Feminism’s ‘Rape Culture’ Insanity

Posted on Comments

Does anyone else remember the “Culture War” of the 1990s? Conservatives like Bill Bennett and Robert Bork argued at the time that the decadence of popular culture — as evidenced in everything from gangsta rap to video games to Quentin Tarantino movies — was corrupting morality, inciting violence and sexual perversion. Here we are, two decades later and feminists are saying basically the same thing.

This is part of what the whole “rape culture” discourse is about. Whereas most of us think of rape as a criminal act perpetrated by individuals, feminists want to indict culture — or “misogyny” or “male supremacy” or some other way of blaming larger societal forces beyond the act of the individual rapist. Therefore, feminists now adamantly insist, it’s the way we talk about sex, or the way sex is depicted in advertising, movies and TV shows, which causes rape. So now the Speech Police patrol the Internet, ready to denounce as a “rape apologist” anyone who contradicts the feminist narrative. No one can be permitted to express doubt toward the Scientific Truth of the Feminist-Industrial Complex. After Christina Hoff Sommers spoke at Georgetown University, the student newspaper published an editorial that accused the College Republicans (who hosted Sommers’ lecture) of having “knowingly endorsed a harmful conversation on the serious topic of sexual assault.”

Merely to have a conversation is harmful on the 21st-century campus.

What sort of conversations are students permitted to have? Feminists apparently had no problem with the Foucault-influenced postmodern gibberish spewed by Emma Sulkowicz in a “Sexual Assault Awareness Month” event at Brown University:

“There does not exist a scientific way to prove non-consent. . . . When it comes to sexual violence, scientific proof is impossible. . . . If we use proof in rape cases, we fall into the patterns of rape deniers. . . . When a person claims that their theory is a science, they disqualify other types of knowledge. . . . Let’s change the question from ‘Did she consent that night?’ to ‘Did she have the power to consent that night?’ . . . This is not about physical strength. . . . This is about historical power. . . . Seeing is the origin of interpretation. Interpretation is the origin of knowing. . . . If truth is scientific, then art cannot access truth. But perhaps there is something beyond the truth.”

Uh, “something beyond the truth”? Something we might call a lie?

This is pretty much what Paul Nungesser’s federal lawsuit says: “Emma Sulkowicz Is a Vindictive, Dishonest and Crazy Slut — Allegedly.”

Far be it from me to presume to know what transpired between Nungesser and Sulkowicz on the night of Aug. 27, 2012. She claims he held her down, choked her and forcibly sodomized her. There is no evidence at all to support her claim, however, while Nungesser says that everything between them was consensual and quotes Facebook messages from her that would appear to suggest that Sulkowicz was quite enthusiastic about sodomy (see paragraph 16 on p. 5 of Nungesser’s lawsuit). As for a possible motive for Sulkowicz to lie, Nungesser’s lawsuit offers a credible explanation in paragraphs 30-31, p. 10:

As is evident from Emma’s Facebook messages to Paul during the summer prior to their sophomore year, Emma’s yearning for Paul had become very intense. Emma repeatedly messaged Paul throughout that summer that she loved and missed him. She was quick to inquire whether he was in love with the woman he was seeing abroad.
Thereafter, she continued pursuing him, reiterating that she loved him. However, when Paul did not reciprocate these intense feelings, and instead showed interest in dating other women, Emma became viciously angry.

“Hell hath no fury,” etc. This is an entirely plausible scenario, if you are familiar with a certain kind of high-maintenance young woman — what I call the “Daddy’s Precious Darling” type — who believes herself to be so special that she deserves to have whatever she wants. If Sulkowicz thought her hookups with Nungesser were about love, and if he treated this as just something casual? Yeah, you could see how she would feel herself to be “the woman scorned” and decide to avenge herself by falsely accusing him of rape seven months after the night in question.

All of that, however, was a preamble to this: Robby Soave at Reason magazine wrote an article with the following headline:

Student Accused of Rape By ‘Mattress Girl’ Sues
Columbia U., Publishes Dozens of Damning Texts

A fair summary of the case, but when it was posted to Tumblr.com, a certain segment of feminist readers went berserk, including one 22-year-old who unleashed this:

Okay, I have something to f–king say about this sh*t, as someone who was raped and isn’t the “ideal” victim.
Like, yes, they had an ongoing sexual relationship.
However, he forced her to have anal sex against her will. Rapist seems to think that previous discussion of anal sex = consent. It is f–king not. You can be having sex with someone and if you start to do something to them they didn’t consent to, that they don’t want, that’s f–king rape.
She still texted him afterward? With “yearning” messages? Oh, wow. I can’t believe real humans who experience emotions are pegging this as evidence that she’s a filthy liar. When you have an established relationship with your rapist, it’s very f–king complicated. I allowed my rapist to torture me for 2½ years. We were dating. I loved him! Maybe, just f–king maybe, this woman continued to care about the man who raped her. That is NOT uncommon at all. And society tells women that when you care about a man, you have to please him. I would send my rapist “sexy” messages because I thought that’s what I had to do to get him to continue caring about me so I wouldn’t have to keep thinking about the rapes and have to cope with it.
f–king f–k all of you, holy f–king SH*T

Do you see the problem here? This anonymous Tumblr blogger says she was tortured by a rapist because she “loved him!”

Maybe I’m hopelessly naïve. Maybe I’ve led a sheltered life.

Maybe the world has changed in the past 30 years, and maybe there are lots of young women who date rapists and let themselves be tortured for 2½ years. “I loved him!”

Or maybe these women are crazy.

Also, maybe, conservatives were right about the Culture War. Maybe raising young people with no religious faith, letting them fill their minds with violence, noise and graphic sex is a bad idea.

Furthermore, the British Independent reported in August 2014:

A study on why teenage heterosexual couples may engage in anal sex has revealed a climate of coercion, with consent and mutuality not always a priority for the boys who are trying to persuade girls into having it.
Researchers at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine interviewed 130 teenagers aged 16-18 in three sites across the country to “explore expectations, experiences and circumstances of anal sex among young people”.
The qualitative study found that anal heterosex appeared to be “painful, risky and coercive, particularly for women”, while males spoke of being expected to persuade or coerce reluctant partners.
“Anal sex is increasingly prevalent among young people, yet anal intercourse between men and women—although commonly depicted in sexually explicit media—is usually absent from mainstream sexuality education and seems unmentionable in many social contexts,” the study, published on BMJ Open, says.
It found that some young people normalised “coercive, painful and unsafe anal sex,” in an issue that needs to be addressed by health workers and schools in sex education.

Guys: DON’T DO THIS. Stop watching “sexually explicit media” (i.e., porn) and remember that sexual fantasy is called “fantasy” for a reason. All that weird and kinky stuff — especially stuff that is painful, degrading and unsanitary — is not what she wants.

Or if she does want it, she’s probably so crazy you don’t want her.

See paragraph 16 on p. 5 of Nungesser’s lawsuit.

Also, notice the footnote at the bottom of p. 7: Chlamydia.

Feminism and porn are both bad ideas. Butt sex? Bad idea. False rape accusations? Bad idea. You know who likes bad ideas? Crazy women.

Just in case you haven’t been persuaded yet:

A woman diagnosed with herpes at the age of 20 has written an emotional essay about living with the common condition to fight the stigma surrounding it.
Ella Dawson, now 22, said she had never had unprotected sex and thought she “wasn’t the sort of person STDs happened to” when the symptoms first appeared during her time at university in the US.
She found the diagnosis days later devastating, feeling a “tidal wave of shame” hit her in the student health centre. . . .
Six months after being diagnosed, she decided to start telling more people she had herpes to help herself get over the mental block.
Ms Dawson says she never had a negative reaction dropping the “herpes bomb” at parties and in class discussions at the Wesleyan University in Connecticut.

Wesleyan University, annual tuition $47,972. Ella Dawson graduated last year with a bachelor of arts in Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Studies with a concentration in feminist media analysis.

There is a word for this, and the word is crazy.





 

152 comments

  1. “And that’s the problem for the feminists: they want the standard of proof changed to become guilty until proven innocent. In the end, nothing less will satisfy them.”

    Ding ding ding. You win the new car.

  2. I mentioned elsewhere, ‘Every time I think RSM is maybe overstating the problem a bit, I see yet another example of loony radfems’.

  3. And this. Radfems have been desperately trying to redefine rape into things like ‘HE LOOKED AT ME FUNNY’.

  4. Emma Sulkowicz has another problem, though I don’t think she sees it.

    She has now made herself such a public spectacle that she will have substantial difficulty having a “normal” relationship with a man in the future. I put “normal” in quotes, of course, because as Stacy points out, there’s little that is normal about her.

    But any man who might be considering dating Ms. Sulkowicz in the future has to take into account that 1) she has some unusual bedroom requests 2) she might accuse him months later of rape and 3) she’ll publicize the hell out of their encounters (and maybe gain graduate school credit at the same time).

    There are plenty of young men who would say, in the crude vernacular, that they’d “hit it”. Not this one, boys. You’ll be sorry.

  5. Remember Cathleen Crowell Webb and Gary Dotson? Eight years after the fact, Mrs. Webb concluded that there was one way to put the business behind her, and that was to admit publicly and emphatically that she’d lied.

    (The Governor of Illinois (a former prosecutor, natch) refused to believe her but split the difference and commuted Dotson’s sentence). Ellen Goodman refused to believe her. Subsequent DNA testing demonstrated the recantation was true, which should have caused Goodman and the governor pause; doubt it did).

  6. As I implied above, what her conduct indicates is a typical youthful inability to contemplate the future. She is living in the “here and now” only and presumably enjoying the notoriety of her status as Feminist icon. Things are fine as long as she stays in her Leftist academic bubble. There’s no doubt she has failed to contemplate life after academe.

    Side note: The professor(s) who encouraged this bit of “performance art” deserves some ridicule, as well. An adult would have inquired whether there might be evidence out there which would call her personal narrative into question. An adult would have asked the question, “Do you really wish to be known for this?” Nineteen year olds do goofy shit. It’s up to grown-ups to try to prevent easily foreseeable collateral damage. Yet, what we see here is a young lady with a story of questionable veracity being used by Progressives. When they’re done with her, whether because there’s a new icon, or because her narrative no longer holds up, they will discard her in favor of the new victim du jour. In many respects, they are as bad as what she’s try to portray Paul Nungesser as being.

  7. Dahoooood, I grew up in Indiana, went to a second tier state college, started my career there and it would be a stretch for me to be “Evansville normal”…”Muncie normal” maybe…

  11. If truth is scientific, then art cannot access truth.

    Godwin be damned, Dr. Goebbels called. He wants his propaganda ministry back.

    Change her assertion to this: “If truth is objective, then art cannot access truth.” Curiously left undefined is her belief as to what “truth” is, and why it is necessary for art to “access” it. In her mind, only where truth is subjective, where she can make it what she wishes it to be without regard to reality, does her “art” have validity. In other words, she is admitting that her construction of reality, i.e. the whole rape culture narrative as it pertains to her, is in fact a false reality.

    My guess is, she didn’t intend to make that admission, but that is the only conclusion one can draw from her statement.

  12. Stated otherwise, if a man did what Emma Sulkowicz did, they would call it rape…and probably cultural appropriation…

  13. What about a panel discussion where Ashley Judd and Anita Sarkeesian discuss how they experience a distinct lack of thirst immediately after drinking water?
    Because the Patriarchy brainwashed them into feeling thirsty so that they could force them into buying the evil, patriarchal water. Duh.

  14. Trying to get people to take responsibility for their own lives is an uphill battle in a culture where the entitle mentality is pervasive.
    And one where victimhood = status. Improve your circumstances in life, and your status among the SJ crowd will go right down.

  15. He deserves ridicule for trafficking in ‘performance art’. I assume specialized art schools have capable students. The output I’ve seen from students of studio art faculty ensconced in ordinary private colleges has been uniformly awful. I do not mean ‘largely awful’. I mean student exhibitions will contain not one item any normal person would ever care to own or display. The 95th percentile among their students produce c**p. Does anyone on the studio art faculty at Columbia merit employment there?

  16. She’s handsome. She’ll likely find someone. The question regarding her future is whether she comes clean or doubles down. This lie is a malignancy within her. It might be contained should she come to a point in her life where she never mentions it again, but that is all that can be done without confession.

  17. In other words, feminism is about relieving women of any sense of
    responsibility, so that she need never examine her own actions and ask
    whether she has contributed to her own problems. And so the woman under
    the influence of feminism continues to follow this map she’s been given
    until she’s a middle-aged cat lady and why has her life turned out so
    sad? Two words: BLAME MEN!

    This is a human problem. It’s more intense among women, many if not most of whom seem to have a truncated sense of personal agency. I’ve seen sterling examples of it in women whose entire upbringing and then some happened in a pre-feminist era.

  18. You know who else is pushing young women to try risky sexual behavior? Sex ed advice groups recommended by high school sex ed. Like Columbia University’s website GoAskAlice.

  19. You have to look at it from the other side, though. He’s being rewarded for this behavior with conquering the most aggressive and desired women in his environment. I guarentee with an attitude like that, he’s top dog and the most sought after man in his circle.

  22. There are legitimate reasons to be skeptical of notions like rationalism, universalism and empiricism.

    Just remember that it was Enlightened monists who gave us the guillotine.

  23. Alas, Disqus will not allow anonymous up-votes.

    I agree. Alas, a really cool discussion of these topics is beyond a comment on someone else’s blog.

    We need a decent bottle of wine, some cigars and endless plates hors d’oeuvres to do that topic justice.

  25. most of today’s liberal arts students are the rough equivalent of the horse from Animal House … they would drop dead at the slightest provocation.

  27. That’s why God invented pseudonyms. ‘Twon’t be long before she is legally named Roberta Stacey McCain or something similar. And we can count on Columbia to be willing to issue her degree in whatever name she requests.

  30. If men employed these weird Foucauldian arguments they could use miraculous logic showing women in fact rape men and all women benefit from that act. Thus the Islamic anti-rape burkha and anti-petting head-scarves. Hide your charms you rapists. You are in the driver’s seat. See how madness works?

  31. Oh my gosh has porn changed in 20 years.
    That schlong in the butt garbage used to be freakish and now nearly every scene has it.
    Disgusting.
    If they’re too stpuid to know what goes where, get a book

  34. Every so often I’ll deign to give expert advice to the subhuman oppressor-pigs who call themselves “men”. According to feminist ideology, somehow these idiots managed to effectively oppress us wymyn seamlessly for thousands and thousands of years because of their motiveless evil. But a few decades ago, quite suddenly, these ultra-competent, ultra-clever oppressors became too stupid and inept to do anything right. Isn’t that an astonishing turn of events? And that’s why those bungling yet masterfully-oppressive men need the sublime gift of female advice… although they clearly don’t deserve it.

    Yes, you men are all a bunch of drooling, low-IQ losers who nonetheless manage to oppress us females using diabolically invisible methods of mind control that only us feminists can discern. But I’m optimistic that not even you are so dim-witted and vile that you can’t comprehend a bit of simple-worded advice from your intellectual betters. (See? I’m not a man-hater. Perish the thought!)

  35. It is quite true that I live every day of my life being gorgeously oppressed. But today I was slightly more gorgeously oppressed than normal. I am now using a university library computer to type this entry; it will soon become clear as to why.

    Earlier this afternoon, I was sitting in my apartment. Of course I was being a feisty feminist hellcat as I always am. Suddenly… the lights went out. As did every appliance. Had I been electro-raped?

    “Damn you, Patriarchy!” I screamed at the ceiling. “If it weren’t for men, there wouldn’t be any darkness!”

    Snatching-up the phone, I dialed the customer service number for the electric utility. After pushing some buttons to summon the service rep, I was unpleasantly surprised by the voice of a vile manpig.

    I instantly demanded to know why the lights had gone off. The moronic penis-lugger mumbled some crap about me “not paying” some so-called “bill” blah blah blah. Bullshit, all.

    MEN! Always with the cold-blooded “explanations”.

    “Enough!” I shot-back. “This is another Patriarchal conspiracy to oppress my tits and make my pussy feel bad about itself! But I see through your plan and refuse to tremble before the destructive forces of your cock!”

    So devestating was my wit, the voice went silent. Perhaps he was stunned by my exposure of his dastardly little plot. It was at that point that I hung-up without further ado. And the creepy rapist-wannabe was probably jacking-off to my voice anyway.

    I have no need for Patriarchal electricity. How many womyn have been victimized by MEN’S high voltage lines? Too many!

    Without missing a beat, I dug-out my scented candles and lit them. They were hand-dipped at a lesbian wicca commune, making them full of that lesbiany wiccany goodness that we all need so badly to counteract our penis-dominated lives.

    But this tale has a happy ending: I had become a survivor!

    So I invite you all to post in this thread about how YOU, a white middle-class college womyn, has been ever-so gorgeously oppressed recently. Did you recover from it? Or do you need a support group to offer succor and sympathy about all the grievances which you’ve suffered at the hands of men in the last 30 minutes?

  36. We womyn are your equals, but we’re also your moral superiors because we believe in equality. And we womyn stopped evolving the instant we hit perfection back in the mid-70s, but you swine still have a long way to go before you can reach our dizzying heights of flawlessness. So the advice I’m going to give today is how you clueless ##### can avoid being the sexual-harassers that you usually are. (Go get a dictionary because I’m going to use words longer than 8 letters. I know you guys have trouble with those. *smirk*)

    To be a vigorous and carefree male today is dirty and wrong!

    You are always enjoying improper thoughts and you might occasionally be doing bad things when our backs are turned. Frankly this pisses us righteous womyn off to no end. That’s why we do everything we can to make sure your happiness and ease of mind in the workplace can never come to fruition. So a team of wonderfully prickly, heterophobic and censorious feminist jurists cooked-up a very convenient entrapment-scheme called “sexual harassment”. There were two assumptions on which sexual harassment is based:

    First, Male heterosexuality is based on domination and violence but female heterosexuality is based on rainbows and happy thoughts. Therefore females are horribly oppressed by your speech but you are not harmed or bothered by the same speech when it comes from a female. This assumption is necessary to guarantee equal treatment for both sexes.

    Second, There are increasing numbers of hard-edged, savvy and self-confident career-womyn entering the workplace and the possibility of you having any heterosexuality at all is absolutely terrifying and beastial to them. It turns out that the hard-edged, savvy and self-confident career-womyn around you are also fragile, easily-hurt orchids who could spontaneously combust from overhearing a risqué pun.

    And because we love to politicize personal conflicts (especially conflicts which are not easily solved by intrusive political means), it is your behavior that needs to be reigned-in. For the sake of equality. The fact that feminist lawyers and feminist harassment counselors profit mightily from the resulting suspicion and dischord is a total coincidence.

    Are You A Sexual Harasser?

    Of course you are, nitwit!

    Have you ever made an off-color remark in mixed company? Have you ever stood close to a female in an elevator? Have you ever gestured with your hands in ways that might be interpreted as obscene by a paranoid onlooker across the room? Have you ever dated a co-worker or unsuccessfully asked a co-worker on a date? Did you ever say something that was offensive to an eavesdropping prude? Well I’ve got news for you, buster: THAT MAKES YOU A FILTHY HARASSER FOR WHOM HANGING IS TOO KIND! You are required to change your speech, habits and behavior immediately.

    (Special note: if you ever expect me to ever “tone down” my potty mouth or change how I dress or act, then it means you’re a misogynist who is forcing me to wear a burkha. Self-control is for YOU, never for me. Expecting me to adjust my behavior is absolutely outrageous.)

    Sexual harassment is not about sex, it’s actually about power. (Special note: SEX is not about sex either, it’s actually about power.) And sexual harassment is not only the making of unwanted sexual advances, but it’s also the failure to make advances when they are wanted by me. Similarly, if you and I were to have a short fling in the workplace (unlikely, but bear with me) and you decide to end the relationship without my consent, then it proves that you were just using me and THAT is a form of sexual harassment. In fact, any behavior I don’t like is harassment. Got it, jerk?

    I have the right to go to work without ever getting uncomfortable in any way and everyone else has got to make accomodations to suit my ever-changing emotional hang-ups. Thems the rules, boys. Deal with it. For the sake of equality.

    And even though us womyn are equally rough and tough as men, we’re also frail and delicate enough to collapse into quivering heaps of fainting Victorian jelly if you make saucy double-entendres or ribald witticisms. We’re equally strong and aggressive as men but we’re also weak and helpless and need protection from men. Yes, perhaps sexual harassment rules create many opportunities for cynical abuse by unscrupulous and vindictive females due to office politics or personal grudges, but unscrupulous and vindictive females simply DO NOT exist!

    Honest, they don’t.

    Trust us.

    In any sexual-harassment situation, it’ll be my word against your word, and my word ought to carry more weight. Because you, as my equal, lack the sense of fair play and human decency that come so naturally to me.

    Always keep these simple rules in mind:

    1. Your behavior may create a HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT for female co-workers. A “hostile environment” is defined however the most hypersensitive, Puritanical and erotophobic ice-queen in the office chooses to define it at that particular instant. The burden is on you to figure-out when that is. The victim might not decide she was harassed until several weeks after the fact.

    2a. Do not make sexual jokes around me. If another man tells a sexual joke, do not laugh and tell him to stop immediately. However, you must be a good sport whenever I choose to crack a sexual joke or a penis-based insult. Especially the jokes and insults that I make at your expense. Those are hilarious.

    2b. Special note: If you’re a gay man, every sexually-charged thing you say is automatically cute and witty.
    3. Do not tell me about your love life, I am not interested. If another man tells you about his love life, stick your fingers in your ears and tell him to stop immediately. But my love life is always extremely interesting and it deserves to be heard by everyone within earshot of my booming, throaty voice. Disallowing me to do so would deny me my freedom of expression, so it’s imperative that you let me tell you in graphic detail about the one night I propped my ankles on the couch and had my cat lick Tender Vittles from the folds of my coochie.

    4. Do not send me mixed messages. Only I may decide when you are sending them. And I may send-out as many mixed messages as I like. Only I may decide when I am sending them. I can flirt as much as I like, as often as I like. I can squoosh my boobies into your back, rub my hands over your chest, nibble your ear, come-on to you like Madonna in heat. But I also reserve the right to suddenly turn cold and be deathly offended if you respond in a fashion that I don’t care for.

    5. Do not wear pants that are ill-fitting lest I see the outlines of your disgusting rape-tool. I may dress however I please. This hot bod of mine is far too gorgeous to keep covered-up, but you mustn’t look at it. Just avert your gaze or gouge your eyes-out or something, I don’t know.

    6. Your behavior can and will be placed under a microscope. Almost anything can offend me at any instant, and you have to figure out what I find offensive before I know it myself. My behavior will never be placed under a microscope, for that would be blaming the innocent victim. Anything I do that offends you is proof that you’re a spineless wimp with no sense of humor. Learn to “take a joke”, numb-nuts. I should never have to “take a joke” if I don’t want to.

    7. Do not try to date co-workers. Do not ask me out for coffee after work. I have no interest in your putrid loins and the poisonous rape-yogurt contained within. I, however, may date whoever I choose. NO ONE tells this grrrl what to do. That would be sexist.

    8. If we ever have an office romance that goes badly, I can seek as much vengeance as I want. You, however, would be an uncouth bastard to do the same.

    9. Womyn ought to be allowed to be just as sexually aggressive and lusty as you are– but YOU shouldn’t be allowed to be as sexually aggressive and lusty as you are.

    10. Do not put sexually-titillating pictures on or around your desk. (”Titillating” pictures may include head-shots of your wife.) An image of an attractive model in a short skirt is exactly as offensive as a swastika but my Jude Law calendar has got to stay– what a hunk!

    What else do you need to remember? Plenty: Watch your mouth. Watch your hands. Watch your filthy mind. Stand-up straight. Clean your fingernails. Tuck-in that shirt. Don’t wear your hair in an offensive way. Don’t breathe so loud. Those socks don’t match that tie. Don’t eat garlic. Wipe that grin off your face, mister. Only YOU can stop sexual harassment. Us womyn can’t be bothered so don’t ask. The snows of suspicion and censure around you will never melt.

    And as for the ladies…

    No rules for you! Isn’t equality great?

    For you, working at the office should be as relaxing and fun as a day at the beach. But how can you protect yourself from harassment? Well my dears, your angelic behavior is always de facto perfect and divine and you don’t have to adjust your habits at all. Not one smidgen. You are the hottest, sexiest most erotic creature in town and everyone ought to know it. Sway those hips after making your PowerPoint show, honey! Be the filthy-talking office-clown who gets lots of laughs. Why not “casually” push your breasts together when asking for a raise? You deserve it all, you goddess-diva you. And us feminists will always deny that you ever act this way.

  37. Heads she wins,
    Tails he loses.
    All men accused are guilty is how the.feminuts like it.
    Whether accused of sexual harrassment or rape or domestic.violence.
    The legal ploys are the same.
    Avoid traditional criminal courts, eliminate rights.of men.
    Accord special rights only for women.
    Call it ekwality (or some non gender neutral name that favors women and ignores men)

  39. I hope it was with a herd of others like yourself, and lots of patties were dropped in the area.

  40. Easy. People doing something as radical as a so-called “gender change” are already the sort of people with a “look at me” complex, i.e., attention whores. They must be, because even after radical surgery they don’t look “right”, and other people will stare at them forever after, saying “what the heck was that?

    It’s much harder to hide body type going from male-to-female, than vice versa. Of course, nowadays when the pervs and perv enablers want to catch boys pre-puberty, that might not always be the case.

  45. That’s because the feminists were so thoroughly ego-centric that they couldn’t see that some women weren’t like themselves, that not all women were college educated, fairly disciplined, mature professionals. They really never had a fornicating clue that 15 year old girls and women with somewhat less education and discipline. The first feminists could be counted on to take their birth patrol pills (that’s what Archie Bunker called them) (sac)religiously, but somehow, some way, no one ever seemed to figure out that the feminists weren’t the only ones who’d take advantage of the “new morality.”

  46. I’ll take a 2016 Ford F-150, extended cab, four-wheel drive, with all of the bells and whistles. Thank you very much. Contributions to the new truck may be made here.

  48. Alger Hiss lied his tuchus off for 50 years. His son (and the circle around Victor Navasky) are still trying to peddle the idea that that bagged and stuffed creature was not guilty. (Morton Sobell eventually came clean).

  49. if you are familiar with a certain kind of high-maintenance young woman —
    what I call the “Daddy’s Precious Darling” type — who believes herself
    to be so special that she deserves to have whatever she wants. I

    The one I knew best was favored by her father but neglected by him on a mundane basis. It was not what she thought she deserved which was notable, but an incredible neediness conjoined to an attraction to rough trade.

    She died at 55 a spinster with two bastard children. The cause was the downstream effects of what the clinicians call ‘polysubstance abuse’.

Comments are closed.