dangerous predator wet woman 750

The rapists & victims they refuse to see

Editor’s note: It is astonishing how much our culture seeks to deny any possibility that a woman may rape with her vagina. But of course, as survivor Typhonblue has so thoroughly documented, not only can they do so, but they do so with near as much frequency as men do with their penises. Our view is that rape apologists come in more than one flavor, and that includes people who deny that women do this. Former Marine James Landrith tells a graphic story of how this exact thing happened to him. I was honored to share a forum with Mr. Landrith to talk about these issues on Huffington Post Live late last year, which you can view here on HuffPo. Mr. Landrith has suffered much mocking and abuse since he dared publish his account, but he has graciously allowed us to reprint it here anyway. More men need to speak up.–DE

I’ve Got the T-Shirt and the Trauma Response to Go With It

As a vocal male survivor, when I’m not talking about sexual violence in writing or before audiences, I’m reading about it in many contexts and sources. A great deal of what I see on a daily basis is directed at men with the assumption that we know nothing about sexual violence or have no experiences that parallel those of female survivors.

Those making such arguments are often NOT sexual violence survivors themselves. Encountering such memes can be quite painful when you are a rape survivor yourself. The problem is not that female survivors receive the majority of the attention when sexual violence is discussed. The problem is that when sexual violence is discussed with regard to male survivors, there is often resistance, condescension, and outright mockery by people who quite often have not experienced such violence themselves. For those who have lived through abuse at the hands of women, that can be doubly wounding.

I’ve lived through sexual violence. I have my own story and my own experiences. I have my own triggers and my own issues. I don’t need to be educated. I don’t need to be taught what to do or not do. I don’t need any proven statistical bias to legitimize my life or my experiences. I lived it.

♦◊♦

Background

Approximately twenty years ago I met a friend at a club in Jacksonville, North Carolina. He came with a female friend. During the night, he disappeared leaving his friend by herself and without a ride. As she was pregnant and without a ride, I agreed to take her home when I left. She had not been out in a while and wanted to stay until the club closed that night. While she was not drinking, she bought me a few thank you drinks for agreeing to drive her home.

After a few drinks, I became very tired and disoriented. I never drank until I got drunk, especially when driving and off base. I didn’t like the feeling and it wasn’t secure off base. I just figured I was tired and had too much without realizing it. There was a motel next to the club. She suggested we get a room and sleep it off, then I could drive her home in the morning. I agreed as I was rapidly losing the ability to think or see straight. She got us a room with double beds and we split the cost.

I vaguely remember laying down with my clothes still on. I probably took off my shirt per the norm, but I left my pants on. I did not feel comfortable taking my pants off around this strange woman. She warned me that she did not want to have sex and I remember saying that I was seeing someone and was not at all interested in that either. I laid down on my side of the room and was out almost immediately.

At some point in the night, I awoke to find her on top of me. I said something I cannot remember and she coaxed me back to sleep. I doubt very much that she could even understand what I was saying, given how disoriented I felt at that time.

The next morning, after the sun had risen, I woke again feeling confused and unsure of where I was or what had transpired since getting off work on Friday afternoon. My pants were nowhere to be seen, my underwear also missing and my penis was erect. I realized that she was on top of me, grinding and moaning. I didn’t know what to think. I wasn’t fucking her. I didn’t want to fuck her. Who was she again? I moved as my legs were stiff and sore from being in the same position for hours with her on top of me.

She darted her eyes at me and told me not to move. I was ordered “don’t be forceful.” She then asked if I was trying to rape her when I could not remain perfectly still and again told me not to move. In addition, I was told that I could hurt the baby if I tried to stop it. After she finally finished, I was still expected to drive her home.

In short, I was drugged, raped, threatened and had a baby used against me as a human shield. To say that experience left me messed up would be an understatement.

Put yourself in my shoes for a minute. I was under 21, drinking illegally in a club, while on active duty with a local, pregnant civilian. Why didn’t I report it? Read this paragraph again and think about it harder if it eludes your grasp.

♦◊♦

The Reaction

How did I react? I buried it deep and pretended it didn’t happen, which is a common reaction for male survivors. That did not mean that it had no effect on me. I simply pretended it didn’t happen. I called it a bad night and said she was a little twisted.

As one therapist would later tell me, denial of trauma does not mean it isn’t affecting you. I believe she said that if unacknowledged, the effects would “come out sideways” and in a manner that may not be easily identifiable. For me, that was a sudden and ridiculous promiscuity that did not exist before the rape. I began to act out sexually by sleeping with any woman who offered. I turned down no one, to include several much older, married women. I did not seek out sex, I simply said yes every time.

To say that I was reckless then would be accurate. I was risking exposure to disease and potential violence from angry husbands and boyfriends. I did this for about three years before getting married and further stuffing the memories down further. Further, I lost nearly all trust in women – especially aggressive and loud women.

Nearly twenty years later, I decided to confront it. The time had come to do something about it. I sought out assistance and began to see a therapist. I spent a lot of time on me, thinking, analyzing and progressing. It was painful, but necessary work. I’m not done with it. I don’t know that I’ll ever be truly done.

While in therapy, it was as if the bandage had been ripped off suddenly and the wounds were newly raw. I had panic attacks, crying fits, sudden anger and loss of time. I felt exposed all the time, everywhere.

I had trouble being alone with a woman in a confined space like an office or elevator. Some days, I didn’t even want to stand next to a woman in line for a cup of coffee. Remember the controversy in the feminist blogosphere over strange men talking to women in an elevator? Reverse the sexes and I lived it. For me, the issue wasn’t hypothetical or used to demonstrate which gender has it worse with regard to potential sexual violence. It was based on an actual trauma response. The back and forth over why men should expect to be viewed as rapists by women in elevators took on a whole new level of offensive when viewed through the lens of my own experience.

I felt guilty all the time. I still feel guilty quite often. I feel guilty because I don’t trust women I don’t know. I feel guilty because I sometimes view women, particularly loud and aggressive white women, as potential threats to my well-being and mental health. I feel guilty because for a long time, I couldn’t look at a pregnant woman without seeing that sick woman from so many years ago.

I still struggle with some of these issues today, but not as often and not always in such intensity as before. Presently, I have returned to my prior human resources career. This field is dominated by women and has proved a big test for me.

The biggest test is sometimes just getting through the day without losing it. Some days I pass without issue, on other days I just have to give myself a hall pass so I can get on with my life.

Editor’s Note: this piece is a reprint from James’ weblog. James has written further on his experiences of being mocked, demonized, and victim-blamed by rape apologists, which he documents here and here amongst other places–DE

About James Landrith

James Landrith is a rape survivor, public speaker, internationally syndicated blogger, civil liberties activist and the notorious editor and publisher of The Multiracial Activist (ISSN: 1552-3446) and The Abolitionist Examiner (ISSN: 1552-2881). Landrith can be reached by email at: james@jameslandrith.com or at his personal website/blog.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • AVFM seeks app writer volunteer

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

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

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

    Fight Wikipedia censorship! Add to and improve the AVfM Reference Wiki. Volunteers needed for writing, proofreading, and organizing. Some knowledge of the German language will be helpful but *not* required.

    Please create an account and then follow instructions here

  • Clem Burke

    Yep, when I told a rape victim in her thread on Facebook I was raped in college, she assumed i was straight and called me a” little man” and not tough enough, and a liar, she was a feminist of course & when I revealed I was gay, and raped by another man the thread went silent. Not another word was said, because it would not have been politically correct but it was ok to bash a straight man that was raped.

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

      A self-proclaimed feminist on Twitter went apeshit on me this morning, called me a rape apologist when I suggested women can force themselves on a man and challenged her notion that only the one with the penis can rape, and then she uttered this classic line:

      “Having sex with someone when they are pissed [drunk] is a voluntary act for the person with the penis.” @ThePosieParker

      She’s continuing even now to busily tweet that only people with penises can rape. Part of the cultural narrative I guess. She of course had nothing to say about this, but blocked me when I noted that what she’s doing is, in fact, a form of rape apologism. [shrug]

      http://www.avoiceformen.com/sexual-politics/evo-psych/manufacturing-female-victimhood-and-marginalizing-vulnerable-men/

      • Cumbria

        I had a male friend who came to the states from the UK in the mid-90’s. I will never forget the shocking stories he told me about how aggressive the women he dated had become. Women would “expect” sex on the first date and feel rejected (and become angry) if he was not interested (he was more on the conservative side). And I don’t think it was just his sexy accent that turned them on, these women wanted control. Trust me, women today are no longer victims and they need to be honest with themselves about that. Stop lying, ladies!

        • http://none universe

          “…women today are no longer victims and they need to be honest with themselves about that. Stop lying, ladies!”.
          – Beautiful.
          That needed to be spoken and bears repeating.
          Such disconnect.

          Thanks for sharing Mr. Landrith.
          Like many, I have no idea how an experience such as yours revealed above can effect the recipient of an act perpetrated “forcibly and without consent”.
          Wishing wholeness upon you.

      • bowspearer

        When you mentioned twitter, I decided to make a tweet of my own to put out there on my twitter account of the same name: “If u perpetuate the lie that women cannot rape (& therefore a penis equates to automatic consent regardless of age)ur a #pedophile apologist”

        It is slightly rough around the edges as I had to resort to some slight SMS-speak, but I figure it throws the cat amongst the pigeons.

        Feel free to retweet the hell out of it ;).

    • SolitaryMan

      There were two condescending parts of your experience – that your rape was real because you’re gay, and part of a disadvantaged minority, and that your rape was real because it was committed by a man. Either of those things might have increased the impact the attack had on you – but they do not decrease the impact on the victim of a female-on-male rape.

  • ContraTerrene

    I saw your interview on huffpost.

    I thought you were not only brave for appearing but for all the hurtful comments that you doubtless knew would come your way afterwards.

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

      I was somewhat surprised I only got a little, although my Twitter account has far fewer followers than James, and my story mostly has to do with childhood trauma whereas he gets it with both barrels: he was an adult and so was his rapist. They hate him for that. It’s disgusting.

  • donzaloog

    I admire the courage of the author to come out with this story as not many men would’ve. An injustice is an injustice no matter who it happens to. The fact that some women would openly mock a man who’s been raped by a woman is disgusting, and goes to show that they want to keep rape as their own special trump card for leverage reasons.

    Sorry to burst that bubble but women don’t have the monopoly on being rape victims as this article and the latest looks at prison rape statistics clearly show. It’s time for people to get real on these subjects.

  • AntZ

    A very touching story, and a very important issue.

  • gwallan

    Things I’ve been told or experienced when being overheard admitting to having been raped by a woman as a child…It’s nowhere near exhaustive.

    Liar.
    You must have wanted it.
    Impossible.
    You’re lucky.
    You’re privileged by it.
    Women never do that sort of thing.
    It’s harmless.
    Laughter.
    I’ve been hit.
    I’ve been threatened.
    I’ve been called a poofter, a fag, gay, a misogynist.
    I’ve been told it’s hateful to women.
    I’ve had feminists, who have also done all of the above, patiently explain how my male privilege prevented my aunt from NOT doing what she did.

    IT WAS LEGAL AT THE TIME.

    • http://none universe

      Sickening.
      This reactive behavior described above. All of it.
      It’s like ‘How dare you, young boy, be sexually violated by a female/woman’.

      Condolences Mr. Wallan.

    • bowspearer

      And this is why, as a fellow male rape and domestic violence survivor, I’ve been calling out the usage of the terms such as “mangina”, “harden up” and “grow a pair for some time now.

      People use them all the time, but how many people actually stop to think what they mean – I mean REALLY stop to think what they mean?

      This comment is a long one, but the subject matter requires it.

      Feminism like in so many cases is half right, in the sense that society has glorified male sexual power traditionally, but like so many things, feminism has lied about and brushed aside the horrors of that glorification for men.

      Glorified sexual dominance was, and still is, the means by which male disposability is enforced. Heck, in antiquity, an erect phallus was not only a symbol of fertility but of good luck.

      Roman attitudes to homosexuality glaringly show the duality of how male sexuality is viewed today. In Roman society, homosexuality was perfectly acceptable when you were “the man” in the encounter. However should a man have been “the woman” in the encounter, then there was a great deal of disgrace in it and it was known to be an effective slur and character blight, against even men such as Marc Antony. The shame was not in being homosexual, but in being sexually dominated, because in Roman society, men who were anything other than sexually dominant, were “unnatural”.

      Today the same attitudes pervade our society. Men are expected to be sexually dominant, a “real man”, with both men and women policing it.

      You see it in the Australian Colonial period for example, where after being viewed as “damned whores”, women after the lobbying of Caroline Chisolm, were viewed as “God’s Police”- of course what Anne Summers and others have omitted in their understanding of the concept is the fact that ultimately it was men who were being [sexually] “policed” by this, and sadly even some MRAs unwittingly believe this.

      A couple of days ago I watched the interview with Warren Farrell and Erin Pizzey in the wake of the UoT protests, where she stated she believes that women civilise men. This “civilising” though, in practice, involves men being sexually rewarded for living up to social masculine ideals and sexually penalised, at which point their masculinity was diminished, should they fail to do so, with the push and pull of women “wanting a real man” on one hand and sexual rejection on the other hand, enforcing this socialised control of male sexuality as a tool for socialised oppression.

      However, to bring us back full circle men have also sexually policed themselves. Think for a minute what terms like “grow a pair” and “harden up” refer to – genitalia, specifically testicles and an erect penis respectively. “Be a man about…” also refers to it as well, but that requires examining of another colloquialism – namely that of “your manhood” which actually refers to, you guessed it, male genitalia. Thus when people are saying “be a man”, that notion of male sexual dominance, or as Tosh puts it, male sexual prowess is being enforced.

      Bear in mind that these slurs, especially “be a man” are thrust on our children – with boys being socially policed in this regard before they’ve even hit puberty, and girls being taught by it that such socialised policing and therefore objectification of men, is perfectly acceptable.

      All of these terms reinforce that men are “lesser” if they fail to be sexually dominating. Bear in mind that too that in the same way that something being less positive is different to being neutral and likewise both are different to something being negative. To put it mathematically, 3 is less than 6, but neither are 0 or say, -2.

      The same rules apply sexually. A man might “strike out” a few times, but he’ll be nowhere near as ridiculed as if he’s impotent, where he’ll be constantly mocked for “not being able to get it up” by both genders – to the point where Viagra and similar drugs have become cash-cows for the pharmaceuticals industry.

      However the ultimate shame is reserved for male victims, particularly male rape victims. Victims of male-on-male rape have traditionally been seen as “women” in the Roman sense of the term, while men who are raped by women have been traditionally viewed essentially as “being in the closet”. The reason for the later is that of course, heterosexual intercourse was automatically viewed as a symbol of male sexual dominance, so therefore if men viewed it traumatically, it must have been an indication of underlying homosexuality on their part. Furthermore the notion of being sexually dominated as a man, is an anathema to the deeply ingrained social values of male sexual dominance.

      Feminist dogma has been a double-edged sword in this regard. On one hand it has benefited male-on-male rape victims by the understanding and acceptance that male sexuality can be predatory and in this regard it has helped validate the experiences of this group of male victims.

      However this has come at the cost of male rape survivors of female rapists such as myself. No longer are we merely “closet homosexuals”, but now we’re also liars, urban myths and perpetual predators.

      A Dulith-model spouting feminist, ironically on a group dedicated to combating rape and domestic violence once told me that “a woman could no more rape a man than I could rape an elephant.”

      Therefore it should come as no surprise that James own rapist, in the middle of raping him too I might add, had the gall to claim, after drugging him and luring him to an isolated location [hotel room] that he was the one trying to rape her.

      Ironically, this leads me to the last slur which comes to mind; one which has been used many a time to shame male feminists – “mangina”. The term’s meaning is unmistakable – that a man is really “the woman” in the situation and in life in general, in terms of their genitalia and therefore is a blatant attack on them in terms of their sexual dominance. While it might be a convenient shaming tactic to shut down a male feminist, it’s also a reinforcement of the stereotypical stigma attached to being a male rape victim.

      I can predict the underlying apologist response to this which would be along the lines of “they’re just words”. However words carry ideas and beliefs and when said ideas and beliefs become commonplace, they become institutionalised. “Patriarchy” is a classic example of this in terms of the success of feminists in perpetuating their dogma.

      The question people who choose to continue to use these phrases need to ask themselves is, if I am truly interested in men’s rights or even if I just truly wish to have compassion for victims of abuse, are the potential gains made from the use of such sayings truly worth the perpetuation of attitudes which drive the ostracism, maginalisation, villainisation and mockery of the most victimised and marginalised men in society?

      It is a question I would encourage those MRAs and those who seek to advocate for abuse victims who use those terms, to think long and hard on….

      • http://www.NewDemocracyWorld.org Dopesauce42

        This has changed my thinking, thank you. The word is out. That i thought not to use it in my writing ever should have been all i needed to realize that I should probably just not use it at all.

        You said that it can be a convenient way to shut down a male feminist. I can see now how it actually gives them ammo more potent than I even realized at first. To the male feminist: “Reject whatever conception of manhood you want and accept any conception of manhood you want. be as sensitive as you want, but please treat men and women with equal sensitivity.” I bet I will get farther with that line than with an insult.

        Thank you for a very clearly expressed idea.

        • strix (David King)

          Kudos, to you both.

      • strix (David King)

        Yes, this, a thousand times this!

        I have argued against the use of the word ‘mangina’ and gotten only a hostile response. You have articulated it much better than me, so I thank and salute you for it. I am truly sorry for your rape and DV experience, themoreso if that is the main reason why you are able to make such a strong case.

        Shaming language achieves nothing: it only makes the target more entrenched and more defensive. It doesn’t work when feminists use it, and it surely won’t work when M(H)RAs do. For 3rd parties, it can be deeply distasteful and off-putting, and it will not win undecided men and women to our point of view. (We’re not a cult, and we aren’t interested in ‘converts’.)

        Attack the ideas, not the man.

        To my fellow MHRAs: if all you want is to vent your pain, go ahead and use whatever language works for you, but if you actually want to advance the cause for men and boys, then think on what bowspearer says.

        Nobody is here to tell you what you can and cannot say, least of all on AVfM: an invitation to reconsider language is not the same as an attempt to silence or censor.

  • Anti Idiocy

    When men-, child-, and other women-victims are concerned, I sincerely wonder if women commit a greater number of violent and sexual assaults than men do.

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

      It’s plausible, though in a sea of such fuzzy data and such fuzzy definitions it’s hard to tell. The important goal in my view is to shed ideology and get the best, cleanest data we can, unclouded by ideologues with an agenda. I suspect what we’ll find out is that men are more overtly violent in certain areas, women more overtly in other areas, and covert violence by both sexes takes on still different forms. I frankly think it’s an area aching for study, rich territory for a real scientific field called “gender studies” minus the gender ideology.

      • bowspearer

        That’s the key though I think, putting every question on the table, asking honest questions, seeking honest answers and genuinely accepting whatever we find, whilst developing systems too best combat all of it. However this requires gender ideologues on all sides of the table to set dogma aside and be willing to seek genuine answers to those questions, rather than a validation of their dogma.

        • Primal

          This probably won’t happen in any meaningful way before the gender goons are gone from Higher Ed.

      • John A

        I agree Dean, but in the end it is not important whether men or women are the greatest offenders. All that matters is that all victims are treated with respect, all perpetrators are pursued with equal vigour according to law and that we are working with valid data about all genders.

        • John A

          Too much is written about which gender is the worst offender. This is not an election 50.1% does not “win all”. Regardless of whether women are 60%, 50% or 30% of offenders or what percentage of victims are male; female offenders and male victims need to be taken seriously.

          People won’t accept that women are a minority of offenders and men are a majority of victims without hard evidence and even then they probably won’t. People will accept (reluctantly) that a significant number of women are offenders and a significant number of males are victims, who knows, it could be 50-50, let’s do some real research.

  • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

    @James

    It’s very good of you to use your bad experience to help other survivors, but you don’t help yourself by doing so.

    For example, …

    http://www.angryharry.com/esDoWeNeedAnAbuseIndustry.htm

    • Ricardo

      This is a fascinating article but I am not sure that I am understanding. This man he has been drugged and forced into sex and told if he does not cooperate the woman she will call police and call him rapist, and she is pregnant so there is the threat he will harm a child if he resists.

      This to me if I were a young man would leave me very confused and never sure if I could trust a woman alone I think. I do not think that is “abuse industry.” I think perhaps it is pointing to that we have enabled something wicked by treating all women as victims and men as perpetually powerful? That is how I read this anyway maybe others will disagree. I do not know everything.

  • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

    @Dean

    “I frankly think it’s an area aching for study, rich territory for a real scientific field called “gender studies” ”

    You mean that you want to see the abuse industry get even bigger?

    =====

    http://www.angryharry.com/esSigningtheSexConsentDocument.htm

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

      Nope, and I’m not even sure where that follows. I believe in an end to the sexual apartheid and double standards in this area. When I look at your article on the abuse industry, I agree with you that it has become an industry which does more harm than good, frequently overidentifying victims or enouraging people to feel like victims or encouraging people to hold onto wounds and let them fester rather than heal. But that has nothing to do with real, rigorous, scientific study of various forms of violence and their effects, absent ideology.

      • Stu

        What I want to see is the entire abuse industry smashed, and all the parasites that work within having to go and get real jobs doing something productive.

        One of the things that seriously needs to get the boot in our society is this growing mentality that peoples hurt feelings are valid injuries, or there is any actionable response needed to such things. People who are so weak and pathetic that they feel this way…..need to harden up..and that is the answer to their problems.

        The reason they are this weak and pathetic is precisely because they have never learned to deal with anything because they have been so protected and propped up that they are so fragile. Strong people brush minor things off, weak people are traumatized by them. We make them weaker by pandering to this.

        This is the first thing that needs to go.

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

          Uuuurgh. You know the worst disagreements sometimes come between people who are 99% in agreement.

          I don’t agree that words can’t hurt or be abusive. I do agree that making words legally actionable is rarely if ever desirable. I think sometimes people need to harden up but sometimes words really do hurt a lot, especially from someone you’re in an intimate relationship (parent/child, pairbonded couple, authority figure/subordinate) and we need people free to discuss and process that in a responsible way. I also think there IS an abuse industry that teaches people to hold onto their psychic wounds and even make them worse, but to be able to go to someone trustworthy and talk about why and how you’re hurting is a good thing.

          There’s probably more than one reason men are 3-4 times as likely to kill themselves as women, but I don’t think a lack of telling them to harden up and brush off their feelings is the main issue there.

          I try really hard not to make my personal issues this site’s issues, but there were times when I was younger when I was hurting so bad I just wanted to die, and people who told me to just get over it were not in the least bit helpful. That said, I talked to more than one therapist who seemed less concerned with helping me process it and get my thinking about myself straightened up and advise me on how to get on with life without any more self-loathing, and instead they were more interested in just wallowing with me, which was worse than not talking about it at all.

          So the whole thing’s fucked from top to bottom I think.

          • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

            @Dean

            Youngsters can feel truly messed up and suicidal over NUMEROUS things these days – even the most trivial of things, from an adult point of view.

            Being a teenager or a young 20’s can be absolute Hell.

            For some reason, we can be incredibly sensitive about certain things when we are young.

            I’ve seen young women be almost suicidal because they have a spot on their nose – or some equivalent.

            I know one young man who tried actually to commit suicide because his hair was thinning and his father was bald.

            I’m not kidding or exaggerating.

            Youngsters often really do feel that life is not worth living any longer because of some such trifle.

            This tells me that, as a society, we are doing something very, very, very wrong.

            And, in my view, the victim culture has much to do with this.

            It’s not the only culprit – but it is a major one.

          • Stu

            Agreed. We need compassion and recognition for individual men’s suffering. I’m just talking about how the abuse industry tends to want to grow, like any other business entity, and it grows by finding more and more of it’s fuel, which is damaged people. If it can’t find enough, as is the case with ever resource once the organism has grown beyond the ability of the current resources ability to sustain it, and provide more growth…….it must go in search of more resources.

            This is why “real” rape used to be the focus……as the rape industry grew bigger…and real rapes declined….the organism was starving. So they have to define rape as these other things that are of less quality than the real rape resource. So they have to inflate the issue….create fear…and get people to see the guy that just reaches over to his wife and puts his hand between her legs to warm her up, without asking…..just like she likes him to do….as a real rapist. Now they have expanded their fuel supply from the scarce resource of “real rapists” and gone from a organism that can only use those real rapists as fuel……to one that can use any man as fuel. There is now fuel laying around everywhere….the streets are paved in fuel for their sustenance and continued growth.

            Eventually they will have to expand their fuel source again once they have outgrown the fuel supply due to a reduction of fuel via men obtaining from the behavior that their partners actually want….and their own overgrowth to new increasingly monstrous size. They now have to redefine rape as merely looking at a woman. And on it goes, for infinity. It will never stop, because the organism will not let it stop……to stop….means it dies.

            This is the problem. We have to kill the beast, and all beasts like this. It’s never going to volunteer to commit suicide. We have to tell people that they need to learn to live without the beast. They have to learn to brush off small things, and get on with life without wanting to respond with nuclear force to every little thing that upsets, or hurts them.

            I don’t count what happened to James as a little thing though.

            What happens is these parasite organisms…..abuse industry etc….start out as worthy causes…..switch to parasites……and then become symbiotic. The abuse industry now employes so many tens of thousands of people, that when the beast dies, all those people become unemployed, and all those other people that are, or have, studied for qualifications to enter the abuse industry, become unemployable. The economic health of the host, is now plugged into the continued existence and growth, of what was a parasite, but now is relied upon by the host, for it’s continued health.

            The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

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

            The real problem here in my mind Stu is that should we choose a path of paranoia that simply talking about problems is going to lead us down the road of victim politics, then we are fucked. By some of the “logic” I have seen in this thread, we should not even talk about male DV victims because it will lead to a monumental VAMA act and we will all have to wear dresses.

            I can’t buy that.

            In fact, if we apply that across the board we can’t talk about any issues or have any “worthy causes” for what men face because it might lead to oppressive government solutions. We should just close up shop and keep taking it up the ass. Obviously we can’t trust ourselves to do anything without becoming feminists.

            I loathe big government and victim politics as much as anyone I ever met in my life. Just not enough to mock real victims (of anything) which I am sad and embarrassed to see happening in this thread from people who should know what a FUBAR path that is.

          • strix (David King)

            There is a school of thought in psychotherapy that the therapist should never inject his or her own thoughts into the process, and especially that the therapist should never guide the client.

            I can see the merit in that line of thought, but I wonder if it derives from a female-centric view of therapy. What works for women might work for men, but then it might not. Tom Golden would be, well, gold on this subject.

    • Primal

      The CRIME industry needs to grow to encompass the whole world of crime. There’s a big difference between false feminist victim-mongering and creating some sort of holistic perspective on sexual aggression…and particularly adult-child sexual aggression…which we have copious reasons to believe is a particularly horrific crime. Shining light on the most taboo and therefore unbelievable forms of sexual aggression is critically important.

      • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

        “The CRIME industry needs to grow to encompass the whole world of crime.”

        Even if it makes matters worse for millions of people?

        Besides which, who decides what is a crime?

        Currently, the feminists and the politically-corrected seem to have their way.

        Do you agree with their views on these matters?

        • Primal

          No. Just so that all crimes are covered. Female-female, female-male rape is no less a crime than the male counterparts.

          No. Of course, I loath the feminist way and the PC ways. To wildly inflate rape for one sex while denying that the other sex rapes at all is hardly justice. Reason needs to return to the game as soon as possible.

    • gwallan

      AH I’ve been around this “abuse industry” for a long time. I’ve frequently put it to services that don’t accept male victims or victims of female perps that they could significantly enlarge their empires were they to become more inclusive. I can assure you that many within it don’t want to get bigger if that means their fundamental feminist ideology and control must be shelved.

      This particular article and the advocacy it represents is necessary in order to shake that control loose. I’m getting a lot of traction in my neck of the woods by arguing that too much of their advocacy relies on emotion and exaggeration rather than rationality. The primary need is to get more men into those systems on the administrative side in order to provide balance.

  • Codebuster

    Ok, if we’re going to play the “i’ve-been-raped-too” game, then it is indeed true that men can be raped every bit as easily and as often as women. Full marks for bringing this to everyone’s attention. To this end, I’ve coined the term “hobby” rape to distinguish this kind of rape from real-rape. Hobby-rape is the rape you lay claim to when you want to be nominated for membership to the “I’ve-been-raped-too” club.

    Real-rape, the kind of rape that occurred recently in India, which was recently highlighted in the media, is to be distinguished from hobby-rape in the following manner:

    1) It is forceful, and intended to overwhelm;
    2) It is harmful and can result in injury and/or death;
    3) It is scary and the victim genuinely feels threatened;
    4) The victim tries to resist and/or evade;
    5) The victim shows physical signs of injury or resistance. Torn clothes, etc, provide indicators of resistance;
    6) We can allow for the possibility that fear (of consequences) may freeze the victim’s intention to escape – and in his/her post-rape survival there may be few if any signs of injury or resistance. In which case we’d have to look at the lead-up and whether the victim knew what he/she was getting into, and whether there’s evidence of complicity or whether he/she was lying. And we can look at his/her prior reputation/record. Of course our stupid rape-shield laws prevent much of this sensible, commonsense stuff from being aired… so there’s a problem right there in the rape-shield laws;
    7) Age… the younger that one is, the less able they are to provide informed consent, the more vulnerable they are to having bad experiences imprint adversely, and therefore impact on future relationships and behaviours. So there is justification for a category of rape the law defines as statutory rape. But how said law is administered is another question, in these obsessive, gynocentric, puritanical, vindictive and misandric times. But we digress.

    Was the author of this article afraid for his life? Was he afraid of physical injury? Was there a reason he could not have simply pushed the woman off him? Sure, women do indeed sometimes try to pull these kinds of “rapey” stunts, as outlined in the essay, sneaking into your bed, sneaking their vagina over certain aspects of one’s person, that kind of thing. Was there reason for believing that maybe, if he pushed her off, she might have filed a false-rape allegation (that might be a legitimate hazard in these misandric times)? Forgive me for my insensitivity, but if we are going to entertain this kind of rape as if it were real-rape, then we become no better than the feminists, and I will be vacating from this kind of MRM should this kind of thing ever come to define us or what we stand for.

    However, having said that, I suppose it depends where we take this “I’ve been raped too” nonsense. If feminists are going to persist in their push for the trivialization of rape, what with their dumbed-down categories like date-rape and their “too-drunk-to-notice” rape, then there is indeed no reason whatsoever why men cannot also climb on board the I’ve-been-raped-too band-wagon. But just one small point… isn’t the subsequent trivialization of rape going to trivialize the rest of what we stand for? We are dealing with big, burly, adult questions for adults here, not with whiney victims of an “I’m-a-victim-too” club.

    Shouldn’t we, as big adults wearing big-boy undies and big-girl panties, be addressing our dopey rape-shield laws, instead of seeking membership to an “I’m-a-rape-victim-too” club? Validating the trivialization of rape in this manner only serves to weaken our efforts to get rid of our evil rape-shield laws.

    Let’s put it another way. We often do things that we regret later, and they can become a burden. But Angry Harry’s advice is an important one… why feed the monster that is the abuse industry?

    Just sayin’.

    • Codebuster

      >”By your logic here, a 12 year old boy raped by their teacher experienced “hobby rape” too…”

      No, I neither said nor implied any such thing. And I agree with you about the outrage that is the family courts forcing the boy to pay their pedophiles while the girl gets all the sympathy. A 12-year-old-boy raped by their teacher is neither less nor more of a crime than the same thing happening to a 12-year-old girl.

      And incidentally, girls can be every bit as averse or as into it as boys. There is no reason whatsoever to presume that the Anglosphere interpretation of the poor, innocent young girl being taken advantage of applies only to girls but not to boys. The girls can be every bit as into it as boys. For example, in the Pitcairn Island trial, many of the alleged rape victims delighted in the thrill of being desired by older, established men with connections:

      Olive Christian said of her girlhood, “We all thought sex was like food on the table.” Christian’s two daughters also said that they had both been sexually active from the age of 12, with one of them claiming that she started having sex at 13, “and I felt hot shit about it, too”. They and other women present at the meeting, who endorsed their view that underage sex was normal on Pitcairn, stated emphatically that all of the alleged rape victims had been willing participants.

      Of the girls who enjoyed the experience, they have different, more subtle ways of celebrating with their hi-fives. Of course for people that young there are consequences, and that’s why the law provides for statutory rape… but these laws should be applied equally irrespective of the sex of the child.

      • bowspearer

        “No, I neither said nor implied any such thing. And I agree with you about the outrage that is the family courts forcing the boy to pay their pedophiles while the girl gets all the sympathy. A 12-year-old-boy raped by their teacher is neither less nor more of a crime than the same thing happening to a 12-year-old girl.”

        And yet your entire post was apologetics for the chauvinism and male disposability which perpetuates the very situation you claim to have outrage for.

        So you recognise the age of consent as a barrier for where chauvinistic attitudes which diminish male rape should cease to be applied? Gee that’s great – so what, if a child who has been serially raped by a pedophile in an area where the age of consent is, say 16 – when a child is 15 years and 365 days old his rape is abhorrent and a clear case of pedophilia, but a day later it’s “hobby rape”?

        The fact is that genuine rape occurs any time someone is in genuinely fear such as in a domestic violence situation, drugged, when someone in the middle of sex withdraws consent, or someone refuses consent and is overpowered. End of story.

        In this case, James clearly had his drink spiked and you’re classing it as “hobby rape” where you’re questioning if he tried to get away when he’d been wiped out by the drug. How is that any different to conservatives or feminists claiming men can’t be raped by women?

        Furthermore how do you expect men to react clearly to being raped when society brainwashes them to think that if they don’t want sex to take place that they must be the problem? Heck his rapist in his drugged and confused state accused him of trying to rape her whilst he was groggy from being drugged with what was most likely a date rape drug!

        Yet according to you, if we start taking the plight of those of us who are male rape survivors seriously, you want out of the movement??

        If so then how can you even remotely claim to give a rats ass about men if your response to men at their most marginalised in society is one of a feminist/conservative (on this issue their beliefs are identical)?

        • Codebuster

          While I had a problem last year with Uncle Bern (Chapin) trying to turn our interests into a left-right issue, your objection does amount to a leftist, liberal stance. I do object to liberal, state-sponsored interference, but it is beyond the purpose of AVFM to turn this into a left-right issue. Feminism is madness enough to contend with, and there is no need to get sidetracked with whether one is a Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative.

          If Earth were invaded by aliens from another planet, it would not make sense to argue about the politics of liberalism versus conservatism. Feminism is the invading alien. Let’s get our priorities right, instead of allowing feminists to define the terms of the debate by trying to out-victim them.

          The cut-off points for statutory rape are state-imposed legal definitions. The question of what rape is and the harm it does lies beyond dumb culture. The best that any culture can do is to do the best they can. There is no hard-and-fast “true” answer to what the cut-off for statutory rape should be. No person magically transforms into an adult by the time they attain a state-imposed legal age.

    • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

      ” Was there reason for believing that maybe, if he pushed her off, she might have filed a false-rape allegation (that might be a legitimate hazard in these misandric times)?”

      Where does this line of questioning end?

      I’m pretty sure 99.9% of women could prevent sex from happening if they fought back enough. Penetration is not easy even with both partners cooperating. Ever try shoving a bratwurst into a extra small condom attached to a jack rabbit? Hah. Right. As if.

      Weapons seem iffy. After all a rapist can only do so many things at once. Therefore the only plausible way one person can rape another is if one person is empowered by proxy violence.

      In fact the only credible rape is rape in which the rapist can make plausible threats that can neutralize her victim’s ability to fight back.

      That means only women can rape men (obviously) since, for the most part, only women can offer credible threats of proxy violence towards men.

      • Stu

        You know, I reckon you could prove that the world is flat if you wanted to Typhon :)

    • SkepticWithRaisedEyebrow

      hug

    • Primal

      Real (male-female) rape rarely resembles your criteria. Most (male-female) rapes are non-violent, cause no injury on than minor intimate injuries directly related to robbing sex, and cause low levels of damage relative to truly violent crimes.

      • Codebuster

        Try telling this to “Damini”, the woman in Delhi India who died a few days ago of her rape following serious trauma to her brain and body. Hers was not date rape, it was not hobby rape, it was about as real as a rape can get. If you are referring to rape as it is defined throughout today’s zeitgeist, however, then that’s the feminist Kool-Aid at work. The rape of 50+ years ago, before feminism… forced sex, rape during war, rape perpetrated by dangerous, convicted felons… had a distinctively different flavour to what it has today. Furthermore, women back in those days had a virtue upon which some kind of value could be placed… now I do realize that for many among us, discussion of women’s virtue is unfashionable and very unprogressive. Nonetheless, their virtue had real value to them and those that loved them, and nobody had any business in taking it away from them. This inconvenience does not exist today, ipso facto the value of what is lost, the contexts that were relevant back then, no longer apply. And while there is never any justification for anyone to rape, ever, nonetheless, getting raped for your average garden-variety slag these days, has all the drama of a bad-hair day. Just look at the choices that women make voluntarily, without anyone forcing them… and we’re supposed to take their self-indulgent, indignant rape-rants seriously? LOL – Hey, it looks like we’ve come full circle and that I actually agree with you :)

        • Primal

          Can’t agree more about how feminists play with rape/rape culture. Back in the day women were not PROUD SlutWalking fools even when they were sluts. Alpha high school girls were not PROUD to sell their virginity to the highest bidder ($4000 or so) or blow daisy chains of guys for free. That’s why the feminist rape hysteria so ironic…once you start hosing your priceless assets around so price-lessly…you cannot at the same time get all hysterical over the robbery of said assets.

          That said, I doubt that James Landrith was ‘empowered’ by feminists before he was raped by a woman. Big differences here.
          The biggest difference of all is that men’s sexuality has never had real market value…which is probably why no one seems to care that Mr Landrith got his stolen so vilely.

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

      I cannot endorse your concept of “hobby rape,” at least not as you have currently formulated it, although you make some salient points. There is clearly a victim industry that is more interested in creating more victims and making people feel like victims than it is in actually healing anybody.

      Nevertheless there are quite a number of psychological and even physical traumas which can never be objectively proven. There are ways to cause people a great deal of physical pain without leaving a single mark on them. On the flip side, I had a friend recently violently mugged to the point of needing hospitalization and he will never see justice because identifying the perpetrators will never be possible; he wasn’t raped, but what he underwent was arguably much worse than what some people who are forced into sexual encounters go through–which is something we also ought to be able to acknowledge like adults.

      I do think you and others are missing the salient fact here that James was drugged, and further, he was in a situation where a pregnant woman was raping him and, double whammy, threatened to cry rape herself if he resisted. I don’t see how you or anyone else failed to catch those important points.

      When looked at from a legal perspective, it doesn’t look like James ever could seek justice under the law, nor do I see a way of writing a law that would let him. Proof of the drugging would be impossible to provide, and he otherwise went into that room willingly; this doesn’t make him “responsible” for what happened but it also doesn’t mean there’s any sane way to write a law to protect him from it that I can think of. What we could do is end the preposterous double standards under the law which made it possible for his rapist to use the proxy violence of the law to put him in jail–her sexual trump card under the law let her get away with it.

      If we look at the statistics on this, “forced to penetrate” is nearly as common as “forced penetration” is–which means James’ story and experience is likely nowhere near as rare a thing as we tend to think. “If you don’t cooperate, I’ll scream ‘rape'”! is one of the more horrid realities we live under now. But we can’t work on fixing that reality, I don’t think, unless we acknowledge it first.

      • Codebuster

        >”I do think you and others are missing the salient fact here that James was drugged, and further, he was in a situation where a pregnant woman was raping him and, double whammy, threatened to cry rape herself if he resisted.

        I just had another quick glance through the article… it’s not actually clearly explicated that:

        1) He was drugged;
        2) He was threatened with a false rape allegation.

        These two things are implied. If, however, we take it as given that he was drugged and that she intended to carry out her threat to make a false rape allegation if he did not comply, then I take your point.

      • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

        @Dean

        “, it doesn’t look like James ever could seek justice under the law, nor do I see a way of writing a law that would let him. ”

        Exactly.

        Furthermore, to endorse what you said, any man at any time could say, “I was forced to have sex because, otherwise, she would cry rape.”

        Is such a thing possible? Of course it is.

        But look at the implications of this when it comes to the law!

        Furthermore, are we going to argue that women who have slept with drunken men are legally raping those men?

        As I said below somewhere: This particular case seems to just cross over the border of what the MRM can get legitimately fussed about – particularly given that there is some lack of credibility/normality to it.

        On the one hand, we are led to believe that James was drugged, drunk and completely unaware of what was going on. On the other hand, he maintains an erection and he remembers her threats.

        To me, this, coupled with his sexual cheating over the next three years, and the twenty years of trauma – much of which is clearly self-inflicted – pushes the case over the line beyond which I am prepared to protest; from an MRA point of view.

        This might well do a dis-service to James, but it would do a dis-service to the MRM if such cases were to be highlighted.

        Finally, James concludes that he was drugged rather than just drunk. He doesn’t know that he was drugged. He has merely assumed this to be so.

        When the police in the UK investigated similar claims by women, they concluded that they had not been drugged.

        “‘The reality is drink spiking is very, very rare’, said senior forensic scientist Michael Scott-Ham. ‘Alcohol itself is the problem.’

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

          One of the things we are in fact fussed about right now is that under the law in many countries and many jurisdictions, a man having sex with a woman who is drunk is in fact considered guilty of rape. This is true in the UK, where numerous men, including some famous ones, are in jail for “raping” women even in cases where it’s admitted both parties were drunk and the woman only says she doesn’t clearly remember what happened.

          In other words, it’s an obscene double standard: men can rape, women can’t. That’s the assertion. Although some more “liberal” minded folks claim “well yes a woman can rape, but only with a dildo,” i.e. only if it’s “penetration.”

          There are men rotting away in jail now because of this double standard.

          Now you tell me which way to fix it: my only argument is that whatever standard we use under the law, it applies the same for men and women. So far as treatment and advocacy goes, that’s a quite separate question; the law may not be clear but if a person seeks counseling saying “I was sexually assaulted even though I can’t legally prove it” they should still get some sympathetic support.

          Who knows? MAYBE the woman who did this to the guy thought she was just having a bit of fun. Doesn’t sound like it, but POSSIBLY. Probably even if the laws were gender neutral (which they should be) there probably could be no conviction. This doesn’t mean he shouldn’t speak out or get any support.

          Our social double standards hold that men rape, women are raped. That needs to change. Typhon’s piece on that is a masterpiece:

          http://www.avoiceformen.com/sexual-politics/evo-psych/manufacturing-female-victimhood-and-marginalizing-vulnerable-men/

          • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

            @Dean

            I do not disagree with anything that you just said.

            But, since it’s you, let me try to explain where I am coming from with regard to the MRM and MM.

            Both the MM and the MRM mean different things to different MRAs.

            My perspective can be summarised fairly succinctly as follows.

            If some person, group or organisation is inflicting injustices on to men, or promoting the employment of such injustices, then I am going after them.

            That about sums up what I intend to keep doing.

            These days, there is not much more to my activism than that.

            In the rape case currently under discussion, I can see emanating from it an increased likelihood that one of the very worst enemies of men will be further empowered; viz; the abuse industry.

            And the likelihood that this abuse industry will ever stop attempting to gain sustenance from demonising people and/or hurting them – even those people who have been abused – is so low that I would rather see it virtually obliterated.

            It is an industry that has proved itself to be highly malicious, dishonest, uncaring and vindictive, time and time again.

            Even Esther Rantzen and Erin Pizzey, the very founders of the industry in the UK have been shocked at what has been happening.

            It does not deserve to survive in our midst.

        • http://www.NewDemocracyWorld.org Dopesauce42

          Did he not say he had an erection when he awoke. She was on top of him at that point, I believe it could have been Viagra and something else. Who knows? There are limits to what we can understand about anything when we only look at this or any other one incident.

          • strix (David King)

            Every healthy man gets several erections each night, and an erection is no indication of sexual arousal.

            In any case, I don’t think Viagra actually works that way. As I understand it, Viagra enhances the normal metabolic processes that result in an erection, but you still have to get aroused for it to have any effect.

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

      Codebuster, are you missing this part of it?

      “She darted her eyes at me and told me not to move. I was ordered ‘don’t be forceful.’ She then asked if I was trying to rape her when I could not remain perfectly still and again told me not to move. In addition, I was told that I could hurt the baby if I tried to stop it. After she finally finished, I was still expected to drive her home.”

      I don’t know if your eyes glazed on that or if it just isn’t clear to you, but my instant thought in that situation is that I’m going to hurt the baby and possibly go to jail if I don’t do everything this crazy bitch tells me to do without question. The threat seems extremely palpable and immediate to me.

      I also wonder if people are missing the part where James was almost certainly drugged, and that he did not get into the same bed with him, that she invaded his bed?

      Look, I don’t think the cops could have done anything in this situation, but if they did anything they would have arrested him and he’d be in jail and his military career would be done right there at age 20. The whole thing seems scary as fuck to me.

      • Codebuster

        >”Codebuster, are you missing this part of it?

        Evidently. But as it was implied and not explicated, it was open to interpretation. But I agree, these can be scary times with the police ready to do violence by proxy on the whim of the holder of a pussy-pass.

    • http://themalesofgames.blogspot.co.uk TheMalesOfGames

      Codebuster – Hold on, who exactly are you to determine what is and isn’t rape? What you seem to be saying is that victims have to have symptoms of rape — side effects, so to speak — OTHER than the rape itself to “qualify” as a rape victim in your eyes.

      Basically, all that needs to exist to qualify as a rape is unwanted insertion (for a female victim) or forced insertion (for a male victim). Codebuster, you seem to be arguing that without something like torn clothing or physical violence, it’s “hobby-rape” and not “real rape”.

      What you fail to grasp with this is that Landrith wasn’t saying “men can be rape victims too”, as you’re arguing. He’s saying “I was a rape victim”. There’s no “too” about it. I’ve heard that argument before, from feminists and it’s always struck me that it only comes up from people who view the world in terms of how it affects women. Men can’t be rape victims … they have to be rape victims “too” because the primary focus has to be on women. That’s not what Landrith was saying at all.

      Landrith’s case seems to fit the standard definition of rape, with some worrying psychological damage too. Yet you seem to dismiss it as not being “real” rape because it doesn’t compare to a tragic, yet also thankfully rare and extreme, instance of rape from India.

      Finally, your attitude appears to be one that treats the rape of men being taking seriously as being a greater evil than stopping the rape of women being taken seriously. That’s some very skewed logic. I agree get that the intervention of law enforcement agencies isn’t always the answer … but it should at least be an option.

  • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

    @bowspearer

    I don’t think that James’ one-night experience – most of which he slept through – can be equated to living in a state of perpetual fear of one’s partner.

    The latter must be terrifying.

    In my view, 99% of men would not suffer as badly as James seems to have done following his ordeal.

    As such, I do not think that such cases are worthwhile pursuing.

    Or, as Codebuster implies, are we to get upset whenever any man happens to be upset by any woman’s actions?

    Where does it stop?

    She touched my dick for three seconds?

    • bowspearer

      “I don’t think that James’ one-night experience – most of which he slept through – can be equated to living in a state of perpetual fear of one’s partner.”

      Let’s go through the list I gave again (pay special attention to option 2 this time):

      “The fact is that genuine rape occurs any time someone is in genuinely fear such as in a domestic violence situation, drugged, when someone in the middle of sex withdraws consent, or someone refuses consent and is overpowered. End of story.”

      Now take note of this section of his account:

      “After a few drinks, I became very tired and disoriented. I never drank until I got drunk, especially when driving and off base. I didn’t like the feeling and it wasn’t secure off base. I just figured I was tired and had too much without realizing it. There was a motel next to the club. She suggested we get a room and sleep it off, then I could drive her home in the morning. I agreed as I was rapidly losing the ability to think or see straight. She got us a room with double beds and we split the cost.”

      Exactly which part of that doesn’t sound like he was drugged?

      “In my view, 99% of men would not suffer as badly as James seems to have done following his ordeal.”

      Yeah let me tell you about that other “99%”. A guy I used to work with was one of them. They’re the ones who live a lie because they’ve been brainwashed to believe it’s their fault and they must have wanted it – they “got lucky”. They live their lives believing, if they were in a relationship, that they “cheated” and and their shame turns into “guilt” and “regret” over it. They bury it and repress any negative feelings they have towards it so they can be seen as “real men”. They suffer a great deal, they just live in denial about it.

      If you think that at some level every man who is raped isn’t suffering, at least on a subconscious level, with things “coming out sideways” in one way or another, then you’re incredibly naive at best.

      “Or, as Codebuster implies, are we to get upset whenever any man happens to be upset by any woman’s actions?”

      This is blatant chauvinism and misandry right here. Instead of recognising a man being violated by a woman, it’s arbitrarily dismissed as “any man happens to be upset by any woman’s actions”. Is it any wonder people view female-on-male domestic violence as an urban myth? Is it any wonder people view female-on-male rape as a physical impossibility?

      When someone’s sexuality is deliberately violated, it is a form of sexual assault – regardless of whether it is a man doing it to a woman, a woman doing it to a woman, a man doing it to a man, or a woman doing it to a man?

      You cannot even begin to condemn male disposability until you come to that realisation.
      “Where does it stop?”

      With male sexuality being seen as a personal choice rather than automatic consent and anything less being met with chauvinistic emasculation – the very kind of chauvinistic emasculation which you and codebuster are responding right now.

      “She touched my dick for three seconds?”

      If it was unwanted, then yes, it’s a form of molestation.

      It’s ironic that you both oppose rape shield laws and similar legislation and both of you on the issue of male victims, espouse the very sort of attitudes which perpetuate the very kinds of laws you claim to take issue with.

    • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

      “She touched my dick for three seconds?”

      When I was 12 I was molested by a man three times my age.

      It was… a non-event in my life.

      Being molested by a woman when I was a child, on the other hand, was traumatizing.

      Since being molested by a man in his thirties at twelve was a non event for me and being molested by a woman was traumatizing… obviously everyone who says being molested by older men is bad is lying and _obviously_ being molested by a woman is far far worse then being molested by a man.

      QED.

      And, unlike you, I have actual experiences to draw upon whilst inferring my flawless logical pronouncements upon other people’s lives.

      • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

        @Typhonblue

        You’re a heterosexual.

        Maybe that’s why you were relatively unperturbed by a man’s impositions.

        • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

          “You’re a heterosexual.”

          I’m… not actually.

          • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

            LOL!

            After all these years, you never told me.

    • Primal

      Rape is rape. What’s good for the gander is also good for the goose. Just because the law ignores female-male rape doesn’t mean that female-male rape doesn’t occur or isn’t equivalent to male-female rape.

  • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

    @bowspearer

    To repeat: 99% of men would not have suffered as James appears to have done.

    Furthermore, you cannot equate James’ experience with yours.

    As for your comment that touching a man’s dick for three seconds is a form of molestation, Yes, it is.

    But I have no intention of making a fuss over such trivial things.

    Mainly for these reasons …

    1. Most men would not agree with the notion that we should make a fuss about it. As such, making a fuss about such a thing would be detrimental to our cause.

    2. If you read my article, you will know that I am of the view that making a fuss over things makes them worse.

    3. I do not want to live in a society wherein hysteria is continually generated over trivial matters.

    So, my question remains.

    But I will rephrase it.

    At what point does the MRM say that this is not an ‘assault’ worth pursuing?

    After all, there must be some point where we would say, “Whoa, Hold on a moment. Pursuing this is ridiculous.”

    In my view, James’ situation just about crosses that border.

    Just.

    http://www.angryharry.com/esSigningtheSexConsentDocument.htm

    • bowspearer

      “99% of men would not have suffered as James appears to have done.”

      Based on what, disclosure rates? That argument is every bit as fallacious as feminist claims that battered men and male rape victims don’t exist for the same reasons. You can’t make that assumption when the cone of silence and shame and the brainwashing of boys in society is so significant. The 1% you refer to is the tip of the iceberg

      “Furthermore, you cannot equate James’ experience with yours.”

      In terms of step by step or the violation he feels. The former is common sense. The latter only demonstrates your personal ignorance on the subject.

      “As for your comment that touching a man’s dick for three seconds is a form of molestation, Yes, it is.”

      Yes and women need to learn that “no” fucking well means “no”. End of story.

      “But I have no intention of making a fuss over such trivial things.”

      And who the fuck are you to say whether or not it was trivial? But then according to you a guy getting drugged and raped when consent had been denied is “trivial” to you too.

      “1. Most men would not agree with the notion that we should make a fuss about it. As such, making a fuss about such a thing would be detrimental to our cause.”

      Congratulations, you just crossed the line to rape and DV apologetics – where when it happens, men should just “man up and shut up”, “take a teaspoon of cement and harden the fuck up”. And people wonder why men suicide at rates so much higher than women do…

      “2. If you read my article, you will know that I am of the view that making a fuss over things makes them worse.”

      Yes because you know battered men should never speak up, male rape victims should never speak up. You’re right, it does make it worse thanks to people like you either trivialising it as “hobby rape” or supporting such claims, chauvinists who claim a penis equals consent and feminists who treat you like a liar and perpetual predator.

      What? Do you think it’s fucking easy opening up like that? Do you think it wouldn’t be easier to forget, do you think that if it were that easy it that survivors wouldn’t just do it?

      Doing it is hard as hell, the emotions choke you and it takes everything you have to open up, which of course only gets met with victim-blaming and trivialisation, which you have so eloquently demonstrated.

      “3. I do not want to live in a society wherein hysteria is continually generated over trivial matters.”

      I guy being drugged and raped when he’d made it clear he didn’t want sex is a “trivial matter” to you?

      “After all, there must be some point where we would say, “Whoa, Hold on a moment. Pursuing this is ridiculous.”

      In my view, James’ situation just about crosses that border.”

      So being date rape drugged and then raped after he’d made it clear he DIDN’T want sex is crossing the line into “hysteria” to you?

      Here’s a thought – why don’t you try actually having some empathy for male victims?

      • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

        @bowspearer

        1. That James is trumatised in some way, I do not doubt. But I doubt that his experience with the woman was the cause of it.

        2. I quote James, … “To say that I was reckless then would be accurate. I was risking exposure to disease and potential violence from angry husbands and boyfriends. I did this for about three years before getting married and further stuffing the memories down further.”

        So James, basically, cheats on other men, with other cheating women – and then he gets married .

        But he doesn’t blame himself.

        He blames that woman.

        Hmmm.

        Twenty years later, he is still blaming that woman for his current woes.

        Hmmm.

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

          I’m actually finding this headscratching. You feel you would not be seriously disturbed if a pregnant woman drugged you, topped you, and threatened to scream rape and have you arrested, along with the possibility that if you did resist you might harm an unborn child–this would be something where you just said “oh well that was unpleasant,” and you’d just move on?

          Perhaps I’m guilty of being one of those “victim types” but I think that, especially as a young man, I would have very serious issues trusting women and have a great deal of trouble sorting out my feelings and would probably develop a great deal of mistrust for the opposite sex. My own experiences (I was molested by both a man and woman in my youth) definitely caused me a lifetime of confusion and insecurity and bewilderment and discomfort. Now in my particular case I didn’t grab onto it and nurse it as a lifelong grievance, because I agree with you that the “victim industry” is a problem, but I don’t think trivializing such things is helpful either.

          In the end what I’d like to see is fewer double standards (we’re rife with those now) and a more hard-nosed look at treatment protocols with an eye toward healing rather than staying crippled. I don’t think that’s too unreasonble.

    • Primal

      Most men are f-in CLUELESS but as one can see at the end of The Reader (book), women tend to ‘get’ the evil game right away. Ole Uncle Angry….all I can say for you is please do crack some books before you go on. I’d particularly recommend that ‘lovely’ feminist heroine Anais Nin in Incest: A Journal of Love (NOT). Female-male sexual aggression IS a very confusing, lonely and misunderstood crime by any measure thanks largely to the taboo nature of said crimes. For that reason, it’s very important that our august leaders don’t shoot from hip so foolishly. Mr. Elam clearly understands that something big is going on here but he is quite rare in his profession.

      “[Eugene Volokh, December 25, 2008 at 1:24pm] Trackbacks
      Statutory Rape” in The Reader:

      I will say that my intuition is that 15-year-old boys are unlikely to suffer lasting emotional harm from affairs with 30-something-year-old women, any more than from any first sexual relationship, whether at 15 or 16, and whether with a 35-year-old or another 15-year-old. (I wouldn’t claim this extends to 15-year-old girls with older men, but I don’t think one should blithely disregard factors such as the sex of the parties in making the moral judgment here.) Of course, maybe that’s just my remembered teenage fantasies (not, I should stress, my personal experience) talking. Perhaps I’m mistaken on it. But again I’m hesitant to say that such relationships can categorically be seen as deeply immoral behavior regardless of person, time, and place.”

      With lawyers like good ole Eugene, Mr Landrith had better just lay back and enjoy his ‘fun and games’. We men are our own worst enemies when it comes to any kind of female-male aggression. From domestic violence on down..the man is always the wuss and the babe is the poor little put upon victim to be protected.

    • Primal

      “1. Most men would not agree with the notion that we should make a fuss about it.”

      Most men are obviously idiotic sex-starved monkeys on this particular topic. I regularly see grown men publishing novels about woman-boy rape without even mentioning the damage done to the boy. One new such novel is sitting front and center in my local bookstore right now…and there’s no mention therein about the long term damage to the boy.

  • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

    @bowspearer

    You still haven’t answered my question.

    So I’ll repeat it.

    At what point does the MRM say that this is not an ‘assault’ worth pursuing?

    After all, there must be some point where we would say, “Whoa, Hold on a moment. Pursuing this is ridiculous.”

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

      Hi Harry,

      I have a slightly different take. Had I been in James’ circumstances I do not think I would have been affected by it very much. But I am not saying that to diminish his personal experience, or to say that men who have this happen should be silent. I don’t think they should.

      However, if I look at the numbers of teenage boys that are groomed and sexually molested by adult women, which I have seen a fair amount of, then my attitude takes a pretty sharp turn.

      I had a client once that was groomed and used sexually by an adult female predator from the time he was 11 till he was 15 years old. By the time he got to me at 26 he was drinking a quart of bourbon a day. In working with him I am convinced it was related to the abuse, the details of which are really sickening.

      He did not live to see 27.

      As to this:

      “Whoa, Hold on a moment. Pursuing this is ridiculous.”

      I suppose the thing is that I don’t see us as “pursuing” this, but rather just allowing a conversation about it. And that brings us to the quandary. I share you concern about victim politics. I have had a few women grab my dick without asking, assuming I wanted sex with them when I didn’t. I found them annoying and trashy.

      And that is where it ended. I was not their victim. I was just the guy that said “Get lost.”

      But that is my personal call.

      While AVFM will not be leading a crusade to advocate for men because some unwanted skeezer tried to handle their equipment, sexual abuse of males by females can be a serious issue. I can’t think of a better place to vet where the lines are than here.

      • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

        @Paul

        I have obviously not been very clear.

        My problem is not with advocating for males who have been raped.

        My problem is with James’ own particular claims and with the dangers involved in adding to all the abuse hysteria – from which men will undoubtedly end up worse off.

        Furthermore, spreading the notion that an unwanted ‘rape’ by a woman during the course of **ONE** drunken evening is likely to lead to a lifetime of trauma for a man is just not helpful to our cause.

        Finally, God help us if we continue creating laws wherein the whole of society has to pander to the overly-sensitive natures of some people.

        Have we not already had enough of this?

        Goodnight Paul!

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

          Well perhaps it is me that is not so clear. I don’t disagree with a word of what you say here. I think maybe your British accent threw me off.

          Soon there will be an article coming here from a very well known person in the movement. Another tasty surprise for AVFM readers. It will address some of this indirectly.

          Should make for a good discussion.

        • Primal

          Cheerleading for rapists is the norm not the exception: http://thesuperfluousman.blogspot.com/2008/07/cheerleading-for-rapists.html Our worst enemies on that score lie within. Until we dig into this one we will always be lost

          Men will happily kill other men before turning on women. Woman is far more dangerous than Man is to most men. Sadly, there will be a lot more cheerleading for female rapists from men before women are ever held accountable, by men, as merciless, cunning, and ruthless rapists, pedophiles and child molesters in there own WRONG.

          Very sad and ironic to see those rape apologetics appear HERE though.

          • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

            @Primal

            I understand your points.

            However, one must always be aware that some people are “overly-sensitive” – perhaps with psychological problems that will cause them to over-react to situations that would not affect most other people badly. Some people also focus on specific incidents for unduly long periods of time and blame others for problems that have very little to do with them.

            Such people will always be among us.

            As for “cheerleading for the rapists” when it comes to men victims, this is just a straw man. I am not supporting what the woman rapist did. I am questioning James’ particular beliefs about what caused his trauma as well as his willingness to blame this woman for 20 years of suffering.

            Futhermore, he does himself no good by obsessing for 20 years over the matter.

          • Primal

            I’d probably want to kill them for trying just as I would want to kill any man who raped his son or daughter. See Savage Grace for more on the how ‘emotionally distant’ and psychologically terrified fatherless boys become when their mothers rape them: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379976/ All boys need to psychologically break away from their mothers to become men. For single(?) mothers to rape them as fatherless boys to ‘wake them up’ emotionally just at the critical time they most need to break away, is just the kind of twisted logic these filthy female predators love to use.

            It sad and disgusting that even Patrick Carnes, one the worlds best known sex therapists blames the mother-son incest victim in his paper on erotic rage. He blames the son for his mother’s rape. Even as a professional sex therapist, he simply can’t seem to understand the reality that women, as the ‘no’ Sex, covertly control sex for the most part, that female sexual predators have sexual agency, and that female predators (sexual or otherwise) are often highly sophisticated liars who thanks to the very social/political/legal/cultural double standards we are SUPPOSED TO BE FIGHTING HERE often get away scott free for lying. Given that context, I’m not surprised that the average LAY-man usually blames the boy victim for rape by filthy older females…but I am very disgusted…because men are rarely so disgustingly dense on any other topic.

            Child sexual abuse by total strangers is probably the cruelest crime known to man/woman. Child abuse by Catholic ‘fathers’ and ‘mothers’ is even worse. Child sexual abuse by one’s own parents or other close elder relations is literally beyond belief for most people…let alone for the ‘loved’ child. It is murder of the child’s spirit/soul/sex by one’s own elders.

          • Primal

            @Angry Harry

            “I am not supporting what the woman rapist did. I am questioning James’ particular beliefs about what caused his trauma as well as his willingness to blame this woman for 20 years of suffering.

            Futhermore, he does himself no good by obsessing for 20 years over the matter.”

            For combat veterans one of the most important milestones is story telling. That allows them to heal the PTS and move back into society. Same applies for other milder forms of trauma…something that feminists have indeed wildly exaggerated for political purposes…but which is necessary nevertheless.

            Mr. Landrith obviously has very little room, even here, to tell his story freely …and that kind of suppression tends to create obsession. And that doesn’t mean that one throws skepticism aside. It does mean that one listens carefully before judging particularly to taboo stories….which courageously challenge ‘common sense’. The reactions you’ve given him here are given to women who do research on female-female rape as well. Seems that we simply cannot handle the fact that women can be and are merciless, ruthless and murderous predators too.

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

          “Finally, God help us if we continue creating laws wherein the whole of society has to pander to the overly-sensitive natures of some people.”

          After a good nights rest and reading this thing again, I that is way too much of a stretch for me. Nobody gives a damn about male rape victims. The man turned a drugging/sexual assault/coercion under threat of false allegation into activism. The idea that this is a fueling of rape hysteria requires a 2 + 2 = 5 equation.

          I am not here to psychoanalyze the man, or speculate on his motives for doing pretty much the same thing that I do, which is try to draw attention to issues no one cares about in a world that hates me for doing it.

          If that is hurting the men’s movement, I am in the wrong business.

          • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

            @Paul

            There was a woman in the UK called Emma Humphreys who killed her boyfriend. She was a feminist cause celebre for killing the man who had been abusing her. And so she was released early from prison.

            Within 10 days of her release, she was interviewed live by the BBC.

            She told us that she now had a new boyfriend.

            She told us that he was abusing her.

            She told us that if a man did not abuse you then he could not possibly love you, could he?

            She was happy being abused by him.

            The BBC cut the recording in embarrassment, and the overt feminist support for her disappeared within days.

            The message is this.

            Good activists choose their poster victims carefully or things can backfire.

            IMHO, James should not be one of them.

            And if he does become a successful activist, then I wonder just how many more men will be prosecuted and/or imprisoned for causing 50 years (not 20) of trauma to women following a night of drunken sex.

            And I wonder how many more rape victims are going to be indoctrinated with the view that even slighter incidents are undoubtedly going to ruin their lives.

            30 years anyone?

            Furthermore, I wonder how many couples tonight are going to have sex with each other under the influence of something.

            Perhaps 20 million across the USA and Europe? Every night.

            There’s rich pickings there for the abuse industry.

            How easy it is to say, the following day, that you were too drunk to consent.

            Follow the trail and it leads to more misery for both men and women.

            Well, that’s my opinion!

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

            You jumped the shark on this one in many places, but especially with comparing the covert drugging of a relative stranger for the purpose of sexual access to that of a couple who shared two bottles of wine and had consensual, conscious sex. It’s obtuse on a level I find shocking.

            Feel free to have the last word, but I am done here. This exchange is embarrassingly stupid.

        • Primal

          “Finally, God help us if we continue creating laws wherein the whole of society has to pander to the overly-sensitive natures of some people.”

          So I guess men should be calling for an end to rape as a crime PERIOD (NOT). Those over-sensitive women who are drugged and threatened and forced to have sex against their will obviously don’t need pandering too (NOT). We need to call for equality between the sexes here because we are getting a real bum deal where one sex is entitled to be ‘overly sensitive’ whereas the other sex is told to overly tough (NOT).

        • http://www.johntheother.com John Hembling (JtO)

          I’m a bit late to this conversation, however, I see some pretty clear problems in the commentary.

          The account provided by JL’s original post is not of a “rape-in-quotes”. It is unambiguously of a rape through the use of drugs and threat.

          Admittedly, I agree with both Harry and Paul that not every such event would induce prolonged trauma to a man thus victimized. However, it’s clear that in this case such trauma is real.

          We recently updated this site’s moto to include the word compassion. Paul and I did that. We were not, and are not kidding.

          The dismissive tone of towards what appears a quite real and pronounced injury to Mr Landrith is misguided, in my opinion.

          Western culture – that is, blue-pill western culture has included for a very long time, an attitude that men do not suffer, that men do not acknowledge their own pain, and I am sure this deep cultural programming informs many of the statistics we cite in our writing here, such as the suicide gap.

          I do not advocate the creation of a culture of victimhood in the way that mainstream gender ideology has done, but dismissal of these matters is not the answer.

          I hope I’ve been clear, and as necessary, will expand the detail of what I mean until it is understood.

          • http://www.NewDemocracyWorld.org Dopesauce42

            Thank you! the way out of victimization is by empowerment, which comes from open and safe dialogue, among other things. It has been rather disgusting hearing how someone should or should not react to being raped. I am inexperienced in arguing for compassion for people who have been raped, guess i was just raised to know that it is a given that you offer compassion to people who are CLEARLY not happy and everyone else, too.

            There is no ‘line’ to cross. There is only compassion to give. People cling to victimhood because they have no help other way to achieve a sense of dignity. We have a scary world full of inequality. Knowing you live in a world that will let you starve on the street homeless is traumatizing. Inequality causes mental and emotional problems in our society.

            Capitalist ideology doesn’t see any problem with the perpetuation of victimhood. If it were ordinary people in charge of the services that are intended to help victims, and capitalists were not in charge, we would see it be a really effective system of empowerment and recovery.

            When we only look through the view of what can happen within capitalism, we see pretty insufficient options all around. We need to break out of this paradigm and visualize how things SHOULD be. This is the only way to make any real changes.

            Worried I’m a commie? I may be the first person you ever talk to that is as against capitalism as he is against communism/socialism. Both fear real democracy like the plague. Both require an oppressive state. I digress.

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

        I guess maybe some of my own headscratching here comes from not just reading James’ account but the talk we had about it on HuffPo where it was further clarified that not only was he certain he’d been drugged, but the woman used not just her sexual privilege under law (she could scream rape, he could not) but also not only was pregnant, but made a point of pointing it out and using her pregnancy to tell him that if he fought in any way he’d hurt the baby.

        I think if you’re going to tell a 20 year old marine in an involuntarily drugged up fog that his choices are to let her have her fun or injure a pregnant woman and possibly go to jail for it, that 20 year old marine is going to let her have her way but be pretty fucking confused about women from that point on in his life.

        So now I’m right BETWEEN you and Harry, because I think we ALL agree that the victim industry is problematic, but I’m actually astonished anyone is looking at this scenario (you’re 20 years old and a pregnant woman is both daring you to injure her and her child AND threatening to put you in jail and ruin your entire life if you don’t do whatever she says) and thinking “well I wouldn’t be effected by that.”

        I could probably process it better at age 46 than at age 20, but I’m not even sure I get why you think this wouldn’t be at least a smidge upsetting.

        (On the other hand, getting overheated on this shit isn’t doing anyone any good, and a few people on this thread need to calm the fuck down.)

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

          I am slapping my head on this one. I was actually quite tired when I read that the first time. I missed the part about being drugged.

          Now I do not know why we are even having this conversation. The man was drugged and sexually assaulted. This is not chasing butterflies or feeding in to rape hysteria.

          If someone did that to me I would be more than upset. In fact, I would be looking for some payback.

          So with apologies to James I retract my earlier statement that I would not have been bothered by it.

          If other men come forward with similar experiences I will beat a footpath to run their story.

          • Primal

            Some serious payback if someone drugs me after I’ve been good to her, rapes me repeatedly, then threatens to double-bind blame me for her rape, and finally threatens call in her proxy violence boys to punish me at gunpoint for her rape.

          • http://www.NewDemocracyWorld.org Dopesauce42

            Thank you!

  • the Tired Low Social

    correct me if i’m missing the mark here codebuster, but my take on the term “hobby rape” is that the rapist treats the act of rape that they commit on their victim as a hobby. and it seems as if angry harry is saying that we shouldn’t let everything go to hell in a hand-basket every time we come across a victim. i sense that neither angry harry or codebuster are trying to trivialize the experiences of victims, but are merely saying that what should be focused on is removing barriers that prevent rapists from facing justice while also trying to not be overly emotive to every case they meet. from my point of view, it would be similar to how people respond to those affected by natural disasters or something of equal damage. we feel for the victims, but we can’t spend time being heart-bleeders about their troubles as we barely know about them, will most likely never encounter them, and probably won’t ever be in their situation. they have other things in their lives to deal with that may or may not prevent them from expressing a lot of emotion about things like this, or they may have come across worse stuff. no one really ever knows what is happening exactly in the life of someone else and each person prioritizes things differently. going from what i’ve seen so far, they seem to want to focus their energy on the big obstacle of feminism and rape shield laws so it’s easier for victims to start healing, and to make it known that we shouldn’t go after feminists for preventing victims of all levels from receiving top-priority status as they have done, lest we become like them. i’ll try to make this a bit less vague in a few hours, as it’s late, and it’ll give me time to think a bit more about what i put in. it’s a bit difficult for me as i’m not really able to find what i need to fully express things easily

    • Codebuster

      No, it’s the feminist victim that I am referring to as the hobby-rape enthusiast, not the rapist. I coined the category “hobby-rape” to distinguish it from “real-rape.” Hobby-rape constitutes the fun categories that are constantly being invented by feminists, such as date-rape, changed-my-mind (regret) rape, and too-drunk-to-notice (intoxicated non-consent) rape. Hobby-rape is the rape that you can lay claim to when you’ve never actually been real-raped, but you’d still like to be nominated for membership to the “I’ve-been-raped-too” club. In this way, you can indulge in the self-flagellation and group hysteria without ever having to actually undergo the horror of real-rape. What a bonus… imagine being able to identify with authentic victims without ever actually being an authentic victim yourself. Freebie on a platter. Guarranted to have everyone, from idiot manginas to supplicating white-knighs to feminists, fawning over you with a “there, there, you poor dear.”

      Remember the real-rape that occurred in Delhi India recently? Notice how western hobby-rape enthusiasts (feminists) tried to identify with the real-rape victim, how eagerly they wanted to identify with the real-rape victim so that they could identify themselves as sisters-in-arms? In doing this, they harm real-rape victims, they trivialize the horror that occurs to real-rape victims. But at least that gets them attention and gets them noticed.

      You might like to invent an alternative terminology… maybe “rape lite”.

      PS: I don’t know about India, but in some cultures virginity is more highly valued than others. The idea of a western slag losing her cherished virtue seems to be something of a misnomer, which further confounds the topic of real-rape at least as far as the Anglosphere (and maybe the rest of feminist western Europe) is concerned. Of course there is no excuse, ever, for anyone to rape, but the question of the value of what is stolen by the rapist needs to be considered. For some slags, rape is about as meaningful as a stolen cookie from a cookie-jar.

  • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

    I… don’t think there’s any overlap between supporting men when they’re raped by women and what feminists have done with rape as a political hot button.

    Until MRAs start saying “rape is the method by which all women keep all men in a state of fear” I don’t think they need to worry about granting men who are raped some goddamn sympathy somehow being “equal to the feminists”.

    Also, violence by proxy isn’t violence “lite”. It is, in fact, a form of violence that not only should be viewed as equal in severity to direct violence but also viewed as a method of social annihilation. “Society is going to do my violence for me because society doesn’t consider you human.”

    • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

      @Typhonblue

      I think that the problem here is that James appears to be inflicting much more violence on himself than did the woman who had sex with him.

      Furthermore, from his account, it seems quite likely that the woman took James’ persistent erection to be an indication that he was enjoying it.

      I’m not quite sure how he indicated otherwise – given that he also popped into bed with her.

      • Ricardo

        But I am reading and he did not go into bed with her. They each had their own bed. She went into his bed.

        I am also not understanding, “persistent erection.” When I was 20 years old I had a persistent erection about half my days it would seem. When a woman is raped is it proof she is having fun if she lubricates or has an orgasm?

        I am more confused here than anything. I have many times had erections I wished would go away that would not. I do not think that would make it so that it means I am enjoying sex from someone who is threatening to put me in jail. Perhaps my erection would fade but perhaps not. I am older now so I have the opposite sometimes and wish I could get an erection but cannot but when I was a boy it seemed like they would come with anything and would not go away even when I badly wanted them to because it was embarrasing and uncomfortable.

        Is this all talk cross-purpose? Does James’s story not just point to double standards? I do not think he wants to be a victim.

        • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

          @Ricardo

          “. I have many times had erections I wished would go away that would not. ”

          Yes, but how would an average woman know this?

          From a woman’s point of view, a man who has an erect penis while in bed with her is actually desirous of sex with her.

          In other words, I can see how this woman did not view her actions as a rape, or as anything unpleasant.

          Nevertheless, I can still see how such an experience might be ‘traumatic’ for a man.

          But, in this particular case – given that James’ response was to cheat on at least four other men and to blame this one-night affair (which he mostly slept through) for twenty years of suffering – it strikes me that James’ responses are much more like those of a man who has psychological problems arising from other factors rather than like those of a man who does not.

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

            Hmm. Interesting point of view. Yet almost all the literature on those who’ve been sexually assaulted or abused, especially while young, are more likely to become promiscuous and careless. Study of rapists has shown repeatedly that the majority of them were sexually abused some time in childhood or adolescence (20 years old is sort of borderline for that, granted, but it’s still young and impressionable). Female rape victims often become sexually promiscuous in response to what they underwent. It’s the literature that I’ve seen on it anyway. It’s very similar to the pattern of chemical dependency.

            It’s dysfunctional behavior that’s for sure, but I am not so sure about your “99% of men would not be affected” stance. I’m pretty sure that if I were 20 years old, drugged, and found a pregnant girl on top of me pounding me and told me she’s scream rape and that I’d hurt the baby if I struggled that I’d be pretty messed up by it. I guess your mileage may vary.

            As a legal thing, I don’t think it would be possible or even desirable to jail this woman unless it could be proven she drugged him, and absent strong proof we’d have to call that a wash legally, just as someone who gets into a fight in a pub can rarely prove “he started it” (even if it’s true).

            But I do think if we lived in a world where we said “hey blokes, you aren’t all asking for it all the time and yeah a girl really can force you into something against your will and that doesn’t make you less of a man and you should be able to talk about it” we’d be all better off. Is that too touchy-feely for some?

          • http://www.NewDemocracyWorld.org Dopesauce42

            Why would she threaten to say he raped her if he moved if she was not aware of there being something beyond ‘thinking he was horny for me’ going on?

            She knew she was doing something that she should not be doing.

      • Sting Chameleon

        A persistent erection is an involuntary, purely physiological reaction that has NOTHING to do with enjoyment or consent.

      • Primal

        Actually, it’s all the rape apologists (female and male) who seem to be inflicting more violence on him than did his alleged rapist. Can you imagine such responses were the sexes switched here? What gives?

  • Primal

    From Incest: Origins of Taboo by sociologists Turner and Maryanski

    “If we list the psychological outcomes by the descriptive words used in various studies on mother-son incest, we can get a sense for the psychopathologies experienced by sons who have incestuous relations (read RAPED by) with their mother: withdrawn, and quiet, anti-social to the point of needing hospitalization, suicidal, borderline psychotic, fully psychotic, schizophrenic, acute behavioral problems, severe dissociative states, murder of perpetrators, narcissistic personality disorder, and sexual dysfunctions. If we compare this list of psychopathologies to those for daughters and sisters, the problems are MUCH MORE GRAVE (caps mine) for victims of mother-son incest than father-daughter or brother-incest. (Note: the authors ignore sister-brother incest altogether.) A much larger percentage of sons involved in mother-son incest exhibit psychopathologies that can be classified as psychotic, and even problems falling under neuroses appear to be more serious. Of course, the majority of males (RAPED BY) incestuous relations with their mothers do not become psychotic, but the percentage who do is far greater than that for other forms of incest, although some have suggested that daughters (RAPED BY) in homosexual incestuous relations with their mothers also exhibit much more serious psychopathologies than do daughters in father-daughter relations (RAPE) (suggesting that the mother’s violation of bonds of nurturance and trust cause severe emotional problems for both males and females.”

    This research suggest that we should take mother-son and mother-daughter incest (RAPE) far more seriously than we currently do father-daughter incest. (There was little coverage of father-son incest in the book…so the damage done by father-son rape was not compared therein.) Given how seriously mother-son incest damages the sons, it stands to reason the all forms of female-male rape may cause more serious damage than all forms of male-female rape. It’d be nice to see some comparative research on this come in but of course, as we already know research on female-male rape is heresy in the Estrogen Ghetto (psychology) and to the feminists who rape academe these days.

    Also, given how stupid men can be about sex, I’d recommend MUCH more careful consideration before we cavalierly blow off James Landrith’s personal story. The comments on his original posts about his rape are almost universally appalling…and I wish I could say that only the feminists were horrible but there were many many ‘men’ weighing in as asinine apes there as well. That kind of bigoted ignorance tends to destroy Mr. Landrith’s ability to be understood by his brothers and is a terrible testament to male pigheadedness about sex in general.

    Since we have more than enough stupidity about sex from feminists, we don’t need more from our ‘brothers’, from our ‘fathers’ or worse from those who speak for us politically, legally and/or socially. The moment one begins to research the real consequences of female-male sexual aggression, one begins to understand that female-male rape is very very dangerous psychically to males…notwithstanding all the ‘romantic’ rape apologetics from feminists or the ‘she was so hot/you got lucky/you should be so happy/all men love sex/what are you crying about’ ridicule from monkey-like men.

    For those reasons and many more, I’d urge everyone here to listen closely to Mr. Landrith, take him seriously, and dig into the personal damage done by female-male rape before writing his story off as a ridiculous triviality or as something that’s not useful politically. His statements need to be considered from very counter-common sense angles because female-male rape remains totally un-THINK-able even today. The potential for using female-male rape as a powerful tool to destroy feminist nonsense about rape also needs to be carefully considered…because the reality that females rape both males and females for their own sexual pleasure is a dangerous heresy to feminist rape culture bigots. Bottom line, we need to listen to those who know first-hand what female-male rape is…and shoot our mouths off about what WE THINK WE ALREADY KNOW a WHOLE lot less.

    • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

      @Primal

      Therapists only deal with people whose situations have gone bad. They do not deal with people whose situations have not gone bad. As such, their claims about what causes harm to others is often exaggerated or downright wrong.

      If you worked in a hospital for example – and never looked out of the windows – you would have to conclude that being in a car is likely to lead to serious harm.

      “Getting into a car will harm you,” they would say.

      The problem with therapists is that they tend only to deal with those who have turned up at the casualty department. They do not deal with the millions of those who did not.

      And this quote of yours is hysterical nonsense … “we can get a sense for the psychopathologies experienced by sons who have incestuous relations (read RAPED by) with their mother: withdrawn, and quiet, anti-social to the point of needing hospitalization, suicidal, borderline psychotic, fully psychotic, schizophrenic, acute behavioral problems, severe dissociative states, murder of perpetrators, narcissistic personality disorder, and sexual dysfunctions.”

      There is no evolutionary mechanism that would give rise to such terrible problems just from having sex. It would take hell of a lot more than sex to cause such problems.

      Besides which, the above illnesses are mostly genetic/embryological in origin.

      Furthermore, as mentioned above, did these therapists – who made the above conclusions – also look at the rest of the population?

      No. They did not.

      As such, they have no idea how many people in the population had incestuous encounters and suffered no ill effects.

      Who knows? Maybe 99% of those who have had such incestuous relations had good experiences with them. But these 99% would not be turning up to see a therapist, would they?

      Indeed, the very fact that those turning up to see these therapists had schizophrenia, psychotic disorders etc etc suggests to me that something rather more serious was going on with these people – and, perhaps, with their parents; given the genetic component.

      Finally, there is a world of difference between Bowpsearer’s case and James’ case – in my view.

      • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

        Of interest perhaps: Many years ago I actually came across two women who had had incestuous relations with their sons.

        In both cases, the situation was this.

        The sons had always been emotionally ‘distant’ from their mothers and from others. Perhaps they were slightly autistic or something. I can’t remember.

        And these two mothers were desperate to arouse some kind of positive emotional feelings in them. Trying to “wake them up” emotionally. Trying to make them feel positive towards them – as mothers – and towards other people.

        They did not want their sons to be emotionally dead zones.

        And so they initiated sex in the hope that this would spark some kind of loving responses in their sons.

        Well, in both cases, this did not work.

        But can you blame them for trying?

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

          Um, yes?

        • Primal

          I’d probably want to kill them for trying just as I would want to kill any man who raped his son or daughter. See Savage Grace for more on the how ‘emotionally distant’ and psychologically terrified fatherless boys become when their mothers rape them: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379976/ All boys need to psychologically break away from their mothers to become men. For single(?) mothers to rape them as fatherless boys to ‘wake them up’ emotionally just at the critical time they most need to break away, is just the kind of twisted logic these filthy female predators love to use.

          It sad and disgusting that even Patrick Carnes, one the worlds best known sex therapists blames the mother-son incest victim in his paper on erotic rage. He blames the son for his mother’s rape. Even as a professional sex therapist, he simply can’t seem to understand the reality that women, as the ‘no’ Sex, covertly control sex for the most part, that female sexual predators have sexual agency, and that female predators (sexual or otherwise) are often highly sophisticated liars who thanks to the very social/political/legal/cultural double standards we are SUPPOSED TO BE FIGHTING HERE often get away scott free for lying. Given that context, I’m not surprised that the average LAY-man usually blames the boy victim for rape by filthy older females…but I am very disgusted…because men are rarely so disgustingly dense on any other topic.

          Child sexual abuse by total strangers is probably the cruelest crime known to man/woman. Child abuse by Catholic ‘fathers’ and ‘mothers’ is even worse. Child sexual abuse by one’s own parents or other close elder relations is literally beyond belief for most people…let alone for the ‘loved’ child. It is murder of the child’s spirit/soul/sex by one’s own elders.

        • Primal

          Please do some serious digging on female sexual abuse of children: http://www.psychohistory.com/htm/05_history.html BEFORE you offer your personal takes on this loaded topic. No personal offense and kudos for your kick ass work for men but you are blind as a bat on this one PERSONALLY. It’s very important that someone in your position speak truth to common sense nonsense on this one because you stand on the oldest bully pulpit that is about protecting men and boys from predatory women.

          In ‘your’ cases, there’s good reason to guess that the sons were emotionally ‘distant’ because the mothers were way to emotionally ‘close’. This kind of co-dependent pathology/predation is very common for mothers with both sons and daughters but is far more dangerous for the sons. Did these boys have fathers to help pull them into the male world and to push their mothers away from them…or were they like so many boys in Great Britain and the US, ‘fathered’ by brainwashed single mother feminists?

          As to the logic of ‘initiating sexual relations’ with one’s son, that is raping one’s son, just turn that logic on it’s head and imagine a father raping his son or daughter to ‘wake them up’ emotionally. I’m sure that this kind of thing is on the minds of many male child sexual predators too but society seems to take a decidedly dim view of MALE child sex predators.

        • John A

          They could have got them a prostitute, sex therapist, anything else…

          • Primal

            Better to have go them their very own father…that is someone who understands why boys shut down emotionally.

          • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

            @John

            “They could have got them a prostitute, sex therapist, anything else…”

            Yes, they could have done; but I don’t think that you quite understand the predicament that they felt they were in.

            When I heard them speak, I was quite moved by how desperate they had been to spark some sense of feeling into them.

            My conclusion was that they desperately wanted some kind of love from them but were getting nothing at all.

            Must be hard for a mother in that situation.

            It reminded me of the time that I worked as a porter in a hospital as a 15 year old, and I would see people desperately kissing their recently-deceased loved ones, or stroking them – sometimes almost tickling them – in the vain hope that their eyes would make some kind of movement – thus proving that they were not really dead at all.

          • Primal

            @AngryHarry

            Where the hell were their fathers!?

        • TigerMan

          Well in this specific case there is cause for consideration – for example if these women were sincere the motivation for what they did was not sexual and perhaps not exploitative either (intentionally at any rate). I do admire your courage for bringing up such a case though because on such a taboo topic we are almost “programmed” to react in a condemnatory way – in fact not to be seen to do so could even earn opprobrium of ones peers.
          Clearly the mothers wanted a positive outcome and while I think it was an extremely foolhardy thing to try I cannot judge them for what they did because I do not know the extent of their love and desire to help their sons break free from their emotional isolation.
          The laws we make often do not allow for such nuances and perhaps it is not practically feasible to some extent. That said it is no reason why we as individuals be as inflexible and lacking in empathy to be more open to consider other factors in our judgements of individual cases like this perhaps.

      • Primal

        And this quote of yours is hysterical nonsense … “we can get a sense for the psychopathologies experienced by sons who have incestuous relations (read RAPED by) with their mother: withdrawn, and quiet, anti-social to the point of needing hospitalization, suicidal, borderline psychotic, fully psychotic, schizophrenic, acute behavioral problems, severe dissociative states, murder of perpetrators, narcissistic personality disorder, and sexual dysfunctions.”

        Careful here. You are calling a review of the science and two sociologists nonsensical hysteria. Now I’m NOT someone to worship sociologists blindly given how infected they’ve become by PC pigheadedness or feminist nonsense but I will give them the benefit of the doubt against a layman who obviously HASN’T reviewed the science on parent-child incest.

        • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

          @Primal

          The social sciences are not science.

          Neither is the dredging up of thousands of papers written by people who have a HUGE vested interest in promoting a certain point of view.

          Volume doesn’t count for much in real science.

          Furthermore, the notion that a one-night stand as described by James can lead to schizophrenia in a NORMAL person is utterly preposterous.

          But 20 years of trauma in a normal person?

          Yes, of course, but only if he has been indoctrinated to believe this – or in something worse; perhaps by his own therapist.

          • Primal

            @AngryHarry

            Never said sociology WAS a science. Did say these sociologists reviewed the available sciencific papers for their chapter on the consequences of incest. Frankly, the research on sex crimes sucks but we have to do the best we can with what we have.

            Do you know anything about trauma and what causes trauma? Normal people can have wildly different trauma levels depending mostly on their ability to cope with the particular situation. Those people who know how to cope well suffer far less trauma than those who are unprepared or helpless beforehand given the SAME stimuli.

            Who the hell are you or I to judge James Landrith’s personal story before we know a whole lot more about him and about female-male rape in general. We’re killing the messenger here. He too may not be perfect (who really knows now) but he’s the best Marine we’ve got so far.

      • Primal

        Looks like you might also benefit from a serious dose of Andrew Vachess’ REASONABLE outrage: http://www.vachss.com/av_dispatches/disp_9119_a.html

      • Primal

        “There is no evolutionary mechanism that would give rise to such terrible problems just from having sex. It would take hell of a lot more than sex to cause such problems.”

        Are you kidding? Are there no Catholic nuns raping boys or Catholic priests buggering boys in Great Britain? Did you listen to the grown men crying?

        • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

          @Primal

          No, I’m not kidding.

          So I will repeat it ….

          “There is no evolutionary mechanism that would give rise to such terrible problems just from having sex. It would take hell of a lot more than sex to cause such problems.”

          In the case of the abused Catholic boys, they had a lot more than just sex in the equation.

          They had RELIGION, they had adults forcing themselves upon them, they had abuse hysteria all around them, and they had been told by people like you that their lives could well be ruined – and numerous other things.

          IOW, it wasn’t the sex that done it.

          It was all the other stuff that came with it.

          And if you can tell me how, from an evolutionary point of view, human beings can often benefit from being traumatised by sex, I shall be most interested to hear what you say.

          But don’t try sneaking anything else into the equation – like coercion, pain, betrayal of trust etc etc – or you will lose!

          • Primal

            I’m speechless. Have you read ANY first hand stories from Catholic child sex abuse survivors? SEX never comes sans context. By it’s very nature it is a extremely loaded/highly explosive form of power…which is why religions have always been trying to control it. Everything else is ALWAYS sneaking into the equation whether we like it or not.

      • Primal

        “Who knows? Maybe 99% of those who have had such incestuous relations had good experiences with them. But these 99% would not be turning up to see a therapist, would they?”

        Properly structured scientific studies are designed to bust these kinds of biases. The research shows that parent-child incest is a very cruel crime. So do the raft of heartbreaking stories from grown adults incestuously abused by Catholic ‘fathers’ and ‘mothers’.

      • Primal

        You are lost in many places here. The science needn’t necessarily have come from therapists. The belief that mental disorders are most genetic doesn’t hold water either. Also there’s no such thing as ‘just having sex’.

        Sex always happens within contexts. For instance, I know a woman who was covertly ‘incested’ as a adolescent by her father. Her mother resented her daughter for ‘seducing’ her husband…and took our her resentment on her daughter by working to destroy her femininity and forcing her be more ‘manly’…rather than demanding that her husband stop covertly raping her/his daughter. The woman, therefore got a double dose of abuse first from her paternal rapist, and then from her blame-the-victim mother.

      • http://www.NewDemocracyWorld.org Dopesauce42

        Evolutionary mechanisms? there are none? proving a negative much? c’mon, enough of this nonsense. Maybe you’re a robot but i think the rest of us here and on planet Earth are complex emotional creatures, sensitive and holding expectations that we can do little about having. speaking as someone who knows someone who was repeatedly raped by their mother, and this person is a woman, i can say that thinking you get it is a waste of the victim’s time. you don’t get it. don’t act like you do. let them tell you how it is.

        also, genes are not set in stone when you are born. genes are still being activated, or not activated, depending on the environment the person is in. this is why children who are abused have less developed brains in areas dealing with, among other things, emotions. Your lack of understanding this leads you to say things that are not true.

  • michael steane

    Since being raped in itself is extremely unlikely to cause death, the term “survivor” is completely inappropriate. We talk of Auschwitz survivors because incarceration in such a place usually meant being killed. Being raped may involve many things, but dying is rarely one of them.

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

      Like a lot of things in language, moving to the term “survivor” was originally an effort to get away from using the word “victim” because it was thought that “victim” was a way of having people hold onto and nurse their victim status; it was supposed to be empowering in the “I’m not a victim, I got through this, I survived.”

      But “survivor” now has taken on cheap connotations as well, and it does cheapen people who’ve experienced genuinely traumatic events, when “I survived a night of drunken sex I don’t remember very clearly” becomes accepted lingo.

      The interesting question is, though, what word to you use instead? “Victim” really does seem worse. I’ve had a lot of horrible shit happen to me, and I positively detest calling myself or making myself a perpetual victim. Yet “survivor” does seem grandiose. I just don’t know what better terminology to use.

  • Primal

    As I read through these comments, it’s becoming clear to me that one of the most important things men need to do for men is to school fathers on how to secure their sons from the very female predators that are so dangerous to the men as husbands. As Dr. T has written many adult men simply cannot or will not fight back against female predators close to them. Sons, who are the next even more tender, juicy, and helpless targets of choice for their father’s primary female predator, simply have no chance whatsoever IF their fathers and other interested elder men don’t get a clue on this one.

  • charlotte

    “For me, that was a sudden and ridiculous promiscuity that did not exist before the rape. I began to act out sexually by sleeping with any woman who offered. I turned down no one, to include several much older, married women. I did not seek out sex, I simply said yes every time.”

    If you’ve ever wondered where “crazy sluts” come from, this is also true for women. I’m not saying that ALL promiscuous people (male or female) are rape victims, but I would not be surprised if it were a very high percentage.

    It certainly puts a new perspective on the whole “douche-bag bro” thing, doesn’t it?

    p.s. Rasputin (of infamy) was bound and raped by a rich woman and her servants when he was only 15. It obviously scarred him for life–he always dreamed of wolves tearing his flesh.

  • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

    Relevant to this type of case, if interested, …

    http://www.angryharry.com/esIsEverybodyConscious.htm

    • Primal

      There’s a big difference between feelings and facts. IF Mr. Landrith’s facts were proven in a court of law, his rapist belongs in prison beside every other male rapist. How he chooses to manage (or not) his post traumatic stress (post-rape) is not particularly relevant to the rape itself.

      • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

        @Primal

        ” IF Mr. Landrith’s facts were proven in a court of law, his rapist belongs in prison ”

        Absolutely.

        But did I suggest otherwise?

        Er, No.

        • Primal

          I didn’t accuse you of suggesting otherwise. Just wanted to create firm distinctions between feeling and facts is all. She goes down for the rape not for his hurt feelings.

  • keyster

    If there is such a thing technically as a Vagina raping a Penis, I have been a victim. 4 weeks later I was paying for an abortion. THAT’S when I really felt victimized.

    Penetrating a bodily orifice without consent is a genuine intrusion into ones psyche and soul. Forced vaginal envelopment of the erect penis, (or even a hand job) is no comparison. It’s concepts like this that make MRA’s look insane…playing the gender egalitarian card.

    Playing their own game against them has it’s limits.

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

      It may look insane to conservatives, but then, conservatives have already given us 40, 50 years of criticizing feminism–how’s that working out so far?

      Is it perhaps time to start trying to persuade some people -in addition to- conservatives that there’s a problem here?

      Besides, if you -are- an egalitarian (yo, my hand’s up here), why would you reject egalitarian arguments? Why on earth is my putting my penis into your vagina against your will more awful than you putting your vagina onto my penis against my will, when statistics actually show clearly that women do this a great deal more than is commonly believed? It’s in plain black and white on the surveys, and furthermore, I know multiple men it’s happened to–all I had to do was start asking.

      Right now, men are being put in jail for having sex with women who happen to be drunk under the theory that if they’re drunk the women can’t consent. If that is really and truly rape, then the argument should be that women be held to exactly the same standard and is guilty of rape if she has sex with a drunk man. Ask that question and most of the arguments about consent collapse into obvious incoherency.

      That said, you know what? A woman who lies to a man and has a baby on purpose and deceitfully toward the father (“yes I’m on birth control” when she’s not), in my view, is no better than a rapist. She’s also pretty much a child abuser, even if she lucks out and it turns out he wants to be a dad and is a great one.

      • SkepticWithRaisedEyebrow

        “If that is really and truly rape, then the argument should be that women be held to exactly the same standard and is guilty of rape if she has sex with a drunk man. ”

        Yes.

        “That said, you know what? A woman who lies to a man and has a baby on purpose and deceitfully toward the father (“yes I’m on birth control” when she’s not), in my view, is no better than a rapist.”

        Yes, but it deserves its own word.

        “She’s also pretty much a child abuser”

        …and here you lost me. Are all single parents due to divorce child abusers too? It’s not like they are necessarily doing the best things for their children’s emotional health or fiscal security either.

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

          All children who lack both parents are harmed. It is like severing a limb. Severing a child’s limb may be the best choice if the limb is gangrenous, cancerous, severely deformed, or there’s an accident or something, but it’s still the loss of a limb.

          Cutting of a child’s arm because you have no better option is one thing, and the child may go on to a happy healthy productive life without that arm with good parenting and therapy. Intentionally chopping a child’s arm off for entirely selfish reasons is child abuse.

          Intentionally having a child without a father you know wants to have that child and is capable of and willing to be with that child is about the equivalent of having a child and chopping its arm off because you think you’d like a kid with one arm better. People who do such things purposefully and for selfish reasons (i.e. not genuinely accidentally, or because circumstances were such that they had no better choices) should be deeply ashamed of themselves.

          • SkepticWithRaisedEyebrow

            I think your metaphor is a good one, and have also thought in such terms myself.

            However, I think holding to that stance would necessarily mean rolling divorce law back to fault-only divorce, and a return to people faking and framing their spouses for infidelities, even murdering them, just to get out- among many other highly objectionable down stream effects.

            On the legal level, there are plenty of pros/cons to no-fault divorce, but it seems like most people I’ve met are highly in favor of it.

            Given that, I’m just not sure it makes sense, societally speaking, to stigmatize single parents in the way you describe.

          • http://www.NewDemocracyWorld.org Dopesauce42

            Yes, and this is why we should ban anonymous sperm/egg donation. No one has the right to sever the connection of child to parent except the child. Children are not happy about being born in this way. It impinges on their human rights, according to the UN. Capitalism doesn’t give a shit, and says that kids just need to ‘deal with it.’

            But being against anonymous donations makes you an enemy of LGBT community, or at least it’s self appointed leaders. They say you are a bigot for opposing same-sex marriage because you understand that marriage is the social approval for a couple to create a family ‘of their own’ and to do this same-sex couples need to use donated egg/sperm. When this is done through anonymous donation, as it usually is, the child’s rights are secondary to the desires of the adults. it is disgusting. Adoption is not creating a child ‘of their own.’ So, adoption is fine, no prob.
            check this article out:

            http://www.nbcnews.com/id/38679526/#.URLcf47nteg

      • Stu

        In fact Dean, women coerce men into a hell of a lot more then sex. They coerce them into having children they are not ready for, apart from just getting pregnant via deception I mean. They will pester and pester their husbands, but no feminist will ever want to see this made against the law.

        In fact, women coerce men into whole relationships, not just a roll in the hay. How many women have you known, or guys have you known that were seeing someone casually and the woman pestered them for more serious relationship and used every emotional heart string and shaming tactic they could muster to get them to commit to something they had said no to initially.

        In fact, the government acts as a bully boy and man trap to help women get men into relationships of status that they did not want, by making laws deeming relationships to be marriage if they meet certain expectations, they apply these retroactively as well.

        Also, they coerce men, but not women, or rather force, to continue having sex with their wives and providing physical intimacy, or be deemed to have committed domestic violence by withholding either. At the same time, they say a man pestering for sex is committing rape or sexual assault. But they allow the woman use the force of law, the cops, the courts, and all the punishments they can put on the man, to force him to continue to provide sexual and other physical services to the woman, under threat of losing his home, children, assets, income, and being branded a wife beater for refusing sex.

        Yes they really believe that coercion is a crime.

    • Primal

      Watch any film involving physical female-male sexual aggression. You will see the woman forcibly envelop the penis as shown so well in Savage Grace. By refusing to equate forced envelopation with forced penetration we falsely deny women sexual agency and we infantilize them as the sex which cannot possible commit rape. It’s also extremely important to remember that women wield superior psychological force in most cases…which allows them to rape in the most ‘loving’ or ‘charming’ of ways.

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

      Men having a say in whether their child is aborted looks insane to a lot of people. Men saying no to selective service is crazy. So is shared parenting and PAS and false allegations.

      Funny thing, though, Key. The idea of drugging a man and taking liberties with his body being a crime does not seem crazy to me.

      What does it seem like to you? After all, what things seem like, that’s what counts, right?

      • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

        @Paul

        I know that I am coming across as heartless over this issue, but I am totally conscious of the fact that hysteria – for want of a better word – causes far more harm than good; particularly for those who have been abused.

        It damages everyone else too.

        I do feel sorry for James and, as I have re-stated, over and over again, the woman deserves to be prosecuted if her behaviour was as described.

        But, on top of everything else that I have already said, I am also very wary indeed of false ‘recovered memories’ given the numerous horrendous injustices that people have had to face on account of them.

        Indeed, I receive a magazine from a well-respected recovered memory organisation over here, and I often read of the claims that are made by people having such memories – memories very often of traumatic events which turn out to be comletely untrue or highly distorted.

        And while I do have sympathy for James’ plight, my alarm bells are ringing.

        He’s an intelligent man for sure judging by his writing, but how can he be so confident about one evening, 20 years ago? – especially when he was mostly unconscious?

        Furthermore, he once wrote this in response to a question about his state of debilitation ….

        ========================
        James Landrith Says:
        July 8th, 2008 at 9:52 pm

        BobF:

        It did happen that way. While up and walking, I was relatively okay to speak and reason – with diminished capacity. Once in the prone position and asleep, my body began its work to repair my body as it does every night. The combination of fatigue from dancing at the club, working all day and alcohol consumption made it harder to wake me up. Further, I’ve always been a sound sleeper, even today.”

        ==============

        No mention of being ‘drugged’.

        An oversight perhaps.

        Whatever the case, I wish him well. And I would also say to him that he should try to let it go and to focus on other matters.

        And this is why I often say to MRAs who have been hurt badly in some way (and there are quite a few of these) that they should ensure that they spread their activism much further than the topic of their own concern.

        Oherwise, it eats them up by occupying far too much of their minds.

        Furthermore, doing this is very cathartic because the mind can then engage in other matters.

        And the trick to achieving this spread is to do it gradually. So, on the one hand, you are facing your demons but, on the other hand, you are intelligently pushing them away.

        I’ve seen loads of activists doing this successfully judging by what they write now compared to what they used to write.

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

          “I know that I am coming across as heartless over this issue, but I am totally conscious of the fact that hysteria – for want of a better word – causes far more harm than good; particularly for those who have been abused.”

          The only thing hysterical here (and I can think of several other adjectives) is your conduct in an environment promoting unity among men. And it is going to stop, now.

          A good MRA would have just made a thoughtful post (and many of us did) about our concerns over rape hysteria and victim politics. That is not what you did and I won’t pretend, even for you, that it is. What you did was mock and ridicule someone on a personal level who was INVITED here to tell his story about how he was drugged, raped and threatened with proxy violence by a woman. You attempted to pathologize his activism and belittle him to make your point.

          That is not what AVFM is about, and with out without your presence, it never will be.

          I won’t listen to another hollow, hypocritical word from you about what causes more harm than good till you start acting with some of the respect you have always been treated with on this website.

          If you can’t handle that, feel free to see yourself out.

          • Primal

            Respect for the leadership here. He’s welcome to piss me off and to be divisive but he’s not welcome to shit on other alleged male rape survivors’ stories (or women’s) unless he has a very good case or is a serious rape ‘combat veteran’ himself.

        • gwallan

          “And this is why I often say to MRAs who have been hurt badly in some way (and there are quite a few of these) that they should ensure that they spread their activism much further than the topic of their own concern.”

          AH you are clearly unaware of the broader advocacy work James actually does.

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

        Yo Keyster, you answering, or is the ghoulie-ghost of AVFM moderating you again?

    • http://www.angryharry.com Angry Harry

      You been raped too, eh Keyster?

      Seems like everyone round here’s been raped.

      Except, perhaps, Stu.

      • Primal

        Sweet!? That your inner feminist talking. I thought we’d be free from this kind of nonsense here.

        • Primal

          @AngryHarry

          This is not the first time I’ve fought this particular battle with an MRA leader. The first time years ago, I remember feeling utterly enraged disbelief but now I’m just tired, bored, and sad. This is an utterly tedious battle that I can’t believe I have to have with other men and particularly with male MRA leaders but there we is so I’ll do the work.

          Here’s the point by point:

          1) Humanity comes before biology. Morality is the father of politics. Principle comes before progress. Conceptual correctness comes before campaigning….unless, of course, we are all bigoted feminists or pigheaded PC PoMo’s too.

          2) Child sexual abuse is a well-known E-V-I-L which causes very serious lifelong damage in many cases. There’s good reason to anticipate that future research will show that female-male child sexual abuse causes the most grave damage as compared to the other forms of child sexual abuse based on the known effects of mother-son incest. For the same reason, there’s a basis to assume that woman-man rape may also cause the gravest forms of damage to the survivor…as compared to the other forms of adult-adult rape.

          3) Based on the serious possibility that female-male rape causes far more serious damage than do the other forms of rape, James Landrith’s long term lingering rape trauma could be reasonable…particularly given the hostile responses he obviously had good reason to believe would come his way were he to tell his story in the first place.

          4) We share a loathing for false memories, for false feminist rape hysteria, for false victimhood BUT I really loath false rape apologetics too. That’s what I was responding to here. James Landrith’s rape story may be totally false but so far he rings true for me. He deserves the benefit of the doubt UNLESS he begins to show himself as a fraud or as an endlessly whining victim. He also deserves great credit for standing strong against a howling mob of female-male rape cheerleaders. I could care less what he does or doesn’t do for the ‘movement’ right now. That’s not the point. The point is to grapple with the strange taboos of woman-man rape until we are able to speak intelligently about this ‘heretical’ crime. After we know what we are talking about, beyond shoot from the hip personal opinions, we can create campaigns to take this ‘happy’ heresy to the ‘girls’ but before then we’d be wise to start listening very very closely to men like Mr. Landrith…particularly given the paucity of real research in this area.

          5) I sense you have some loaded personal opinions which have little to do the facts on the ground and more about your firmly help personal biases. I find the way you have shared those personal biases to be very demeaning to the men who have suffered from female-male sexual aggression…particularly as a powerful MRA leader. I’d ask that you talk a whole lot less and get to reading, researching or watching films a hell of a lot more before you pop into this particularly loaded topic next time.

          6) Please do not play the feminist gang bang game to ‘argue’ points. I’ll listen to your logic and you will follow the available science as best you can or we won’t have a foundation on which to talk. IF everyone here WAS to have been raped you’d be wise to shut the fuck up and listen closely to your brothers AS A MRA LEADER, UNLESS you yourself have a rape story to tell that is far more interesting than say Mr. Landriths. You also owe Mr. Landrith some direct questions if you doubt his story or believe he is whining forever about his rape.

          7) I believe you’d benefit form some serious research into why people become traumatized (or not), as well as the process of trauma transformation.

          8) I also believe you’d benefit from better understanding female sexuality, female sexual aggression, and the serious double standards that surround female sexual aggression. For instance, when I began to research female sexual aggression a decade or so ago, the only good paper I could find ANYWHERE was a five page tongue in cheek essay entitled How to Rape a Man proudly posted on the female soft-porn site ScandalousWomen.com. Of course that scary essay was since pulled but not before I understood that women rape men very differently and for different reasons than men rape women. Even women who research female-female child sexual aggression suffer extremely serious backlashes for daring to suggest that women can be very dangerous sexual predators in their own ‘wrong’. Most professional men simply don’t even dare to ask the question in the first place. Finally, given that the most dangerous male-female serial rapists most often have backgrounds of rape by filthy older women as a teens or as kids, there’s good reason to believe that female-male child-rape can engender serious long term sexual rage/pathology. So there’s good reason to listen to Mr. Landrith before we write him off as less than credible as a rape survivor.

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

        Well, something certainly seems to have been lodged your your ass.

        Were you raped, Harry, or just self pleasuring?

      • John A

        Stu was raped but he didn’t give a shit…

        Using feminist definitions of rape pretty well everyone has been raped, or molested… but these things effect different people in different ways.

        Recently my mother recounted a man that stayed with her family in the 1940, he was a gibbering mess, constantly shaking and unable to interact. She was told that he was ‘shell shocked’ in the great war. Did every soldier have that reaction? No, some didn’t care, most coped as best they could and a few could not handle it at all. Some people are more fragile or sensitive than others, physically or emotionally.

        As for the victim industry the more victims, the more meaningless it becomes.

        I also saw James’ piece as a request for understanding and recognition of men in his position, not a call to arms.

        • Stu

          Actually if you use the feminist definition of rape, I’ve been raped so many times I couldn’t even estimate. My second wife use to often wake me up with blow jobs…..rape. Nearly all my ex partners and current partner at times just help themselves spontaneously…….rape.

          The amount of times I’ve had sex when I truly did not feel like it, would be staggering. This includes with women I’m not in a relationship with. Although they are friends, and occasional sex partners.

          In regards to things like partners or fuck buddies just being spontaneous, going for it without a written invitation or consent form, my attitude is….if you have a partner that requires that……..dump them……period. You are not safe with a partner like that, and you need to get out. The same with having a partner that thinks it’s abuse if you pester a bit for sex, if that is how they feel…..dump them…..throw them in the bin and find someone that isn’t suffering from this sort of delusional victim hood.

          Sex is no different then anything else in a relationship. Sometimes your partner nags you for sex, sometimes she might nag you to mow the lawn when you don’t feel like it. Both are annoying when it’s happening, but they are just little annoyances…..not crimes. Except for weak pathetic and incredibly selfish people that are so traumatized by small annoyances. These people that think they should be able to be in a relationship and never have to consider what the other person wants unless it’s exactly the same as they want, right now, only see their partner as their utility. The abuse industry would dearly love if everybody thought like this and therefore every relationship was completely dysfunctional because there would be piles of misery for them to feed off for their own benefit.

          I know the situation with James had nothing in common with what I’m talking about, just my ramblings about the abuse industry in general.

          In general, I think people are getting that way that they are talking themselves into feeling traumatized by things because other people have told them they should be….it’s in the air…..gaseous victimhood….mixed with misandry. Do you think that’s air you’re breathing?

        • Primal

          “Did every soldier have that reaction? No, some didn’t care, most coped as best they could and a few could not handle it at all.”

          ALL soldiers break down in sustained unrelenting combat. There are limits beyond which the human animal cannot cope with the stresses of combat. In the final analysis, humans are not machines.

      • TigerMan

        Well because of feminist activism to water down definitions of “rape” whilst at same time campaigning for harsher punishments I could say “rape is rape” but morally or ethically speaking that now without a whole lotta context is becoming a pretty meaningless thing to say!

    • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

      “Forced vaginal envelopment of the erect penis, (or even a hand job) is no comparison.”

      Why?

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

        Because tradcon Republicans and Jesus say so.

    • SkepticWithRaisedEyebrow

      I can’t really agree.

      There will always be quirks of local culture and upbringing that will make a crime more horrific and traumatic to some than others.

      Some women will be traumatized more by the fact of penetration, others the theft of their agency, others the process of rebuilding self-esteem from scratch.

      God forbid you were ever faced with such a trauma as rape, it sounds like envelopment might not be the sticking point for you. But it can be for others who have built their confidence, self-esteem, and gendered adulthood on different things than you.

      Rape in men has only begun to be studied. Maybe we will find that the contrast between penetration and envelopment means that a sense of helplessness will be processed differently and contribute to trauma differently in raped men and women. We don’t know. Does it matter? A sense of helplessness in initiation isn’t the only way rape can be powerfully destructive.

      I think a lot of the MRA couching of rape concepts paints them in the worst light possible, but I really don’t think this one is it. A terrible wrong has been done any way you cut the cake.

      • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

        “I think a lot of the MRA couching of rape concepts paints them in the worst light possible,”

        At the very least MRAs don’t embrace an ideology that leads to marginalizing a significant portion of rape victims while excusing a significant portion of rapists based not on discussions of what constitutes consent and due diligence (legally and socially) but simply on the genital configuration of the rape act.

        • SkepticWithRaisedEyebrow

          “but simply on the genital configuration of the rape act.”

          Most feminists I know don’t. They base it on the response studies they have, and acknowledge that rape of men by men and women is vastly underreported.

          Edit to add: in fact, it is men who I hear deride the idea of a woman raping a man more than anyone else.

          Sorry your experience hasn’t been the same.

          • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

            “Sorry your experience hasn’t been the same.”

            What do the phrases “patriarchy”, “rape culture” and “male privilege” do but marginalize male victims by implying they live in a society that somehow benefits them (all while said society ignores and dismisses their victimization in reality)? Worse still the idea that men benefit from a “rape culture” that condones and normalizes men raping women (when a cursory glance over social norms will reveal that male-on-female rape is generally despised, alleged male rapists are often subject to physical aggression and even criminals will kill men convicted of rape… but female-on-male rape _is_ normalized and condoned by society.)

            The entire ideology of feminism is disturbingly anti-male. (And also anti-female, certainly anti-female when it comes to women like me who have been raped by other women.)

          • gwallan

            This is something I’ve been watching for more than a decade. There is as much negativity from both sexes. The form it takes is a bit different.

          • http://www.genderratic.com typhonblue

            @ gwallan

            I’m inclined to give men a pass on the negativity.

            If you think about it a good portion of the men who are saying things like “you got lucky” were likely victims themselves. Since they can’t hope for any kind of help with dealing with their victimization, saying “I got lucky” is a way of distancing themselves from the pain and closing it off from every day reality.

            And the ones who weren’t victimized live in a society where their consent is effectively meaningless; they are sexually available to women whenever women want, regardless of their own wishes. Subconsciously they are aware of this reality and when you’re in a society where a woman can sexually exploit you whenever she wants with legal and social impunity, perhaps the only way to defend yourself psychologically is to pretend you don’t care about consent in the first place. It’s not like men’s consent is something that society’s going to respect any time soon.

            Women who believe this shit… well, I don’t make any excuses for them.

    • gwallan

      The vagina is designed to cope with the rigours of childbirth. What on earth makes you think a penis cannot be hurt by a vagina?

      • Primal

        With all due respect, rape rarely hurts the vagina or the penis physically. It’s the robbery of precious sex-related ‘treasures’ that tends to cause the losses here. Unhappily men are rarely seen as ‘owning’ sex related treasures in the first place…so the rape of men is seen as impossible or irrelevant…but that’s a dangerous falsehood that needs to challenged.

        • gwallan

          With all due respect I was responding to an implication that it couldn’t happen at all.

          • Primal

            Gotcha.

  • Primal

    Romance is REALLY not supposed to be rape as shown here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOqkxN88qHA But of course this very actress called her repeated ‘rapes’ “true love between equal partners”. Does a boy’s ‘overly sensitive’ soul have any worth whatsoever in today’s Cunt culture. Guess not based on the comments below the vid.

  • Primal

    Rape a boy, marry him and skate: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57564974-504083/leah-gayle-shipman-teacher-accused-of-sex-with-student-wont-face-trial-after-she-married-alleged-victim/ Can’t make this shit up. Hope male child sex predators can do the same thing (NOT).

  • SkepticWithRaisedEyebrow

    “male privilege”
    My mother is rich. I have a right to enjoy the advantages that I was born into, the ownership of which is beyond my control. I have the responsibility as an ethical person not to leverage the advantages of monetary privilege in unjust ways.

    When possible, I believe it is my duty to be sensitive to other’s less privileged position and the doubts that comes with: I don’t wave my fancy degrees in people’s faces, and I strive not to intimidate others with words- on purpose or accident- as their education often precludes a fair fight. I won’t claim to succeed even most of the time. When I see unspoken nuance cross a less articulate person’s face, I don’t ignore it. That is not being good. That is being decent.

    Privilege =/= evil, or anything negative whatsoever. Identifying male privilege is a call to responsibility and ownership.

    “patriarchy” and “ideology of feminism”
    It is an ideology, not a religion. There is no sacred text that I am bound to, no opinion I can hold that can get me excommunicated. Feminism has always changed in response to geography, culture, and time. There have already been three waves of it with vastly different ethos. There will be more.

    In regards to patriarchy, I believe it to be a word that is thankfully moving toward ‘defunct.’ I think what it expressed wonderfully and uniquely was the accrual of bias in cultural systems and institutions in such a way that it is beyond any one individual’s ability to control. I believe most grown men (not the young’uns) acknowledge, more or less, consciously or subconsciously, the accrual of these biases and respond justly to their privilege when given the vocabulary and means to do so. Not all do.

    “rape culture”
    I’ve never heard anyone say anyone of any gender benefits from it. Because feminism is ‘for women, by women’ project, I get that the articulations of this concept can be inherently alienating to men, and destructively so. It more than bothers me. The phrase is inflammatory and marketing driven, and of course that is worthy of criticism.

    On the other hand, it was my first introduction to the idea that our dating culture is diseased, not only putting women in a madonna/whore catch-22 (etc), but men in a chivalry/stalker (etc) catch-22. It opened up the door for me to understand just how deeply warping some of the dating pressures on men are. I think that ‘rape culture’ articulates many of the issues that drive people to MRA, just in alienating language. I think it would be great if MRA could find a word of their own choosing that can build on the constructive work that ‘rape culture’ has done in raising awareness of these issues.

    “marginalize male victims by implying they live in a society that somehow benefits them (all while said society ignores and dismisses their victimization in reality)?”
    I think the deeper issue here is absolutism, and the human desire for simplicity. All privileges have their limits, caveats, and trump cards that can counter them.

    When I am strongest, with all my privileges working for me, I’m not feeling my vulnerabilities. I imagine it is the same thing with men. You brought up the “you/I got lucky” phenomena. I think this fits into it. I care too much about women and society getting these issues straight to generally give a pass to anyone that dismisses the possibility of female violence or male victimhood. I will rethink this given your comment about the victimhood of the source of such comments.

    Lastly, and most importantly: I am sorry to hear that you’ve been hurt, and you have my deepest sympathies. I would’ve started with this, but I didn’t want an apology to be followed by what could be read as an attack.

    If this discussion is continuing, should it be in the forum area?

    • SkepticWithRaisedEyebrow

      That was supposed to be a reply to typhonblue’s question to me.

    • JFinn

      LOL

      None of your apologist re-defining of these feminist concepts have anything to do with reality. Virtually no feminist would agree with your euphemistic explanations.

      When I first explored the feminist paranoid cult in-depth, it was after a woman told me that feminism is also about men’s issues. I then was introduced with discourse that had waaaaaaay more than 99% of it be about hostility towards men. You’re like that woman.

      I conducted an experiment a couple year ago. I took the text of another feminist apologist(“that’s not feminism,”) and re-posted it on a feminist forum. It was her detailing how feminism is good for men. Every single post lambasted the shit out of it, with their WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ mockery.