This woman thinks all men support rape

[Revanance (Ancient)]

LOL So whether you are anti-abortion or pro-abortion (I am anti-abortion), you are still a rape-supporter? Heh, this woman's just mad in my view. What made me laugh was the fact that at the bottom of the page it said "Now, name a male over the age of 18 who does not fit this list? Anybody?" Some things are cultural, dammit!

[Luciratus]

Given that some of her items listed were legit, it was pretty disappointing to see her go well off into crazyville.

The only stripclub I've been to I was dragged to by a girl... so, does that means I'm a rape supporter, or that both of us are, or that just she is?

Good luck trying to find a man who doesn't watch porn. Seriously.

I suppose I should raise my hand, then? Seriously, do all men watch porn?

In truth, I concur in a number of regards with the individual. Nonetheless, it is fairly obvious that she paints all individuals who disagree with her own ideology in the slightest (regardless of how legitimate the reason) as a supporters of rape. Thus, it becomes relatively difficult to access the accuracy and credibility of her claims.

[Luciratus]

LOL So whether you are anti-abortion or pro-abortion (I am anti-abortion), you are still a rape-supporter? Heh, this woman's just mad in my view. What made me laugh was the fact that at the bottom of the page it said "Now, name a male over the age of 18 who does not fit this list? Anybody?" Some things are cultural, dammit!

I do not believe that gender is cultural. However, there is a significant number of women who may be included in her list of "rape supporters". Although, I am inclined to believe that she merely falls into the category of radical feminists (those who lost track of the original goals of the movement as espoused by such wonderful people as Steinem and Friedan).

[Tahar Joblis]

"Ducks have feathers" is exactly as much of a complete concept as "most men do things that support rape culture."

Unfortunately, the former is unquestionably true, while the latter is more ambiguous.

Hm, let's see... Roman Polanski's name is shit and he can't leave Switzerland without landing in the slammer - decades after the incident, even with the now-adult victim not particularly interested in pressing charges.

...so, his life has been ruined by being a multi-millionaire with a highly successful career who simply can't go on vacation?

His life? No. His reputation? Yup... and he ended up having to flee the US, restrict his travel, and pay out civil damages anyway.

You have one hell of a low standard for ruination.

Kobe Bryant? It's nice of you to assume guilt, but unfortunately, after the DA spent about $200,000 preparing to bring Kobe to trial, the alleged victim dropped the case like a hot potato.

Wow. It was bad enough when you couldn't read MY posts, but now you've apparently forgotten how to read your OWN.

The simple accusation of rape can ruin a man's life

Ah, yes. I see you weren't bringing him up as an example of a rapist gone free, which is what you spent so much time talking with, but actually responding to me! How delightful. I must admit the accusation has not ruined his life.

It's cute when your argument is so bad that you have to resort to flaming. It's also cute that you think I won't notice that "their lives are RUINED" and "their lives are IMPACTED" are not the same thing. No shit, being accused of a crime impacts you? Wow! Clearly we take rape incredibly seriously if accused rapists sometimes are impacted in some way!

Right, evidently you didn't hit the search button to review, so I'll just gracefully point you here, remind you that not everybody is a celebrity with the cash to fly to other countries to avoid extradition and a dedicated team of PR specialists and lawyers to revamp your image, and note that Don was the assistant track and cross country coach at my high school while I was running there, and that his little brother and my older brother became acquainted in elementary school.

False rape accusation do happen; and they do ruin lives. And if that's not enough for you, well, I'll point you to the Innocence Project, and remind you that actual false convictions happen. And that DNA "dragnet"-type matching trawls have almost certainly put a number of innocents in jail for rape. Failure to convict actual rapists is not the only type of error present in the system.

I don't specifically remember debating the issue with you, but I do remember that absolutely every reliable source supports the statement that MOST allegations of rape are true.

No; every reliable source supports the statement that most allegations of rape that actually make it to police are made with a sufficiency of evidence to pursue the complaint.

This is not quite the same thing; and as a simple matter of fact based on the indeterminacies of the legal system, there is literally nobody in a position to successfully prove anything about the majority of accusations of rape. I would be totally unsurprised to find that a majority of rape allegations are true; I would also be unsurprised to find that it was a slim majority, or only a large minority were true due to the three-way split of cases that were false on the basis of misidentification of attacker. The evidence is flat.

If it weren't flat, we would have more actual convictions.

If you seriously want to claim that the majority of rape claims are lies while simultaneously claiming that rape is NOT condoned, then I think we're done here, because I don't even know how one would get past that level of massive cognitive dissonance.

I don't think you quite understand what's being said here. You're claiming rape is actually condoned, that is to say, tacitly endorsed, by a majority of the population; I say this fraction is a minority, and that the failure of rape accusations to translate into a similar number of rape convictions has very little to do with society condoning rapists; but rather the distinct problem of treating the victim as "damaged goods." Rape victims may in some cases decline to come forward in order to protect their attackers, but I would think that more important in their consideration is personal shame.

Which, as I have repeatedly said, is a stupidly phrased and sexist exaggeration of reality. Most people, male and female, do things that promote rape culture. It is utterly inane to try pretend that truth away because one random woman on the internet decided only to take men to task for it.

Do you know what "exaggeration" means? It means not true.

...erm, she says "almost" or "nearly" in every single one of those quotes.

Almost. Nearly. Yes, she does. She allows for this theoretical existence of some one-in-a-million freak that she doesn't believe any of her readers will have met, that she believes she has never met.

Or, in other words, the sum total of adult males that she expects to be up to several social connections away from. A fraction empirically undifferentiable from unity within her expectations. For me to describe that as "all" is to simply undertake the depressing task of rounding off her .9999-ish estimated prior. You'll note that I've alternated between describing her "essential point" as being that "all men support rape" and saying that she said almost all men support rape, but the former is simply a description of her take-home message for readers, while the latter is a description of her attempt to sound slightly rational, much as the take-away point of a white supremacist's speech might be "black people are bad," while the actual statement is something more along the lines of "black people are more likely to engage in criminal behavior and less likely to engage in socially constructive behavior, while expert phrenologists tell us their skulls are malformed, nyah nyah Henry Ford blah blah blah..."

Rape culture exists.

Rape-supporting behavior is not something that all, or even "nearly all," of any gender participate in. Nor is it an indeliable part of our culture; even a fairly significant percentage of frat boys can be educated to the point of realizing that it's wrong to roofie a girl for your evening's entertainment.

[Wikipedia and Universe]

Ok, I'm just gonna go bit-for-bit to see how I stack up.

He has ever sexually engaged with any woman while she was underage, drunk, high, physically restrained, unconscious, or subjected to psychological, physical, economic, or emotional coercion

I'm currently a virgin, so this is essentially N/A. I'd never try to sexually engage a woman if it was not her conscious will, however.

He defends the current legal definition of rape and/or opposes making consent a defense.

The current definition of rape being "to force someone into sexual activity, either through physical force or unwilling coercion"? Sure. I don't really get the last part about making consent a defense; meh.

He has accused a rape victim of having “buyer’s remorse” or wanting to get money from the man.

Never. Unless there was overwhelming, reasonable proof that the individual was not in fact raped and this was their intention, I would not make such ridiculous claims.

He has blamed a woman for “putting herself in a situation” where she “could be” attacked.

Hell no.

He has procured a prostitute.

Nope.

He characterizes prostitution as a “legitimate” “job” “choice” or defends men who purchase prostitutes.

It's not black and white like that. If the prostitute is under control of a pimp or brothel, then I see that as unethical. However if he or she has a license in a regulated, decriminalized environment without coercion then sure it could be seen as legit.

He has ever revealed he conceives of sex as fundamentally transactional.

Nein. I see sex as, at its core, fundamentally rooted in romance. "Love as ye will."

He has gone to a strip club.

No. Not my cup of tea really, but generally it is not rape-based. Increased regulation and safety could prevent serious harassment.

He is anti-abortion.

No.

He is pro-”choice” because he believes abortion access will make women more sexually available.

No. While I find this one amusing, it is a ridiculous motivation.

He frames discussions of pornography in terms of “freedom of speech.”

Yes. I guess I'm a rape supporter because apparently supporting sexual expression = supporting rape. Oh wow.

He watches pornography in which women are depicted.

Ja. This inherently makes me a rape supporter, eh?

He watches any pornography in which sexual acts are depicted as a struggle for power or domination, regardless of whether women are present.

Not my cup of tea.

He characterizes the self-sexualizing behavior of some women, such as wearing make-up or high heels, as evidence of women’s desire to “get” a man.

That is not inherently connected. If a woman wills to seek a lover, then that is her will. Just as if she doesn't. Again, love as ye will.

He tells or laughs at jokes involving women being attacked, sexually “hoodwinked,” or sexually harassed.

No.

He expresses enjoyment of movies/musicals/TV shows/plays in which women are sexually demeaned or presented as sexual objects

Not really, when viewing women in a sexual context I prefer to view them as sexual actors and agents.

He mocks women who complain about sexual attacks, sexual harassment, street cat-calls, media depictions of women, or other forms of sexual objectification.

It depends, seeing as you grouped all of these together under a blanket criterion. Sexual attacks and harassment are uncalled for. As for cat calls it depends on the situation. A lot of times they are obnoxious. For the latter two I think that sexualization (I hesitate to use "objectification" because the vast majority of the time no one is actually overlooking their humanity) should be a two-way street, not shut down. If you see Emma Stone, Kat Dennings, or some other model advertising something, why not also toss Ryan Reynolds up there as well, eh?

He supports sexual “liberation” / and claims women would have more sex with (more) men if society did not “inhibit” them.

Agreed on the first part; on the second part I'm not going to make a statement like that. I think no one should be sexually inhibited by society and they should engage in such activity under their own will.

He states or implies that women who do not want to have sex with men are “inhibited,” “prudes,” “stuck-up,” “man-haters,” or psychologically ill.

Not always, no. Not wanting to do men does not necessarily make someone a man-hater. They could be lesbians, asexual, or just not particularly interested for whatever reason. I see "curse the chaste" as more something to apply to nuns or the Jonas Brothers.

He argues that certain male behaviors towards women are “cultural” and therefore not legitimate subjects of feminist attention.

This is far too vague for me to acknowledge or refute.

He ever subordinates the interests of women in a given population to the interests of the men in that population, or proceeds in discussions as if the interests of the women are the same as the interests of the men.

Not everyone's interests are the same, regardless of gender grouping, and no gender is subordinate to the other. This statement is still confusing anyway.

He promotes religious or philosophical views in which a woman’s physical/psychological/emotional/sexual well-being is subordinated to a man’s.

Not at all. In my philosophical views a major dictum is "Every Man and every Woman is a Star".

He describes female anatomy in terms of penetration, or uses terms referencing the supposed “emptiness” of female anatomy when describing women.

That's just downright weird.

He defends the physical abuse of women on the grounds of “consent.”

If they truly consent to an act, it is not inherently abusive.

He defends the sexualization or sexual abuse of minor females on the grounds of “consent” or “willingness.”

I don't have an issue at all with adolescent sexuality, and molesting anyone, not just females, is not a consensual act.

He promotes the idea that women as a class are happier or more fulfilled if they have children, or that they “should” have children.

Not at all.

He argues that people (or just “men”) have sexual “needs.”

Everyone who is sexual has some kind of sexual needs. That doesn't mean anyone has the right to rape anyone.

He discusses the “types” of women he finds sexually appealing and/or attempts to demean women by telling them he does not find them sexually appealing.

I don't try to demean people by calling them ugly, and if having individual sexual preferences makes one a rape supporter, then humanity is doomed.

He sexually objectifies lesbians or lesbian sexual activity.

So since I am aroused by women sexually engaging, I am now a rape supporter? I love that logic, totally LUV 33T.

He defends these actions by saying that some women also engage in them.

Given the actions that I did in fact defend, then yes. Apparently I support rape, how grand.

[Voltronica]

Anyone wanna do a counter post to the blogger titled "All Women Support [insert crime here]?" For the fun of it?

Or is there one already out there

[Wikipedia and Universe]

Anyone wanna do a counter post to the blogger titled "All Women Support [insert crime here]?" For the fun of it?

Or is there one already out there

Don't bother. The blogger screens all comments before displaying them. Yes it's censorship, and yes doing what you describe would be a waste of time, and would likely also feed her ammunition.

[Voltronica]

Anyone wanna do a counter post to the blogger titled "All Women Support [insert crime here]?" For the fun of it?

Or is there one already out there

Don't bother. The blogger screens all comments before displaying them. Yes it's censorship, and yes doing what you describe would be a waste of time, and would likely also feed her ammunition.

after looking at your signature I may have to edit the first line in mine.

[Wikipedia and Universe]

Don't bother. The blogger screens all comments before displaying them. Yes it's censorship, and yes doing what you describe would be a waste of time, and would likely also feed her ammunition.

after looking at your signature I may have to edit the first line in mine.

To make it easier, here is the raw BBCode for it:

Code: Select all

[url=http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=5718140#p5718140][b]Proud RAPE SUPPORTER[/b] ([i]apparently[/i])[/url]. [size=70][i]Please follow the link before taking me out of context.[/i][/size]

[Luciratus]

Anyone wanna do a counter post to the blogger titled "All Women Support [insert crime here]?" For the fun of it?

Or is there one already out there

Don't bother. The blogger screens all comments before displaying them. Yes it's censorship, and yes doing what you describe would be a waste of time, and would likely also feed her ammunition.

Well, I suppose I am not only a rape supporter but a rapist by the definitions provided (no I do not literally rape anybody).

[Christmahanikwanzikah]

woops, i'mma go support raep now

[Trotskylvania]

I can understand a quick lawl, but why is this thread still going?

[Coffin-Breathe]

I´d say, while she might have a point somehow, her list is mostly shitty; and marks her as the intolerant, ignorant and bigot fanatic she is...

[Tahar Joblis]

I can understand a quick lawl, but why is this thread still going?

As might be considered inevitable on any rape-related topic, there are a wide variety of opinions, and some folks started attempting to defend the author of the blog linked to in the OP. Others took exception to that, such as myself, and that frequently bumps the topic up to the top while we argue, which attracts more quick lawls and the occasional brawler.

Right now, we're busy finding out how much TNB has totally forgotten since the last thread that the two of us participated in which I explained about how false accusations of rape are harmful, as she appears to have defaulted to the position that false rape accusations (a) are really vanishingly rare and (b) don't do anyone harm anyway, both of which contentions were demonstrated false back then.

I'm particularly unhappy about this because this has reminded me of a fairly unhappy occurrence that I hadn't thought about for a while, namely my high school coach's suicide, which I find hard to put back out of my mind once brought up; and TNB's callous forgetfulness, such that even after having previously quoted a post in which I brought this up, just a few months ago, she can't possibly bring herself to believe that anyone's life could be ruined by a false accusation of rape in this culture we live in, makes me feel a little bit sick.

[Wikipedia and Universe]

I can understand a quick lawl, but why is this thread still going?

As might be considered inevitable on any rape-related topic, there are a wide variety of opinions, and some folks started attempting to defend the author of the blog linked to in the OP. Others took exception to that, such as myself, and that frequently bumps the topic up to the top while we argue, which attracts more quick lawls and the occasional brawler.

Right now, we're busy finding out how much TNB has totally forgotten since the last thread that the two of us participated in which I explained about how false accusations of rape are harmful, as she appears to have defaulted to the position that false rape accusations (a) are really vanishingly rare and (b) don't do anyone harm anyway, both of which contentions were demonstrated false back then.

My suggestion with TNB is that if your argument seems to be going in circles, break it off. You already got pushed to the point of flaming, which got you warned by a mod, so don't get pulled in any further.

[Tahar Joblis]

My suggestion with TNB is that if your argument seems to be going in circles, break it off. You already got pushed to the point of flaming, which got you warned by a mod, so don't get pulled in any further.

Well, that would make only the second time that's happened in the last eight years as far as I'm aware. I can hold my shit together just fine.

All things considered, given how many times I have to repeat things for some students to learn them, I shouldn't be terribly surprised that it takes more than one argument with me before TNB realizes that men are humans, too; that the society we live in actually takes certain types of crimes very seriously (rape and pedophilia in particular) such that even just rumors that you've done such a thing can derail your life. Going through a public accusation, being arrested, your name splashed all over the front page of your hometown newspaper... the retraction is rarely as wide-spread news as the accusation; the Duke lacrosse case is perhaps the closest thing to an exception I'm aware of.

I'm aware that as a woman, it's something she has probably never had cause to worry about - women are rarely accused of such things, and accusations of rape aimed at women are often not taken seriously; and while it's statistically reasonably likely that she herself has taken part in the social shunning of someone identified (rightly or wrongly) as a "sex offender," she probably never tried to put herself in the accused's shoes - just as many men may have a little bit more difficulty empathizing with a rape victim, or understanding why a woman might not want to come forward and be identified as a rape victim. I mentioned that studies have shown that even uncouth frat boys can learn to move away from rape myths; and if that's possible, well, then, perhaps TNB can learn to empathize with men.

[The Norwegian Blue]

I'm aware that as a woman, it's something she has probably never had cause to worry about

Wow. Just....wow. If we want to talk about "facts that have come up before on NSG," the fact that you could seriously say something this ridiculously offensive to ME...well, it says a lot about you. Congratulations, you've just made the list of "posters I will never be able to respect or take remotely seriously again." If you'd like to keep baiting me, please do it inside your head, because I'm done engaging with you in this thread if these are the depths to which you'll stoop.

[Kyronea]

I'm aware that as a woman, it's something she has probably never had cause to worry about - women are rarely accused of such things, and accusations of rape aimed at women are often not taken seriously; and while it's statistically reasonably likely that she herself has taken part in the social shunning of someone identified (rightly or wrongly) as a "sex offender," she probably never tried to put herself in the accused's shoes - just as many men may have a little bit more difficulty empathizing with a rape victim, or understanding why a woman might not want to come forward and be identified as a rape victim. I mentioned that studies have shown that even uncouth frat boys can learn to move away from rape myths; and if that's possible, well, then, perhaps TNB can learn to empathize with men.

Wow.

I mean, just fucking WOW. What in all of the names of FUCK is wrong with you? No, seriously, what is? Is it just a mind-numbing inability to grasp another person's viewpoint? Is it just that you're that fucking stupid, that you were dropped on your head that many fucking times as a kid?

Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you? How has anything she said painted her as someone who hates all men? For that matter, what the fuck kind of person actually thinks that people "live in fear of being accused of rape"? Or that being accused of rape is somehow anywhere remotely near equivalent to actually being raped?

I...I just can't fucking believe you actually said this. You, sir, are THE fucking moron to which all morons aspire to be. You're the king of idiocy. And no, I don't give a fuck how much of a warning I get for this post. This needed to be said.

[Ifreann]

Well, that would make only the second time that's happened in the last eight years as far as I'm aware. I can hold my shit together just fine.

This is holding your shit together? Being patronising and dismissive? "Poor little TNB just doesn't know how to empathise with men. I'll just make her out to be a total idiot and a callous bitch, over and over again, until she learns to take other people's feelings into account"

[Dumb Ideologies]

Sigh.

Well one troll certainly isn't going to go home hungry.

[Tekania]

Me, I think the appropriate response is to assume she's probably but not certainly telling the truth - because that's what statistics support - then examine the evidence, and come to the best conclusion you can based on it...which means being accused of rape SHOULD generally ruin lives, because generally, being accused of rape means you're a fucking rapist.)

I'm civilized and follow the core belief of innocent till proven guilty, I could care less what the accusations are. We have a system of courts to handle whether they end up being valid or not. But that you would not only vilify the accused yourself, but dismiss the entre concept as then likely being guilty anyway? You're a rapist. You're a fucking rapist. That you do it with media-attention is besides the point.

[Keronians]

I'm aware that as a woman, it's something she has probably never had cause to worry about - women are rarely accused of such things, and accusations of rape aimed at women are often not taken seriously; and while it's statistically reasonably likely that she herself has taken part in the social shunning of someone identified (rightly or wrongly) as a "sex offender," she probably never tried to put herself in the accused's shoes - just as many men may have a little bit more difficulty empathizing with a rape victim, or understanding why a woman might not want to come forward and be identified as a rape victim. I mentioned that studies have shown that even uncouth frat boys can learn to move away from rape myths; and if that's possible, well, then, perhaps TNB can learn to empathize with men.

Wow.

I mean, just fucking WOW. What in all of the names of FUCK is wrong with you? No, seriously, what is? Is it just a mind-numbing inability to grasp another person's viewpoint? Is it just that you're that fucking stupid, that you were dropped on your head that many fucking times as a kid?

Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you? How has anything she said painted her as someone who hates all men? For that matter, what the fuck kind of person actually thinks that people "live in fear of being accused of rape"? Or that being accused of rape is somehow anywhere remotely near equivalent to actually being raped?

I...I just can't fucking believe you actually said this. You, sir, are THE fucking moron to which all morons aspire to be. You're the king of idiocy. And no, I don't give a fuck how much of a warning I get for this post. This needed to be said.

... You might want to tone it down a bit, pal. That looks flamey to me... /notamod

[Ifreann]

Sigh.

Well one troll certainly isn't going to go home hungry.

Feeding trolls counts towards my community service.

[Keronians]

I'm aware that as a woman, it's something she has probably never had cause to worry about

Wow. Just....wow. If we want to talk about "facts that have come up before on NSG," the fact that you could seriously say something this ridiculously offensive to ME...well, it says a lot about you. Congratulations, you've just made the list of "posters I will never be able to respect or take remotely seriously again." If you'd like to keep baiting me, please do it inside your head, because I'm done engaging with you in this thread if these are the depths to which you'll stoop.

Actually, at least from what I know (if this is untrue please tell me. It's not exactly an expert field of mine), men who get raped are often not taken seriously / mocked, so a woman rapist, IMO, IS more likely to get away with it...

That, and there are men who get raped but don't report it due to the social stigma.

[Nazis in Space]

I for one have been thoroughly enjoying Tahar Joblis owning the fuck out of everyone else in this thread. Quite an enjoyable read. I also dig the nigh-violent reactions to his arguments.