The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

‘Extremely Rare False Rape Accusations’

Posted on | March 7, 2016 | 28 Comments

 

Marc Patrick O’Leary is a serial rapist, a sexual predator who in 2011 was sentenced to more than 300 years in prison. He was convicted of four rapes in Colorado and two in Washington State. O’Leary’s modus operandi involved systematic surveillance of his targets, usually breaking into homes or apartments through unlocked sliding-glass doors and taking measures to prevent leaving behind DNA or other trace evidence. His criminal career was recently detailed at length in an article by Pro Publica that focused on one of O’Leary’s victims, an 18-year-old named Marie whose story was disbelieved by police detectives. Marie was charged with filing a false report, and the Pro Publica article is intended to lend weight to the common feminist argument that, because false rape accusations are rare, no one should ever doubt such an accusation.

The problem, however, is that this “believe the survivors” rhetoric usually arises in connection with claims about sexual assault on university campuses, and especially in regard to dubious cases where regret about a drunken hook-up, or a desire for revenge against an ex-boyfriend, appear as plausible motives for a false accusation. In the current climate, where activists have incited a “campus rape epidemic” hysteria, cases like this seem to proliferate. More than 100 male students have sued their universities saying they were falsely accused of sexual assault and denied due process in campus disciplinary tribunals. While research shows that only about 5 percent of rape charges reported to police are false, what about these campus cases, most of which are never reported to law enforcement? The lower threshold of evidence required in campus disciplinary hearings, and the fact that university administrators impose no penalty for false accusations, means that liars like University of Virginia hoaxer Jackie Coakley can get away with inventing crimes that never happened. It is one thing to say “believe the survivors” when dealing with the victims of a violent menace like Marc O’Leary, but another thing entirely when confronted with the case of a student at elite Brown University who says he was expelled merely for making out with a girl he met at a party. The bungled police investigation in the case of O’Leary’s victim Marie, whose lawsuit against the city of Lynwood was settled for $150,000, does not justify the persecution of Paul Nungesser at Columbia University by fanatical feminists who insist that Emma Sulkowicz is both sane and honest, despite all evidence to the contrary.

The public-radio show “This American Life” did a story based on the Pro Publica article about Marie’s case and this radio broadcast was deemed “problematic” by feminist Nikki Gloudemann:

As listeners, we’re left to believe that rape victims like Marie have a responsibility to prove their case to others, because doubt is the natural byproduct of “how people think.” There is virtually no explicit mention of a rape culture that unfairly places this burden on victims, and nary any implicit references either. The show, for instance, touches on the nature of trauma, but never really explains how and why rape victims, due to biological changes in the brain, may respond in ways that seem unusual—and as such, why it’s deeply problematic to expect that they behave in a certain way. It never notes how extremely rare false rape accusations are. It never discusses a culture of shame and stigma that helps explain why 68% of rapes are never reported to police in the first place. . . .
As an influential media force . . . This American Life has a responsibility to report on something as serious as rape with appropriate depth, context, and framing. In failing to do that, it not only ignored rape culture; it actively helped to perpetuate it.

Here you see the difference between rape — a violent crime — and feminist “rape culture” rhetoric, which is a dishonest propaganda tactic, a way of generalizing guilt to implicate all males in crimes they deplore. Feminists are always looking for an excuse to demonize men, and “rape culture” has become a way of making ordinary heterosexual male behavior and attitudes seem monstrous. A guy makes an innocuous joke, or compliments a woman’s appearance, and suddenly he is condemned as a misogynist perpetuating “rape culture.” Amanda Marcotte has called men who disagree with her “rape apologists,” accused her critics of “supporting rape because you hate women,” and smeared skeptics of the Rolling Stone UVA hoax as “rape truthers.”

Skepticism about the false “1-in-5” statistic — a feminist myth about campus rape produced by “Statistical Voodoo and Elastic Definitions” — does not mean that one is “denying that rape is real.” No matter how often Amanda Marcotte smears skeptics as “rape apologists,” what is actually at issue is a matter of public policy. Marcotte and her feminist allies are deliberately exaggerating the prevalence of sexual assault at colleges and universities in order to argue for policies that have the effect of criminalizing all sexual activity on campus. The policies advocated by feminists like Jessica Valenti, Jaclyn Friedman, Jill Filipovic and Alexandra Brodsky shift the burden of proof in such a way that an accusation of rape is tantamount to proof of guilt, and accused students say they are denied the opportunity to present evidence of their innocence in the campus kangaroo court tribunals mandated by the Obama administration’s infamous 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter.

When the captain of the Yale University basketball team is expelled and his teammates are accused of “supporting a rapist” because they believe his expulsion was unjust, skepticism seems entirely warranted.

Nikki Gloudemann’s phrase “extremely rare false rape accusations” is misleading. If 5% of the accused are innocent, is that “extremely rare”? Well, according to federal statistics, gay and bisexual people are 2.3% of the U.S. population, and are thus even more “extremely rare.” Furthermore, is it in any way fair or responsible to suggest that the typical sort of he-said/she-said campus date-rape scenario involving two drunk teenagers is comparable to the brutal crimes of a violent predator like Marc O’Leary? Whatever the Yale Women’s Center says about Jack Montague, I’m pretty sure he’s not a knife-wielding sadist. When feminists like Jessica Valenti declare their intention to “redefine rape,” shouldn’t we become suspicious of such a project?

If you ask questions like that, you’ll be branded a “rape apologist” and maybe banned from Twitter, too. Truth is dangerous in an age of lies.




 

Category: Sex Trouble

‘Heterosexuality Is the Structure That Keeps Sexist Oppression in Place’

Posted on | March 7, 2016 | 81 Comments

 

“According to feminism the role of heterosexuality is what structures the male-female relationship. Heterosexuality is the structure that keeps sexist oppression in place in the private realm; where sexism in general operates to also oppress in the public sphere. In other words heterosexuality reinforces the hierarchy established by sexism to keep women dominated in ‘sexual interaction, romantic love, marriage, and the family.'”
— “Heterosexuality: The Role it Plays in Feminism and Lesbianism,” 2007

That quote is from a Portland State University student enrolled in a course (“Gender and Critical Inquiry,” WS301) in the department of Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies. The syllabus of that course shows that the assigned text was Feminist Theory Reader: Local and Global Perspectives (edited by Carole R. McCann and Seung-Kyung Kim, 2002), and the readings included such radical lesbians as Charlotte Bunch, Monique Wittig and Audre Lorde. The student quotes from “Separating Lesbian Theory From Feminist Theory,” an essay by Cheshire Calhoun in the textbook, where she says that “from a feminist perspective, sexual interaction, romantic love, marriage, and the family are all danger zones,” being patriarchal institutions that “serve male interests.”

Trying to explain feminist theory to a stranger Saturday night at the Project Veritas CPAC party, I realized he thought I was a lunatic. What most people think of as feminism — a commitment to “equality,” understood as basic fairness — bears little resemblance to what is taught in the university Women’s Studies programs that enroll more than 90,000 students on some 700 campuses in the United States. Women in these courses learn to despise motherhood, to celebrate abortion, to fear men as perpetrators of sexual violence, and to consider heterosexuality a synonym for oppression. When you try to describe this paranoid anti-male belief system to people, they look at you like you’re crazy. Maybe I am crazy to read Women’s Studies textbooks like Feminist Frontiers, Women and Gender, Rethinking Sexuality, Gender Trouble, Toward a Feminist Theory of the State and Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions, but it is impossible for anyone who hasn’t read this stuff to believe how extreme academic feminism has become. So when I summarize these theories — the social construction of the gender binary within the heterosexual matrix — people look at me as if I’ve slipped a cog.

As insane as it may seem, however, this radical ideology is what the word “feminism” now means on campuses. Ideas Have Consequences, as Richard Weaver warned us, and the consequences of feminist ideas are manifest throughout academia, e.g., the University of Pittsburgh:

In the spirit of free speech, Pitt’s Student Government Board passed the microphone [March 1] to a line of students speaking out about a controversial speaker whose visit SGB partially funded.
At its public meeting in Nordy’s Place, students packed the William Pitt Union’s multipurpose room to speak their piece on Milo Yiannopoulos’ lecture [Feb. 29]. . . .
SGB President Nasreen Harun amended the agenda at the meeting to allow for more time for student comments. . . .
Board member Everett Green said, in his three semesters on the Board, this was the first time he had seen a student response of this magnitude at a meeting. . . .
Marcus Robinson, president of Pitt’s Rainbow Alliance, said after leaving the lecture on Monday, he felt unsafe on campus for the first time.
“So many of us shared in our pain. I felt I was in danger, and I felt so many people in that room were in danger. This event erased the great things we’ve done,” Robinson said. “For the first time, I’m disappointed to be at Pitt.”
Robinson suggested that the University should have provided counselors in a neighboring room to help students who felt “invalidated” or “traumatized” by the event. . . .
“This is more than hurt feelings, this is about real violence. We know that the violence against marginalized groups happens every day in this country. That so many people walked out of that [event] feeling in literal physical danger is not alright,” Claire Matway, a social work and urban studies major, said. . . .
In response to student comments, Harun said, with teary eyes, said the best way to make an impact on campus was to begin conversations like this with the Board.
“Now is a good time talk about [amending the allocations manual]. It starts here and we can take it from there,” Harun said. “We’re very sorry people are feeling the way they are and it was not intended … and we’re sorry people are not proud to be at Pitt.”

This kind of rhetoric — students claiming to be “traumatized” and “feeling in literal danger” because someone contradicted their opinions — shows how ideological conformity has made universities a bubble, a cocoon where students never encounter criticism of “progressive” dogma. Consider this mission statement:

The University of Pittsburgh Gender, Sexuality, and Women’s Studies Program is an interdisciplinary academic program focusing on excellence in teaching and research relating to gender, sexuality, and women. The Program is committed to promoting feminist and LGBTQIA activism, pedagogy, and scholarship that engage with the larger local, national, and global communities. Program offerings provide opportunities for students and faculty to explore the historical development, cultural variations, and changing representations of gender and sexuality as they organize identities, interactions, and institutions and intersect in complex ways with sex, race, class, ethnicity, ability, age, religion, and nation.

Notice that this academic program is “committed to promoting feminist and LGBTQIA activism” — it is a department with a political agenda. Among recent events on the department’s calendar was a book release party for the program director’s new book that claims to be “the first sustained and comprehensive study of Renaissance textual responses to Platonic same-sex sexuality.” Another event was a lecture by Professor Susan Wells, “In Search of the Clitoris: Writing and the Body in Our Bodies, Ourselves.” Permit me to suggest that nobody smart enough to go to college should require a lecture about where to find the clitoris. And despite my enthusiastic interest in female genitalia, I’m not sure what Professor Wells could have said on the subject that would have added to my knowledge. If students at Pitt need enlightenment in this regard, a quick Google search should suffice to cure their ignorance.

We can perceive, however, that the “education” provided by such programs is not about the transmission of knowledge, but rather about indoctrinating students in terms of their attitudes and beliefs. There are no Republicans or conservatives on the faculty of Pitt’s Gender, Sexuality, and Women’s Studies Program, nor are there any professors in this department who advocate a traditional Judeo-Christian understanding of gender and sexuality. Pitt’s resolute hostility toward traditional morality can be seen from its events calendar, featuring Gabriella Lukacs’ lecture “Career Porn: Blogging and the Good Life” and Patricia Ulbrich’s “Hard Hatted Women & Wild Sisters: Lesbian Feminist Community in Pittsburgh.” A feminist student at Pitt will be applauded if she becomes a lesbian or a porn blogger; the only “wrong” choice she can make is to pursue a life that involves a husband and children. Feminists have never made a secret of their goal of destroying the traditional family.

“Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the Women’s Movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage.”
— Sheila Cronan, 1970

“The nuclear family is the school of values in a sexist, sexually repressed society.”
— Andrea Dworkin, 1974

“No woman should be authorized to stay at home to raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.”
— Simone de Beauvoir, 1975

“The first condition for escaping from forced motherhood and sexual slavery is escape from the patriarchal institution of marriage.”
— Alison M. Jaggar, 1988

“Women’s heterosexual orientation perpetuates their social, economic, emotional, and sexual dependence on and accessibility by men. Heterosexuality is thus a system of male ownership of women . . .”
— Cheshire Calhoun, 1994

“The term motherhood refers to the patriarchal institution . . . that is male-defined and controlled and is deeply oppressive to women.”
— Andrea O’Reilly, 2008

“I don’t particularly like babies. They are loud and smelly and, above all other things, demanding . . . time-sucking monsters with their constant neediness. . . . Nothing will make me want a baby. . . . This is why, if my birth control fails, I am totally having an abortion.”
— Amanda Marcotte, March 2014

“Heterosexuality and masculinity . . . are made manifest through patriarchy, which normalizes men as dominant over women. . . .
“This tenet of patriarchy is thus deeply connected to acts of sexual violence, which have been theorized as a physical reaffirmation of patriarchal power by men over women.”
— Sara Carrigan Wooten, 2015

Feminism is a death cult which exercises such hegemonic influence in academia that no one on the 21st-century campus dares to dissent from this anti-male/anti-heterosexual belief system. Because there are no professors who criticize feminist ideology and rhetoric, students are never exposed to evidence or arguments that contradict the cult beliefs propagated by radical academics “committed to promoting feminist and LGBTQIA activism.” Is there any professor — at the University of Pittsburgh or Portland State University or anywhere else — who doubts that heterosexuality is “the structure that keeps sexist oppression in place”? If there are such skeptics of feminist theory on campus, do any of them dare say a word in favor of heterosexuality? Can anyone name a professor who has spoken out in opposition to the claim that “marriage constitutes slavery for women,” or who defends motherhood against the assertion that it is “deeply oppressive to women”? Do any faculty dispute the implication that all heterosexual men perpetrate “sexual violence” to express “patriarchal power by men over women”? And is there anyone in academia today who loves babies, rather than despising them as the smelly “time-sucking monsters” Amanda Marcotte wants to abort?

 

Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It, and the suppression of dissent is accomplished by terroristic intimidation tactics intended to silence opposition. Feminists like Amanda Marcotte do not hesitate to slander their critics as “rape apologists” and accuse opponents of “supporting rape because you hate women.” However, anyone who attempts to call critical attention to this anti-male propaganda by confronting feminist hatemongers will be accused of “harassment” and stigmatized as a “misogynist,” because disagreeing with Amanda Marcotte — or Anita Sarkeesian or Jaclyn Friedman, et al. — is considered proof that you are a woman-hating rape apologist.

“The feminist movement’s goal — ‘to destroy the structure of culture as we know it,’ as Andrea Dworkin said — is incompatible not merely with marriage and the family, but with the principles of democratic government. In order to obtain the androgynous ‘equality’ that is the objective of feminist ideology, religious freedom will have to be abolished, along with the free speech rights of feminism’s critics. Unless we are willing to oppose feminism now, we may find ourselves eventually living in a totalitarian society where such opposition is prohibited by law.”
— Robert Stacy McCain, Sex Trouble: Radical Feminism and the War Against Human Nature

People think I’m crazy for taking feminism seriously, but this totalitarian movement is becoming increasingly powerful in American culture:

Students at Western Washington University have reached a turning point in their campus’s hxstory. (For one thing, they’re now spelling it with an X—more on that later.) Activists are demanding the creation of a new college dedicated to social justice activism, a student committee to police offensive speech, and culturally segregated living arrangements at the school . . .
WWU’s student-activist community — the frightening-sounding Assembly for Power and Liberation — made their demands public earlier this week. . . .
The most substantial of the activists’ demands is a call for a new college that would essentially train students to become social justice warriors . . . WWU must meet the needs of this new “College of Power and Liberation” by immediately hiring 10 faculty members — subject to the approval of student-activists. . . .
Activists have also demanded the creation of an Office for Social Transformation, which would employ 15 students — young Robespierres in training — for the purposes of monitoring “racist, anti-black, transphobic, cissexist, misogynistic, ableist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and otherwise oppressive behavior on campus.” . . .
Keep in mind that WWU is already an extremely liberal campus with a number of social justice-oriented activities: it has a department of Education and Social Justice, a Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies program, a Queer Resource Center, a Social Issues Resource Center, and an Ethnic Student Center. . . .
At the heart of this effort lies a bizarrely totalitarian ideology: Student-activists think they have all the answers—everything is settled, and people who dissent are not merely wrong, but actually guilty of something approaching a crime. If they persist in this wrongness, they are perpetuating violence, activists will claim.
The list of demands ends with a lengthy denunciation of WWU’s marginalization of “hxstorically oppressed students.” The misspelling is intentional: “hxstory,” I presume, was judged to be more PC than “history,” which is gendered, triggering, and perhaps violent.

The public education system produces high-school graduates who know nothing of history, even if they could spell the word correctly. Mass ignorance benefits the taxpayer-supported intelligentsia who exercise hegemonic control within academia. Professors now indoctrinate college students with the kind of paranoid radicalism that perceives “oppressive behaviors” everywhere, and it is these progressive training camps that produce our nation’s future ruling-class elite.

“When you have a ruling class that doesn’t believe in — or even much like — the fundamental values of the nations it rules, things tend to work out poorly.”
— Professor Glenn Reynolds

Be afraid, America. Be very afraid.

 

+ o + o +

BANNED BY TWITTER!

The #FreeStacy movement, a grassroots response to Twitter’s Feb. 19 decision to suspend my popular @rsmccain account, has received international attention. You can help support this movement by including the #FreeStacy hashtag on your Twitter messages, by retweeting messages in support of this movement, and by signing up at PublicStatus.org, which is dedicated to defending free speech rights on social media. Thanks to everyone who has helped spread the word.

— Robert Stacy McCain




 

Category: Sex Trouble

In The Mailbox, 03.07.16

Posted on | March 7, 2016 | 2 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho


OVER THE TRANSOM
Da Tech Guy: Baldilocks – Random Disjointed Stuff
Camp of the Saints: Nancy Reagan, RIP
The Political Hat: On The Cis Side Of Trans
Michelle Malkin: Five Years Missing Marizela
Twitchy: Sandernistas Trash Nancy Reagan
Shark Tank: Sanders – The GOP “Is Proof We Need To Invest” In Mental Health


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
American Power: “Why I Left The Conservative Movement”
American Thinker: Is The Republican Establishment The Next Whig Party?
Conservatives4Palin: Taliban Reject Invite To Afghanistan Peace Talks
Don Surber: Best Democratic Debate Tweets
Jammie Wearing Fools: Trump Tower Funded By Rich Chinese Trading Cash For Visas
Joe For America: Are Wind Turbines Killing Whales Too? (Not A Joke!)
JustOneMinute: Rubio Feeling The Heat In Florida
Pamela Geller: Zuckerberg Allows Savage Death Threats By Muslims, Censors Facebook Posts Critical Of Muslim Migrants
Protein Wisdom: The Undoing Of The American Revolution
Shot In The Dark: They Don’t Give Participation Trophies For Life
STUMP: Kicking Off The 2016 80% Funding Watch
The Gateway Pundit: Sikhs, Muslims Hold DC Rally To Support Trump
The Jawa Report: Sandcrawler PSA – Man’s Gotta Eat
The Lonely Conservative: Must Watch – Glenn Beck’s CPAC Speech
This Ain’t Hell: Fat Floats
Weasel Zippers: Dem Rep Joaquin Castro Claims Hillary’s Been Cleared by DOJ (Spoiler: Nope.)
Megan McArdle: Donald Trump’s Very Human Failing
Mark Steyn: Steyn In For Rush!


Shop Amazon – $10 off $50 on Select Fishing Products

Category: Linkagery

Nancy Reagan, R.I.P.

Posted on | March 7, 2016 | 1 Comment

 

The headlines via Memeorandum:

Nancy Reagan, an Influential and
Stylish First Lady, Dies at 94
— New York Times

Nancy Reagan, Former First Lady, Dies at 94
— ABC News

Nancy Reagan — Dead at 94
— TMZ

Former First Lady Nancy Reagan Dead at 94
— NBC News

She was classy and shrewd, although some Reaganites criticized her for playing favorites among her presidents’ aides. The White House intrigues of the Reagan era were legendary and Nancy Reagan had her favorites, like Michael Deaver, which sometimes caused conflicts.

 

Category: Republicans

Rule 5 Sunday: Animal Magnetism

Posted on | March 6, 2016 | 7 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

While I was somewhat tempted to go with a classic Roxy Music cover for this week’s appetizer, I thought better of it and decided to use something a little more scientific, which is to say the cover off the Scorpions’ seventh studio album, Animal Magnetism. As usual, keep in mind that many of the following links are to pics normally considered NSFW, and the management is not responsible for dog bites on your junk, feminist rage, loss of face, damaged relationships or other consequences arising from your failure to exercise discretion in your clicking.

Rawr.

Goodstuff leads off this week with a double dip: Cigarette Girls and a handful of Lucy Liu. Next up is Ninety Miles from Tyranny with Hot Pick of the Late Night, Morning Mistress, and Girls with Guns; Animal Magnetism with Rule Five Animal Rights Kook Friday and the Giant-Sized Saturday Gingermageddon;  The Last Tradition with Andressa Urach and Gracie Carvalho, and of course First Street Journal, who has Redheads With Rifles.

EBL has Ivanka Trump, Leo and his posse, the Michigan Debate with Megyn Kelly, Rule 5 Hysteria, Rule 5 Trans-Kansas, and Neve Campbell Joins House of Cards.

A View from the Beach contributes Hell’s Belles – Lucifer’s Girls, Jumping the Gap at Clinton.com, “Man Up!”, The Morning Weather Report, Is This How He Gets That Spray Tan?, Tuesday Tennis, It’s Leap Day!, A Monday Morning Hookup, Stacy No Fan of Taylor Swift, and Saturday Saturday at Clinton.com.

At Soylent Siberia, it’s Coffee with Kyla (Extra Sugar), Monday Motivationer Flanimal, Tuesday Titillation Shay, Humpday Hawt Emily, Feral Fur Sweaterpuppy Interferometry, Latent Lingerie with Champagne, and Weekender Think Pink.

Proof Positive’s Friday Night Babe is Hannah Ferguson, his Vintage Babe is Iris Adrian, and Sex in Advertising is covered by Victoria’s Secret. At Dustbury, it’s Rebecca Romijn and Aarthi Agarwal.

Thanks to everyone for your linkagery! Deadline to submit links to the Rule 5 Wombat mailbox is midnight on Saturday, March 12!


Visit Amazon’s Intimate Apparel Shop

Category: Rule 5

South African President Says Women Are Now Too Quick to Claim Harassment

Posted on | March 6, 2016 | 32 Comments

In an impromptu exchange with reporters Saturday, South African President Jacob Zuma said modern women no longer know how to accept a compliment: “But when men compliment you innocently, you say it’s harassment. You will miss out on good men and marriage.” The opposition party Democratic Alliance was swift to condemn Zuma’s remark as “outrageously sexist and an insult to every single woman in our country, especially those who are survivors of violence and sexual abuse”:

It is precisely this patriarchal attitude that allows for women to remain the subjects of high levels of violence and sexual abuse throughout our country. It is also this sort of thinking that keeps women locked out of the economy, and out of jobs that could bring a much needed income to their family. . . .
South Africans must join the DA in rejecting this blatant sexism. The best way they can do this is to register for change this weekend.
This is change that will end sexism, create jobs, and build an inclusive South Africa for all her people, men and women alike.

How could President Zuma’s remarks about men complimenting women “innocently” be condemned as “blatant sexism” and a “patriarchal attitude”? Are his critics saying that men should never compliment women and that every time a man compliments a woman he is engaged in harassment? Apparently so, according to South African feminist writer Louise Ferreira.

“It’s not flattering. If you do this, you are a misogynist, a participant in rape culture, and a straight up a–hole,” Ferreira wrote on Twitter.

Ms. Ferreira, who  describes herself as an “unapologetic queer socialist feminist,” went on a rant against Zuma as “a rampant misogynist,” saying compliments from men make women “feel uncomfortable, self-conscious and unsafe,” and categorically condemning male expressions of interest in women as “catcalling and street harassment.”

 

Category: Uncategorized

FMJRA 2.0: #FreeStacy CPAC Style

Posted on | March 6, 2016 | 5 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Late Night With In The Mailbox: Extra Family-Size Okra Edition
Regular Right Guy
Batshit Crazy News

#FreeStacy: Email to My Samoan Lawyer: Taylor Swift Is Decadent and Depraved
Regular Right Guy
The Political Hat
A View from the Beach

Note To The Trumpenproletariat
Regular Right Guy
Batshit Crazy News

FMJRA 2.0: Every Picture Tells A Story
Regular Right Guy
A View from the Beach
Batshit Crazy News

Fox News Is Corrupt and Unethical
First Street Journal
The Political Hat
Batshit Crazy News

#FreeStacy Won’t Shut Up
Batshit Crazy News

Rule 5 Sunday: Disney Girls
Ninety Miles from Tyranny
A View from the Beach
Proof Positive
Batshit Crazy News

Did @Nian_Hu ‘Friend-Zone’ You? #FreeStacy: Feminism Is a Death Cult
A View from the Beach
Batshit Crazy News

“How’s The Weather, Donald?” “It’s Raining Knives”
Batshit Crazy News

In The Mailbox: Super Tuesday Morning Edition
Proof Positive
Batshit Crazy News

#FreeStacy: $2,090,000,000.00
A View from the Beach
Batshit Crazy News

Those Danged Voters!
Batshit Crazy News

In The Mailbox: 03.02.11
Proof Positive

#FreeStacy #CPAC2016: Because ‘Freedom of Expression Is Essential’
Batshit Crazy News

#CPAC2016: Trumpsters and RINOs and Immunity for Witnesses, Oh, My!
The Lonely Conservative
Batshit Crazy News

In The Mailbox: 03.03.16
A View from the Beach
Proof Positive
Batshit Crazy News

Is Jack Montague a Rapist?
Batshit Crazy News

University Students Traumatized After Milo Yiannopoulos Speaks on Pitt Campus
A View from the Beach
Batshit Crazy News

 N.C. Teacher, 30, Charged in Lesbian Sexual Affair With Female Student, 17
Batshit Crazy News

#CPAC2016 Trump Pulls Out
Batshit Crazy News

Top linkers this week:

  1.  Batshit Crazy News (18)
  2.  A View from the Beach (7)

Thanks to everyone for all the linkagery!


Shop Amazon Fashion – Up to 70% off Jeans
Shop Amazon Fashion – $100 & Under Prom Dresses

Category: FMJRA Award

#FreeStacy #CPAC2016: I’ve Got Friends in Low Places (and Everywhere Else)

Posted on | March 5, 2016 | 20 Comments

 

NATIONAL HARBOR, Maryland
Everybody at CPAC is talking Trump (his supporters walked out on Ted Cruz) but I find it impossible to get excited about the presidential campaign. As I pointed out in my column at The American Spectator, Andrew Breitbart always said, “Politics is downstream from culture.” If conservatives will not fight on the level of culture, we will always lose on the level of politics. The Trump phenomenon (whether you are pro-Trump or anti-Trump) is a reflection of culture. People who don’t wish to think past the most recent headline will never understand why some people support Donald Trump, no matter what he says or does.

The #FreeStacy hashtag campaign continues. I had people ask me, basically, “What’s next?” To which I answered, basically, “We’ll see.” There are people more influential than me who are working behind the scenes to try to correct the situation. Some of these people are lawyers.

You can figure out what that means.

Speaking of which, how can we figure out what false rape accusations mean? Ashe Schow at the Washington Examiner writes:

Women who make false rape and sexual assault accusations are just looking for help, according to a social worker in Boise, Idaho.
Becky Waggaman with Warm Springs Counseling Center told Boise’s CBS affiliate KBOI2 that false accusers are troubled and looking for sympathy.
“Sexual assaults get a lot of attention,” Waggaman said. “They get a lot of media. If that’s [the] primary goal, then that’s what they’re going to go for.”
Waggaman said this was the case even when the accuser is anonymous.
“So it’s still out there, and they can say: ‘That’s me, that’s me,'” Waggaman said, “and they can get a lot of other people involved in their storytelling.” . . .
Waggaman’s comments come after a second sexual assault accusation in Boise proved to be false. And while Waggaman may be correct about men and women who completely make up accusations involving strangers, she misses other reasons people falsely report rape and sexual assault when the accused is known to the accuser. . . .
Some accusers — particularly those on college campuses — make accusations for revenge against a lover who did not want to continue with a relationship. Some accusations come after an accuser cheated on their significant other (the second case linked there involved a woman who slept with another man after a break-up, then claimed she was raped in a bid to get back together with her ex). Some accusations are the result of accusers failing classes or their grades slipping. The Rolling Stone rape hoaxer known as “Jackie” first made up her gang-rape story after being rebuffed by her crush, and only reported it to the school after her grades began to fall.

(Hat-tip: Instapundit.) The fact that women do sometimes make false accusations of sexual assault — indeed, as with Jackie Coakley and “Haven Monahan” at UVA, sometimes they invent imaginary rapists — is dismissed by feminists as an irrelevant and trivial matter.

Friday night at the Project Veritas party, I had the opportunity to talk to a Yale University sophomore who assured me that the expulsion of Jack Montague, senior captain of the basketball team, was “all bulls–t.” Although no details of the accusation against Montague have been made public, there was this story Friday in the Yale Daily News:

The father of former Yale men’s basketball captain Jack Montague told the New Haven Register on Thursday that Montague has been expelled from the University. . . .
“We have strict orders from our lawyers,” Jim Montague told the Register while explaining he had been advised not to comment. “Soon enough, I’d love to tell the other side of the story. It’s ridiculous, why he’s expelled. It’s probably going to set some sort of precedent. We’re trying to do things the gentleman’s way, so we’re keeping things close-knit. But you guys will get a story.”

In the climate of fear generated by feminist “rape culture” discourse at colleges and universities, false accusations have proliferated, and more than 100 male students have filed lawsuits claiming they were denied due process rights in the campus kangaroo court tribunals where these cases are heard. This is highly relevant to the situation at Yale, where administrators made a “peculiar decision to broaden the campus definition of ‘sexual assault,’ beyond all recognition,” as K.C. Johnson says. If the captain of Yale’s basketball team can be expelled on such a basis, who is safe? Guys: Never talk to a college girl.

 

+ o + o +

BANNED BY TWITTER!

The #FreeStacy movement, a grassroots response to Twitter’s Feb. 19 decision to suspend my popular @rsmccain account, has received international attention. You can help support this movement by including the #FreeStacy hashtag on your Twitter messages, by retweeting messages in support of this movement, and by signing up at PublicStatus.org, which is dedicated to defending free speech rights on social media. Thanks to everyone who has helped spread the word.

— Robert Stacy McCain




 

PREVIOUSLY:

 

Category: CPAC
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin