Feminism is pro-women not pro-equality. Pro-women comes first. Equality takes a backseat. Feminists love pretending like it's the same thing hoping that we don't see through the smoke screen or that we're too passive to call them out.
Some Beta Orbiter Queen posted about how lonely she was on Facebook and how guys should come out and tell her if they have a crush.
One guy posted, "Well you rejected me, but at least I did! :)"
I responded (to the guy) with, "If you improve yourself and make yourself sexier, you'll never be rejected again" (obvious exaggeration, but the general principle is true). The girl responds with, "Wow."
Some other orbiter posts, "Wow, because women can only process sexiness in their tiny woman brains, isn't that right?"
And I just thought to myself, "Oh, poor beta, if only you knew how wrong your approach was, you'd drop it immediately".
There's no reasoning with these people. It's as if their logical reasoning is hijacked by their dick.
I was like, "Getting sexier is wrong? I would say the same thing about men and women, honestly" (though obviously knowing that increasing SMV for women is, besides losing weight, pretty much a crapshoot).
The beta said that I was, "incredibly shallow", to which I said, "yes I am", because I am.
He then said for me to be happy dating a bimbo (read: a girl out of his SMV range that he has decided are all dumb as bricks, to justify his sour grapes)
The read I got out of that situation was:
He instinctively recognizes I have more options than him, and rather than improving himself, he hates me for it.
Note, this was beta #2 that was attacking me (presumably to win points and favor with his queen), the first never said anything.
I made that mistake with a friend that I assumed would be receptive. Instead of rational conversation I got emotional backlash, complete with straw man arguments and mockery. As a bonus he shares everything with his wife so now she especially isn't too fond of me and I'm the misogynist of the group.
It's pretty hilarious to say the exact same type of quip or joke involving women that my friend is known to make and watch the entirely different reactions I get. Once a misogynist always a misogynist..
I find the duck and run attitude regarding feminist rhetoric to be pretty disgusting to be honest and I don't give one half of a fuck what people think.
You'll try to tell me how it will affect my life and my future dating, career, and life prospects and I will respond with "like feminism run rampant has?" so save it. I don't care. Allowing feminists to shove their message down everyone's throats without anyone presenting any counter arguments is what has allowed it to get to this point.
I had a pretty spectacular brouhaha with a bunch of feminist leaning women and I held court like a boss and actually disseminated some contradictory government statistics which refute the feminist dialogue at their request. Don't fucking care if they read it or considered it. I did something rather than huddle and whine to myself that we're already beaten.
Hate if you want but I personally find it unforgivable that a bunch of so-called Alphas think that the best thing is to tuck their tails and say nothing to curb a movement which affects us all.
Down-vote if I hurt your little feelings but it won't change a damn thing.
The funny thing is, I can't even count how many times people have told me that they like me for my blunt and often times brutal honesty. They know where I stand and know that I will defend my position vigorously and with intelligence. If they think I'm a misogynist, that's their problem for being idiots.
Once you're labelled as a misogynist it's very hard to change that reputation.
Yeah, I don't even give a fuck anymore. The only people who give a shit are white knight faggots and fat hamplanets, neither of which I care to have in my life. Now, I just agree & amplify when someone pulls the misogynist card. "You know it, sweet tits. Get me another beer."
This behavior has not put any kind of a damper on my sex life. If anything, the "bad boy" reputation I've inadvertently fostered has been entirely beneficial. It's really hard for crazy bitches to create drama with me when they know I'll just agree & laugh it off.
Oh I know in general that's a smart plan, but with her I'm just trolling. We have no friends in common anymore, I have no interest in sleeping with her really (if she made it easy enough, sure, but she lives 45 minutes away now and she's not anywhere near attractive enough for real effort or desire). I see it as a funny game.
Suzanne Summers and other feminist have come out against the gender feminist movements, and have made a space for what they call equity feminists. The 2 groups are vastly different in terms of goals and methodology
If they believed in actual equality, then it should be perfectly OK to hit women. I'm not suggesting that it be made so, because I don't believe that men and women are the same. And I do not believe that it is ever OK to hit a woman.
But, if we were truly equal, then there should have been zero national outrage at the Ray Rice video, and he shouldn't have been ostracized like he was.
And I do not believe that it is ever OK to hit a woman.
I know this is a belief, but I call bullshit on your belief.
If a woman comes at you with a knife, or a gun, and you're unarmed, will you hit them to defend yourself? How about if some bitch threatened your kid (assuming you do/ever would have kids)? How about if the cunt in question outweighs you by 150lbs and trains MMA in the gym?
Of course it is ok to hit a woman, if the situation calls for it. I realize that in this culture we really shouldn't, if for any other reason than self-protection in a legal sense, but to say that it is never acceptable to hit a woman could put you in a world of hurt.
How about if the cunt in question outweighs you by 150lbs and trains MMA in the gym?
I can guarantee you that a 310 pound woman has zero chance against me in the ring, or anywhere in hand to hand combat of any form.
And I do not expect a woman to be overly skilled in knife fighting, so I wouldn't consider that a viable threat. If she had a firearm, punching her would be my last course of action. If she threatened my children? No. I still wouldn't hit her for that. I would remove the threat.
No, it is not OK to hit women. We are bigger and stronger, and should be capable of controlling the situation where hitting a smaller and weaker opponent is never necessary. If you have found yourself in a place where you feel the need to beat women, then you need to perform a serious inward look to try to figure out why your world is so fucked up.
You can call bullshit all you like, but ... it doesn't change anything.
I don't sport whiteknight armor. I'm not putting anyone on a pedestal, I'm specifically stating that at no point should a man lose control enough that he has to resort to punching a woman. They are smaller and weaker than us, therefore not a significant physical threat.\
Pro-tip: (I'm guessing you are a bit light on hand-to-hand combat experience, so allow me to help ...) - if your opponent has a knife, and all you have is two bare hands ... punching them is a real shitty plan. Remove yourself or the weapon from the equation, but you still shouldn't ever need to punch a girl.
Watch the video of the bouncer in the train getting verbally and physically abused by some girls in the NY subway. He ends up beating the girls are one of the white knights. The judge let him go free.
For most groups that demand equality, the 50/50 split always seems to be you get the front half of the cow, they get the rear half of the cow that makes the milk. Then they complain you are not feeding the cow enough and the milk is poor quality.
76 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
Quote from the article: "The law treats men and women as being equal"
The problem is not equality in front of the law or that stopping people from living in the street is bad. The problem is that some people don't have anywhere to live but in the street.
21 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
Sorry for being a little TRP off-topic but:
There's so much scarcity mentality when there need not be. Knowledge is the cheapest and most available it's ever been but somehow there are more victims than ever. Africa is an entire continent ripe for development that can create huge amounts of wealth but instead of making a farm for yourself people want to squat on someone elses. Do people realize Liberia was successful until the natives toppled the americanized government? That South Africa was far more productive and safe under apartheid?
When things got bad for the European "barbarians" they packed up all their shit and went marauding to start a better life, sometimes at the end of a sword. That drive to improve is gone and in place of it people just whine and complain and lament their situation on the fat of their ass.
Do not think it is a good thing when first-world countries take in third-world refugees. We are taking their smartest and most productive people from those countries and robbing them of their revolutionaries.
13 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
[permanently deleted]
4 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
We also reward apathy. There is no reason to acquire knowledge or apply it.
18 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
You want to go start up a successful business in Africa? Go ahead, just don't say you weren't warned when the guerillas come to take your shit and rape your wife.
Do not think it is a good thing when first-world countries take in third-world refugees. We are taking their smartest and most productive people from those countries and robbing them of their revolutionaries.
It is reverse colonization. European colonization served two purposes. First one is the obvious, it got natural resources. Second one is less obvious. It got rid of potential malcontents and revolutionaries.
1 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
That South Africa was far more productive and safe under apartheid?
I'm going to assume you're white and would not have faced apartheid?
Do people realize Liberia was successful until the natives toppled the americanized government?
Also safe to assume that you have cultural beliefs and would fight to preserve them if a foreign country (Say China) decided to colonize the U.S.
These two examples are bullshit. Your initial point is interesting, but weak. Africa has lots of opportunity for development, but socio-political strife and civil unrest prevents that from occuring. A scarcity mentality is definitely understandable.There's more mouths to feed and the pie isn't getting any larger. Every year there's a net gain (death-birth) of 75 million people. Combine that with recent technology eliminating jobs, and you'll understand scarcity mentalities.
-1 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
[permanently deleted]
3 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
Your post shows a horrible understanding of human nature and a pretty ethnocentric worldview.
Do you really think things are that simple? Go in, create a wealthy city, and people will be ok with occupation?
Do not think it is a good thing when first-world countries take in third-world refugees. We are taking their smartest and most productive people from those countries
If they come here for college or training, perhaps.
But the typical Euro "asylum" seekers and refugees are far from the "most productive". They're just chasing welfare state cash and are often quasi recruited by the european governments themselves (not even self-initiative).
The US probably has much more strict immigration rules for everyone else because so much of the available infrastructure for taking in immigrants is innundated with Mexicans.
1 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
Can you briefly explain what you mean by this?
1 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
It's a strategy women adopt to secure the best mates for themselves.
“The law treats men and women as being equal when it is obvious that in these matters, the men are the stronger ones.”
Something, something, animals are more equal than others.
According to the Justice Ministry, the amendment is necessary because the current wording applies only to men. Although it is rare, there is a possibility that a woman may rape an adult male or female and therefore the law should stipulate that this, too, is forbidden.
That is perfect! The Benny Hill theme music paired with modern feminism. Show feminists running around, protesting, and always imagine them on the hamster wheel.
3 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
Wasn't rare enough to exclude what happened to me.
Funny how the fact that most women lap up feminism and never question a thing has really had the most negative effect on my view of women. It's really hard to believe they are at all intelligent when they follow this shit.
If you think about it, there's no greater organization devoted to the idea that women are simply adult-sized children with no agency of their own. Literally every one of their ideas boils down to "We have it badly but we can't fix it on our own. Men...fix it for us".
This was part of what ultimately made me take the pill.
I had learned PUA, and I had a plate who was ardently feminist. I, at the time, arguably agreed with feminist principles.
Then at one point, we got into an argument, I don't remember what it was about, but it directly contradicted my experiences. I told her, "I don't agree with that, you'll have to convince me if you want me to change my mind."
She responded with, "That's not my job. It's your job to educate yourself."
I was like, "That makes no sense - if you want people to come to your cause, it's your job to convince them."
We had the same argument a couple more times, with her telling me to educate myself.
that's the thing, they feel they are educated because they blithely believed some bullshit they hear everyone regurgitating. The spread of feminism is two-fold: women's tendency to follow the crowd and conform and be accepted, and the fact that the truth makes them feel bad about themselves because it requires they place blame and/or responsibility on themselves. And we can't have either of those because feelz.
That was honestly what really started pushing me down this path. It was the moment I realized that feminists were not arguing in good faith. Also my counter-arguments to her points were always met with, "You sound like an MRA", which previously to that point, I had only a vague knowledge of them as "horrible misogynists". I read up on them, found the Redpill more to my liking (I'd already taken responsibility for my life during my 3 year PUA transition), and boom. There we were.
It has given them rights and power but if they use said power they end up miserable and alone.
I.e. divorce rape average guy making 40k or do a year and take half of the shit which amounts to some IKEA stuff and a small house in the burbs. She gets 10-20k a year in child support/alimony but for the rest of her life she'll be a pump and dump or plate for men of lower and lower smv.
Or she works and party's through her 20s gets a leg up in promotions etc but hates her job and worries about finding a man she wants. She he grudgingly ends up with beta boy at 30 has 2 kids and side tracks her "career" the divorces at 38 and tries to pick it back up but doesn't feel truly happy at any point in her life.
The refrain of any attack or charge of inequality is that feminism IS about equality.
Also, most people generally don't follow news - it's a very small percentage - and even a smaller percentage with the education, intelligence, and time to sort it out and read up.
Intelligence is just one factor in actually being aware of what's going on and proper interpreting.
Probably the same reason non Jews didn't really question Nazism, or why most white people didn't question Jim Crow laws. It's easy to follow something without question when it does nothing but help you.
“What will happen now is that every time a woman files a criminal complaint against a man for rape, he will countercharge that the woman caused him to penetrate her body, that he did it without wanting to,” she said. “He will then make a counter complaint, so that there will be two files in court, his against hers. This will block women, silence them and prevent them from going to the police.”
Wtf this doesn't even make sense.. are they just trolling to see what they can get away with or something?
I have a hard time believing this isn't some onion-style parody. First they describe that the law is about being able to charge women for faciliting objects being inserted into men/women. So dildoing a guy or taking part in the dildoing of a man (or another woman). To go from there to charging a woman with inserting a man's penis into herself is quite a bizarre leap.
But even if we take that this law can be used like that, I mean sure there have been cases where men reported being forced into sex they didn't like, it's not like a charge means a verdict. Since when it is wrong to be able to charge people with a crime? It's up to the judge to decide. If a man truly did rape a woman, a nonsensical counter-charge he was raped would be thrown out by the judge quite easily based on the evidence that is naturally needed to convict. How exactly does this silence women?
I've found that Jewish culture in general is very female dominated. I'm half Jewish half Christian. On the Jewish side, all my male family members who are married are subservient to their wives. The wives don't work and make all the decisions for the family. The men aren't in control. The others are divorced.
The Christian side has more traditional gender roles, where the guys are more dominant and in control.
I suppose in certain Jewish-centric communities it works that way, but all my uncles live in secular communities and have secular jobs. Thus, they don't really exert much control over their communities either.
This is a really fascinating point. The "separate spheres" doctrine (men are dominant in some roles, women in others) generally works alright as long as those spheres are roughly preserved.
If one of those spheres is dissolved (or made "equal"), suddenly there's a fundamental imbalance. This makes a lot of sense for religious communities becoming secularized, but I think it can be applied more broadly.
We've very much seen egalitarianism grow in social and workplace settings without corresponding "balance" in the home. Chores are being slowly offloaded onto men, while domestic choices and control of children are largely reserved to women. The common feminist complaint of "Working full time and raising children is too hard!" is pretty much true, but the people saying it would never budge on giving up control of their homes and children to men.
Funny, one could argue that in traditional Christian settings, it's exactly the other way around and women do indeed control the community.
It's the contrast of overt versus covert power. Men are usually more comfortable and better at over control, and women have a natural for covert control over men. But in Judaism, there's a cultural emphasis on covert modes of influence through intellectual pursuits, so it would make sense this would translate in some sort of reversal of tasks in the family unit.
I'll have to give it some more thought, but feminism seems to affect Christianity and Judaism in very different ways, probably due to those cultural differences.
This producing an interesting "splitting" effect, I think. In secular communities, there's a steady push to make extra-familial interactions gender-neutral. The result in that whichever gender's power was primarily social decays, and whichever gender's power is primarily domestic remains untouched, creating imbalance.
It's hard to see for Christianity because Christianity in secular communities is weakening and getting rarer, but I suspect that in "strongly religious" households, whichever side controlled household affairs has been steadily gaining power. Just spitballing, but it's interesting.
I thought false rape claims, if they happen at all, are only like 1% of all claims. Also, according to one prominent feminist, Catherine Comins, people can often benefit from being falsely accused of rape.
edit: Holy shit! I didn't think this was necessary but /s
Well, if you tho't that, you'd be wrong by 40x. At least 40% of all rape claims are false. US Air Force did an extensive, crawl-up-your-ass-with-a-microscope study. Ask any large city detective.
In a nine-year study of 109 rapes reported to the police in a Midwestern city, Purdue sociologist Eugene J. Kanin reported that in 41% of the cases the complainants eventually admitted that no rape had occurred.3
In a follow-up study of rape claims filed over a three-year period at two large Midwestern universities, Kanin found that of 64 rape cases, 50% turned out to be false.4 Among the false charges, 53% of the women admitted they filed the false claim as an alibi.5
“The bill will cause women to stop complaining..." she warned. “The law treats men and women as being equal when it is obvious that in these matters, the men are the stronger ones.”
I have a question. Won't the "yes means yes" bill necessarily mean that women will be charged with rape also, assuming that the law is applied equally? I mean, in most rape cases the male, who is probably drunk also, doesn't provide affirmative consent. So if she makes accusations against him, can't he just turn around and make the same accusations against her?
Mentioning Orthodox Judaism with general Tel Aviv culture and society shows you have no idea what you are talking about. Also, would definitely recommend a trip Tel Aviv, secular Israeli ass is epic.
Few years ago I started talking to this Israeli girl in the mall who was selling crap. I was happy to practice my Hebrew, before I knew it I was her boyfriend. God I miss that place!
There is something to be said about Israeli women, after moving here in Canada 10 years ago I'd have to say Canadian girls are much more tame.
Here I thought one of the reasons Orthodox Judaism has persisted for so long as a relatively unchanging culture and tradition was due to strictly proscribed gender roles. Guess we can cross Tel Aviv off the travel list.
Seriously? Non-Haredi Judaism is probably the single biggest force promoting cultural-marxism and feminism in the Western world. Everything from Marx himself to Saul Alinsky to the Southern Poverty Law Center to the ADL is under their thumb. The only one's outside their clutch are non-Zionist Haredi Jews (i.e. the Ultra-Orthodox) and a few libertarian Jews like Rothbard and Mises.
The orthdox, conservative and reformist branches of Rabbinic Judaism differ in their personal stances, but politically they're effectively the same. In Israel, the orthodox are often the ones in power, but most of Israel's supporters in the US are reformist. It's usually the reformists, and atheists, that promote "Progressivism" in the West. It's like comparing Neoconservatism with Progressivism, Neocons act like they're traditionalist/conservative but they're hand-in-glove together with Progressivism (actually an offshoot of it).
Haredi is a form of orthodox Judaism. There's many types of orthodox Judaism. You are wrong. In the orthodox (read: religious) Jewish world the families are patriarchal. In the modern and non religious and reform Jews are liberal and Marxist types.
Why is that? I'm a Jew - I come from a secular, close-to-atheist family that is firmly left of center. I find that I (and many Jews of my generation) have shifted to the right (the original catalyst was ultra anti-Israel sentiment on the left, which drove me into the arms of the right, which I previously dismissed as 'selfish' and 'irrational.') Since then, I've become much less emotional about issues, and more rational. Though I'm still interested as to why Jewish secular culture tends to veer to the left. PS: I'm not here for Protocols and conspiracy answers, duh.
I honestly have no idea. Probably because of the holocaust. They think being a pacifist will protect them and be above violence (when in reality it's the opposite)
There is a huge difference between orthodox Judaism and Haredim (Ultra-orthodox). The vast majority of Haredim are non-Zionist, while most Orthodox are Zionist. Haredim are often apolitical, and politically they never ally with the reformists. Orthodox, Conservative and Reformist often ally with each other for political purposes. The founders of Zionism were very anti-religious, and the Haredi have always opposed them for those reasons, meanwhile the Orthodox and Conservative have supported them.
Furthermore, Judaism is at least to some degree matriarchal. That is one of the key features of Rabbinic Judaism, compared to pre-Rabbinic Judaism where lineage clearly came from the father (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, etc). In modern Rabbinic Judaism, lineage and race is inherited through the mother. The exception being Reform Judaism, which ironically is the most Progressive/leftist version of Judaism, facilitating gay partnerships, anti-gender segregation, etc.
It's interesting that Israel trains relatively effective female soldiers - along with Russia's 1st Women's Battalion of Death, the soldaderas of Revolutionary Mexico, and the "Dahomey Amazons" of what's now Benin, all of these cultures had in common their explicitly patriarchal nature.
Women are still humans and humans in general are pretty malleable. While virtually no woman will approach the strength of most any men, with the right environment they can still be taught discipline. It may not come as naturally to them, much as emotional manipulation, reading subtext or childcare doesn't come as naturally to us, but if you sink enough hours into anything, man or woman, you'll typically get better at it.
The problem in this context is that women get no sexual value from this practice (or marginally little), it isn't emphasized for them, and the incentives typically aren't enough for them to deal with their boredom (why program computers or join the military when you can lie on your back and have a man who believes it is his duty to take care of you - take care of you?)
Yeah; is there any evidence that they are effective soldiers?
(also, not to get too political here, but pushing unarmed Arab children around at checkpoints isn't exactly difficult. Let me know when the Israelis have an all-female rifle company ready to go house-to-house in Fallujah.)
As a former officer of the IDF, I can confirm that the Karakal battalion (male & female infantry battalion) is pretty effective. I wouldn't compare it to the main infantry brigades such as Golani and the Paratroopers, but they take full responsibility for the Egyptian border and have already dealt with incidents before, some of those operations were led by women.
If you'd ask the girls from the battalion, I believe they would all be willing to go house-to-house in wherever.
It's just one of those things that make Israel so different and difficult to grasp from a TRP perspective, very versatile and distinct culturally.
TRP is, as far as I can tell, MOST applicable to white upper-middle class American women between the ages of 18-25 (and for the wall stuff, their aftermath) in elite colleges, primarily near the coasts.
The more deviation you get from that, the less applicable it'll be. Don't get me wrong - a lot of the TRP stuff is timeless, universal truth, but the specifics are, as far as I can tell, for that demographic.
My suspicion is that this is because a good portion of the men here are in a similar demographic.
No surprise. A fair amount of feminists are Jewish. As an outside observer, it seems like they have a vindictive need to emasculate Jewish men. Jenji Kohan, the writer-creator behind Weeds and Orange is the New Black, is especially good at it. The male Jewish characters she writes are submissive in nearly all aspects.
It is important to distinguish between a Jew [religion], an Israeli [nationality, 30+% of Israelis are Arab], a Hebrew [ethnicity, i.e., seed of Abraham], and Zionist [proponent of Jewish/Hebrew state in palestine - most Zionists live in USA and are fundamentalist Christians]
Dear ,islamic calture is truly a rape calture...not the feminist definition..but actually a rape calture If you are in a place where sharea law is present...you can inslave a woman,rape her,have a child,rape your own daughter because technically any slave's offspring belongs to you by law (koran 23:1 if i remember correctly...and i read it in arabic the original language of the book)
Here I thought one of the reasons Orthodox Judaism has persisted for so long as a relatively unchanging culture and tradition was due to strictly proscribed gender roles.
These progressive feminist groups are generally secular and antagonistic to Orthodox Judaism. A small minority of these feminists claim to be Orthodox, but they radically reinvent Orthodox Judaism in their own image, and the resulting syncretic religion is largely ignored or rejected by mainstream Orthodoxy.
Israel, unlike the the rest of the feminized countries still needs to be masculine or other wise they will get steamrolled by their enemies. So I doubt they will end up completely emasculated.
Feminists know their own bullshit and will guard against the other side doing it. The same came up whenever you talk about the male birth control pill (what if he lies about taking it????).
Pretty interesting, considering that it is in Israel.
-5 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
[permanently deleted]
5 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
[permanently deleted]
-4 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
[permanently deleted]
1 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
Enjoy getting a woman you hate pregnant? If you force yourself off she could just claim domestic violence too. People like you are the reason why shit like this exists.
Well you've just answered your own question. Expand that to everything else.
Your ever increasingly loose definitions of rape, such as non verbal permission, talking someone into it, not getting a notarized document etc are one way. These rules have to work both ways.
And there's the obvious point that someone could simply not want to. By now you should have figured out that sexual arousal isn't exactly something that everyone can control 100% of the time. It's a reaction that can come at inconvenient or unwanted times (and even not happen for some if they're unlucky). It's like saying if a women has a physical reaction to being forced into sex, she must have wanted it. Biological reactions don't demonstrate consent.
Same for a guy. But maybe the guy is super weak, get's pressured into it because he doesn't want to be labelled as gay / not up for it, or he's being threatened / blackmailed etc etc.
It's not really stuff that I'd imagine applies to many guys in here, but I don't see how you can't understand it.
0 upvotes • [deleted] • 5 years ago
Thank you for actually sharing a cogent point of view and not just a bunch of paranoid fantasies.
Well for a start all your even increasingly loose definitions of rape
For me, this is the crux of the issue: there's a world of difference between being beaten unconscious or having a knife put to your throat (or some other violence or threat of violence) or being drugged into unconsciousness then having an object (penis, bottle, whatever) forcefully inserted into your body against your will and merely being seduced, coerced without violence, or otherwise being made to perform a non-penetrative sexual act against your will. They just are not the same, whatsoever, and using the same word to describe both acts cheapens the first one and elevates the second beyond its merits.
Is being tricked or even drugged into sex bad? Yes. Is being tricked into getting a girl pregnant bad? Absolutely. Is waking up to find someone you're not attracted to riding on top of you troubling? Very much so. But are any of these events actual rape? Fuck no.
People need to stop using the word "rape" to cover every possible crime that might revolve around sex. It's lazy and shabby use of language, and it's bullshit like this that got our society to this point in the first damn place. Sexual assault is not rape in the same way that assault is not murder.
I pretty much agree with the reasons you're confused about it all. All the bs that's counted as "rape" nowerdays really isn't. Someone who was pressured into something and only finds out it was "rape" the next day from a friends definition is not comparable with someone who is physically assaulted in a dark alley.
I think the only point is that if this BS is applicable to women, it has to be to men. Half of it is the principle and just the whole double standards of it. But yeah being raped is not really a huge concern for most guys, and actually the fear of a false rape accusation actually is more-so. Making the moronic Israeli feminist actions all the more fucked up.
Either way at a base level, 100% regardless of whether the rules are bat-shit insane, or reasonable and correct, rape shouldn't have anything to do with gender at all.
Some ham-beast gets three of her friends to hold you down, and rubs her gunt on your face until she is squealing and sweating with pleasure... You cool with that?
Feminism is pro-women not pro-equality. Pro-women comes first. Equality takes a backseat. Feminists love pretending like it's the same thing hoping that we don't see through the smoke screen or that we're too passive to call them out.
I blame the betas who follow 100% what women say but turn a blind eye to what they do. Pussy-pedestal blinders.
Some Beta Orbiter Queen posted about how lonely she was on Facebook and how guys should come out and tell her if they have a crush.
One guy posted, "Well you rejected me, but at least I did! :)"
I responded (to the guy) with, "If you improve yourself and make yourself sexier, you'll never be rejected again" (obvious exaggeration, but the general principle is true). The girl responds with, "Wow."
Some other orbiter posts, "Wow, because women can only process sexiness in their tiny woman brains, isn't that right?"
And I just thought to myself, "Oh, poor beta, if only you knew how wrong your approach was, you'd drop it immediately".
There's no reasoning with these people. It's as if their logical reasoning is hijacked by their dick.
[permanently deleted]
A sad truth. Only in these crazy times is "improve yourself, get sexier, and you won't get rejected" somehow evil red pill misogynist advice.
That's more or less what I responded.
I was like, "Getting sexier is wrong? I would say the same thing about men and women, honestly" (though obviously knowing that increasing SMV for women is, besides losing weight, pretty much a crapshoot).
The beta said that I was, "incredibly shallow", to which I said, "yes I am", because I am.
He then said for me to be happy dating a bimbo (read: a girl out of his SMV range that he has decided are all dumb as bricks, to justify his sour grapes)
The read I got out of that situation was:
He instinctively recognizes I have more options than him, and rather than improving himself, he hates me for it.
Note, this was beta #2 that was attacking me (presumably to win points and favor with his queen), the first never said anything.
I made that mistake with a friend that I assumed would be receptive. Instead of rational conversation I got emotional backlash, complete with straw man arguments and mockery. As a bonus he shares everything with his wife so now she especially isn't too fond of me and I'm the misogynist of the group.
It's pretty hilarious to say the exact same type of quip or joke involving women that my friend is known to make and watch the entirely different reactions I get. Once a misogynist always a misogynist..
I find the duck and run attitude regarding feminist rhetoric to be pretty disgusting to be honest and I don't give one half of a fuck what people think.
You'll try to tell me how it will affect my life and my future dating, career, and life prospects and I will respond with "like feminism run rampant has?" so save it. I don't care. Allowing feminists to shove their message down everyone's throats without anyone presenting any counter arguments is what has allowed it to get to this point.
I had a pretty spectacular brouhaha with a bunch of feminist leaning women and I held court like a boss and actually disseminated some contradictory government statistics which refute the feminist dialogue at their request. Don't fucking care if they read it or considered it. I did something rather than huddle and whine to myself that we're already beaten.
Hate if you want but I personally find it unforgivable that a bunch of so-called Alphas think that the best thing is to tuck their tails and say nothing to curb a movement which affects us all.
Down-vote if I hurt your little feelings but it won't change a damn thing.
The funny thing is, I can't even count how many times people have told me that they like me for my blunt and often times brutal honesty. They know where I stand and know that I will defend my position vigorously and with intelligence. If they think I'm a misogynist, that's their problem for being idiots.
[permanently deleted]
Yeah, I don't even give a fuck anymore. The only people who give a shit are white knight faggots and fat hamplanets, neither of which I care to have in my life. Now, I just agree & amplify when someone pulls the misogynist card. "You know it, sweet tits. Get me another beer."
This behavior has not put any kind of a damper on my sex life. If anything, the "bad boy" reputation I've inadvertently fostered has been entirely beneficial. It's really hard for crazy bitches to create drama with me when they know I'll just agree & laugh it off.
Oh I know in general that's a smart plan, but with her I'm just trolling. We have no friends in common anymore, I have no interest in sleeping with her really (if she made it easy enough, sure, but she lives 45 minutes away now and she's not anywhere near attractive enough for real effort or desire). I see it as a funny game.
It's facebook, anybody can read it. When you post shit like that, you're yelling off into a public forum.
Don't be a moron, conceal your hand.
Listen to what the other poster said.
Don't blame them. Educate them.
Suzanne Summers and other feminist have come out against the gender feminist movements, and have made a space for what they call equity feminists. The 2 groups are vastly different in terms of goals and methodology
If they believed in actual equality, then it should be perfectly OK to hit women. I'm not suggesting that it be made so, because I don't believe that men and women are the same. And I do not believe that it is ever OK to hit a woman.
But, if we were truly equal, then there should have been zero national outrage at the Ray Rice video, and he shouldn't have been ostracized like he was.
I know this is a belief, but I call bullshit on your belief.
If a woman comes at you with a knife, or a gun, and you're unarmed, will you hit them to defend yourself? How about if some bitch threatened your kid (assuming you do/ever would have kids)? How about if the cunt in question outweighs you by 150lbs and trains MMA in the gym?
Of course it is ok to hit a woman, if the situation calls for it. I realize that in this culture we really shouldn't, if for any other reason than self-protection in a legal sense, but to say that it is never acceptable to hit a woman could put you in a world of hurt.
"Dont hit anyone unless you have to." No gender, no bullshit.
I can guarantee you that a 310 pound woman has zero chance against me in the ring, or anywhere in hand to hand combat of any form.
And I do not expect a woman to be overly skilled in knife fighting, so I wouldn't consider that a viable threat. If she had a firearm, punching her would be my last course of action. If she threatened my children? No. I still wouldn't hit her for that. I would remove the threat.
No, it is not OK to hit women. We are bigger and stronger, and should be capable of controlling the situation where hitting a smaller and weaker opponent is never necessary. If you have found yourself in a place where you feel the need to beat women, then you need to perform a serious inward look to try to figure out why your world is so fucked up.
You can call bullshit all you like, but ... it doesn't change anything.
Yeah man, knife attacks are no threat
Maybe your whiteknight armour will save you?
That's not a chick.
I don't sport whiteknight armor. I'm not putting anyone on a pedestal, I'm specifically stating that at no point should a man lose control enough that he has to resort to punching a woman. They are smaller and weaker than us, therefore not a significant physical threat.\
Pro-tip: (I'm guessing you are a bit light on hand-to-hand combat experience, so allow me to help ...) - if your opponent has a knife, and all you have is two bare hands ... punching them is a real shitty plan. Remove yourself or the weapon from the equation, but you still shouldn't ever need to punch a girl.
EDIT: removed name-calling.
Watch the video of the bouncer in the train getting verbally and physically abused by some girls in the NY subway. He ends up beating the girls are one of the white knights. The judge let him go free.
They know from personal experience how easy it is to falsely convict someone of rape.
Let it not be forgotten that feminism is and always has been a sexual strategy.
For most groups that demand equality, the 50/50 split always seems to be you get the front half of the cow, they get the rear half of the cow that makes the milk. Then they complain you are not feeding the cow enough and the milk is poor quality.
Quote from the article: "The law treats men and women as being equal"
This is framed as a problem with the law.
The law in its supreme equality punishes both the rich and the poor equally for sleeping in the streets and stealing bread.
And before someone corrects me, yes I'm sure I butchered some part of that quote.
You see the demagoguery in that quote right?
The problem is not equality in front of the law or that stopping people from living in the street is bad. The problem is that some people don't have anywhere to live but in the street.
Sorry for being a little TRP off-topic but:
There's so much scarcity mentality when there need not be. Knowledge is the cheapest and most available it's ever been but somehow there are more victims than ever. Africa is an entire continent ripe for development that can create huge amounts of wealth but instead of making a farm for yourself people want to squat on someone elses. Do people realize Liberia was successful until the natives toppled the americanized government? That South Africa was far more productive and safe under apartheid?
When things got bad for the European "barbarians" they packed up all their shit and went marauding to start a better life, sometimes at the end of a sword. That drive to improve is gone and in place of it people just whine and complain and lament their situation on the fat of their ass.
Do not think it is a good thing when first-world countries take in third-world refugees. We are taking their smartest and most productive people from those countries and robbing them of their revolutionaries.
[permanently deleted]
We also reward apathy. There is no reason to acquire knowledge or apply it.
You want to go start up a successful business in Africa? Go ahead, just don't say you weren't warned when the guerillas come to take your shit and rape your wife.
[permanently deleted]
As long as people have a problem with racism.
Because to do what you said would require people to admit that Africans aren't great at progress, and white european descendants are.
TRP explanation.
It is reverse colonization. European colonization served two purposes. First one is the obvious, it got natural resources. Second one is less obvious. It got rid of potential malcontents and revolutionaries.
I'm going to assume you're white and would not have faced apartheid?
Also safe to assume that you have cultural beliefs and would fight to preserve them if a foreign country (Say China) decided to colonize the U.S.
These two examples are bullshit. Your initial point is interesting, but weak. Africa has lots of opportunity for development, but socio-political strife and civil unrest prevents that from occuring. A scarcity mentality is definitely understandable.There's more mouths to feed and the pie isn't getting any larger. Every year there's a net gain (death-birth) of 75 million people. Combine that with recent technology eliminating jobs, and you'll understand scarcity mentalities.
[permanently deleted]
Your post shows a horrible understanding of human nature and a pretty ethnocentric worldview.
Do you really think things are that simple? Go in, create a wealthy city, and people will be ok with occupation?
If they come here for college or training, perhaps.
But the typical Euro "asylum" seekers and refugees are far from the "most productive". They're just chasing welfare state cash and are often quasi recruited by the european governments themselves (not even self-initiative).
[permanently deleted]
The US probably has much more strict immigration rules for everyone else because so much of the available infrastructure for taking in immigrants is innundated with Mexicans.
Can you briefly explain what you mean by this?
It's a strategy women adopt to secure the best mates for themselves.
Some key elements from the post:
Something, something, animals are more equal than others.
Those people sound like rape apologists to me.
They should play Benny Hill music over feminist news these days.
That is perfect! The Benny Hill theme music paired with modern feminism. Show feminists running around, protesting, and always imagine them on the hamster wheel.
Wasn't rare enough to exclude what happened to me.
Funny how the fact that most women lap up feminism and never question a thing has really had the most negative effect on my view of women. It's really hard to believe they are at all intelligent when they follow this shit.
Feminism has never turned any actual misogynists into non-misogynists, but it has made new misogynists.
If you think about it, there's no greater organization devoted to the idea that women are simply adult-sized children with no agency of their own. Literally every one of their ideas boils down to "We have it badly but we can't fix it on our own. Men...fix it for us".
This was part of what ultimately made me take the pill.
I had learned PUA, and I had a plate who was ardently feminist. I, at the time, arguably agreed with feminist principles.
Then at one point, we got into an argument, I don't remember what it was about, but it directly contradicted my experiences. I told her, "I don't agree with that, you'll have to convince me if you want me to change my mind."
She responded with, "That's not my job. It's your job to educate yourself."
I was like, "That makes no sense - if you want people to come to your cause, it's your job to convince them."
We had the same argument a couple more times, with her telling me to educate myself.
So I did.
Now I'm here.
Fem-speak for "because I said so!"
Yep. And what is so hilarious, is that there is no "education" involved at all. It always boils down to what some other feminist told them.
that's the thing, they feel they are educated because they blithely believed some bullshit they hear everyone regurgitating. The spread of feminism is two-fold: women's tendency to follow the crowd and conform and be accepted, and the fact that the truth makes them feel bad about themselves because it requires they place blame and/or responsibility on themselves. And we can't have either of those because feelz.
Dat entitlement mentality.
Wants you to believe something, doesn't want to do any of the work to convince you, despite you saying you are open minded.
It's the rhetorical version of "give me free shit"
That was honestly what really started pushing me down this path. It was the moment I realized that feminists were not arguing in good faith. Also my counter-arguments to her points were always met with, "You sound like an MRA", which previously to that point, I had only a vague knowledge of them as "horrible misogynists". I read up on them, found the Redpill more to my liking (I'd already taken responsibility for my life during my 3 year PUA transition), and boom. There we were.
[permanently deleted]
If they didn't keep 'em that way, they wouldn't be able to recruit new feminists.
So they follow a movement that has effectively given them more rights than men while still being seen as the victims and you find them stupid?
Who is really bring stupid here?
It has given them rights and power but if they use said power they end up miserable and alone.
I.e. divorce rape average guy making 40k or do a year and take half of the shit which amounts to some IKEA stuff and a small house in the burbs. She gets 10-20k a year in child support/alimony but for the rest of her life she'll be a pump and dump or plate for men of lower and lower smv.
Or she works and party's through her 20s gets a leg up in promotions etc but hates her job and worries about finding a man she wants. She he grudgingly ends up with beta boy at 30 has 2 kids and side tracks her "career" the divorces at 38 and tries to pick it back up but doesn't feel truly happy at any point in her life.
The refrain of any attack or charge of inequality is that feminism IS about equality.
Also, most people generally don't follow news - it's a very small percentage - and even a smaller percentage with the education, intelligence, and time to sort it out and read up.
Intelligence is just one factor in actually being aware of what's going on and proper interpreting.
Probably the same reason non Jews didn't really question Nazism, or why most white people didn't question Jim Crow laws. It's easy to follow something without question when it does nothing but help you.
Wtf this doesn't even make sense.. are they just trolling to see what they can get away with or something?
Maybe they are talking about drunk hookups? .08 BAC man and a .08 BAC woman have sex --> he raped her but she didn't rape him.
I have a hard time believing this isn't some onion-style parody. First they describe that the law is about being able to charge women for faciliting objects being inserted into men/women. So dildoing a guy or taking part in the dildoing of a man (or another woman). To go from there to charging a woman with inserting a man's penis into herself is quite a bizarre leap.
But even if we take that this law can be used like that, I mean sure there have been cases where men reported being forced into sex they didn't like, it's not like a charge means a verdict. Since when it is wrong to be able to charge people with a crime? It's up to the judge to decide. If a man truly did rape a woman, a nonsensical counter-charge he was raped would be thrown out by the judge quite easily based on the evidence that is naturally needed to convict. How exactly does this silence women?
Umm. That's all feminism ever was.
I've found that Jewish culture in general is very female dominated. I'm half Jewish half Christian. On the Jewish side, all my male family members who are married are subservient to their wives. The wives don't work and make all the decisions for the family. The men aren't in control. The others are divorced.
The Christian side has more traditional gender roles, where the guys are more dominant and in control.
Also Jewish here. Women control the family. However, men control the community. This is Judaism's way of giving equal power to men and women.
I suppose in certain Jewish-centric communities it works that way, but all my uncles live in secular communities and have secular jobs. Thus, they don't really exert much control over their communities either.
This is a really fascinating point. The "separate spheres" doctrine (men are dominant in some roles, women in others) generally works alright as long as those spheres are roughly preserved.
If one of those spheres is dissolved (or made "equal"), suddenly there's a fundamental imbalance. This makes a lot of sense for religious communities becoming secularized, but I think it can be applied more broadly.
We've very much seen egalitarianism grow in social and workplace settings without corresponding "balance" in the home. Chores are being slowly offloaded onto men, while domestic choices and control of children are largely reserved to women. The common feminist complaint of "Working full time and raising children is too hard!" is pretty much true, but the people saying it would never budge on giving up control of their homes and children to men.
Chores are drudgery, children and control over the home is power.
Yep. It's a move towards "equality" to offload chores to men, but it's only made because it isn't a move towards power sharing.
Funny, one could argue that in traditional Christian settings, it's exactly the other way around and women do indeed control the community.
It's the contrast of overt versus covert power. Men are usually more comfortable and better at over control, and women have a natural for covert control over men. But in Judaism, there's a cultural emphasis on covert modes of influence through intellectual pursuits, so it would make sense this would translate in some sort of reversal of tasks in the family unit.
I'll have to give it some more thought, but feminism seems to affect Christianity and Judaism in very different ways, probably due to those cultural differences.
This producing an interesting "splitting" effect, I think. In secular communities, there's a steady push to make extra-familial interactions gender-neutral. The result in that whichever gender's power was primarily social decays, and whichever gender's power is primarily domestic remains untouched, creating imbalance.
It's hard to see for Christianity because Christianity in secular communities is weakening and getting rarer, but I suspect that in "strongly religious" households, whichever side controlled household affairs has been steadily gaining power. Just spitballing, but it's interesting.
Thus is born the shiksa appeal
There's a huge difference in religious and non religious Jewish families.
It is very female dominated
I thought false rape claims, if they happen at all, are only like 1% of all claims. Also, according to one prominent feminist, Catherine Comins, people can often benefit from being falsely accused of rape.
edit: Holy shit! I didn't think this was necessary but /s
Well, if you tho't that, you'd be wrong by 40x. At least 40% of all rape claims are false. US Air Force did an extensive, crawl-up-your-ass-with-a-microscope study. Ask any large city detective.
And it's getting worse.
Where's the source? I've never heard that many
http://www.mediaradar.org/research_on_false_rape_allegations.php
I thought the /s was implied.
It should have been. Good sarcasm shouldn't need /s.
That number only applies to female false claims. Men obviously would lie every single time, as that woman stated.
A man would never lie about being raped.
Never is a big word my friend
[permanently deleted]
Well, with the homophobic trend, instead of admitting to homosexuality, I can see one spinning it to assault. Never is a big word
Unless that man is a douche bag Hollywood actor..
There's no proof he's lying
Wow, from a critic of the law:
I have a question. Won't the "yes means yes" bill necessarily mean that women will be charged with rape also, assuming that the law is applied equally? I mean, in most rape cases the male, who is probably drunk also, doesn't provide affirmative consent. So if she makes accusations against him, can't he just turn around and make the same accusations against her?
Mentioning Orthodox Judaism with general Tel Aviv culture and society shows you have no idea what you are talking about. Also, would definitely recommend a trip Tel Aviv, secular Israeli ass is epic.
Few years ago I started talking to this Israeli girl in the mall who was selling crap. I was happy to practice my Hebrew, before I knew it I was her boyfriend. God I miss that place!
There is something to be said about Israeli women, after moving here in Canada 10 years ago I'd have to say Canadian girls are much more tame.
I didn't see anything about the law makers deciding to ditch the bill... it is postponed.
Seriously? Non-Haredi Judaism is probably the single biggest force promoting cultural-marxism and feminism in the Western world. Everything from Marx himself to Saul Alinsky to the Southern Poverty Law Center to the ADL is under their thumb. The only one's outside their clutch are non-Zionist Haredi Jews (i.e. the Ultra-Orthodox) and a few libertarian Jews like Rothbard and Mises.
There's a difference between orthodox Jews and secular Jews.
The leftism-pushing parties are the latter, but both are tied by common ancestry and religion.
The orthdox, conservative and reformist branches of Rabbinic Judaism differ in their personal stances, but politically they're effectively the same. In Israel, the orthodox are often the ones in power, but most of Israel's supporters in the US are reformist. It's usually the reformists, and atheists, that promote "Progressivism" in the West. It's like comparing Neoconservatism with Progressivism, Neocons act like they're traditionalist/conservative but they're hand-in-glove together with Progressivism (actually an offshoot of it).
Haredi is a form of orthodox Judaism. There's many types of orthodox Judaism. You are wrong. In the orthodox (read: religious) Jewish world the families are patriarchal. In the modern and non religious and reform Jews are liberal and Marxist types.
Why is that? I'm a Jew - I come from a secular, close-to-atheist family that is firmly left of center. I find that I (and many Jews of my generation) have shifted to the right (the original catalyst was ultra anti-Israel sentiment on the left, which drove me into the arms of the right, which I previously dismissed as 'selfish' and 'irrational.') Since then, I've become much less emotional about issues, and more rational. Though I'm still interested as to why Jewish secular culture tends to veer to the left. PS: I'm not here for Protocols and conspiracy answers, duh.
I honestly have no idea. Probably because of the holocaust. They think being a pacifist will protect them and be above violence (when in reality it's the opposite)
There is a huge difference between orthodox Judaism and Haredim (Ultra-orthodox). The vast majority of Haredim are non-Zionist, while most Orthodox are Zionist. Haredim are often apolitical, and politically they never ally with the reformists. Orthodox, Conservative and Reformist often ally with each other for political purposes. The founders of Zionism were very anti-religious, and the Haredi have always opposed them for those reasons, meanwhile the Orthodox and Conservative have supported them.
Furthermore, Judaism is at least to some degree matriarchal. That is one of the key features of Rabbinic Judaism, compared to pre-Rabbinic Judaism where lineage clearly came from the father (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, etc). In modern Rabbinic Judaism, lineage and race is inherited through the mother. The exception being Reform Judaism, which ironically is the most Progressive/leftist version of Judaism, facilitating gay partnerships, anti-gender segregation, etc.
[permanently deleted]
It's interesting that Israel trains relatively effective female soldiers - along with Russia's 1st Women's Battalion of Death, the soldaderas of Revolutionary Mexico, and the "Dahomey Amazons" of what's now Benin, all of these cultures had in common their explicitly patriarchal nature.
Women are still humans and humans in general are pretty malleable. While virtually no woman will approach the strength of most any men, with the right environment they can still be taught discipline. It may not come as naturally to them, much as emotional manipulation, reading subtext or childcare doesn't come as naturally to us, but if you sink enough hours into anything, man or woman, you'll typically get better at it.
The problem in this context is that women get no sexual value from this practice (or marginally little), it isn't emphasized for them, and the incentives typically aren't enough for them to deal with their boredom (why program computers or join the military when you can lie on your back and have a man who believes it is his duty to take care of you - take care of you?)
Its all just a PR stunt, don't get too excited.
Yeah; is there any evidence that they are effective soldiers?
(also, not to get too political here, but pushing unarmed Arab children around at checkpoints isn't exactly difficult. Let me know when the Israelis have an all-female rifle company ready to go house-to-house in Fallujah.)
As a former officer of the IDF, I can confirm that the Karakal battalion (male & female infantry battalion) is pretty effective. I wouldn't compare it to the main infantry brigades such as Golani and the Paratroopers, but they take full responsibility for the Egyptian border and have already dealt with incidents before, some of those operations were led by women.
If you'd ask the girls from the battalion, I believe they would all be willing to go house-to-house in wherever.
It's just one of those things that make Israel so different and difficult to grasp from a TRP perspective, very versatile and distinct culturally.
TRP is, as far as I can tell, MOST applicable to white upper-middle class American women between the ages of 18-25 (and for the wall stuff, their aftermath) in elite colleges, primarily near the coasts.
The more deviation you get from that, the less applicable it'll be. Don't get me wrong - a lot of the TRP stuff is timeless, universal truth, but the specifics are, as far as I can tell, for that demographic.
My suspicion is that this is because a good portion of the men here are in a similar demographic.
No surprise. A fair amount of feminists are Jewish. As an outside observer, it seems like they have a vindictive need to emasculate Jewish men. Jenji Kohan, the writer-creator behind Weeds and Orange is the New Black, is especially good at it. The male Jewish characters she writes are submissive in nearly all aspects.
[permanently deleted]
It is important to distinguish between a Jew [religion], an Israeli [nationality, 30+% of Israelis are Arab], a Hebrew [ethnicity, i.e., seed of Abraham], and Zionist [proponent of Jewish/Hebrew state in palestine - most Zionists live in USA and are fundamentalist Christians]
ITT: Israel experts who have never been to Israel
So far Muslims are the only ones keeping their women at bay
Dear ,islamic calture is truly a rape calture...not the feminist definition..but actually a rape calture If you are in a place where sharea law is present...you can inslave a woman,rape her,have a child,rape your own daughter because technically any slave's offspring belongs to you by law (koran 23:1 if i remember correctly...and i read it in arabic the original language of the book)
That's the opposite extreme. I'd take pause anytime I found myself agreeing with Islamic culture.
These progressive feminist groups are generally secular and antagonistic to Orthodox Judaism. A small minority of these feminists claim to be Orthodox, but they radically reinvent Orthodox Judaism in their own image, and the resulting syncretic religion is largely ignored or rejected by mainstream Orthodoxy.
In any case, Orthodox Jews comprise only about 20-30 percent of Jews in Israel, and rarely control the legislative agenda.
Israel, unlike the the rest of the feminized countries still needs to be masculine or other wise they will get steamrolled by their enemies. So I doubt they will end up completely emasculated.
Feminists know their own bullshit and will guard against the other side doing it. The same came up whenever you talk about the male birth control pill (what if he lies about taking it????).
Pretty interesting, considering that it is in Israel.
[permanently deleted]
[permanently deleted]
[permanently deleted]
Enjoy getting a woman you hate pregnant? If you force yourself off she could just claim domestic violence too. People like you are the reason why shit like this exists.
[permanently deleted]
[permanently deleted]
[permanently deleted]
Let's see...if you're too drunk to move and she shoves something up your asshole?
[permanently deleted]
Well you've just answered your own question. Expand that to everything else.
Your ever increasingly loose definitions of rape, such as non verbal permission, talking someone into it, not getting a notarized document etc are one way. These rules have to work both ways.
And there's the obvious point that someone could simply not want to. By now you should have figured out that sexual arousal isn't exactly something that everyone can control 100% of the time. It's a reaction that can come at inconvenient or unwanted times (and even not happen for some if they're unlucky). It's like saying if a women has a physical reaction to being forced into sex, she must have wanted it. Biological reactions don't demonstrate consent.
Same for a guy. But maybe the guy is super weak, get's pressured into it because he doesn't want to be labelled as gay / not up for it, or he's being threatened / blackmailed etc etc.
It's not really stuff that I'd imagine applies to many guys in here, but I don't see how you can't understand it.
Thank you for actually sharing a cogent point of view and not just a bunch of paranoid fantasies.
For me, this is the crux of the issue: there's a world of difference between being beaten unconscious or having a knife put to your throat (or some other violence or threat of violence) or being drugged into unconsciousness then having an object (penis, bottle, whatever) forcefully inserted into your body against your will and merely being seduced, coerced without violence, or otherwise being made to perform a non-penetrative sexual act against your will. They just are not the same, whatsoever, and using the same word to describe both acts cheapens the first one and elevates the second beyond its merits.
Is being tricked or even drugged into sex bad? Yes. Is being tricked into getting a girl pregnant bad? Absolutely. Is waking up to find someone you're not attracted to riding on top of you troubling? Very much so. But are any of these events actual rape? Fuck no.
People need to stop using the word "rape" to cover every possible crime that might revolve around sex. It's lazy and shabby use of language, and it's bullshit like this that got our society to this point in the first damn place. Sexual assault is not rape in the same way that assault is not murder.
I pretty much agree with the reasons you're confused about it all. All the bs that's counted as "rape" nowerdays really isn't. Someone who was pressured into something and only finds out it was "rape" the next day from a friends definition is not comparable with someone who is physically assaulted in a dark alley.
I think the only point is that if this BS is applicable to women, it has to be to men. Half of it is the principle and just the whole double standards of it. But yeah being raped is not really a huge concern for most guys, and actually the fear of a false rape accusation actually is more-so. Making the moronic Israeli feminist actions all the more fucked up.
Either way at a base level, 100% regardless of whether the rules are bat-shit insane, or reasonable and correct, rape shouldn't have anything to do with gender at all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ikd0ZYQoDko
Some ham-beast gets three of her friends to hold you down, and rubs her gunt on your face until she is squealing and sweating with pleasure...
You cool with that?
[permanently deleted]
Rape = forced sex.
That's like arguing Bill Clinton didn't have sexual relations with that woman Lewinsky.
Because the only thing that can penetrate another thing is a penis?
Right?