TheRedArchive needs help
With 700,000+ posts and 16,000,000+ comments archived, and new Red Pill content being added every week, keeping TheRedArchive alive and discoverable to everyone is starting to become very costly. As a 20-year-old student who just moved out and is living independently for the first time, keeping TheRedArchive alive is beginning to cost me much more than I thought.

Therefore, if you appreciate the website, have gained a lot of knowledge and insight from it, and want to show your appreciation, you can do so by donating any amount that you want via the options below. The money will be used on the expensive monthly host bill and any future maintenance of the website.
Thank you, and I wish you all a successful 2021 and a good luck with achieving your goals and dreams!

Best, /u/dream-hunter

Israeli feminists helped kill a bill that could charge women for rape of men because - get this - they're worried about false rape claims.

Reddit View
Facebook Twitter Reddit Email Copy link
PDF EPUB TXT PNG
brotherjustincrowe
December 8, 2014
1031 upvotes
TheRedPill

Oy vey izmir. http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Womens-groups-Cancel-law-charging-women-with-rape

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.


Post Information
Title Israeli feminists helped kill a bill that could charge women for rape of men because - get this - they're worried about false rape claims.
Author brotherjustincrowe
Upvotes 1031
Comments 179
Date 08 December 2014 03:21 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit TheRedPill
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/26022
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2onh0j/israeli_feminists_helped_kill_a_bill_that_could/
Similar Posts
A list about feminism misandry for anyone who thinks that feminism fights for men’s rights, for anyone who thinks that feminism was only a sexist movement starting from the third wave and for anyone who accuse the MRM of being a sexist movement, while still defending feminism.

A list about feminism misandry for anyone who thinks that feminism fights for men’s rights,

A list about feminism misandry for anyone who thinks that feminism fights for men’s rights, for anyone who thinks that feminism was only a sexist movement starting from the third wave and for anyone who accuse the MRM of being a sexist movement, while still defending feminism.

A list about feminism misandry for anyone who thinks that feminism fights for men’s rights,

All Women Lie About Rape - PART ONE

I originally started typing this up about a week ago, and found myself a dozen

The impact of a man's past on him is very different from the impact of a woman's past on her - and the difference can be day and night when the man has the tools to deal with his past.

TL : DR - What doesn't kill a man makes him stronger, once he recovers

Round and round the hamster goes. Where it stops? Nobody knows.

EDIT: This shit is long as fuck so I figured Id move the Tl;dr I


Red Pill terms found in post:
the red pillfeminist
Comments

[–][deleted] 112 points113 points  (32 children) | Copy

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.

[–]brotherjustincrowe[S,🍰] 56 points57 points  (20 children) | Copy

I blame the betas who follow 100% what women say but turn a blind eye to what they do. Pussy-pedestal blinders.

[–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face26 points27 points  (17 children) | Copy

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.

[–][deleted] 61 points61 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]TRP VanguardArchwinger2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

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.

[–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]systemshock8692 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

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..

[–]LittleCrazee3 points4 points  (4 children) | Copy

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.

[–][deleted] 3 points3 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]LittleCrazee0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

I don't have the time or energy to respond very effectively so all I can say is that the ignore them and they'll go away tactic and blaming people who offer counter arguments to feminist bullshit is so fucking stupid it hurts my brain. Just because a bunch of redditors and manosphere gurus parrot this absolutely ludicrous strategy, doesn't mean it's true.

I wish you all the personal glory and Pussy that all of your manly pursuits will surely result in, in the feminist hell that you tacitly allowed the world to become.

As for me thinking I'm more alpha for taking action, quite simply, I don't. I think the term as it is used in here is so nebulous that it is meaningless and I do not aspire to it. I aspire to be me. To fuck with stupid childish labels.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]LittleCrazee0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Fair enough I suppose. You seem like a bright guy (in all seriousness), I wish you the best.

[–]1independentmale1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Endorsed Contributorbicepsblastingstud3 points4 points  (4 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy

You're really far more worried about the opinion's of my Facebook friends than I am. I do agree that as I become more influential, I'll need to curtail that behavior.

[–]Endorsed Contributorbicepsblastingstud1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

I do agree that as I become more influential, I'll need to curtail that behavior.

Why wait?

You're really far more worried about the opinion's of my Facebook friends than I am.

Reputation is everything. I'm guessing you're fairly young, and haven't really experienced how important it is to have a good rep with that friend of a friend.

[–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I haven't been waiting, I've gradually been decreasing the behavior over the past two years or so. But I used to really like attention and validation, and every once in a while I'll still swipe for it. I consider it a moral failing when I do, of course - though in most contexts, not a huge one.

Actually, I'm moderately old. I'm just now getting to the point in my life where I care about reputation. I've never had a value add from reputation thus far though. Everything I've gotten has just come from working harder/learning things for me.

[–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Another reason why I'm not too bothered by it is because I know it is temporary - zeal of the convert and all that. Eventually the desire to save other men will die out.

[–]krakosia2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Listen to what the other poster said.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Don't blame them. Educate them.

[–]TylerX52 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

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

[–]blue_27-1 points0 points  (9 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Kaelteth14 points15 points  (7 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Ibex3D15 points16 points  (1 child) | Copy

"Dont hit anyone unless you have to." No gender, no bullshit.

[–]blue_27-3 points-2 points  (4 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Lt_Muffintoes4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy

Yeah man, knife attacks are no threat

Maybe your whiteknight armour will save you?

[–]blue_27-2 points-1 points  (2 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Lt_Muffintoes1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

I have to admit that I've never been attacked with a knife, but if someone truly means to kill you with a knife, you're probably already dead.

I'm specifically stating that at no point should a man lose control enough that he has to resort to punching a woman

I'll agree insofar as you shouldn't be around women who will come after you physically, but man, come on. Someone has a knife in their hand, you pretty much have permission to do anything and everything against them.

[–]blue_27-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

I will repeat my original statement that has spawned all of this shit:

... I do not expect a woman to be overly skilled in knife fighting, so I wouldn't consider that a viable threat.

Not one single rebuttal has actually shown me a depiction of a female who was highly trained in edged weapons, and fits into this discussion.

Someone has a knife in their hand, you pretty much have permission to do anything and everything against them.

Sure. They have now shown themselves to be a legitimate threat. However, at no point in time does punching them become the proper course of action. Your primary focus should be to secure that weapon, and at that point, why would you then resort to punching if you have now disarmed your opponent. You should now be in full control of that situation, and I am not sure that moving back within arms reach of that person is the best of plans. I wouldn't do it, and I consider myself very well trained and highly experienced.

But what we are discussing now has absolutely zero to do with the concept of not hitting women. Don't be a fucking victim, and if anyone says that they were scared of a little girl, then ... they are playing the victim role.

[–]krakosia1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]trp22222 points23 points  (0 children) | Copy

They know from personal experience how easy it is to falsely convict someone of rape.

[–][deleted] 193 points194 points  (66 children) | Copy

Let it not be forgotten that feminism is and always has been a sexual strategy.

[–]sir_wankalot_here130 points131 points  (62 children) | Copy

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.

[–][deleted] 75 points76 points  (4 children) | Copy

Quote from the article: "The law treats men and women as being equal"

This is framed as a problem with the law.

[–]colovick4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Dorrog4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy

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.

[–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (55 children) | Copy

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.

[–][deleted] 13 points13 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

We also reward apathy. There is no reason to acquire knowledge or apply it.

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (20 children) | Copy

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.

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]jmottram0811 points12 points  (18 children) | Copy

How much longer are we going to wait for Africa to pick themselves up before we conclude that they're incapable of it?

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.

[–]Endorsed ContributorAFPJ5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

If I had a penny for every time a geneticist doing good scientific work lost his career, funding & had his study shrieked on by shills I'd buy a Land Rover. "Africans" are the only remaining pure Homo sapiens. They interbred with Deniova hominis 40K years ago, forming the genetic substrate for Hispanic and Asian Races as well as Homo Neanderthalensis about 60K years ago, creating Nordics & Scandinavians. Everything else is a mix of the big 3.

I'm just as happy as ya'll to see the occasional actually scientific study on here but you've got to realize that science is just as distorted, twisted & undermined by Political Correctness as anything, sometimes even more so.

[–]sir_wankalot_here4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

TRP explanation.

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.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (24 children) | Copy

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.

[–][deleted] -1 points-1 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (22 children) | Copy

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?

[–]thisjibberjabber3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

It did sort of work in Hong Kong. Seems at least as promising as the NGO model of development.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy

The world is much more simple than we can possibly imagine. Who would have thought that after all our societal evolution women still just want to get fucked by a caveman?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy

The world is much more simple than we can possibly imagine.

Some aspects are some are not.

Who would have thought that after all our societal evolution women still just want to get fucked by a caveman?

That's not particularly surprising. Most signs point towards this; women dating bad boys, animal interaction, etc.

Now look at occupations and the results of previous occupations. Most often it ends in a violent revolutions. What does that tell you about human nature and willingneess to submit?

[–]johnbranflake2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy

No, British colonies were all better off having been colonized, and people were mostly happy with it. In the US all they wanted was the same rights as British Citizens. Ghandi wanted India to be part of the British Commonwealth. AUS NZ CANADA are all part of the commonwealth.

[–]666Evo0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I'd hesitate to include Australia in "...and people were mostly happy with it."
The criminals the British sent to paradise? No shit they were happy with the situation.
The native people who were slaughtered en masse? Not so much. They're still not overly happy with it. Nor were they particularly better off until relatively recently and they still lag behind in the majority of metrics today.

I can't speak for the rest of the Commonwealth but the only people happy with colonisation in Australia were the people forming colonies.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

and people were mostly happy with it.

Until they felt that their culture (language, religion, worldview) was under attack. Then they were willing to fight and die.

[–]AngriestBeaver-5 points-4 points  (9 children) | Copy

Little new to trp, see a lot of good post about self I improvement, sociobiology, evolutionary evidence of human behavior. Was all refreshing and evidence based until I saw u/stumbles racist ethnocentric rant and his completely ignorant view of Africa. Holy shit. Aren't there mods to keep agenda spewing shit out, or does this come with the territory. And why the fuck does he have so many upvotes. Take that shit to r/politics

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points  (4 children) | Copy

Occasionally. I don't care that it's racist or ethnocentric, but it's just such a fucking stupid argument.

"Don't they know that if white people took over things would be better? Why won't they allow us to colonize and Americanize them? Why don't they understand that if we make their country like ours they'll be happier. All we need to do is make them wealthy and they'll allow their culture to die."

When it's completely the other way around. Most people are willing to give up wealth and fight to the death to maintain their culture (aka identity).

[–]johnbranflake4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy

Go to Africa, people beg you to take you with them. They want wealth and culture, but will choose the former if they could.

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points  (1 child) | Copy

Just the way you phrase your statements shows your bias:

They want wealth and culture

This clearly implies:

  1. American culture is the best. Cultures different from American are inferior.

they want wealth

Yes they do. All people want wealth. What does that have to do with American culture?

they want culture

No. They already have culture. They have the sports, stories, religion, jokes, and language that they grew up with and are used to.

Go to Africa, people beg you to take you with them.

You're telling me poor people who struggle to get food and healthcare would move to prosperous areas? No shit.

Go to wealthier parts of Africa without war or famine. Areas where families have a surplus of food, leisurely time, and strong social/family ties. They will almost always prefer their own culture to American. Just like you prefer American culture.

[–]2wiseclockcounter-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

it's pretty much the same deal with conservatism on here. Just down-vote and give a simple retort so that people can see the other side and make their own decision.

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]AngriestBeaver1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

realists base their opinions on facts and evidence. you are giving your opinion on an issue you have a limited understanding of. stumbles for president /s

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

The irony is that I envision a much more prosperous future for blacks than you do. Yet I'm the racist.

[–]jmottram08-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy

No, they won't be okay with occupation. But they are occupied by drug and warlords now, so I don't think its a huge problem.

At least with white people in charge they won't be getting murdered and raped as they currently are. And their standard of living will skyrocket.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Such blatant racism and stupidity.

No. With white people in charge, violent regimes and dictators will be elected and thousands of innocent people killed.

http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon2/world.html

Browse around South America and Africa.

Good examples are Nicaragua, Somalia, Libya, and Congo.

[–]jmottram084 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

No. With white people in charge, violent regimes and dictators will be elected and thousands of innocent people killed.

Are you aware of what africa is like currently?

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]2comment0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

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).

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]Hirudin8 points9 points  (2 children) | Copy

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.

[–]nived321-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

At least they're not Muslims...

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Can you briefly explain what you mean by this?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

It's a strategy women adopt to secure the best mates for themselves.

[–]Areimanes93 points94 points  (3 children) | Copy

Some key elements from the post:

“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.

Those people sound like rape apologists to me.

[–]neoj88885 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

They should play Benny Hill music over feminist news these days.

[–]Endorsed ContributorBluepillProfessor5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Wasn't rare enough to exclude what happened to me.

[–]Kekeramitu48 points49 points  (18 children) | Copy

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.

[–]anonlymouse111 points112 points  (1 child) | Copy

Feminism has never turned any actual misogynists into non-misogynists, but it has made new misogynists.

[–]TRP VanguardCyralea58 points59 points  (7 children) | Copy

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".

[–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face85 points86 points  (6 children) | Copy

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.

[–][deleted] 34 points35 points  (2 children) | Copy

educate yourself!

Fem-speak for "because I said so!"

[–]ddundly17 points18 points  (1 child) | Copy

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.

[–]2wiseclockcounter7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]through_a_ways6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy

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."

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"

[–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–][deleted] 28 points28 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]brotherjustincrowe[S,🍰] 15 points16 points  (0 children) | Copy

If they didn't keep 'em that way, they wouldn't be able to recruit new feminists.

[–]Dorrog3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy

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?

[–]mrp3anut13 points14 points  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Hoodwink1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]redpilltom-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]1runnerrun229 points30 points  (3 children) | Copy

“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?

[–]Newdist217 points18 points  (1 child) | Copy

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.

[–]1runnerrun2-4 points-3 points  (0 children) | Copy

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?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Umm. That's all feminism ever was.

[–]Vietnom34 points35 points  (13 children) | Copy

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.

[–]UsernameIWontRegret34 points35 points  (8 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Vietnom18 points19 points  (4 children) | Copy

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.

[–]1Snivellious2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Chores are drudgery, children and control over the home is power.

[–]1Snivellious1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Endorsed Contributorzyk0s12 points13 points  (1 child) | Copy

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.

[–]1Snivellious0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]no_face2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Thus is born the shiksa appeal

[–]WindowToAlaska1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

There's a huge difference in religious and non religious Jewish families.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

It is very female dominated

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (13 children) | Copy

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

[–]1KyfhoMyoba5 points6 points  (5 children) | Copy

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.

[–]justskatedude0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

Where's the source? I've never heard that many

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (1 child) | Copy

http://www.mediaradar.org/research_on_false_rape_allegations.php

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

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

I thought the /s was implied.

[–]WhiteTrashInTrouble0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

It should have been. Good sarcasm shouldn't need /s.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

That number only applies to female false claims. Men obviously would lie every single time, as that woman stated.

[–]Newdist27 points8 points  (5 children) | Copy

A man would never lie about being raped.

[–]Venicedreaming4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy

Never is a big word my friend

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]Venicedreaming1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Well, with the homophobic trend, instead of admitting to homosexuality, I can see one spinning it to assault. Never is a big word

[–]MyNewAccount96 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy

Wow, from a critic of the law:

“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.”

[–]4_YRT5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

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?

[–]TRPtruth5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Vrnn2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Transmigratory1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I didn't see anything about the law makers deciding to ditch the bill... it is postponed.

[–]R4F16 points7 points  (6 children) | Copy

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.

[–]through_a_ways1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

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.

[–]R4F1-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

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).

[–]WindowToAlaska1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

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.

[–]JazzerciseMaster0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

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.

[–]WindowToAlaska-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

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)

[–]R4F10 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]brotherjustincrowe[S,🍰] 5 points6 points  (6 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

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?)

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (4 children) | Copy

Its all just a PR stunt, don't get too excited.

[–]Newdist21 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

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.)

[–]FarOrAMess3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Senior Contributorcocaine_face0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]bakbakgoesherthroat2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy

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.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]1KyfhoMyoba2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

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]

[–]Bazooko3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

ITT: Israel experts who have never been to Israel

[–]Idontlikekarmawhores1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

So far Muslims are the only ones keeping their women at bay

[–]bkmnalpha0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

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)

[–]WhiteTrashInTrouble-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

That's the opposite extreme. I'd take pause anytime I found myself agreeing with Islamic culture.

[–]FTFY_account0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

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.

In any case, Orthodox Jews comprise only about 20-30 percent of Jews in Israel, and rarely control the legislative agenda.

[–]bobbatosakosanose0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

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.

[–]Endorsed ContributorrebuildingMyself0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

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????).

[–]KubrickBrHue0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Pretty interesting, considering that it is in Israel.



You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter