with violence or threats of violence or by being held down) to penetrate a woman (vaginally or anally) or a man (anally) or forced to give oral sex to a woman or forced to receive oral sex from a woman or man.  If these were counted as rape, men would have been raped at a rate of 1 in 16 as opposed to the reported 1 in 71.  In fact, using those instances counted as rape, the rate of rape of men and women are exactly the same for the 12 months prior to the CDC study. (1)

The second development is what the FBI has included in their new rape definition.  This definition now includes penetrating someone, no matter how slight, while that person was under the influence of alcohol or drugs.  You can bet the feminists have their soldiers lined up at the doors of every state legislator to pressure them to adopt this new definition for their state.  Judging by history, the states will bow to their wishes.  If so, common rapists will include those men that engage in sex with women that were drunk, high or on drugs.  How many ladies reading this sentence can say they have ever had “consensual” alcohol or drug facilitated sex?  If so, you are a rape victim and your partner is a common rapist.  So here we go- To Rape or Not to Rape?

Men, you must now make that feared decision.  Let’s look at a few examples and see what this new definition does:

a): A husband and wife celebrate the wife’s 40th birthday.  They go out and enjoy a nice dinner.  They then arrive back home and share a bottle of wine to celebrate her big day.  There is some sensual talk and they express their love for each other.  She then goes into the bedroom and comes out dressed in erotic lingerie, takes his hand and leads him back to the bedroom.  She tells him to make love to her.

b): A woman asks her new boyfriend to meet her at a local restaurant/bar to enjoy some light fare and perhaps a drink.  He calls to tell her he is running late from work and will be there in 45 minutes.  The girlfriend notices a couple of female coworkers at the bar.  She joins them for a few drinks while she waits.  Finally her boyfriend arrives and tells him that instead of dining there they should order takeout and dine at her place a few blocks away.  When they arrive at her apartment, she says dinner can wait. She brings him into the bedroom and pushes him down on the bed and asks if he would enjoy some oral satisfaction.  He agrees.

c): The same woman as example b) goes to a bar and meets her girlfriends after work for happy hour. She drinks the same amount as in example b).  She seems fine when she leaves so her girlfriends say nothing when she says she is going to leave and drive home.  She misses a stop sign and plows into a car going through the intersection, killing the passenger.  Subsequently, the police discover she is slightly over the legal limit.

d): A husband and wife go out for New Year’s Eve.  Every year they go to the same tavern and celebrate. They tell each other prior to the party that they will enjoy the first sex of the year together after dinner and drinks and midnight toast.  After consuming several drinks each, they go back home via cab and start their initiation of the New Year.  Both are inebriated, but neither is passed out or staggering.

e). A man and woman just finished celebrating their wedding reception.  They have both had their fair share of drinks.  They take the limo to the hotel and consummate the marriage.

OK.  Let’s analyze some scenarios using the above examples:

a): If the husband decides to help his wife remember her 40th birthday with some passionate romance and sex, she can now lay claim to spending her 40th birthday being raped by her spouse.

b): Again, even though the girlfriend initiates the sex and is the aggressor, he will be raping her unless he pushes her off and says stop.  At the moment of passion, he must now decide whether to probably lose his new girlfriend due to her being insulted and thinking he doesn’t like her, or whether to be a common rapist according to the new legal definition (and perhaps future state law) even if he wasn’t aware she drank before he arrived.

c): Here we have a woman that is in the same inebriated state as example b.  She also chose to drink one or two too many and made her own decision to drive home anyway.  In b, the woman is removed of all responsibility of her actions even though it was her choice to drink and her decision to not stop at one or two.  If we apply the logic from the new rape definition in b to c, then this woman should not be arrested for vehicular manslaughter or any crime since this car crash was alcohol facilitated. A woman cannot be held responsible for any bad choices if the choices were alcohol facilitated.  In fact, based on the FBI thinking, the sober driver should be arrested as he should have known the woman was incapable of making her own choices and decisions about driving after drinking.

d): Here we have both husband and wife inebriated at equal levels.  The husband is expected to be responsible for his actions and be able to think clearly enough that if he has sex, he will be committing rape.  His wife is not expected to be responsible at all for her actions in accepting sexual enjoyment. Even though they both agreed ahead of time that they would enjoy sex after some drinks, this is not good enough.  Consent must be at the time of encounter, not given hours prior to relations.

e): Here, after the reception at which most likely drinking took place, consummation of the marriage will, according to the FBI and the CDC, be rape.  Yes, there is nothing like raping your new bride on her wedding night.  The FBI has turned what used to be a tender moment of passion and romance into a criminal act.

OK.  I know some out there are saying that these rape examples I gave would almost never result in any kind of rape accusation by the woman.  The key word is almost. We all too well know there are women out there that will, for various reasons, falsely accuse a man of rape.  If, however, this becomes state law, it wouldn’t be considered falsely accusing since it would be actual rape.  Should the FBI definition become state law, there is no longer a defense justified by her consent.  Once under the influence, the man is a rapist, period.  Should the revised VAWA be passed, any college male would automatically be a rapist since the proposed revised VAWA now defines rape using the FBI definition (cleverly the feminists saw to that knowing they would get their way and change the FBI definition).  This would mean, essentially, guilt by accusation and immediate expulsion.  No chance to ever get your degree.

A man must think of the future.  Even in example e, it is quite possible the new bride would accuse her groom eventually.  Perhaps the relationship sours in 5 years. Over half of marriages end up in divorce, with the wife filing most of the time.  If she wants to get even for some perceived wrong-doing, all she needs to do is call authorities and state that she was raped on her wedding night.  200 witnesses, photos, and a videotape will all corroborate her drinking that day.  The man now may be imprisoned for 25 years just because he wanted to consummate his marriage.  Similarly, a, b and d could result in a rape accusation if the wife/girlfriend chose to get rid of her husband/boyfriend at any time.  Of course if they are married, she’ll take the house, kids and assets as well.  

I am bringing up these examples as a warning to men; most especially to college men.  “To rape or not to rape?”  Ask yourself if 15 minutes of pleasure is worth expulsion from school or 25 years in jail.  Personally, I would not take the risk, no matter how slight it may seem.  No woman is worth decades in jail. No orgasm is worth my life being destroyed.  Self-love is much less risky, and I could get a good night’s sleep without being awakened by the thought I have just given license to a woman to destroy me.  I would think avoidance of any ladies nights would now be the accepted norm.  

That atmosphere invites trouble.  It is rife for manipulation and entrapment.  An upscale bar may give free or low priced drinks to ladies and advertise for men to come and enjoy the company of the self-inebriated.  At any of these ladies nights, there could lurk an opportunist willing to be picked up in order to blackmail a well-intentioned male with a rape charge if he doesn’t make her financially happy.  Or perhaps an ego trip, actually accusing someone to destroy a successful man’s life.  Now there would be no hassles of a trial with he said/she said issues.  A woman would just need an affidavit from her regular bartender telling of him serving her several drinks on the night in question.  

I would avoid bars if I knew myself to not be able to resist conversing with the opposite sex hoping to get “lucky.” I’d have to think twice about meeting a woman that enjoyed alcohol at a favorite bar.  Men, the same goes for college parties.  If you attend in hopes of meeting a woman, you’d better think twice.  Don’t even be alone with a woman that has indulged.  The conference call on 1/9 given by the President’s administration made it clear that college men are now the main targets of this new definition regarding drug/alcohol facilitated sex.

Ideologues have asked, and now received for all women a total release of responsibility for their actions and are automatically provided the rape victim status if they decide to engage in sex while using drugs or alcohol.  In each case, by indulging in drink, the female is always a victim and the male always the rapist.  Hey, just like the feminists proclaimed all these many years.  

A victory for feminism.  Or is it?

If all men heed my warning (which I know is unlikely), then any time we went out with our wives or girlfriends, we would have to state up front that if they would enjoy some romance and sex later on, they can no longer enjoy having anything to drink over dinner or at the bar other than soft drinks.  We as men would be able to enjoy our wine or beer or hard drink while we watched our partners complain and scold us about how lucky we were that we could enjoy alcohol or drug facilitated sex while they could no longer do so.  

Most likely the feminists will use this as another example of Patriarchy, despite themselves being the creators.  As men, we would need to tell the woman we are with, that this is what women want.  By law, we can’t have sex with women if they insist on drinking with us at dinner.  If we take this seriously, which we damn well should, feminists just took away a right most women do enjoy and have given us sole ownership of this right.  We’d have a right that women don’t.  Yes, I am looking at this new rape definition optimistically because I have to.  And, being the optimist, I see this with my wine glass half full.


(1)  Pages 17-19.

About Howard Gordan

I always have been a proponent of gender equality. While I have not yet been a direct victim of the biased courts or false allegations, I have seen how men are discriminated against so severely at times, that I am now an active men's rights activist.

View All Posts
  • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

    March 17th 2012, the day of Drinking, I will become First Initiate in The Temple of Men. It’s a new Pagan Faith System (PFS) where our Household Gods are Men. Among other things my Vows will include a Vow of Celibacy.

    Truthfully not so difficult for me considering my drive has always been low. But these sorts of circumstances drive home the point that perhaps more men should consider begging off of women and simply refusing sex with them, romance with them, attention to them, and money for them until such time as they get out into the streets marching and overturn these draconian laws. The women have only themselves to blame.

    But reading this I am only happier than ever, and more convicted than ever in my choice of faith.

    Men Gods Bless.


      The church of Zeta or MGTOW

      The international grass eating brotherhood of men.

      • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

        That gives me some ideas for the temple.

        And no I’m not kidding. I’ve been Pagan for years with no Household Gods. Now that I’ve found my calling, I’ve decided to make us Men my household gods.

        Maybe a Chapel of the Zeta in The Temple of Men.:D

    • gwallan

      “more men should consider begging off of women and simply refusing sex with them, romance with them, attention to them, and money for them”

      I don’t think of it as “a vow of celibacy”. That isn’t necessary. More like hydraulic despotism – control that which they need most.

      Do not initiate. Do not tolerate the emotional blackmail which is sure to ensue but call that manipulation for what it is. When they ask say “no, next time”.

      Women believe – KNOW – that men think about nothing but sex. That is actually THEIR weakness. They depend on male desire for everything. Switch it off in large enough numbers and that power base will crumble.

      • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

        Straight on with everything you said. Men *want* sex. Women *need* sex. Big difference.

        My vow though is a part of my spiritual walk and has hardly anything to do with women and everything to do with me.

        But I like your terminology, hydraulic despotism..maybe I might use that in my vow. If that is amenable to you.

        • gwallan

          I have no ownership of the expression.

          It relates to control of populations through limiting, harming or ceasing the supply of essential resources such as water. There are numerous instances throughout history.

          • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

            Excellent. Thank you for enlightening me.

      • Howard

        I agree totally. That was my point at the end of the article. However, I also know that too many men will risk everything they have going for them and give in to the “emotional blackmail”. Once this becomes part of states’ law perhaps a few high profile cases will change that. A few lambs to the slaughter might be needed to wake the others up.

        • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

          It has to be entirely systemic for most men to change.

  • Rper1959

    Thanks Howard , crazy crazy stuff.
    the loophole hey?

    men can drink and have sex, women can’t

    won’t take long for the “PIV critical RADFEMS” to come up with a way of closing that loophole,

    don’t you know an intoxicated man taking advantage of a sober women is committing rape!! get with the plan, all “PIV” is rape, men exerting their power and control over women. :-(

    If they can get to this stage, they will then want the next.

    • Poester99

      men can drink and have sex, women can’t
      it’s against the law

      Framing it this way is beautiful, this meme really needs to get out.

      • OneHundredPercentCotton

        That would make a FANTASTIC bumper sticker!

        My son is ALWAYS trying to get his lush of a girlfriend to do her share as DD (designated driver) but she always dives for a drink, forcing HIM to always be the sober driver or pay for the cabfare.

        Lemons to lemonade!

        • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

          She’s not forcing him to do anything. He is allowing her this control over his life. For what? I’ve always been the designated which meant free soda pops for me. I don’t mind. But Men need to stop paying for women and make them pay their fair share.

          Of course once he does that she is going to start crying rape.

          • OneHundredPercentCotton

            “Forcing his hand” as in “I’m not gonna drive your car home, I’m gonna drink”. The clear choice is to stand around watching her enjoy herself, call a cab (expensive) or risk a DUI – which is what happened when he tried to force his hand.

            I’m always the DD too, but that’s because I don’t enjoy drinking. If I did…there would be big problems, since my husband is like my son’s girlfriend.

          • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

            Women have learned not to force my hand. The relationship with someone that will ignore my occasional wish is about as important to me as getting smeared with jelly so fruit flies can mate and incubate on my fat Irish belly. I’ll end a relationship in a heartbeat and a half and they can move along their merry way.

        • Howard

          Any entrepreneurs here? How about t-shirts? I’ll buy one.

  • Open War

    It would be funny if it wasn’t so damn sad. Men won’t be controlling women’s alcohol consumption because we don’t control their sexuality. More likely you’ll refuse sex unless your partner is sober and she’ll find a new rube. Women are more likely to use the nuclear option in a relationship, even for small differences of opinion. Better to go your own way from both women and alcohol. Imagine the money you’ll save!

    • JGteMolder

      Men don’t control women’s sexuality because we allow them to control our own. It’s because this feminist society has spent their time indoctrinating women and men alike that they control sexuality and men have to go begging for it. It’s spent its time, for a part since time immemorial, teaching women to not put out, to not be “sluts”, because their value would plummet.

      Well, now by law, men are the ones who are not allowed to put out or they go to jail. We just need to spread this reality to enough men, and enough men will stop putting out for fear of jail.

      Result, women have to be sober and must actually go after the men. They are the ones who will be forced to make the first move if only enough men are explained the realities of the new situation. Ignoring women, the ultimate form of game, “alfa sexuality”, was just signed into law as the only lawful ways for all men to act.

      If we can only get the reality of this law to enough men, and how they should act because of it, this could be an interesting time indeed.

      • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

        Problem is, even if she is sober she can claim she was not sober. How do you prove she was intoxicated years later when she levels the charge?

        The solution would be for men en masse to just refuse sex with women, romance, children, money. Refuse to pay all child support, refuse to work. Refuse to run the electric plants, the water and sewage systems, the gas delivery, food delivery and more. Just….

        sit down.

        Do this en masse and what are women going to do? Drill their own oil? Refine it? Produce their own computers? Generate their own electricity?

        But men on the street won’t even say hello to each other and will compete like baboons for a little wiff, not even a touch, of the female. What needs to spread is the Zeta.

      • Howard

        I agree fully, but just to clarify- It’s not law- yet. A man can statistically be counted as a rapist but not be charged legally. Though it’s only a matter of time. If VAWA passes, college men will be the guinea pigs. We all know, immense pressure will be put to ensure it’s passage in all states. The biggest promotion was the definition change, not this alcohol/drug section. The feminists all promoted this as “men will finally be counted”. What they didn’t say was their true agenda- “men will finally be incarcerated”.

  • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

    It’s actually been this way for a while, just varied state by state. Now we see the definition of rape vis a vis the feminist (ones I’ve actually seen..):

    If you FEEL it was rape, it was rape.

    If you withdraw consent after the act, it was rape.

  • JinnBottle

    A fine debut, Howard. Of course, you – and I, and everyman here – realize what the first line of defense is going to be when your perfectly valid concern and possible case scenarios are presented before the state legislators, the FBI – or rather, their boss, Obey Mama – and movers-and-shakers generally: The line of defense will be the Nixonian one – the counterattack, specifically, in the form of the Horse-Laugh. “You’ve got to be kidding us, Howard!” “How do you MRAs expect us to take you seriously?” – neglecting to notice, naturally, that what was laughable – and duly laughed at – 40, 20…*five* years ago is now the law of the land.

    One correction: You mentioned that a husband accused of marital rape – by whatever definition was instituted *this* week – is subject to up to “25 years imprisonment”. It’s actually, in my, and I believe all but 9 states at last count, 35 years.

    Barkeeps beware: You and alcohol are Next on the femihitlist. That means you, too, “99”, Chili’s and *all* God’s alcohol-dispensing children.

    • Howard

      Thank you. I am very humbled to have been able to contribute. I picked 25 years as an average, not the maximum. For some stupid reason I thought maybe a judge might give leniency due to the victim being “incapacitated by drug/alcohol”. I now see the error of my ways.

    • Booyah

      Obey mama was just priceless i have to say. I laughed at that one.

  • Tom Snark

    I’m sure we can all see what’s going on here.

    It’s not that every man who has sex with a woman after they have been drinking is automatically condemned as a rapist.

    It’s got nothing to do with alcohol whatsoever, except that they chose to focus on alcohol because it’s common for people to drink and have sex.

    They could have chosen something else that’s common … if it’s done on a bed, it’s rape … if he has eyebrows, it’s rape … etc.

    The point is to give every woman ammunition, and for every man to be living constantly with a loaded gun pointed at his head.

    What couple hasn’t had sex when a little under the influence? – right. So now, practically any man can be thrown in prison for 30 years or so. That’s the point. Men had better watch their step around women, because they have total power now.

    That’s the point. It has nothing to do with alcohol, nothing to do with sex, nothing even to do with rape.

    It has nothing to do with any of these things, and everything to do with the psychopathic will to power. That’s why this definition was drawn up by feminist groups behind closed doors. It’s not about protecting women from rape and never was. It’s about adding to their arsenal in the event that they might like to go nuclear on a man for any reason.

    So he’d better not disagree or argue with her – ever.

    He’d better just do whatever she says, no matter how demeaning or degrading.

    “Yes, I’d like to report a rape. It happened 25 years ago. My husband had sex with me, but it was ON A BED.”

    “That’s rape. I sentence you to 30 years in prison.”

    Exact same logic as what’s going on here. It’s about women exercising totalitarian power over men. It doesn’t matter that most women won’t report these “rapes” (i.e. consensual sex that she very much enjoyed, and sometimes initiated, thankyou). What matters is they always have that option to destroy men’s lives by making a simple phone call. And any woman, even if she elects to set that power down, can pick it back up again at any time, because society allows her to.

    • mongo

      I suspect you are right on the mark with regard to the motivation of feminists, but it is difficult to reconcile this motive with all the other parties involved in making this law.

      For instance, I imagine there are government people whose thinking is dominated by the desire to capture all human activity in the form of measurable (and taxable) financial transactions. To them, the idea that female labour is not being exploited because men are supporting women is wrong, wrong, wrong. Some will be motivated by the desire to tax. Others will be Utopian ideologues, still others will have law and order priorities that are gratified by the thought of all female activity being recorded and regulated.All these groups will have a common interest in driving a wedge between men and women – for them, this draconian rape law is just another way of making men avoid women.

      There will be yet other broad areas of motive unrelated to either feminists or state interests. The personal empire building instincts of police and prison industry comes to mind – laws like this have immediately guaranteed them extra business. Then there are population control people. Nothing assures zero population growth more than men too afraid to approach women, and men made undesirable to women because of their powerlessness.

      There is no single motive. We are up against a matrix of innumerable motives united by a common contempt for the welfare of men.

  • Robert Full Of Rage

    I hope parents who are reading this article realize this is being taught to your daughters, and sons, at college campuses across the United States. If you think your children won’t accept this radical thinking as truth, the you are mistaken. While female and male college students get themselves into trouble by drinking too much, it is the women who believe they should not be held accountable for their actions.

    I hope the men reading this article understand its serious nature. This is not something that can happen to someone else, once in a blue moon. This is something that happens everyday not only at college campuses across the United States, but also in your own living rooms (or bedrooms).

    I also don’t believe that a tiny fraction of feminists are radicals, and the overwhelming majority are naive, but have good intentions. Misandry is the core of feminism. All feminists hate men to some degree, whether the hate be lukewarm or hot as the Sun. Don’t be fooled into thinking feminists don’t have hearts of stone regarding their “compassion” for men.

    Men, watch your backs, and watch the backs of your fellow men.

  • Lucian Cross

    Great article Howard!

    Since about 1994, I’ve maintained rules which confuse friends of mine and frustrate/disappoints women (familiar & in general):

    1. I do not casually drink. (Weddings, Graduations, Funerals if in The Will)

    2. I do not buy women alcohol. Ever.

    3. If a woman partakes (alcohol or whatever) I will not be intimate with her until she is sober.

    Some have said my decision is a tad on the hyper-vigilant side but it seems the FBI and radical feminists agree with my outlook.

    Hmm… maybe I should take up social drinking just to rub women’s noses in it.

    • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

      “Some have said my decision is a tad on the hyper-vigilant side but it seems the FBI and radical feminists agree with my outlook.”

      It only takes one accusation and since it is and has been law for decades, there’s nothing hyper about it.

      Of course if you have sex with a drunk woman, or even one that’s had a drink or more, you are a rapist. If you refuse to you are “paranoid”. Either way the feminists gets to whinge about the patriarchy.

      All sex is rape.

      All celibacy is misogyny.

      • CCRoxtar

        Indeed. We guys are damned if we do, & damned if we don’t!

      • Lucian Cross

        Well in my case, I simply refuse to engage if they’ve had alcohol. Too many witnessed ‘rare instances’ of “I think you got me pregnant” or the girl got caught cheating etc.

        Even in a paradigm of “All (male-expressed) sex is rape” and “All (male expressed) celibacy is misogyny” I’d rather be considered a bigot for not doing what they want when they want, then being considered a criminal/monster.

        • sarot

          “Even in a paradigm of “All (male-expressed) sex is rape” and “All (male expressed) celibacy is misogyny” I’d rather be considered a bigot for not doing what they want when they want, then being considered a criminal/monster.”

          Hey man I agree with you 100% if women really feel that way then i say let them all live in their own little female Amazon utopia and leave us men alone. They ought to get money from the government to buy an island or state and live their alone. And invite men- if they are straight- LOL to come be with them long enough for sex and then let the men leave. These women are such narcissistic hypocritical ass holes- what man in their right mind would date or even have sex with them let alone marry them? Besides most are fat and ugly anyway. Even attractive ones act so masculine (butch) and in your face that they are such a turn off to most guys.

          • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

            That wont work. The object of feminism is not a female utopia. It is a dystopia where anything a man wants he is denied.

            In the USA the feminists are leading the charge to criminalize circumcision. Why? Because in the USA there are still large numbers of circumcised men who want their sons circumcised.

            In Africa the feminists are leading the charge to circumcise men? Why? Because in Africa there are large numbers of men with their foreskins that want to keep them.

            Essentially feminism is about deciding what a man wants or has decided he needs and stripping that from him. So the fact that we are working on is driving them out of their frickin’ minds. No thanks we don’t need you honey.

        • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

          I care what a woman or feminist thinks about me as much as I care about what a flea cares about me. When I announced I would be taking my vows of celibacy for the priesthood (Pagan), I learned how they are willing to demonize men that simply want nothing to do with them.

          As to being branded a criminal or monster, they do that to all of us anyhow. Even in celibacy we’re monsters. The issue with the rape accusation is you end up losing things, life, liberty, property, jobs, reputation. Men are growing wiser though even if the FBI is growing more controlling.

  • gateman

    Every man should set up a video camera in his bedroom (hidden or not) for the purposes of recording any sexual encounter which may be needed for future evidence.

    • Lucian Cross

      I’ve had this conversation with a friend of mine.
      Granted I took it a bit further.

      1. A “pre-coitus” agreement outlining the upcoming event’s purpose, length of stay, expectations of outcome
      2. Drug & Alcohol screening onsite (in a man’s home)
      3. Clear signage stating events are being recorded for private retention and the protection of the participants
      4. Video data backed up to onsite and offsite media storage.
      5. “Post-Coitus” performance and satisfaction r6eview to be completed by the participants where it’s also reaffirmed as a voluntary and consensual event.

      Of course each person would get a copy of all documentation. At first she was shocked and a bit offended by the idea but after explaining the redefinition of rape in America and how it will ripple to Canada, she couldn’t help but agree.

      I’m thinking of starting it as a business with STD/I testing as well. lol

      • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

        All good except for one thing. Never ever have a woman in your home.

        • Lucian Cross

          I’m ok with a woman being in my home on my terms. If I think for a moment she’ll contest it, well she’s simply not even welcome to knock on the door.

          • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

            Good luck with that. Once you let her into your home it is already too late. Remember women are predators

            posing as prey.

      • JGteMolder

        Anyone remember that movie Cherry 2000?

        They were only off by a decade.

  • Leos Tomicek

    Perhaps you do not even have to have sex with that woman for her to claim rape. With cases where women claim years old rape, where there is no way to verify whether you ever had sex, all it takes is female accusation.

    • sarot

      True man- but if your never alone with a woman then she can’t make up false claims. I say never be alone with any female and always have your handy camcorder (or cell phone with camcorder feature since they are so small now ) around at all times. Also guys need to buddy up and look after each other- the women gang up on men all the time so the guys ought to do the same. Armed with a camera and witnesses. Fight fire with fire. Use technology to your advantage. Also if a girl falsely accuses anyone spread the word around to all the men so they can avoid the bitch like the plague!

      • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

        “but if your never alone with a woman then she can’t make up false claims. ”

        You think so huh? Tell that to David Letterman. Tell that to the man (from an article I read years ago) who was on a plane out of the USA what the “rape” took place. Tell that to my former stepmum who was in bed with me da when me mum called her to tell her he was there right then and there fracking her…

        Women lie all the time and proximity to reality has nothing to do with it.

  • Leos Tomicek

    And how should we know she is not high? If she had couple of hits from a joint, or one line of coke, or small crystal of MDMA, it might not show on her appearance or behaviour. Besides, not everyone of us has experiences with how drugs alter people’s behaviour.

    • Howard

      Yes, that was my assertion in example b. Didn’t make that clear enough. But unless VAWA will fund all men’s requests for breathalyzers (and drug test kits?) , you can’t be sure she hadn’t imbibed beforehand.

      • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

        That would not matter anyhow because she can file a complaint regardless.

  • BertieW

    In the second example, you stated “even though the girlfriend initiates the sex and is the aggressor, he will be raping her unless he pushes her off …” If he does push her off, wouldn’t he be guilty of battery? It would appear that any man caught in a situation like this could not avoid going to prison for either rape or battery.

    • Lucian Cross

      It would be considered “reasonable” for it to fall under the label of assault & battery with a fleshy phallus. The most heinous of crimes is the simple possession of such an object which is an accidental byproduct of a social construct.
      Am I right?

    • Perseus

      Yes, he will be arrested for pushing her off as the physically larger of the two parties under ‘primary aggressor’ corrupt law.

    • Howard

      Yes, that did cross my mind. Perhaps a better line would have been (instead of pushing her off) get up, fake left, cut right, and just run- similar to Walter Payton. Then again, that’s what DSK did, and look where that got him.

  • navian

    I remember when NOW had a convention in Los Angeles and it was revealed that a large percentage of the participants had been raped but were not aware of it. Their awareness was enhanced when the idea that accepting two or three drinks from a man was the same as being coerced into sex which is the equivalent of rape.
    At the time the public did not accept this bullshit, it looks like now even if he did not offer the drinks he will still be a rapist.

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      This sounds like the Dr. Drew/Bristol Palin interview where he kept trying to convince her Levi Johnson raped her after she had a few wine coolers and sex with him.

      He kept pressing the point – several times – but she ignored or dismissed him.

      3 years from now, after the thought percolates awhile, she will be charging him with rape.

      Right now the concept is just too new.

  • navian

    This new criteria will take some time before becoming universally oppressive. The feminists, DA’s and judges will chip away at what incapacitated means. With enough federally subsidized feminist slanted propaganda studies, unethical DA’s and judges who prostitute justice for votes, NAWALT’s and white knights who already are to stupid to tell the difference from a forced rape and the non-rape rapes that they have come up with. It is only a matter of time before this article is the reality.

    • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

      Incapacitated always means females, never males. The male can be drugged, chained to his bed, have his penis cut off, and he is still not raped. She still wont be charged with rape or even aggravated sexual battery.

      The woman can be sleepy and he can be charged.

      In short what they are demonstrating is that women simply are incapable of consenting. Since we all abhor rape let’s give them what they want, no sex.

  • Bombay

    The power to take the kids and the father’s property/money is very similar. Most women will not give up that power because they always want that option. The same will be/is true of the new definition of rape. Very few women, no matter how “nice” are against these inequities. “They won’t do it” – but they still want the option and you should trust them.

    • mccrorie

      “but they still want the option and you should trust them.”

      Yes, I suspect so. Another opportunity to kafka trap opponents as people with ‘ulterior motives’

      • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

        Would we trust friendships with employers if the law allowed them to make a claim and we would be enslaved and forced to work for them against our will? If there were good employers out there who would not do this would they be upset at us if we didn’t trust employers as a group and barely trusted that specific employer because of this law?

        Well then I tell “good” women, your anger shows me the nature of your goodness. I’m not interested in being your slave.

  • rickster

    Well spoken.

    Will women just not have sex? Doubtful.

    Now after being sexually liberated, they have to choose between two desirable social customs; either have a few drinks or have sex. Tough call I’m betting even for a woman. At least as you said Howard, that’s how it would be if men were smarter about the whole situation.

    I can very well see it get to the point where if men did become smart enough to force women to choose, that complaints would be lodged, men blamed, and feminists would then lobby against alcohol and we’d have another amendment that repeals the amendment that repeals prohibition.

    • Lucian Cross

      I think at that point they would lose.

      Too much money tied to alcohol…

  • ubermensch

    Just hire a cunt for an hour and be done with it. Throw the bitch out when you’re done. That’s what you pay them for. This is what feminism and divorce has done to me. Taken a nice guy and turned him into a predatory misogynist. Women are worthless to me now.

    • Sting Chameleon

      Predatory? Nah, you aren’t preying on anyone, you’re just paying for a service.And expect the feminazis to come cracking down on it and get the man arrested like in Sweden.

  • Red Bones

    At this rate, I wonder how long before a man,sitting alone in the privacy of his own home,masturbating inside an airtight vault with a six inch steel door, will be legally considered rape.

    I’ll say one thing for feminists, they’re going to make me a fortune laying odds on things like this.Nobody outside the MRM,and probably not many within it, would ever believe that such a scenario could come to pass in the United States.

    When I was just a pup, I’d have called you a dumbass if you told me that women would one day be able to accuse you of rape if you’d both been drinking before you had sex.

    Of course, we know the next step on the feminist litany of rape redefinition,and that’s to make it legally rape if a woman consents to sex and then later decides she’s uncomfortable with the experience.

    After that, I don’t think feminists realize,or maybe they do,no woman will ever be approached by any man in this country again.

    Of course,men will still be enjoying pornography alone in their own homes as no one can claim THAT is rape-OR CAN THEY?

    My money’s on “yes”,they will make the claim, and it will probably stick.

    • Raven01

      They will define it as “rape by proxy” no doubt.
      Because, you know the female porn “actors” (and only the female porn actors) are incapable as adult to decide for themselves if they are willing to exchange having sex in front of a camera for money.
      And, still feminists accuse US of hating women. Unreal. Time to work on my “apology” to women for expecting them to be fully functioning self-aware adults the next type some hairy legged feminist tries to claim I dislike women.

      • Daniel Kulkarni

        When porn is effectively illegal, hentai will be targeted next. Apparently asking women to provide the voice in an animation is just as bad as actually being raped.

    • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

      Already happened. Not at law yet but definitely at feminist sites in discussions. That’s always the warning about what’s to come.

  • Nutz


    I love how she blows the CDC study out of the water. And it’s worth pointing out that men are almost as frequently “victimized” by this as women are using their cooked study.

    • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

      The difference is men actually are victimized by this sort of behavior. Men have a greater likelihood of regret of sex after the fact, especially when they see what they’ve fracked. Further there is a greater likelihood any detrimental effects of pregnancy will come to rest on him, not to mention false accusation, and other bullshit.

  • Keith

    i think its much more important to start asking public officials if they have stopped raping their wives.

    Any media depicting officials at functions that serve alcohol are recording evidence of tax payer funded promotion of rape.

    Pardon me senator do you and your wife drink
    Were your children consensual or was it rape?

    I think its much more important to read headlines questioning the actions of these people.

    Maybe Obama is a rapist oppressing his wife from exposeing him. Her demeanor certainly suggests this very hostile but towards whom?
    George W is likely a rapist.

  • AntZ

    Thirty years from now, men will have the option to form long term, stable, monogamous relationships with VIRTUAL women.

    This is unavoidable.

    Computer-brain interface technology is advancing very rapidly. A small implant and an I-pod sized device on the nigh-stand means that every man will be able to program the country he wants to visit, the mountain he wants to climb, the sights he wants to see, the adventure he wants to have … and do it all in the company of a woman that he is deeply in love with. More importantly, the woman will not be able to take his property, his home, his income, his dignity, his freedom, and his children.

    I know many of you find this idea disturbing and/or distasteful. Fine — but how can you not see that it is UNAVOIDABLE? I am talking about an option, not a mandate. For those men who want it, a medical implant + a purchasable electronic device that allows a complete normal and enriching emotional relationship with a virtual partner.

    Laws are already in the making to criminalize virtual partnerships:

    I know how unsavoury this fight is. I think Handley is a sick individual, and I have no genuine compassion for him.

    However, I know what this case is really about: the far right attempting to re-assert the “male half” of the conservative “mutual dependency contract.”

    I could tolerate living in a “conservative mutual dependency world.” Sometimes life offers only half a cup.

    However, I think only fools dream that women will ever again agree to have any obligations towards men. Consequently, my fight is to remove all male obligations towards women.

    The most powerful tie that binds men to serfdom in pursuit of women’s dreams is neither legal nor cultural — it is biological. We should embrace the nascent technology that will break that bond.

    Keep in mind that, just the fact that men will have the OPTION of a virtual partner, will completely change the gender equation — even if 99% of men do not use that option.

    • AntZ

      By the way, in case any of you are afraid that women may flee by the thousands to the arms of virtual husbands, have no fear.

      In the first 60 seconds of a date with a woman, you will know that a virtual partner cannot provide what she wants from a relationship — because virtual money can’t buy shoes and condos.

    • sarot

      I guess this is like AI (Artificial Intelligence)? Just slightly above a blow up doll? LOL well- I can say this- I have had better conversations with myself than with women I’ve dated in the past. LOL

    • Booyah

      remember not to give your virtual gf a drink though

  • Truyardy

    Hot Damn! We now have 2 choices. You can either ghost, or make every woman take a breathalyzer test before engaging in sexual relations with them.

    Ghosting is better I think.

  • Howard

    Here you go men. If the FBI definition becomes law or The Plan is hatched, these cab drivers wouldn’t even be on trial. They’d be in jail already.

  • Doug1


    We, and you, should be agitating to keep the VAWA from being revised in this fashion, and otherwise to not let what is legally raped be so outrageously expanded, rather than counseling college and other men to never have sex with a woman when she’s not incapacitated but has had a few drinks.

    Hell the majority of first time sex with a new woman in the Anglosphere probably occurs when she has had a few drinks. It’s woven into our social fabric and customs.

  • sarot

    Not sure how old the rest of your guys are, but at 46 I really don’t need sex. I don’t have the sex drive I did at 25- and no I don’t have E.D. nor am I gay. Women get on my nerves- except for the older generation of ladies who actually like and respect men. So needless to say I don’t date often and I’m celibate and proud of it.

    It doesn’t hurt my feelings one bit if people want to make fun of me for being a moral person. At least I don’t have any STDs! LOL! (I’m also not ugly nor fat)- like most of the young females who are mostly a bunch of STD ridden skanks. Most of these loud mouth skanks are fat and if they are attractive they are so un-feminine it is a turn off!

    The only women that I can even carry on a decent conversation with are in the 70’s or 80’s age range that I know at church. They actually are caring people, unlike the younger women. These older women were not infected with the radical feminism that is such a toxin to our society.

    As a Christian I avoid younger women who have feminist ideas like the plague. If they don’t respect men or me in particular- I don’t have anything to do with them period. If a woman doesn’t respect men- I say refuse to even be around them. I have a big mouth and I let people know where I stand and it doesn’t bother me one bit if they don’t like me. It’s No skin off my teeth: Shaming tactics don’t work on me neither. I tell them off. You can put people in their place without being really nasty or using cuss words. Use your intelligence and show them that they are ignorant fools.

    That reminds me of a female cousin of mine who sat at the table and complained that she couldn’t find any decent men to date. I ask her- “where are you meeting these men?” She was a little hesitant to say cause she knows I go to church and I’m a dedicated Christian. She meets them at bars. I told her,” if you want to meet a good man go to church.” She just said-“ I guess you’re right.” That shut her up pronto.

    I tell younger guys don’t date or even hang around women who aren’t decent caring people. I realize if you have a job that you might have to deal with nasty feminists, but avoid as much contact with them as possible. If you have a feminist boss- maybe you should look for another job or start your own business? I do realize that might be hard in this horrible economy.

    Many problems men deal with can be solved by just avoiding nasty women to begin with. I don’t mean you always have to run from a confrontation but be ready with an intelligent rebuttal and leave it at that. Most of the time if your wise, they will be left standing there with their mouths hanging open cause you just blew their argument out of the water and you showed them what a sexist pig they really are. So I say be gentle as a dove and wise as a serpent- if you understand what that metaphor means.

    • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

      Ditto to everything you said save for:

      1. I am Pagan (about to take my priestly vows of celibacy).

      2. The older women don’t talk any better.

      3. Many problems can be solved by just avoiding women to begin with, nasty or not, because they turn out nasty even when you don’t know it.

      • sarot

        hey- man congratulations on your religious rites. I guess i’ve just been blessed to be around good women- in church that is. Sorry that you haven’t. My mom is one of the wisest sweetest ladies I know. If she does say something I don’t like I do point it out to her in a nice respectful way- she does apologize.

        I doubt many young ladies would apologize when they say or do something disrespectful to men. I consider the ability to see that you did or said something that is wrong and apologize for it as a mark of maturity. We’re all human and make mistakes. i’m not perfect by any means- I do the best that i can and that’s all i can do. I do; however, expect women to behave in the same manner as well. Have a blessed day.

        • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

          Ja you have. Frankly I have also. The Pagan women already went through what women in society are going through with worshiping the exclusively female and they now want the male. So the Pagan women I’ve talked to and know have never given me shite when I’ve said that I was abused by my mother. Usually the ones accusing me of hating women are Christians.

          When a religion is too matriarchal for Pagan women, you know something’s wrong. 😀

          • sarot

            hi- just read about a village for men. That is a great idea. Even thought i am a Christian i would never force my views on anyone. I believe in the Golden Rule. Real Christian ideals aren’t being followed by many so called “Christian” groups at all. They don’t even read the Bible anymore even in Sunday School- That is to do unto others as you would have them do to you. Many mainstream “Christian” people misquote the Bible and take verses out of context for their own agendas. The Old Testament is a history of the Jews and how God dealt with them- it is not to be copied as a way of life for modern non-Jewish people today.

            Live and let live is what I say. I think wars are evil and our government is evil and corrupt and uses wars as a means to take what doesn’t belong to them- its all about oil and greed- that is what I say the whole Afghanistan and Iraqi war was about.

          • sarot

            I agree- i saw a video on you tube by a pastor- Mark Driscol that really made me mad. He was male bashing something bad. I wrote him a letter and gave him a piece of my mind! I basically ripped him a new one- metaphorically. I told him that he is overlooking the nasty behavior of the women in the group.

            He was talking about how men were disrespectful to the women in his church. I told him I was sick of hearing about the men being blamed for everything. Also how much I was sick of “Christian” women ridiculing young men for not dating and marrying them. That the women were a bunch of hedonist swine. If I can control my sex drive so can they. We are not animals!

            I told him to preach the word of God instead of feminist dogma and stop pandering to the lust filled women. I told him I am celibate and I don’t plan to marry and stay celibate (like the Apostle Paul) and that i don’t want to hear him preach anymore sermons about why men need to marry. I never heard back from him so I hope I hit a nerve- LOL

          • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

            Ja I love the bible. Christians view it from a Christian perspectives, Jews from a Jewish (The Torah and other Hebrew Scriptures anyhow), Muslims from an Islamic and I view it from a Pagan. All are getting something out of it.

            Golden rule is very similar to the Wiccan Reed ‘An it harm none, do as thou wilt. I am fine with Christians preaching to me. I just wish they were Patriarchal like Feminists claim. 😀

          • sarot

            Excuse me for my ignorance about paganism or wicca. i saw the movie, The craft, it’s from mid 1990’s. Is the movie based on wicca or paganism? The girls in the movie are witches. They talk about a force- reminds me of new age philosophy. Manal- not sure of the spelling- is the force that they talk about- is that supposed to be like a god force that fills them.? They also talk about the same ideal of the Golden Rule but from a pagan perspective. Interesting movie- How accurate is it to real religion?

          • truth_seeker

            @Sarot: I think the point Pastor Driscoll was trying to make is that men need to step up and be the leader in the family, which is a far cry from radical feminist dogma. I also think his point was not that men should get married, but that they should get married to Christian women rather than non-Christian women. It may sound like he’s being hard on men, but he’s just as hard on women.

      • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

        Ja, um, The Craft, not so much. 😀 I imagine there are teenage girl wiccans who read such trite as “How to turn your boyfriend into a frog” who might think that’s Paganism or even Wicca. It’s not though. That’s not me whinging, just me smiling. 😀

        I’m glad to carry on the conversation in private if you want.

        Aoirthoir at or facebook I’m Aoirthoir AN Broc, Masculinist.

        • sarot

          Sure- would like to hear more about it- i guess i’m just an inquisitive person. I’m always reading and learning. are we allowed to give out email addresses?

          • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

            No one’s ever told me not to. I do it as Aoirthoir at so that way I don’t have issues with pam. Or spam. 😀 And I am too. I love talking about religion, just don’t want to hijack this thread which is so important.

  • jaytheman

    I have a few questions that still make no sense to me at all regarding this new definition. If the man is drunk and the women isn’t then isn’t she technically under this law raping him. I hate how all laws and social constructs put all the blame on the men because i don’t know we are the ones doing the penetrating.

    What if she spikes your drink and sticks a dildo up your ass? i’m sure feminists would still say it aint rape

    What about gay people? does this law just not apply to them?

    What if she faked being drunk? yes their are some women out there that can be that good of actors.

    • Aoirthoir An Broc Masculinist

      1. If she is drunk and he is sober, he is raping her. She could not consent.

      2. If she is drunk and he is drunk, he is raping her. She could not consent and he lost control.

      3. If she is sober and he is drunk, he is raping her. He lost control.

      I do not understand why you men have such a hard time understanding what rotten beasts you are. Honestly, get with the program. 😀

      • jaytheman

        haha none of that makes any sense to me, but in our blue pill world i guess it does. men will always pursue sex with women. even if it was proven that women had acid in their vagina’s that would melt you dick off there would still be men willing to take that “risk.” hell it seems like even going to a place that serves alcohol and has women even if you aren’t pursuing sex is too dangerous.

  • Luek

    Sex is a good and necessary thing. The feminist bad sickness has made it into something filthy to promote their own misandric agenda. That being said men have to do things today that they wouldn’t have done previously…PROTECT YOURSELF and and emphasis is on YOU. I hope no one in this year of 2012 has unprotected sex. That is protecting yourself. But men have the additional burden of having proof that they didn’t do the “R” word. The best way to do that is to video any sexual encounter. A picture of the tryst is worth a 1000 words as the saying goes. Video cameras are very compact today and you could have a couple going to make sure you get the picture. If parents can use them to trap abusive baby sitters you can use them for your protection. Of course don’t be a stupid a-hole retard and show the video to your pals at the local bar. Remember, it is for your personal protection and could keep you out of prison on a bogus charge. Also, remember that rape law in the West is misandric bad law and it takes bad people to enforce bad law.

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      Hold onto the sex tape, however. You never know she might become famous.

  • David

    I have nothing more to add to this wonderful article and comment section, except that maybe the latter seems to be inflating the years possible to get for the unattempted statuatory rape of an adult. Even if we go just by rape, I know of cases where people have gotten 30 years, but that surely is not the average? I’m not sure wheather it’s fair to present the average for rape, statuatory rape or even unaware statuatory rape for this one, but presenting one that is higher than the top 20% for the most serious category might put off undecided readers..

    Our voices carry greater punch for longer if they speak precise truth.

    So, my question to anyone who want to answer, if this was put into actual governing and judging law, what do you think would be the average sentence of “rapists” who would not have become rapists had we stuck to a reasonable definition of rape?/How would you go about figuring it out?

    And over to an accuser’s joke “You raped her in your mind”.

    Thanks for the article, Howard Gordan.