TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

TIL feminist play "The Vagina Monologues" celebrates the statutorily rape of a 13 year old girl by a 24-year-old woman, describing it as a "positive, healing experience" and a "good rape".

JohnKimble111

February 21, 2017
2079 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vagina_Monologues#Robert_Swope_critique
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title TIL feminist play "The Vagina Monologues" celebrates the statutorily rape of a 13 year old girl by a 24-year-old woman, describing it as a "positive, healing experience" and a "good rape".
Author

JohnKimble111

Upvotes 2079
Comments 245
Date February 21, 2017 3:50 AM UTC
(9 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5v9e7w/til_feminist_play_the_vagina_monologues/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/til-feminist-play-the-vagina-monologues-celebrates.931563
https://theredarchive.com/post/931563
Red Pill terms in post
feminist
Top posts by JohnKimble111

Women Should Have to Register for the Draft, Congressional Commission Says

6700 upvotes
March 25, 2020
/r/PussyPassDenied

BBC admits its viral “women write better code” story was fake news

6298 upvotes
December 28, 2016
/r/MensRights

Gender pay gap in modelling sees men paid 75% less than women

6153 upvotes
February 8, 2018
/r/MensRights

Toxic Masculinity

5904 upvotes
March 10, 2018
/r/MensRights

After feminist cry sexism over BBC pay, official review uncovers more underpaid men than women

5789 upvotes
January 31, 2018
/r/MensRights

Controlling girlfriend, 22, who starved and stabbed her partner, banned him from her bed and took over his Facebook account is jailed for more than seven years

3826 upvotes
April 16, 2018
/r/PussyPassDenied

'If you tell anyone I've cheated, I'll ruin you': Cambridge don is cleared after his PhD student fiancee accused him of assault 'to get back at him' for calling off their wedding after she had affair in Galapagos Islands

3770 upvotes
September 16, 2017
/r/MensRights

Amber Heard loses bid to get $50 million defamation suit by her ex Johnny Depp thrown out

3737 upvotes
March 28, 2020
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]feedmecarrots 399 points400 points401 points 9 years ago (61 children) | Copy Link

Why am I not surprised? From a feminist standpoint, they see only men as being able to rape.

[+]Rauma points 9 years ago [recovered] (12 children) | Copy Link

Only men can rape but can't be raped /s /s /s

[–]Source_or_gtfo 66 points67 points68 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Men can be raped, but only by other men /s.

True facts time : A famous feminist hate-stat used for a long time was "99% of rapists are men", of course failing to mention that the definition of rape used in the stat required the rapist to penetrate the victim.

[–]Nuggetry 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

So 1% of rapists were women who were successfully able to penetrate a man?

[–]nixonrichard 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Objects, fingers, and tongue generally count.

[–]_RandyRandleman_ 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Totally agree. Fuck you, men!

[+]killerbake -15 points-14 points-13 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

/s

[–]_RandyRandleman_ 28 points29 points30 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

It's implied you spanner

[+]killerbake -15 points-14 points-13 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Funny cause when I posted that you were at -10 so go fuck yourself

[–]_RandyRandleman_ 30 points31 points32 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The tables have turned

[–]RockFourFour 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Reddit giveth, and she taketh away.

[–]Aureolin9861 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She? MISOGYNY! REEEEEEEEEEEE!

[–]dangrullon87 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Worked for Lena Dunham.

[–]JebberJabber 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

The original 1996 play stated that it was technically rape, while presenting it as a good thing. This is exactly what Milo got in trouble for. I saw it in that form, it seemed old-fashioned even at that time (late 1990s).

The script was modified after criticism in 2000. The age was raised from 13 to 16 (the age of consent in most countries) and the line "if it was rape, it was a good rape" was dropped.

[–]feedmecarrots 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

So, they cleaned it up. Still the thought of the original bothers me a lot. While they would condemn a man of doing as much in a heartbeat, they seem to think that it is all right for a woman on girl situation. There is an awful lot of hypocrisy in that.

[–]JebberJabber 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

Yes it is hugely hypocritical and feminism has yet to face up to this sort of issue.

The play was performed around the world for four years before a prominent protest was raised by Scopes in 2000. What does it mean, that this was even possible?

Obviously there was disquiet about it within feminism at the time. The play was criticised as overly lesbian focused. But the doctrine of mutual support or at least of not publicly criticising other feminists, plus the invulnerabiliy of lesbians from criticism because they are a minority, led to this bullshit persisting.

Another possible factor is residual idolisation of lesbians within feminism. This was certainly a thing in the 70s among some rad fems. There was a feeling that attraction to men was almost a dirty secret, a weakness that they might hope to overcome eventually. Separatists were seen to be the most pure, committed feminists in some circles.

[–]feedmecarrots 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Feminism is rife with hypocrisy. If it is sex by coercion, that sure sounds like rape to me.

[–]JebberJabber 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago* (15 children) | Copy Link

The example in the play very clearly did not involve any kind of coercion and was still viewed very positively many years later. But it was still a 13 year old who is legally unable to give consent, with an 11 year older woman. And no reference to the issues involved in that were made other than to note that it was technically rape.

[–]feedmecarrots 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Thank you for clearing that up. So it would be from a statutory point.

[–]JebberJabber 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Yes. But it was not just a technicality. Feminists are very well aware of the problems which arise from relationships with big power differences, and specifically about the problems with abuse of underage children. The analysis of power differences is a very big part of feminist and SJW thought, and they are sophisticated in doing so.

So missing or tolerating the problem in the play for so long, then just modifying the offending bit, shows huge hypocrisy. Nobody went and drove a stake through the original playwright. People who had performed the play were not shunned. The whole play was not seen as permanently contaminated by association with the terrible child-molester advocate who wrote it.

And when Milo (whom I loathe) had his views revealed expressing, in part, exactly the same thing, there was zero mention of the V monologues made.

Yet they claim misandry is not a thing because men's overall dominance in many areas of society somehow overwhelms all areas of life, giving blanket exemption from criticism except as an individual to individual thing.

[–]feedmecarrots 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Maybe it would be a sign of terminal cynicism, but i wonder if we will ever be able to not be shocked by the hypocrisy of feminism? i have to wonder what older feminists are doing to young ones in real life?

[–]JebberJabber 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

I'm not so cynical. The hypocrisy is not usually conscious.

Theoretically it is fixable but it is difficult, because they have insulated themselves from non-feminist and particularly non-female sources of information.

[–]ThirdTurnip 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Honestly I am surprised by this. While I've never had any desire to see this thing, it gets referred to frequently in popular culture so I'm aware of it.

Discovering that it glorifies statutory rape is horrifying.

[–]mwobuddy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But the victim said it was a good rape! Are you trying to control her feelings now, shitlord?!

[–]MisterCerulean 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And only White Men can be racist.

[–]theninjallama 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

These same people scream at Milo for his comments about statutory rape being a positive experience

[–]Rethgil 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

He didn't say that though did he. Let's not start misquoting him to make him look a certain way.

[–]theninjallama 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Joking or not it's what was implied.

[–]Rethgil 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

So why is it being reported in mass media and HERE that he "said" such things, if actually it is only "implied" as you say?

Bit of a difference.

[–]theninjallama 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Idk I don't really care to nitpick that much here, in my opinion he said something so close to it I just don't care of the difference.

[–]Singulaire -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That seems to be more of a right-left thing than a man-woman thing. George Takei also spoke positively of a similar experience and nobody's out for his blood.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Do any of you ever read the OP before commenting

[+][deleted] -6 points-5 points-4 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

feminist standpoint

No. Not feminists, deranged idiots.

[+]creamyfrog points 9 years ago* [recovered] (13 children) | Copy Link

No, feminists. Stop trying to defend a hate movement.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

Haha, wait didn't realize I was at /r/mensrights. So the suffragettes who sought equal voting rights were a hate movement? The brave women of Iran who got beaten or even died trying to stand up for their rights during the Iranian revolution were part of a hate movement too? The people protesting the legalization of domestic abuse in Russia right now are also extremists? Seriously, I want an answer, because these are feminists, all of them.

*-2 and no answer? Really guys?

[–]heimdall_ 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm pretty sure he is talking about third wave western feminism.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No I'm not, font speak for me, I'll reply to him in depth when I get a sec

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

*-2 and no answer? Really guys?

Its only been 23 hours dude. I'll reply in depth when I get a bit of time.

[–]dkey1983 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Can't wait to see this epic reply about how all of feminism going back to the suffrage movement is a hate group.

[–]Mackowatosc 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

They spught voting rights without obligations that men had together with the voting privilege. Like being conscripted.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

So because women didn't throw their bodies at the battlefields of WWI they contributed nothing to society? Oh okay, just gonna ignore all the women who worked in the textile factories that Britain made it's wealth upon? And the countless women who died early because of the shit conditions in those factories, which they couldnt change because they had no right to vote?

And also, my other examples, are they extremists too?

[–]Mackowatosc 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

If you want the same rights, take on same responsibilities, including dangerous ones. Unless you think its fair for men to put their lives at risk while you stay safe and sound at home, while enjoying life without anyone trying to shoot you? Then again, you just might.

And the countless women who died early because of the shit conditions in those factories

Just as men do in work related incidents. Daily. In dangerous and demanding jobs that keep society running. Not much strong, independent feminist women there, why is that? Why is that ?

If you deem women are the same, I request you do the SAME 50% part of ALL jobs.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

That argument falls flat instantly, why do you think women didn't historically fight in wars or work at construction jobs? Is it because they were cowardly and selfish? No, it's because they weren't allowed. It was the mans job to be a soldier or a concrete pourer, women shouldn't strain their "frail bodies" according to the men at the time. Furthermore, those stereotypes live on today, albeit more softly and subtly.

[–]Mackowatosc 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Its not about wheter they were allowed. Its wheter or not they are willing to change that.

Or, maybe you could show me that push for equal employment opportunity (that is prevalent in corporate jobs as far as female employment goes) in another industries? Like, those that underlay the society, dangerous, dirty, but still high paying jobs ?

Right. No push there. Its not a push for equality, its a push for assets without willingness to take on the same involvement and responsibility, stress, and risk. One sided, double standard, hedonistic, and self-serving.

Or maybe show me that push for equality in shelters for DV male victims vs female ones? Oh right...male shelters are being torn down because well, cant have men have same sort of social security network and support right ? How's NOW doing to change that in the US? Oh right, they are the ones trying to make shelter system strictly female only ;)

Reproductive rights then, maybe? Oh right...we men do not get RIGHTS here, nor support. We get responsibilities, or jail time if we dont pay up ;) Not to mention having any say in wheter or not OUR children (yep, they are ours to, we men are fathers, thus EQUAL parents to women) in a case of abortion? OH right, its HER body, her choice, and our RESPONSIBILITY to pay if she chooses so, by unilateral decision.

So where's the equal rights for males in there ?

And dont tell me its better for "society". Its only better for female part of the society.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

So the suffragettes who sought equal voting rights were a hate movement?

Except they didn't. They didn't want the draft which came with the responsibility of the vote for men. They wanted the privilege but without the responsibility to protect your country that came with it. And they also made it all about the wimmins, even though most men fighting in WW1 didn't have the vote as they were under 21. Women were and are the most privileged people in society, what terrorist group do you know of that was given into during war time?

You may pass this off like I saw in a previous comment as logical as why should women want to give their body's up to the meat grinder? Well if they aren't or weren't a female supremacy movement, why they didn't cause much of a fuss when men were forced into the meat grinder to protect their country and by extension their right to vote. Why do feminists advocate rights above men if they are an equality movement and not a female supremacist one?

We can talk about the suffragette bombings if you want.

So the suffragettes who sought equal voting rights were a hate movement?

Yes look up the white feather movement and the leader of the suffragettes, Emmaline Pankhurst loved shaming boys and young men into fighting to protect them but were unwilling to do the same for them. If they were an equality movement, why did they shame boys to suicide to protect them in the meat grinder instead of the other way around? Again equal voting rights are not equal if one part of the population gets special privileges for their genitalia.

The brave women of Iran who got beaten or even died trying to stand up for their rights during the Iranian revolution were part of a hate movement too?

I'm sure you can find examples of feminists fighting for equal rights but I can more easily find articles on Israeli feminists who petition against motions to cover female on male rape under the law and succeeding.

The people protesting the legalization of domestic abuse in Russia right now are also extremists?

Where they protesting because of female victims of domestic violence or all? Given your answer to that question it should answer your question for you. Feminism is a female supremacy movement.

*-2 and no answer? Really guys?

I'm sorry I cannot reply immediately at your whim. Its almost as if not everyone operates under what time is best for you...

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm not saying there haven't been extreme feminists who have gone way beyond the line, because there have been. Just like there have been anti feminists who have beat down, intimidated, killed and silenced them. What I am saying is that this sub is showcasing the worst examples that you can possibly find, and you make it seem like this is the face of feminism. In reality, feminism is a civil struggle for the basic democratic rights that men have had since the inception of democracy.

And yes, voting is a right in a democracy, not a privilege. Everyone who contributes to society, has a say in how it operates and where the funds they contribute go.

I'm sorry I cannot reply immediately at your whim. Its almost as if not everyone operates under what time is best for you..

What I meant was that at least 3 people had read my comment, disagreed with me and promtly downvoted without actually giving any arguments.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm not saying there haven't been extreme feminists who have gone way beyond the line, because there have been.

We measure a Movement Based on its actions, not what a couple of coffee shop feminists think. The fact is that Emmaline Pankhurst was the main leader of the suffragettes and took part in the terrorist activities and shaming of you boys, even adolescents to make them fight for the rights she apparently didn't have. Erin Pizzey, the one who set up the first domestic abuse shelter in the UK was run out of the country by feminists. these are not isolated incidents or rarities, this is what the movement is founded upon.

anti feminists who have beat down, intimidated, killed and silenced them

Like Who? Or do you mean anti terrorists and the working class who didn't like having their businesses vandalised?

What I am saying is that this sub is showcasing the worst examples that you can possibly find, and you make it seem like this is the face of feminism.

So your example of protests in Iran are OK but because you came across some uncomfortable examples they aren't valid, even though There are hundreds of these cases and usually ended up in them succeeding. Yes it is the face of feminism because who is running the oppressive family courts; the biased criminal system who give men higher sentences for the same crime as a woman; write into legislation laws that violate individual liberties to protect women's feelings or sensibilities? How come Anita Sarkeesian or Emma Watson can show up at the UN if these people do not represent the face of feminism? It is a feminist system and as a result is anti male, or maybe to be more charitable it would be better described as gynocentric.

In reality, feminism is a civil struggle for the basic democratic rights that men have had since the inception of democracy.

There are so many problems with that statement, firstly if this is the case, why is feminism still a thing in free western society's? And so large and prevalent in the government that we actually have MP's that argue for the abolition of womens prisons? The score was settled one-hundred years ago.

Secondly, that is patently false; before a large portion of men got the vote previously only people of nobility could vote, so how do you think men have had this right since the dawn of democracy? And as I said previously, most fighting men could not vote, yet still had to fight, women got the vote through domestic terrorism and no responsibility.

And yes, voting is a right in a democracy, not a privilege. Everyone who contributes to society, has a say in how it operates and where the funds they contribute go.

Well actually, in the context of the time period we are discussing you had to have the draft in order to vote, until women's suffrage atwhich point women got the vote without earning it like men had to. That is why I called it a privilege as at the time that is what I see it as. Although you are right it is a right not a privilege.

What I meant was that at least 3 people had read my comment, disagreed with me and promtly downvoted without actually giving any arguments.

People have to respond to you in order to have a valid disagreement? There are a whole host of reasons why not every voter will respond, and valid reasons at that.

[–]William__F0ster 99 points100 points101 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

Outcry from the play's supporters resulted in Swope's being fired from the staff of The Hoya, before the piece was even run.

[–]vijeno 17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

Even more surprisingly, acc. to the WP page this took place back in 2000. I would not have guessed that the feminist movement was so strong back then.

[–]SoundOfDrums 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh man, it's been rolling positive and negative for a while. National Organization for Women has done some fucked up stuff, like fighting shared parenting for divorced parents.

[–]Alpiney 30 points31 points32 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Erm...feminists as an arm of the New left have been strong for 40 years. This is not a new development. Though if I were to pinpoint a time they became most powerful would of been the rise of sexual harassment laws in the early 90s.

[–]could-of-bot 41 points42 points43 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It's either would HAVE or would'VE, but never would OF.

See Grammar Errors for more information.

[–]ThatDrunkenScot 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

What a rude bot.

[–]thisprofilenolongere 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

What a drunk Scot.

[–]ThatDrunkenScot 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ya got me there.

[–]vijeno 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well yes, maybe. It's not quite how I remember it, but that's not to say that I remember everything correctly on a global scale.

I really think there is a divide between Europe and the U.S. in that regard.

[–]vijeno 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Specifically, I cannot recall instances of officials being fired for stuff like that from back around 2000. I guess the first time I remember I heard stuff like that must have been between 2005 and 2010.

[–]yvaN_ehT_nioJ[🍰] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's quite surprising. I just finished reading Spreading Misandry and though it was originally published in like 2000 (or shortly after) a lot of what it talks about either still rings true or has gotten worse. It takes a look at how pop-culture spreads misandrist ideas/values and how those came from certain circles of academia/marxism.

It's worth a read if for no other reason than to see how there were people talking about the same issues we worry about back in the 1990s. Pretty well referenced and has a decent chunk of the book just devoted to explaining why the two profs who wrote it included/talked about the issues they did.

[–]William__F0ster 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I would not have guessed that the feminist movement was so strong back then.

You have a lot to learn!

[–]vijeno 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So say we all!

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You know feminism has been going since the mid 19th century, yes?

[–]vijeno 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, that doesn't tell us anything about how strong it was.

[–]mwobuddy 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They were fire bombing and regular bombing buildings at that time, as urban/homegrown terrorists, so...

[–]vijeno 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, I guess if we really wanted to go into this, we'd first have to discuss our definition of "strong", but frankly I'm not up to that now.

[–]notacrackheadofficer 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riot_grrrl
Edit: This music defined the 90s/2000s college radfem.

[–]vijeno 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You WANT me to go down memrrry lane, huh?

[–]notacrackheadofficer 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Screaming

[–]bluefootedpig 189 points190 points191 points 9 years ago (97 children) | Copy Link

If I am not mistaken, the vagina monologues are taken from real interviews. It is not passing judgement on those women, merely retelling their stories.

I imagine they could have found others.

[–]JohnKimble111[S] 139 points140 points141 points 9 years ago (54 children) | Copy Link

Yes but just think about the selection of the stories. Almost all those selected either feature negative sexual experiences with men or positive lesbian experiences, even if said experience was rape and the rapist giving the victim alcohol.

It's very obvious that all material has gone though a filter, whereby almost anything is rejected if it doesn't fit the narrative of "men are evil bastards and women are brilliant".

Eve Ensler is the person behind the play - a lesbian radfem. Note that her "research" for the production included interviewing a six year old girl and asking her intimate questions about her vagina. That's bad enough in itself, but it appears even more sinister when we realise the interviewer promotes drugging and raping 13 year old girls (just as long as the rapist is female).

[–][deleted] 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Reminds me of the female pedophile confession in /r/trueoffmychest the other day which was so highly upvoted instead of shamed.

[–]Lovelandmonkey 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I commented in that thread in support of her for coming out and telling her story, and I did so for a few reasons.

  1. I've seen many a countless time where female pedophiles are let off the hook while male pedophiles are at worst shamed. She expressed in that thread that she is shocked at how bad male pedophiles have it. She expected there to be much backlash but because she is a woman there was significantly little.

  2. I like hearing everyone's story. If there is a nazi sympathizer spewing some unspeakable things I will still listen to his side of the story. Sadly this society just doesn't allow this to happen sometimes. Male pedophiles come and tell their story, and they get shamed, no critical analysis, no attempt to help them. Women will be listened to, therefore I can hear their side of the story for myself.

In short, I hate that whole state of affairs but if it means I can hear their perspective then at least we have that.

[+][deleted] -6 points-5 points-4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If there is a nazi sympathizer spewing some unspeakable things I will still listen to his side of the story. Sadly this society just doesn't allow this to happen sometimes.

Because we recognize the benefit of making our mind up about what is wrong and where to stand rather than constantly staying "open minded." society has heard enough nazi bullshit. You still being curious about it doesn't make it "sad" that society made its decision already. Nazis and racists are still given a platform to speak and protected, isnt that enough?

[–]Lovelandmonkey 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I get that they have a platform to speak, but it's a chore to have to constantly search for a view that I know I won't agree with anyways. When Reddit, arguably one of the most popular Internet forums on the web lets mods restrict where they can speak it's hard to find it, and makes them more radical.

[–]sneakpeekbot 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Here's a sneak peek of /r/TrueOffMyChest using the top posts of the year!

#1: I hate r/girlgamers
#2: /r/offmychest is trying to ban people that support hate communities, and in doing so have become a hate community themselves.
#3: I hate that criticizing ghetto culture makes you "racist"


I'm a bot, beep boop | Downvote to remove | Contact me | Info | Opt-out

[–]flyingfox12 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The anonymity of Reddit makes it a powerful tool for gaining insight into a culturally shamed event. It allows large groups to gain insight into what is a wrong/shameful/illegal act; this is what confession bear is all about. The upvotes are not people supporting the idea but instead people helping give exposure to something noteworthy, as crime and immoral acts usually are. Your comments sound to me like censorship.

[–]YFNN 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

Edited by Power Delete Suite

[–]CircadianRadian 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This one i'm guessing

[–]YFNN 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Edited by Power Delete Suite

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Edit: After reading it, I don't see the problem with it being upvoted. She was very clear on not wanting to harm children and never having done so.

If it were a man who started a thread to confess his similar levels of attraction to children, the thread would be downvoted to oblivion and the OP crucified.

Funny how it's a woman and suddenly people want to spread all the sympathy they could spare.

[–]YFNN 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Edited by Power Delete Suite

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

We should start by brining people up to achieve equality, not tearing others down.

Then you've been living under a rock since society isn't doing that.

[–]YFNN 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Edited by Power Delete Suite

[–]FeierInMeinHose -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not sure why you think she should be shamed, attraction is not something you can control. It also takes quite a bit of courage to admit what she did, even if it's anonymously.

[–]Ithelda 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Are there different versions of the play, and you've seen/read a different one than me? Because I remember many stories about positive sexual experiences with men. I didn't have the impression that there was a filter to make all men look like evil bastards. There were only one or two lesbian stories if I recall...

[–]mogulman31 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes a single performance incorporates a selection of monologues from a larger pool.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You know man, I agree with a lot of things but

Note that her "research" for the production included interviewing a six year old girl and asking her intimate questions about her vagina.

Lets not cross the bridge from objective reasoning, to demonizing human sexuality. We all know humans suck. One of things humans really suck at en mass is accepting, understanding, and discussing our sexuality.

[–]Sawses -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Children have vaginas. Well, about half of them do anyway. Women are heavily encouraged to be ashamed of their bodies...or at least they're more susceptible to it than men are. That's what all that knee-jerk fat-praising and shit is on about; they feel repressed, so they swing radically in the other direction.

Let's not give them more people to confuse by teaching little kids that their 'private parts' are something to be ashamed of. If you start off like that, then they'll already have negative feelings about sexuality when they're old enough to start feeling things for other kids. That's not healthy for anybody.

[–]vijeno 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Hm. Just to link a different perspective: http://academinist.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Reiser.pdf claims that it is deeply heteronormative.

I've only browsed the play myself so far, maybe I will finally give it a full read. My impression is that Ensler wrote a play, an opinion piece on stage -- which is really fine and dandy -- but with the added authority of "real life" interviews, which does not work because the interviews are obviously highly edited to suit Ensler's ideology.

[–]Nergaal 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/blog/TVMscript2006.pdf

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

What the fuck did I just read. Did she just turn rape into something positive?

[–]mwobuddy 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Only ecause its an older woman 'showing her about her body'. When a man does that, its horrific and disgusting.

feminism

[–]helsquiades 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I just read this twice trying to figure out what you're on about...I don't see it? She was raped and it seems as if her dad probably killed the guy and then she hooked up with a woman later. edit: it seems like a story illustrating the contrasts in experience between her earlier, terrible "straight" experiences and a more liberating lesbian experience.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

She got raped by a guy then again by a lady. 2nd was when she was 16 and she was made intoxicated by the lady who raped her. She views it in a positive light.

[–]helsquiades 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Oh, I see, I had sort of tuned out the age bit looking for "rape". Statutory rape and rape aren't the same thing though. Rape has to do with lack of consent and statutory rape is a legal matter (with moral implications I'll grant, but it's a little more fuzzy). Clearly the older woman seems to be taking advantage of a younger person using alcohol and such but I don't think it's on par with forceful rape.

[–]Lppt87 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She was 13, it later was changed to 16.

[–]helsquiades 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, someone made this clear elsewhere; thanks though

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I considered it statutory until the alcohol bit came up so I thought it was definitely exploitation of a minor in the end. Granted we have no idea how much she drank.

[–]ThatNinaGAL -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

I've seen the play, and I have never understood why it inspires such vitriol. It doesn't promote any kind of rape or exploitation of anybody. It's not great art, but even mediocre art doesn't deserve to be falsely labeled as pro-rape. And the pedophilia slander is particularly disgusting - there is nothing "sinister" about the child character that Ensler created, or the fact that she interviewed children with the knowledge and consent of their parents and discussed their bodies. No specific child is identified, and the character is played by an adult actress.

[–]cranktheguy 40 points41 points42 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

It doesn't promote any kind of rape

The line in the play is: "... if it was rape, it was a good rape" when talking about statutory rape of a 13 year old. How do you reconcile this fact and your position?

[–]Dangers-and-Dongers 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Have you considered that people that were statutorily raped might not consider it a bad thing. Considering I was statutorily raped and don't mind one bit.

[–]cranktheguy 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Glad you're not apparently affected, but hopefully you can agree that promoting sex with 13 year olds isn't good?

[–]ThatNinaGAL 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

We all agree about that.

[–]Bisexual-Bop-It 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This is exactly what happened in the story, the 24 year old didnt say it was good rape, the 13 year old knew that legally is was rape but she enjoyed it and doesn't regret it.

[–]Greg_W_Allan 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's Ensler's words.

[–]ThatNinaGAL -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Easy. I remember 9th grade English class, where I learned that a character's viewpoint does not necessarily reflect the author's viewpoint.

Go read Lolita, that will really knock your block off ;-)

[–]cranktheguy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That's kind of a cheap dodge there. If I wrote a book about Hitler's positive contributions to society I'd be attacked from all angles. The Lolita character is portrayed in a negative light.

If it was a 13 year old girl talking about a positive sexual experience with a 20-something year old man, would you still say it is just the author's perspective and that there is nothing wrong with it?

[–]ThatNinaGAL -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If you interviewed old Nazis and created a composite character who remembered Hitler fondly because his economic stimulus measures put food in her belly as a 13-year-old... well, you'd not be doing anything new, actually. This isn't a cheap dodge. It's a basic understand of how art works.

[–]cranktheguy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Show me some feminist play that shows a rape of a woman by a man in a positive light and I'll concede the point.

[–]Nergaal 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/blog/TVMscript2006.pdf

[–]helsquiades -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

So, second time this was posted but it in no way seems to be promoting, accepting or condoning rape of any kind?

[–]Nergaal 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

Memory: sixteen13 years old. There’s this gorgeous 24-year-old woman in our neighborhood and I stare at her all the time. One day she invites me into her car. She asks me if I like to kiss boys, and I tell her I do not like that. Then she says she wants to show me something, and she leans over and kisses me so softly on the lips with her lips and then puts her tongue in my mouth. Wow. She asks me if I want to come over to her house, and then she kisses me again and tells me to relax, to feel it, to let our tongues feel it. She asks my mama if I can spend the night and my mother’s delighted that such a beautiful, successful woman has taken an interest in me.** I’m scared and I can’t wait. Her apartment’s fantastic. She’s got it hooked up. It’s the seventies, the beads, the fluffy pillows, the mood lights. I decide right there that I want to be a secretary like her when I grow up. She makes a vodka for herself and then she asks what I want to drink. I say the same as she’s 36 drinking and she says she doesn’t think my mama would like me drinking vodka. I say she probably wouldn’t like me kissing girls either, and the pretty lady makes me a drink. Then she changes into this chocolate satin teddy. She’s so beautiful. I always thought bulldaggers were ugly. I say “You look great,” and she says “So do you.” I say “But I only have this white cotton bra and underpants.” Then she dresses me, slowly, in another satin teddy. It’s lavender like the first soft days of spring. The alcohol has gone to my head and I’m loose and ready. There’s a picture over her bed of a naked Black woman with a huge Afro. She gently and slowly lays me out on the bed and just our bodies rubbing makes me come. Then she does everything to me and my Coochi Snorcher that I always thought was nasty before, and wow. I’m so hot, so wild. She says, “Your vagina, untouched by man, smells so nice, so fresh, wish I could keep it that way forever.” I get crazy wild and then the phone rings and of course it’s my mama. I’m sure she knows; she catches me at everything. I’m breathing so heavy and I try to act normal when I get on the phone and she asks me, “What’s wrong with you, have you been running?” I say “No, Mama, exercising.” Then she tells the beautiful secretary to make sure I’m not around boys and the lady tells her, “Trust me, there’s no boys around here.” Afterwards the gorgeous lady teaches me everything about my Coochi Snorcher. She makes me play with myself in front of her and she teaches me all the different ways to give myself pleasure. She’s very thorough. She tells me to always know how to give myself pleasure so I’ll never need to rely on a man. In the morning I am worried that I’ve become a butch because I’m so in love with her. She laughs, but I never see her again. I realize later she was my surprising, unexpected and politically incorrect salvation. She transformed my sorry-ass Coochi Snorcher and raised it into a kind of heaven.

As you can see, it in no way seems to be promoting, accepting or condoning rape of any kind /s

[–]SuperSailorSaturn -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

When I originally read this back in high school, I didn't take it as a rape story. Is it wrong she gave the girl alcohol? Probably. But she never says no, stop, or fights anything that is happening. I always took it as a story of young girl exploring sexuality-which happens a lot and in different ways. Then again, I took the stories as a way to push boundaries and tell woman its ok to take ownership of their bodies. If I recall, there is another story about a woman using a mirror to look at herself.

*Edit: Adding with what I wrote below.

I'm not saying promoting pedophilia is good nor am I supporting 'good rape'. I was simply saying my view when I originally read the story (which was nearly 10 years ago now). But you don't have to talk down to me and explain rape or what alcohol is. Yes, it would be worse if it was an older guy and a 13 year old girl, I never said it wasn't just like people would flip if both parties were male. Like I said, I was simply stating my original reaction and thoughts on the story, if that deserves downvotes so be it

[–]mwobuddy 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

And if it'd been a male in that scenario, especially older, you probably would've viewed it explicitly as rape and explitation. FWIW, alcohol is a controlled substance, a narcotic, and sex with someone under the influence of a narcotic is considered rape. Especially when they'er 13 (or 16 when it was changed so that it wouldn't look like pro-pedophilia).

you see, in http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/13/books/renegade-view-on-child-sex-causes-a-storm.html The author writes about mid-age-range-teens having sex, and she is condemned BY THE SUPREME COURT for promoting pedophilia.

She is condemned for promoting pedophilia for discussing sexuality like this and saying its not always bad. "it was a good rape".

The 13 year old angle in vagina monologues very neatly fits in line with the propaganda that it is pedophilia. Worse, it is pedophilia by propaganda, AND there's rape involved by the use of a drug to coerce her into sexual activity.

That's why it was upped to 16, to muddy the waters on the moral view and to avoid condemnation by the supreme court for promoting pedophilia.

[–]SuperSailorSaturn 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm not saying promoting pedophilia is good nor am I supporting 'good rape'. I was simply saying my view when I originally read the story (which was nearly 10 years ago now). But you don't have to talk down to me and explain rape or what alcohol is. Yes, it would be worse if it was an older guy and a 13 year old girl, I never said it wasn't just like people would flip if both parties were male.

Like I said, I was simply stating my original reaction and thoughts on the story, if that deserves downvotes so be it.

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, it would be worse if it was an older guy and a 13 year old girl.

Do you actually mean that 24 year old male and 13 year old girl > 24 year old female and 13 year old boy?

[–]helsquiades -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

In another comment someone replied pointing out the age difference. I had assumed rape, not statutory rape so I neglected to note the age difference when reading. Curious as to why you struck the 16 out and replaced it with 13 though?

[–]Nergaal 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Before 2000, it was 13, but in the later versions it was changed to 16. Either the original was deliberately changed for artistic reasons, or the latter to remove the authenticity of the original

[–]helsquiades 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Ah, I see, thank you. I saw they had redacted it or something like this.

[–]yourewelcome_bot 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You're welcome.

[–]vijeno 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm really inclined to agree, but have only browsed the text so far.

The question is, at what point does a character's voice become the author's?

I'd argue that, at the very least, Ensler's portrayal of the material as "real life interviews" is highly problematic in that regard. Or at least quite naive.

[–]Bisexual-Bop-It 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Almost all feature a negative sexual experience with a man/ positive experience with a woman? Out of the 8 monologues listed on the wikipedia page only two specifically mention a man in the story, one of which is a positive experience where a man enjoys looking at the narrators vagina and makes her feel more confident. If these poems were put through a filter to show extreme prejudice against men and for women then not only would every poem have that theme but also it would be a lot more consistent in the stories. As for your last statement on "promotes drugging and raping 13 year old girls (just as long as the rapist is female)" Im not trying to defend this story too much (its a bit crazy for my tastes) but i am trying to stop the spread of misinformation. 1. The 13 year old wasn't drugged with something like rohypnol, she was given one serving of alcohol. 2. The story starts with many negative experiences with her vagina (being told not to touch it, falling and hurting it, and being raped) leading her to believe that anything to do with her vagina is a bad omen. (No, its not about "ever since this man touched me in a negative way I've been lesbian" its about "bad things happen to my vagina so i will consider it a place of bad luck" 3. She was legally raped considering her age and involvement of alcohol, however, it is outlined in the story that she believes that even though it was wrong for so many reasons, she feels it is the only positive experience she has had with her vagina and there for doesn't personally consider it rape. She doesn't turn into a lesbian at the end and renounce men, she is just glad that someone basically broke the curse of her vagina. I agree that there are definitely some weird poems in there , a little bit of prejudice and some crazy methods, but, as a female who is subbed so i can try to stay aware of male equality issues as well, i really do not appreciate seeing a post spearing an entire collection of poems just because of one controversial piece, misinforming people on the poem and watching people circle jerk over the "feminists believe female rape is okay". Feel free to downvote me, but know that i read the poem and gave you the true outline of the poem, be mad at the poem, not me.

[–]BenReilly616 31 points32 points33 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Milo just said the same thing, that when he was 17 he had a boyfriend that was 29, and people are calling him a pedophile apologist

[+]FirstEvolutionist points 9 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

In one of the videos(with Joe Rogan, I believe) he says he was 14 when he was abused by the priest. Supposedly, he's also talking about that relationship when he is talking about boy/men relationships being ok.

[–]BenReilly616 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah and this is the reality for gay men. I don't think he was necessarily supporting it he was just saying this is what happens and this is what happened to me.

Can you imagine a woman being molested at fourteen, dealing with it the way he did, and then everyone calling her a rape apologist? You can't even question a woman who makes rape allegations much less criticise the way she deals with it

[–]Novashadow115 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Go watch the interview that clip came from over on the Drunken Peasanrs podcast. He also said some other stuff

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Right? I've said it so many times now. Feminists pushed age of consent to 16 to 18. Age gaps of ANY TYPE are now considered pedophilia.

People really believe that a 40 year old havign sex with a 16 year old is a pedophile sex predator who's getting away with it legally.

Others claim that the law age of consent 16 only allows sex between 16 year old and 18 year olds, like in the UK. People from the UK really believe this is what the law means, and not that it allows 16 and 40 year olds to screw.

They don't want to believe that, because that's 'pedophilia'.

Age of consent violation in general is pedophilia. Age gaps are pedophilia, even if they're legal, if someone is under 18. That's what we believe in 2017.

[–]Lppt87 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

He was 14, and yes it was rape.

[+]bluefootedpig -15 points-14 points-13 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Milo was defending it, not telling his story of his 17 on 29. He uses that story to justify pedophilia. That makes it worlds different.

[–]dungone 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

He was literally talking about a relationship he had when he was over the age of consent.

Then, he joked of his being victimized by a priest by saying that it taught him how to give head. As a victim he is entitled to joke about it if that is his coping strategy, and this is where people need to chill out. He has never portrayed his experience as anything but sexual abuse by a pedophile. He has been outspoken against child sexual abuse.

There's just nothing really there beyond people who want to censor him jumping onto this and twisting his words.

[–]NOT_A_SENTIENT_DILDO 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah i keep seeing this claim and I haven't seen anything that verifies it. So drop a link and I'll be glad to believe you.

[–]BenReilly616 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd love to see where he justified pedophilia.

[–][deleted] 28 points29 points30 points 9 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

If I am not mistaken, the vagina monologues are taken from real interviews.

So was Milo's account of his sexual encounters during school

[–][deleted] 28 points29 points30 points 9 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

He also talked about it in general not just his anecdotal instance. Oh not to mention calling the teachers who sleep with boys the victims. I shit you not he said the women are the victims who get seduced. Not really relevant to the op, but you brought up Milo for some reason.

[–]ThatNinaGAL 25 points26 points27 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Milo is waaaaaay more obnoxious than Eve Ensler, which seems only right, as he tries as hard as he can to be obnoxious and she appears to be doing it accidentally.

But they are both, in their own obnoxious ways, refusing to deny a real truth about coming of age as a gay person back when there was no support, no resources, no access to your peers, and a constant crippling fear of total social rejection - sometimes the first person you had a positive sexual encounter with was much older than you, and it was the first time you realized that you weren't destined for a life of isolation and misery. I have heard some version of this story from dozens of gay adults, none of whom went on to endorse or practice pedophilia.

[–]altxatu 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I know some gay folks like that too.

[–]jrackow 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

I have a hard time believing this wasn't posted as a response to the Milo situation...

[–]DRU-ZOD1980 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

What is the Milo situation?

[+]bukkake_bonanza points 9 years ago [recovered] (11 children) | Copy Link

Liberals managed to finally get a pelt on their wall. Ironically, it's the flamboyantly gay pelt.

[–]TheLizardKing89 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Yes, the liberals who run CPAC got him.

/s

[–]famasfilms 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

yeah, it's ironic that the Right showed the Left how to silence him - with his own words (admittedly carefully selected and edited) rather than with violence

[+]bukkake_bonanza points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

You mean RINOs, right?

[–]RoboChrist 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

RINO: A Republican that another Republican disagrees with at the moment.

I don't doubt that most of those at CPAC have been Republicans much longer than Milo supporters.

[–]bananapanther 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah fuck liberals and their anti pedophilia ways!

[–]partyon 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

deleted What is this?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They killed and skinned milo you say...What was he criticized for saying?

[–]Abraxas65 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

He talked about how is first sexual encounter was with an older man and how he was the aggressor. Somewhat shocking to some people, especially how much the Donald and everyone loves going after pedophiles, but the real kicker was a follow up interview, I believe, where he went pretty far out on a limb defending sex between teenagers and adults.

As others have said his words were used against him. Hard to find sympathy for a demagogue who selectively quotes and twists others words and then has the same thing done to him.

[+]fuckyoubarry points 9 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Poor sweet milo he got his feewings hurt.

[+]bukkake_bonanza points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

He'll be back, I guarantee it. CPAC is not his base. Never was, never will be.

[–]fuckyoubarry 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah he's probably good at whatever it is he does

[–]TheSourTruth 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

People also made up stuff saying Milo is a pedo-apologist, which is just bullshit.

[–]BaconJunkiesFTW -5 points-4 points-3 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

How is it bullshit? He attempted to justify adult men having sex with thirteen year old boys.

Edit: Downvotes don't prove me wrong.

[–]BaconJunkiesFTW -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Milo tried justifying adults having sex with thirteen year old boys.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

He also talked about it in general not just his anecdotal instance. Oh not to mention calling the teachers who sleep with boys the victims.

It's strange that much of reddit regularly adopts this attitude until it comes time to criticize someone they don't like for holding it.

It's a shit attitude, but a lot of society holds it. Seems funny to criticize one man for what is, to all appearances, the majority position in this country.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's strange that much of reddit regularly adopts this attitude until it comes time to criticize someone they don't like for holding it.

You realize that this is the men's rights subreddit? If there's any subreddit where that isn't the regularly adopted attitude it's here. I didn't know anything about Milo until I saw a clip of him on Bill Mahr.

I also haven't seen anyone mention it in their criticism of Milo. I was hoping to see someone talk about it here, but no we get "whataboutism". When you intentionally piss off every group you can you can't cry hypocrite because it could be from the side that consistently disagreed with you on that point.

[–]tchoob 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Not to mention, it's supposed to be the perspective of people who have been damaged by sexual abuse. Not that their perspectives are morally right, but actually that they are morally wrong, and they have them because of the abuse itself. It's supposed to show that abuse leads to more abuse by perverting the minds of the abused.

But I guess once the /r/MensRights circlejerk starts rollin'...

[–]mwobuddy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly. Its called an unfalsifiable claim. If you take a stand and say "I enjoyed every minute of blowing this 18+ year old pedophile" at 14-16, you're emotionally traumatized and disturbed, and you're coping with it by brain damage which makes you into a stockholme syndrome.

If you take the stand and say "it was horrible, and I feel harmed by it forever", then you're being honest with yourself and the court.

See the point? Only one answer is correct. "You can choose any answer you want, you're free to do so... oh but if you choose the answer we don't like, then you're not free to choose".

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Not to mention, it's supposed to be the perspective of people who have been damaged by sexual abuse.

So she was damaged by a man and "Saved" by a woman.

Yeah, typical. The man is always the main villain.

[–]tchoob 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She wasn't saved at all, you're completely missing the point because you want to be a victim.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm a victim for pointing out the same old "Man is the villain" trope used throughout stories centered on women?

[–]Bisexual-Bop-It 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Also if you read the summary of this specific poem it was from the 13 year olds perspective. It wasnt a outsider or the 24 year old saying it was "good rape", it was the 13 year old who understood that legally, it is rape, but she knew she enjoyed it, aka, "good rape".

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I can't help but notice that the "monologues" are more likely than not taken from a very convenient sample.

[–]Imnotmrabut 65 points66 points67 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

For those met with demands of Proof:

1) The "Good Rape" line is from the 1998 Villard edition;

2) Full reference; Eve Ensler (1998). The Vagina Monologues. Villard. p. 75. ISBN 978-0-375-75052-6.

3) It can be verified on Google books

"I was only thirteen and she was twenty-four" Link To Page 75 Snippet View

"good rape then, a rape that turned by sorry-ass coochi snorcher into a kind of heaven"Link To Page 75 Snippet View

Ensler and her whole empire have been built upon hiding lesbian paedophilia and rape in plain sight.

[–]Nergaal 18 points19 points20 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

A 2006 print had it changed to 16

[–]Imnotmrabut 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm aware that Ensler and her publishers decided to change the age to 16 to cover up. It in fact was changed as far back as 2000 with a strange Intro to the Little Coochi Snorcher That Could added;

In hundreds of interviews with homeless women in the last thirteen years, only one woman was not sexually abused as a little girl or raped as a young woman. For most of these women, “home” is a very scary place, a place they have fled. The shelters are ironically the first places many of them ever find safety, protection, or comfort.

This is a woman’s story as she told it. What isn’t in the story is the fact that this woman met another woman in a shelter, and they fell in love, and through their love, they both got out of the shelter system. We dedicate this to her memory.

It claims that story now of a 16 year old and 24 years old is totally different to that published just 1 years earlier - the reference "Thirteen" is to years of work and nor age of being raped.

It uses the term "thirteen" quite differently and had either the deliberate or inadvertent effect of priming readers to believe that was the reference to a 13 year old child - and so ignore the changes to texts. It's a psychological technique know as "Priming"!

Unless you gain access to an original 1989 Villard copy, you can't find the reality, and even then many have to be Un-Primed in advance to be able to see and address the issue of a Writer and Audiences applauding the Statutory Rape of a 13 year old girl by a 24 year old women..... and Eve Ensler Promoting it as GOOD RAPE whilst railing against supposed Rape Culture!

[–]nobahdi 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I read the link you posted elsewhere and it also changes the end to avoid calling it "good" but I think I can see both sides of this.

Advocating for statutory rape and describing it as "good" is inexcusable but the words within a play/book/movie aren't necessarily supposed to be actual commentary but maybe just the character's perspective (even if the character is a real person who actually said that).

My takeaway from reading just the three-page excerpt is the narrator's most positive relationship was still one where she was being victimized. Even though it's described in a positive way it's still abuse but I feel like the subtext is the narrator is the one who is being celebrated for her transformation in spite of, or maybe because of, her abuse. The premise from the opening line was that for some women abuse is a fact of life so maybe this is one way some of them deal with it.

A side note that might be more relatable: the movie Wolf on Wall Street could easily be criticized for glorifying greed, money, excess, etc... but I think it's also very easy to see the movie is a cautionary tale that condemns the very things it appears to celebrate.

[–]doreadthis 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The wolf of wall street is explicitly a cautionary tail about the excesses of greed.

[–]nobahdi 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Right, that's basically my point. You shouldn't walk out of that movie thinking greed is good (in spite of the many scenes that glorify it) and similarly when I read those three pages my takeaway was that girl had gone through so much abuse that she had no idea what a real, loving, positive relationship looked like and instead spoke fondly of her latest abuser.

[–]doreadthis 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah i can see that

[+]bukkake_bonanza points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

On the upside, Ensler got a sweet cameo in Walking Dead last week.

[–]Imnotmrabut 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Do we truly need Zombie Feminist Pedophile Rapists, being ignored for all eternity, as they Ravenously devour your daughters?

[–]Sheriff_Jibbers 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

yes a good rape, quite

[–]MisterMisfit 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Exquisite, might I add.

[–]iTzinmyblood 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They ended up firing the guy who wrote an article against it...Wow is all I can say. This world sucks

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Because by writing that article he attacked women, feminism, and rape survivors all in one go.

[–]BannedFromImzy 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Outcry from the play's supporters resulted in Swope's being fired from the staff of The Hoya, before the piece was even run.

Swope is the guy who called out the rape apology.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 32 points33 points34 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Yet, funnily enough, nobody is refusing to publish Ensler's books!

[+]Thesecondcontrecoup points 9 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Is this the part where I try real hard to feel bad for Milo.

Hnnnggggg

No, sorry, I'm straining every muscle in my body, but the pity just isn't coming out.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, you're cunt, so it's not surprising.

I don't feel 'bad' for him, but it does incense me that feminists get away with everything, but that every other group gets held to account.

[–]Tmomp 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Should we teach women not to rape?

... and not to be rape apologists?

[–]GunsGermsAndSteel 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I bet that somehow, a man is to blame even when an adult woman rapes a female child.

[–]Nergaal 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The relevant section:

Memories from 13: There’s this gorgeous 24-year-old woman in our neighborhood and I stare at her all the time. One day she invites me into her car. She asks me if I like to kiss boys, and I tell her I do not like that. Then she says she wants to show me something, and she leans over and kisses me so softly on the lips with her lips and then puts her tongue in my mouth. Wow. She asks me if I want to come over to her house, and then she kisses me again and tells me to relax, to feel it, to let our tongues feel it. She asks my mama if I can spend the night and my mother’s delighted that such a beautiful, successful woman has taken an interest in me.** I’m scared and I can’t wait. Her apartment’s fantastic. She’s got it hooked up. It’s the seventies, the beads, the fluffy pillows, the mood lights. I decide right there that I want to be a secretary like her when I grow up. She makes a vodka for herself and then she asks what I want to drink. I say the same as she’s 36 drinking and she says she doesn’t think my mama would like me drinking vodka. I say she probably wouldn’t like me kissing girls either, and the pretty lady makes me a drink. Then she changes into this chocolate satin teddy. She’s so beautiful. I always thought bulldaggers were ugly. I say “You look great,” and she says “So do you.” I say “But I only have this white cotton bra and underpants.” Then she dresses me, slowly, in another satin teddy. It’s lavender like the first soft days of spring. The alcohol has gone to my head and I’m loose and ready. There’s a picture over her bed of a naked Black woman with a huge Afro. She gently and slowly lays me out on the bed and just our bodies rubbing makes me come. Then she does everything to me and my Coochi Snorcher that I always thought was nasty before, and wow. I’m so hot, so wild. She says, “Your vagina, untouched by man, smells so nice, so fresh, wish I could keep it that way forever.” I get crazy wild and then the phone rings and of course it’s my mama. I’m sure she knows; she catches me at everything. I’m breathing so heavy and I try to act normal when I get on the phone and she asks me, “What’s wrong with you, have you been running?” I say “No, Mama, exercising.” Then she tells the beautiful secretary to make sure I’m not around boys and the lady tells her, “Trust me, there’s no boys around here.” Afterwards the gorgeous lady teaches me everything about my Coochi Snorcher. She makes me play with myself in front of her and she teaches me all the different ways to give myself pleasure. She’s very thorough. She tells me to always know how to give myself pleasure so I’ll never need to rely on a man. In the morning I am worried that I’ve become a butch because I’m so in love with her. She laughs, but I never see her again. I realize later she was my surprising, unexpected and politically incorrect salvation. She transformed my sorry-ass Coochi Snorcher and raised it into a kind of heaven.

[–]Imnotmrabut 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Which "Verison or Edition" are you quoting from?

[–]Bisexual-Bop-It 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The context before this is the narrator recounting negative memories from when she was quite young involving her vagina (getting punched in the vagina, falling on it , being told not to touch it and being raped), meaning that by the time she was 13 she considered her vagina a place of bad luck.

[–]Nergaal 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ah, the good ol' days when Salon was criticizing "voices conforming to orthodox feminism."

[–]poorpersonality 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

Where I live there was this influential Feminist, Atlas Saarikoski, who wrote a blog wheres she tried to inspire women to rape 14-year-olds. To turn them into lesbian Feminists or something. Perhaps she just liked it. She said that young girls are easy to manipulate so Feminists should try it.

I wrote to several people who should have been concerned about this and usually got no answer. Perhaps the best answer was from a woman who warned me against libeling her if I didn't want to end up in trouble. And I had sent a link to the text.

After that I just gave up. Fighting Feminists is very hard. I'm not sure why, but it is.

Nowadays she's the editor in chief of a Feminist magazine.

I'm totally convinced that Feminism is behind many rapes of young girls. And murders of boys and men, but that's another story.

[–]Kinbaku_enthusiast 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's hard because they have state power behind them and everybody knows that women never lie.

[–]Source_or_gtfo 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Can you find archives of her blog posts?

Post it here with the name of the magazine. It should get upvoted to the top. Tumblrinaction would probably help too.

[–]bulboustadpole -4 points-3 points-2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I'm totally convinced that Feminism is behind many rapes of young girls. And murders of boys and men, but that's another story.

I'm sorry, it's comments like these that really make me consider unsubbing from MensRights.

[–]poorpersonality 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

I don't really care, sorry, because I know what I'm talking about but you obviously don't.

You're like a guy whoa says that it's ridiculous to claim that the clan propaganda made no difference on how people treated African Americans. Well, it did, and so does Feminist propaganda. Or stories like in Vagina monologues.

A person who doesn't acknowledge this is not on the same planet with me. And other reasonable people.

But unsubscribe if you don't care of what's going on. I write here only rarely on the other hand ....

[+]Bumi_Earth_King -8 points-7 points-6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't really care, sorry, because I know what I'm talking about but you obviously don't.

/r/iamverysmart

[–]poorpersonality 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Are you very smart? I'm not but I've spend about 40 years thinking about the society and studying it. If you're smart, so be it, I''m at least not arrogant and have manners. Cheers :)

[–]Greg_W_Allan 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

And murders of boys and men, but that's another story.

Maybe not murders but I can guarantee there's many suicides.

[–]that_all_you_got 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You really haven't seen the sentences for women that kill their partners?

[–]Thuban 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Also in that part of VM Ensler also claims (without exaggeration) that there are 700,000 rapes in the US per year. Stats for the year 2016 say 89,000 (still too many) and 3% of those are men.

source

[–]DrippingHotButter 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Triggered

[–]HellhoundsOnMyTrail 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I wonder what ever happened to Robert Swope

[–]MrSmook 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

What the fuck is a "good rape"? :|

[–]HeForeverBleeds 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Apparently when it's perpetrated by a woman

[–]MrSmook 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I really don't get this whole thing... Extreme fems. are OK with this... but if I flipped it and it was a man doing it... it'd be wrong?

Aggggh.... it baffles me. I guess I'll just carry on with my degree and not think about it .__.

[–]Bisexual-Bop-It -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

In the context of the story it is statutory rape but emotionally both parties enjoyed it

[–]MrSmook 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Uuuugh... I'm real confused @_@

[–]SolongStarbird 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I actually read the wikipedia article. The event this thread title describes is in a monolgue entitled "The Little Coochie Snorcher That Could".... WTF?

[–]Bisexual-Bop-It 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Art is weird

[–]ScienceAteMyKid 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

There's a vast difference between artistic expression in a play, however odious, and advocating a practice in real life.

[–]Imnotmrabut 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Except that Ensler's whole life and her supposed charitable foundation - the Vday Foundation - was set up to counter sexual violence against women.

Statutory Rape is Sexual Violence and when 1994 Ensler started promoting that a 24 years old women sexually assaulting a drunk 13 year old was "Good Rape" (it's there on the page), she lost all credibility and became a promoter of "Rape Culture".

The Mental disconnects required of Ensler indicate that either she is a total idiot or sees such rape as normal, acceptable and tolerable. That is the mind set of a paedophile, sociopath or both!

[–]junkeee999 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Is it promoting assault of a 13 year old though? Just because a character in a work of fiction says it?

[–]Imnotmrabut 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Ensler has peddled the position quite strongly that "Trivialising Rape" in any way is Rape Culture. As soon as she uttered the words "Good Rape" she was trivialising matters.

If she sets a standard it's double standard to happily and even gleefully promote matters in a 180 degree manner. If she was so secure, why would she change the words and ages when rightfully criticised for the double standards?

[–]junkeee999 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Except she didn't 'utter the words'. Her fictional character did.

Do you believe that say Quentin Tarantino promotes murder?

[–]Imnotmrabut 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Except she didn't 'utter the words'. Her fictional character did.

Except darling - I have seen the original Video footage of Ensler saying the words herself. She looses the It's just a character when as playwright she is Monologing so happily and excitedly. It was quite disturbing seeing her behaviours... and how she was so happy to be applauded and ovated by her audience.

As many are aware Mr Tarantino is conflicted and confused over murder - he sees characters as blameless and police as murderers. Ms Ensler has of course maintained a stoic and lengthy silence ... which is an interesting course f action and one that is often seen in those with sociopathy!

Why won't she clarify if rape Is Good or Not?

[–]junkeee999 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So accepting what you say, that Tarantino sees his characters as blameless, does that translate into him supporting murder in real life? Or just within the universe of his movies?

[–]junkeee999 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It is a play. The fact that she herself is monologuing as a part of the play is irrelevant.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

These were based on ACTUAL INTERVIEWS!

[–]junkeee999 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

OK, so if I made a play based on actual interviews of the Manson murderers, reciting their words, recalling their memories and feelings on those nights, does that mean I'm supportive of the murders? Or am I just making an artistic statement peering into their minds?

Are you guys really having this much trouble understanding what I'm saying?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

OK, so if I made a play based on actual interviews of the Mansion murderers, reciting their words, recalling their memories and feelings on those nights, does that mean I'm supportive of the murders? Or am I just making an artistic statement peering into their minds?

Are you aware of what would happen if the person who raped the 13 year old was a man? Think carefully and spot the double-standard provided you're not blind as a bat.

[–]junkeee999 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

It's a play. Plays have featured rapists, murderers, criminals and moral defectives of all sorts. You're still not getting it.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

They pay, or have paid, for their crimes though. People are not meant to sympathize with them either. Here we're asked to lend support to a rape. A "Good" rape. So you're the one still not getting it.

[–]junkeee999 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Are we being asked to support it? Or are we simply being shown a bizarre character profile?

You guys are just filling in the blanks to support your particular views.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Are we being asked to support it?

A feminist play about taking the word "Vagina" back, reclaiming it. Turning it into something positive and you have to ask that question?

Yeah, I'm done. See you.

[–]that_all_you_got 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

How can I tell that you haven't read The Vagina Monologues? Because you don't seem to have a clue.

Go read it now, then research the writers and then, when you have cultivated yourself accordingly, feel free to just shut the fuck up.

[–]ScienceAteMyKid 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I do love a polite debate. You have made a very thoughtful and convincing point by offering concrete examples, and backing them up with textual references. Well played sir, I have no rebuttal.

[–]that_all_you_got 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Start reading and stop talking shit, you are wasting everyone's time.

[–]ifelsedowhile 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

still not sure how Milo personally considering his statutory rape at 13 as good makes him a pedophile or a pedo apologist. if I had a positive single experience with cocaine it's not like I'm encouraging, apologizing or advocating heavy drug use. I'm just stating/recalling my personal experience.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

FEMALE EMPOWERMENT YAAY

[–]Rethgil 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Shouldn't they be the first feminists to defend Milo then?

[–]BruceCampbell123 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Outcry from the play's supporters resulted in Swope's being fired from the staff of The Hoya, before the piece was even run.

Fuck.

[–]Imnotmrabut 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It has been contended that his evident criticism of unthinking Feminists and Women was seen as a problem - not his acute observations on the double standards and social insanity of applauding Child Rape!

He was attacked for writing the following:

Applauding Rape at Georgetown
Robert Swope

(Our guest writer, Robert Swope, is a junior at Georgetown University. This article was censored, and he was subsequently fired, by his editors at The Hoya.)

"Your vagina, untouched by man, smells so nice, so fresh, wish I could keep it that way forever." Thus spoke the 24-year-old woman before she statutorily raped a 13-year-old girl in Eve Ensler's play, The Vagina Monologues, which thanks to the New Press (and your tuition dollars), was performed last month in Bulldog Alley on the Georgetown University campus.

The older woman, who immediately before making this rather, shall we say... illegal observation, had given a vodka and orange juice to the young girl who was spending the night at her house. The girl's mother for some foolish reason admired this woman and hoped that her daughter would benefit from the two spending some time together. When she later calls to check up on her child, worrying of all things, about boys, the woman tells her to "Trust me, there's [sic] no boys around here." Wink-wink.

After getting drunk on the older woman's booze, the 13-year-old then tells the audience how "She gently and slowly lays me out on the bed and just our bodies rubbing together makes me come [sic]. Then she does everything to me and my coochi snorcher [vagina] that I had always thought was nasty before, and wow." When it's all over, the little girl concludes that thanks to the experience, "I'll never need to rely on a man." Mission accomplished.

Now some might call what just happened to the little girl a rape, and indeed, if a 24-year-old man had gotten her liquored-up and then had sex with her, rational people (which one would hope includes members of Georgetown's student government, which couldn't support crucifixes on the walls of a Catholic school, but could find time to sponsor the Monologues) would consider that rape, even if she consented, and assuming we ignored for the moment the fact that an inebriated 13-year-old isn't quite capable of consenting to much of anything.

Unfortunately, that wasn't the case when the play was performed. Like clap-ridden sailors in a Southeast Asian strip joint, the mostly female audience who attended the Monologues hooted and hollered, laughing and clapping at just about every piece presented, including this perverted one entitled "The Little Coochi Snorcher That Could." In their revelry, the audience suprisingly missed a very important point: that rape is wrong, no matter the sex or the sexual orientation of the person who commits it or whether it is statutory or not.

For the record, the little girl's part in the play reads: "Now people say it was a kind of rape ... Well, I say if it was rape, it was a good rape then, a rape that turned my sorry-ass coochi snorcher into a kind of heaven." Is there such a thing as a good rape? Or, to put it another way, why is rape only wrong when a man commits it, but when it's by a woman committed against another woman, who just happens to be 13-years-old, it is celebrated and a university club sponsors it?

While the play's producers did eliminate the sentence in which the girl calls her rape "good" from this year's performance (last year it was kept in), they failed to show enough maturity and still allowed for everything else in the monologue to be presented. The message put forth was that the molestation this girl experienced is a good thing.

Ironically, the alleged reason for performing these Monologues in the first place was to combat violence against women! One wonders then, why it is that a generous reading of the play's 115 pages yield only 15 that actually deal with violence against women. There is a monologue about Serbian gang rapists, and the 13-year old was molested by one of her father's friends before she was molested by a woman (who is that particular monologue's unstated hero), along with some "vagina facts." But that's about it. The rest of the Monologues deal mostly with the promotion of lesbianism, sado-masochism, and female masturbation. In one particularly disgusting segment, a six-year-old girl is queried about her vagina. "What does it smell like?" asks Ensler.

The university must somehow discipline the Women's Center and the New Press for implying that the illegal and immoral crime committed against the first little girl is to be in any way endorsed. Some may claim that the Women's Center had nothing to do with it, but the simple fact of the matter is that the Women's Center and its members were responsible for The Vagina Monologues presence at Georgetown, and its continuance. As documented in last semester's Hoya, the Women's Center helped revive the New Press in 1995 after it had gone unpublished for several years, and it is the organization that originally brought the play to campus last year under the supervision of Prof. Margaret Stetz, the Center's advisor.

The producer and directors of the play all work at the Women's Center, and one of these Directors (who happens to be the editor-in-chief of the New Press) is the paid personal assistant to Nancy Cantalupo, the Director of the Women's Center. All this is not a coincidence. The Women's Center has a history of radicalism on-campus and in the past has shown its disrespect for Georgetown and its Catholic identity, not to mention the individual Georgetown students who don't subscribe to the Center's radical feminist orthodoxy. It is long past time the university stopped funding both organizations, letting them exist or not in the marketplace of ideas without subsidy.

With events like this, it's unbelievable that the Jesuits could wonder why people laugh whenever somebody calls Georgetown a Catholic school.

Original as archived by The Wayback Machine - archive.org

[–]SKNK_Monk 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Are we having a throwback day in this sub?

[–]SoundOfDrums 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Probably came up because Milo Y. said he appreciated having underage sex with a priest. But between this, Sarah "I used to be an edge lord and abused my younger sister" whatever her last name was, and George Takei essentially saying the same thing as Milo, there's a lot of cherry picking going on.

[–]_kodz_ 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

/u/TheDevineJuan

[–]kaluh_glarski 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What in the fuck?

[–]Knittingpasta 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well that's super messed up

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Reasons why I never at all wanted to see that play, besides its being a crude sycophantic piece of shit.

[–]Darkbeshoy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Criticism from feminists[edit] The Vagina Monologues has been criticized by some within the feminist movement, including pro-sex feminists and individualist feminists.[14] Sex-positive feminist Betty Dodson, author of several books about female sexuality, saw the play as having a narrow and restrictive view of sexuality.[15] Individualist feminist Wendy McElroy stated that the play "equates men with 'the enemy' – heterosexual love with violence".[16][17] McElroy also identified problems with the work's lesbian bias, stating "A play that claims to unveil the truth about vaginas but, somehow, overlooks the salutary role men play in most women's sexuality has no credibility."[18]"

Huh.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They also changed the girl's age to sixteen. Then future editions omitted that skit altogether. Caught with their pants down, they scrambled to save face.

[–]kutuup1989 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Isn't it one of the least popular stage shows ever produced, though? I don't think I've ever met someone who had seen it and thought it was good. Then again, in my experience very few people have seen it.

I think it's seen more widely as a deliberately provocative heap of trash with little substance. I don't think any theatre near me has ever agreed to have it performed.

I think ultimately the solution is to get a bunch of guys together to put on a show called The Dick Diaries. 90 minutes of nothing but discussion of dicks and all things dick related. Throw in a little segment on anecdotes of illegal things people have done with their dicks and dick paraphernalia and you have the complete package! We'd have a smash hit on our hands...

...Apparently.

[–]McFeely_Smackup 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Isn't it one of the least popular stage shows ever produced, though? I don't think I've ever met someone who had seen it and thought it was good.

I don't know about that...I saw "Cats", it's difficult to imagine anything worse than that.

[–]kutuup1989 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, yeah, I just presumed that was a given. Isn't Cats the baseline used to determine precisely how bad a stage show is?

Like "on a scale of Cats to 10, how would you rate this show?".

[–]McFeely_Smackup 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd rate it about "Rent"

[–]icecoldpopsicle -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Yeah because modern feminism is a tribal movement, pro female, anti male. That simple really. It's not pro victims. A stronger female > weaker one.

[–]bufedad 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Feminism is a tribal movement. It sometimes splits into smaller tribes that war with each other.

It is pro-female (it's in the name... feminism).

It is anti-male (manspreading, mansplaining, manterruption).

Feminism is pro-victims. Weak females get money from the government and attention from society.

[–]icecoldpopsicle 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Feminism is pro-victims. Weak females get money from the government and attention from society.

Nope, that's just the product. They are in the business of "improving society" and they do that by handling victims. But they don't actually care for the victims, only the power it grants them over society.

They are pro power and pro funding. The victims are just the product.

[–]Tyz3 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This is the sub where everyone hates feminism? It should be worth mentioning that the play got much critique from other feminists aswell. From the same wikipedia page: The Vagina Monologues has been criticized by some within the feminist movement, including pro-sex feminists and individualist feminists.[14] Sex-positive feminist Betty Dodson, author of several books about female sexuality, saw the play as having a narrow and restrictive view of sexuality.[15] Individualist feminist Wendy McElroy stated that the play "equates men with 'the enemy' – heterosexual love with violence".[16][17] McElroy also identified problems with the work's lesbian bias, stating "A play that claims to unveil the truth about vaginas but, somehow, overlooks the salutary role men play in most women's sexuality has no credibility."

Stop trying to portray all feminists like men-hating idiots. They exist, but they are not in majority. It's like saying all muslims are terrorists and we all know that isnt true.. right?

[–]Imnotmrabut 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Stop trying to portray all feminists like men-hating idiots. They exist, but they are not in majority. It's like saying all muslims are terrorists and we all know that isnt true.. right?

Please stop assuming that all people here are as your bias requires!

[–]that_all_you_got 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In both cases happens the same thing: the tyranny and violence of extreme groups...and the silence of the moderates. Because even if they don't like the methods, those groups are still "their side", or so they think.

[+]Bad_Idea_Hat -6 points-5 points-4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

G'morning, NAMBLA apologists.

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

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter