~ archived since 2018 ~

Adèle Mercier, Queens University: Feminist Rape apologist

AlphaWookie

April 8, 2014

0 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://francisdroy.wordpress.com/2014/04/04/adele-mercier-queens-university-rape-feminist-apologist/

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	Adèle Mercier, Queens University: Feminist Rape apologist
Author	AlphaWookie
Upvotes	0
Comments	34
Date	April 8, 2014 4:24 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/22izeu/adèle_mercier_queens_university_feminist_rape/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/adele-mercier-queens-university-feminist-rape.1001895 https://theredarchive.com/post/1001895

Comments

[–][deleted]3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AlphaWookie2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AlphaWookie1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]planned_serendipity12 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AlphaWookie1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AlphaWookie3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AlphaWookie3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]-2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]francis_roy2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

First, this is not an "attack". She chose to speak publicly, she used her full name, announced herself as a Professor of Philosophy of 20 years with Queen's University, and as a Feminist. She chose to speak in those two capacities simultaneously. She's an adult, and adults that choose speak publicly, are as accountable for their words as they are their deeds.

She then chose to write publicly, using her full name to make such absurd claims.

She does have the right to free speech, and as you can see, I have not impeded it in the slightest degree, I have promoted it. Her words, incidentally, are found at the end of the article as a screenshot.

Second, she is, as am I, Canadian. "First Amendment Rights" apply to Americans, not to Canadians.

As to the rest of your comment, it is little more than speculation and an expression of your sentiments, and not particularly pertinent to the discussion.

[–][deleted]-5 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]francis_roy5 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Please be very careful with your choice of words. In what manner was she "attacked?" Search term: "define attack" Result: "an aggressive and violent action against a person or place."

Can you present me one instance of an aggressive and violent action taken against her? Certainly not in my post, you cannot.

Please read what I've said carefully. I said that the rest of your comment was speculation and an expression of sentiments not pertinent to the discussion. The discussion is the matter of my post. Your thoughts on AVFM are not pertinent to the matter of my post.

Do you recognize that the question "who are you" and the question "who do you think you are" is a challenge to one's social status? How is that pertinent to the matter of my post? Of course you are free to state your opinions, I have made no attempt to prevent you from doing so.

Disagreement is not attacking someone or impeding their right to speak.

[–][deleted]3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]francis_roy1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]francis_roy1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]francis_roy1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

First tell me what "villainous speech" is

Did you look the words up?

avfm dude (feel free to deny you're an avfm shill)

If you're going to call me names, at least choose accurate ones. In what way have I promoted AVFM? Just as disagreement is not an attack, agreement with one individual is not the promotion of her affiliations.

Or whatever bullshit.

Aptly said. Your simile fails for the following reason. You appear to believe that disagreement is "an attack." We've already handled that one.

First explain what you have posted here

I haven't posted anything here, other than responses to you this discussion. Someone else posted it. I found the link in my referrer logs and was interested in what conversation my post may have generated.

Please quote anything that I've written encourage the destruction of anyone's reputation. Her reputation is based on her own words and deeds. Anyone with a moment to spare need only click on a link to read her own words.

And why call her "a woman professor" as opposed to "a professor" or "a person"?

You want to bring your stuff here, you have to face a reality check here. it's not your site here and you don't make the rules.

Tell me what "stuff" I've "brought" here other than questions and answers. Did I at any time claim to have any form of authority whatsoever?

If your next response doesn't bring discussion on the subject matter, I'm dropping this conversation. Do you realize that you've said nothing of consequence to the matter in several replies? You've made a good many accusations, yet have failed to back any single one of them up. You've called me names without any evidence to support them. In fact, you've pretty much done that which you are accusing me of doing, throughout. You demonstrate a great concern for this sub-reddit, but not enough, it seems, to bother picking up a dictionary, taking a moment to focus your thoughts into a cogent argument, or to reply to simple questions with straight answers. Your responses are illustrative of my primary reason for not being a frequent participant on Reddit: To much noise, not enough signal.

If you have an argument to make, make it, clearly, concisely and I'll address it. If not, then we're done.

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]francis_roy1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]College_MGTOW1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TRPACC0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]blueoak93 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TRPACC2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]blueoak92 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AgentOrangeMRA1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]blueoak91 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link