The Other McCain

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

Rule 5 Sunday: Cinnamon Girl

Posted on | January 18, 2015 | 17 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Welcome back to another edition of Rule 5 Sunday, your weekly break from deranged radical feminists, vile criminals, spineless politicians, and other such annoyances of everyday life. For those of you who may be new to Rule 5 Sunday, be advised that some of the following links are NSFW, so therefore, dear readers, exercise discretion in the clicking.

“I could be happy the rest of my life
With a cinnamon girl…”

Average Bubba leads off this week with Rule Five Friday: Russian Beauties Edition, followed by Goodstuff with generously endowed cosplayer Abby Dark Star, Ninety Miles from Tyranny with Hot Pick of the Late Night, Morning Mistress Bar Rafaeli, and Girls with Guns; and Loose Endz with Mary Jane and the Superheroes. Also, Animal Magnetism with Rule 5 Friday and the Saturday Gingermageddon!

EBL has dirty Girls, last week’s Packers win, Buckeyes Rule 5, some Zooey, Rule 5 Retweet, Packers vs. Seahawks, and Seagals at the NFC Championship.

At Soylent Siberia, it’s vintage coffee creamer, overnighty snow blinding, Monday Motivationer: Polished, Evening Awesome For Wirecutter: Extreme Cameltoe, Tuesday Titillation Invitation, Overnighty Sushi, V is for…Yeah, You Win, Evening Exceptional, Spassfabrik Fursday Featurette Ava, Corset Carumba With Incidental Incidentals, T-GIF Friday Poke Salad Annie, OverNighty Linky Love Contender…With Fur, Weekender Reflection, and Bath Night Bayou.

A View from the Beach brings us Kylie Minogue, the Wonder from Down Under, You Knew it was Basketball Season in Lithuania, Right?, Average American Men Prefer Blondes, Wednesday Wombat News Review, “White Flag”, Wombat Tuesday News, “All Along The Watchtower”, RIP: Anita Ekberg, Colts vs Broncos, Packers vs. Cowboys?, Sunday Morning Wake Up Music, and Ravens vs. Patriots

Proof Positive’s Friday Night Babe is Diane Neal, his vintage babe is Carole Lombard, and Sex in Advertising is all about staying focused. Plus, a double double extra scoop of NFL cheerleaders! At Dustbury, it’s a Carol Cleveland retrospective and Zooeypalooza XXII!

Thanks to everyone for their linkagery! Deadline to submit links to the Rule 5 Wombat mailbox for next week’s parade of pulchritude is midnight on Saturday, January 24.


Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere
Visit Amazon’s Intimate Apparel Shop

Category: Rule 5

Feminism’s Predictable Consequences: ‘Our Society at Large … Hates Women’

Posted on | January 18, 2015 | 75 Comments

What is the effect of feminism on males? How does a constant barrage of anti-male/anti-heterosexual discourse influence men?

Newton’s Third Law of Motion — for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction — can be applied to group psychology. Confronted with hostile criticism, some people will comply (the equal reaction), attempting to conform to the views of critics, so that we see some men trying to placate feminists by refraining from whatever male behaviors or attitudes feminists say they find offensive.

However, some men will not merely reject feminist criticism as incorrect or unfair, they will exhibit the opposite reaction, deliberately saying or doing things that offend feminists.

This kind of Newtonian opposite reaction to feminism takes many forms, both conscious and unconscious. I’ve always considered the “macho man” trend that emerged in the late 1970s and ’80s — e.g., the body-builder culture, action hero blockbusters like Rambo and Terminator — as a psychological reaction to feminism. Sure, those movies were mostly just escapist fun. Sure, tough-guy heroes have always been a staple product of Hollywood. But the ultra-muscled physiques of Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger were cartoonish in their exaggerated masculinity, and the stories were cartoonish, too.

We also see the Newtonian opposite reaction to feminism in the whole “dudebro” male-bonding culture, where chilling with your buddies in your “man cave” playing videogames or watching sports on TV is venerated as the ultimate in leisure. And I would argue that a lot of what feminists now label as misogyny (a word that means woman-hating) could best be understood as a secondary effect of feminism.

Quite often, you see young men doing or saying things they certainly must know will drive feminists into a furious rage. This is the politically incorrect thumb-in-the-eye response to feminist rhetoric that routinely insults heterosexual males. It is evident that feminists, despite their constant disclaimers of desiring nothing more than an innocuous “equality,” are in fact advancing a totalitarian worldview, a zero-sum game in which women’s “equality” requires expropriation.

According to this logic, everything any man possesses — education, employment, family, property, a good reputation — can only have been obtained through his oppression of females. If your son graduated summa cum laude, was hired by a Fortune 500 company, married a beautiful woman, and bought a nice house in the suburbs, this just proves that your son has benefitted from male privilege. His success is a result of cultural misogyny and anti-female discrimination.

Male success is social injustice, according to feminism’s totalitarian worldview. The feminist demand for “equality” is actually a demand that society punish successful men, a demand for new policies in schools and workplaces, a demand for a system that can guarantee more success for women by systematically depriving males of opportunities for success.

The enactment of such punitive anti-male policies is what feminists consider “progress” toward “equality.” We can view the entire campus “rape epidemic” discourse — false statistics and false journalism intended to force the imposition of policies aimed at depriving males of due-process rights — as emblematic of feminism’s totalitarian tendency.

Young men sense this intuitively. They perceive feminism as a hostile force. However, more than four decades into the feminist revolution, with feminism now deeply entrenched in our culture, exercising hegemonic influence within academia, today’s 20-year-old has no access to a rhetoric by which he can effectively challenge feminism. There are no anti-feminist professors on campus and no anti-feminist books in the library, and so young men generally lack the intellectual resources necessary to countering feminist arguments. Very few opponents of feminism bother to study the subject at a theoretical level, and opposition to feminism is therefore often badly argued — or not “argued” at all, instead taking the form of crude jokes and insults.

Viewing all this in terms of psychology, rather than politics, is really the only way to understand it. Here’s an example: Some dude posts a genuinely offensive joke about tricking women into believing he’s wearing a condom during sex. This joke is so wrong in so many ways that you have to suspect it was deliberately wrong, intended as some sort of ironic spoof of Bad Male Behavior. But the reaction? Oh. My. God.

If a guy does this, it’s rape. Call the cops. Ruin his life since he has no problem risking yours. Make him f–king learn. Rapists belong in jail. Rape by deception is rape, not a funny “meme.”

. . . and . . .

I’ve had a dude do that before. that sh–t is terrifying. . . . I didn’t know that he [wasn’t wearing a condom] until he pulled out.
I FLIPPED. Cried all the way home. Cried for days. Got tested. Bought the morning after pill. Seriously, f–k dudes that do this.

. . . and . . .

This is how men talk to each other about us.

Ever since the “safe sex” gospel took hold in reaction to the AIDS crisis of the 1980s, young women have been learning painful lessons about human nature that their sex-education teachers never taught them. Anybody who actually buys into the In Latex We Trust mentality promoted by the “pro sex” evangelists is a fool, but these fools refuse to accept responsibility for the harms they suffer as a result of their own folly. “Safe sex” is a myth. There is no such thing as risk-free promiscuity. If you don’t know a guy well enough to know whether he can be trusted, sweetheart, why are you having sex with him?

The most ironic reaction, however, was this:

I had a man do this once.  When I first started sex work and had no idea what I was doing, I went to a man’s house.  I made so many mistakes- I’m lucky I’m not dead.

Uh . . . “sex work”?

The person who posted that describes herself as an “overeducated whore,” and provides this information about herself:

I have about 3 years’ experience as a stripper.
I have been escorting a bit over two years.
I have been sugaring for almost one year.

In case you didn’t know, “sugaring” is about so-called “Sugar Daddy” arrangements, which is prostitution by any other name. For an “escort” to admit that she’s lucky she’s not dead is a recognition of the brutal realities of that sordid business, and johns not wearing condoms is scarcely the worst of it. But, hey, feminists will condemn us for “slut-shaming” if we disapprove of prostitution, so once again we see how feminism’s totalitarian tendency to silence dissent serves to suppress basic common sense.

Easy money for easy sex ain’t so easy, is it, honey?

Moving on in our Bad Ideas Have Bad Consequences tour — try to imagine if Richard Weaver had a blog — let’s ask ourselves what kind of guy actually buys into feminist ideology?

Assuming that you are an honest, decent, law-abiding person, you realize that you are not to blame for creeps who slip Rohypnol into girls’ drinks at frat parties. You don’t engage in abusive catcalling. You are not producing “revenge porn.” You are not “oppressing” women. You genuinely like women and so you recognize that feminists are engaged in dishonest anti-male propaganda if they accuse you of misogyny merely for disagreeing with their ideology.

A clean conscience is helpful in confronting totalitarians, which is why most males enjoy mocking the feminist rhetoric that portrays us as Patriarchal Oppressors. What about those other guys, the ones who jump on the feminist bandwagon and start pointing the accusatory finger at other males? We naturally suspect they have some ulterior motive, and our suspicions of these “white knight” types are frequently confirmed: Feminist hero Bill Clinton turned out to be a sexual predator, and then there was the case of “male feminist” Professor Hugo Schwyzer.

Nevertheless, not every “male feminist” can be presumed to be a hypocritical worm who has figured out that he can get laid by hanging around liberal women and talking “pro-choice” politics. Some of these guys sincerely believe feminist theory, and one of them posted a diatribe against MRAs (Male Rights Activists) in 2012:

Misandry Isn’t Real Dudez
I’m a guy, and I need feminism. Not “men’s rights.” Feminism. Here is why.
Everything that MRAs talk about that men can’t do or are socially punished for arise directly and immediately from misogyny and transmisogyny. Not “misandry.” Misogyny.
Whether a man is expressing his emotions, playing with children, baking, having sex wherein he is penetrated in any way, wearing the wrong color, talking the wrong way, moving the wrong way, being sexually harassed/assaulted, or paying too little attention to looking like he’s not paying attention to how he looks, when society punishes him or derides him or marginalizes him for these things, it is happening because they are things associated with women, and our society at large f–king hates women.
Has that sunk in yet?
Men, can you even think of a single goddamn way you have ever been mocked that wasn’t somehow related to something that a misogynist society sees as feminizing? Even when large men are mocked for their bodies, they are referred to as having “man-boobs,” for f–ks sake.
How do you expect to improve those things with “men’s rights?” What right are you fighting for? I can tell you what I think you’re fighting for. I think you’re fighting for the right to contain and control misogyny, and direct it back at women, where you think it belongs. You want to maintain your privilege but erase its consequences, and that’s why your movement is farcical; it’s a big f–king feedback loop. How do you expect men to be free from the peripheral effects of misogyny and transmisogyny when you refuse to even f–king believe it’s real?

That 2012 male feminist rant went viral and has been endlessly reposted on Tumblr, where it is typically praised thus:

A post that brilliantly explains why “Men’s Rights Activists” are misguided and why the oppression that men face in our culture is not a result of “misandry” but of misogyny.

Here, then, we have a brilliant male feminist. This guy is the progressive beau ideal of a supportive ally for gender equality. Yet when we check out the guy who authored this rant . . .

Edit: please note that since writing this post, which is by far my most popular, I have come out as a transgender woman. That doesn’t, however, change any of the points I make.

Sure it doesn’t. Whatever you say.

Quod erat demonstrandum.





 

Category: Feminism

Feminist Author @PennyRed Quotes Bolshevik Commissar’s Anti-Love Advice

Posted on | January 17, 2015 | 94 Comments

In her most recent book, controversial British feminist Laurie Penny treats her unsuspecting young readers to Soviet propaganda, quoting a Bolshevik commissar’s denunciation of romantic love — without bothering to identify Alexandra Kollontai as the top female official in Vladimir Lenin’s Communist revolutionary regime.

A contributing editor for The New Statesman, Penny attacks “the neoliberal notion of romantic love” in her book Unspeakable Things: Sex, Lies and Revolution, insisting young women must “refuse to define ourselves by romantic love . . . or lack of it.”

In support of her anti-love position, Penny writes on page 236 of her book that “today’s growing girls of every age might do well to recall the words of Alexandra Kollontai.” Penny then quotes Kollontai’s condemnation of love as “an absolutely incredible squandering of our mental energy, a diminution of our labour power.”

The source of this quote is identified in the endnotes of Penny’s book (page 254) as Kollontai’s 1926 The Autobiography of a Sexually Emancipated Communist Woman. That note lists the URL at Marxists.org where Penny evidently found it online.

Beyond this endnote, however, Kollontai is not further identified in Unspeakable Things, perhaps because Penny assumes her feminist readers are already familiar with the Soviet official who died in 1952.

So-called “Second Wave” feminists — leaders of the Women’s Liberation movement that arose from the New Left in the United States in the late 1960s — embraced Kollontai as a pioneering hero. Between 1979 and 1981, three separate English-language biographies of Kollontai were published, two by American professors (Barbara Evans Clements and Beatrice Farnsworth) and issued by university presses, and a third by British scholar Cathy Porter. In addition to those three biographies, a 1977 anthology of Kollontai’s writings, translated from Russian by British editor Alix Holt, was republished in the United States in 1980 by W.W. Norton & Company.

“With the current high interest in both feminism and Marxism in the West, the rediscovery of Kollontai was predictable,” Professor Simon Karlinsky wrote in a 1981 New York Times article reviewing the Kollontai biographies by Clements, Farnsworth and Porter. Karlinsky saw these biographers as seeking “to appropriate her ideas and experience to the newly revived feminist trends in Western democracies.” Karlinsky noted how Kollontai and the Bolsheviks opposed the liberal reform efforts of “bourgeois” feminists:

The roots of all oppression, the Marxists reasoned, are economic. Proletarians, whether men or women, are exploited by the bourgeoisie, and a proletarian revolution will put an end to that. . . . Alexandra Kollontai’s contributions to the anti-feminist campaign of the Marxists were her coaching of a group of women workers to disrupt the 1908 national congress of Russian feminists by shouting slogans and the publication in 1909 of her book The Social Bases of the Woman Question, a 400-page diatribe against the leaders of the feminist movement.

In that “diatribe,” Kollontai declared that the Marxist party “always and everywhere adheres to the principle of women’s equality”:

The followers of historical materialism reject the existence of a special woman question separate from the general social question of our day. Specific economic factors were behind the subordination of women; natural qualities have been a secondary factor in this process. Only the complete disappearance of these factors, only the evolution of those forces which at some point in the past gave rise to the subjection of women, is able in a fundamental way to influence and change their social position. In other words, women can become truly free and equal only in a world organised along new social and productive lines.

Kollontai’s rejection of reforms within the capitalist system and her demand for a revolutionary destruction of that system, are echoed in Laurie Penny’s own denunciation of “the logic of business and money” that she identifies as “neoliberalism.” Penny slams liberal feminism:

As financial capitalism faltered following the near-collapse of the global stock markets in 2008, the notion that one day all women would be able to make empowering choices within a market that respected their goals and autonomy was exposed as a twenty-year-old fairy tale.
The feminism that has mattered to the media and made magazine headlines in recent years has been the feminism most useful to heterosexual, high-earning middle- and upper-middle-class white women. Public ‘career feminists’ have been more concerned with getting more women into ‘boardrooms,’ when the problem is that there are altogether too many boardrooms, and none of them are on fire.

Although she is herself of upper-middle-class background — her mother is a lawyer, as was her late father, and she attended elite schools in England — Penny’s hostility toward capitalism led her to support the so-called “Occupy” protest movements in 2011. In this, also, Penny mirrors the life of Kollontai. The Russian revolutionary Kollontai describes in her autobiography how she grew up in comfortable circumstances as the daughter of a general in the czar’s army:

I was the youngest, the most spoiled, and the most coddled member of the family. This, perhaps, was the root cause of the protest against everything around me that very early burgeoned within me. Too much was done for me in order to make me happy.

Alexandra Kollontai, Soviet Commissar

In contrast to the reformist measures advocated by 19th-century liberals, Marxist doctrine demanded the destruction of the traditional family, as Kollontai explained in her 1921 Bolshevik treatise, “Theses on Communist Morality in the Sphere of Marital Relations”:

The communist economy does away with the family. In the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat there is a transition to the single production plan and collective social consumption, and the family loses its significance as an economic unit. The external economic functions of the family disappear . . . In the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat the family economic unit should be recognised as being, from the point of view of the national economy, not only useless but harmful. The family economic unit involves (a) the uneconomic expenditure of products and fuel on the part of small domestic economies, and (b) unproductive labour, especially by women, in the home — and is therefore in conflict with the interest of the workers’ republic in a single economic plan and the expedient use of the labour force (including women).
Under the dictatorship of the proletariat then, the material and economic considerations in which the family was grounded cease to exist. The economic dependence of women on men and the role of the family in the care of ‘the younger generation also disappear, as the communist elements in the workers’ republic grow stronger. With the introduction of the obligation of all citizens to work, woman has a value in the national economy which is independent of her family and marital status. The economic subjugation of women in marriage and the family is done away with, and responsibility for the care of the children and their physical and spiritual education is assumed by the social collective. . . .
Once the family has been stripped of its economic functions and its responsibilities towards the younger generation and is no longer central to the existence of the woman, it has ceased to be a family. The family unit shrinks to a union of two people based on mutual agreement.

Penny does not quote these other writings of Kollontai and, as previously noted, gives her readers no biographical information on the Russian Marxist who was the lone female member of the Bolshevik Central Committee at the time of the 1917 revolution. Kollontai spent six months as a commissar in Lenin’s dictatorship before resigning that post and was subsequently appointed to a series of diplomatic posts, spanning two decades as a Soviet ambassador first in Norway (1923-25), then Mexico (1926-27) and Sweden (1930-1945).

Left to right: Josef Stalin, Genrikh Yagoda, Nikolai Yezhov.

Left to right: Leon Trotsky, Felix Dzerzhinsky, Lavrenti Beria.

“This is no time for speech-making. Our Revolution is in serious danger. . . . We have no need for justice now. Now we have need of a battle to the death! We must act not tomorrow, but today, at once!”
— Felix Dzerzhinsky, December 1917

It is doubtful that Laurie Penny’s young readers know any more about the murderous brutality of the Soviet Union than does Penny herself. Only 28 years old, Penny’s attacks on “neoliberalism” in Unspeakable Things never examine the prosperity and freedom enjoyed under this system — i.e., limited government, representative democracy and industrial capitalism — in historic contrast to the totalitarian nightmares that covered the 20th century in the blood of innocents. A deliberate policy of terrorism was a weapon that the Bolsheviks considered absolutely necessary, as Leon Trotsky proclaimed in 1920:

We were revolutionaries in opposition, and have remained revolutionaries in power. To make the individual sacred we must destroy the social order which crucifies him. And this problem can only be solved by blood and iron. . . .
The Red Terror is a weapon utilized against a class, doomed to destruction, which does not wish to perish. . . .
The man who recognizes the revolutionary historic importance of the very fact of the existence of the Soviet system must also sanction the Red Terror.

Dzerzhinsky, Genrikh Yagoda, Nikolai Yezhov, Lavrenti Beria — these depraved monsters led the Cheka and the NKVD, merciless and sadistic murder gangs that imposed the “dictatorship of the proletariat” on the enslaved millions who suffered under Soviet tyranny. By the time the Evil Empire crumbled into the ash-heap of history, it is estimated that as many as 100 million people had been killed by Marxist-Leninist regimes in Russia, China, Cuba, Cambodia, Vietnam, Angola, Nicaragua and other outposts of communist imperialism.

Of this senseless slaughter — to say nothing of the millions impoverished, imprisoned or exiled by the “dictatorship of the proletariat” — Laurie Penny seems stubbornly ignorant. Instead she heaps every imaginable calumny on the West’s “neoliberal” capitalist system. It is this system, of course, which sent her to some of England’s finest schools and provides her with publishing opportunities, a system that is even now providing her with a prestigious Nieman Fellowship to Harvard University.

If she would care to research the history of the man whose name is on that fellowship — founded with a bequest from his widow — Laurie Penny would learn that the self-made millionaire Lucius Nieman earned his fortune by hard work and courage. In 1919, Nieman’s Milwaukee Journal won the Pulitzer Prize for its “strong and courageous campaign for Americanism,” resolutely supporting the U.S. war effort against Germany “in a constituency where foreign elements made such a policy hazardous from a business point of view.” Indeed, at the time of World War I, Milwaukee was home to one of the largest German emigré populations in the world, yet Nieman’s “Americanism” was unflinching.

How ironic, then, that Laura Penny, an outspoken enemy of “Americanism” and an enthusiastic devotee of the Marxist doctrines of Kollontai and other radicals, should be granted a fellowship named for the great patriot Lucius Nieman, her reward for such important “journalism” as these colorful passages from Unspeakable Things:

In 2011, the summer of rage and riots, I kiss a girl and she tastes of cigarettes and gin and I like it. She says she wants to be a mistress forever. We met because we were sleeping with the same boy, and he isn’t entirely comfortable with how close we’ve become. I buy her a cupcake from a posh sex shop. The cupcake has icing on it shaped like a cunt with a little clear sugar glaze tricking obscenely off the frosting folds. She laughs and eats it right there in front of me because she is hungry. . . .
Then he’s sick of us both, and so we go out like we have before, eyeliner and cigarettes and bus passes on our way to corrupt young minds. . . . We are a tag team, an unstoppable perversion: we drag strange little hipsters into strange beds, turn them on to roll-ups and feminism. . . .
I have spent more time than I care to contemplate in my nimble years in the company of polyamorists, queer non-monogamists and the sort of people who prefer labels like “love anarchists” . . .
I don’t mean to advocate casual sex, housing collectives and late nights drinking bad vodka with bisexual activists as alternatives that necessarily work for everyone, though they’ve always done so for me.

Anyone who cares to read Unspeakable Things (those passages are excerpted from pp. 231-234) will discover that Laurie Penny is as wholehearted an evangelist for sexual perversion as she is a wholehearted enemy of democratic capitalism. Indeed, she is an enemy of every value of Lucius Nieman’s “Americanism,” but in this she is probably no different than any of the other Nieman Fellows at Harvard. Do any of them disagree with anything in Laurie Penny’s book? Is there a single Nieman Fellow who would criticize Laurie Penny’s tribute to the deadly ideas of the Bolshevik commissar Alexandra Kollontai?

Of course not. The last person at Harvard University who dared disagree with feminists was Larry Summers, and we know what happened to him. Feminism’s totalitarian terror continues, and the revolutionaries in power have no need for justice now.




 

 

ADDENDUM: Why am I such an outspoken and uncompromising anti-feminist? Because it is always smarter in the long run to be an enemy of totalitarians than to be a friend of totalitarians. If you think you can negotiate or compromise with totalitarianism, you are doomed to learn a painful lesson. While researching this article I discovered an interesting historical statistic: Of the 16 original commissars in the Bolshevik regime, nine were executed during Stalin’s 1937-38 purge and another, Trotsky, was assassinated by one of Stalin’s agents in 1940.

 

Category: Feminism, History, Sex Trouble

FMJRA 2.0: Walk On

Posted on | January 17, 2015 | 4 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Rule 5 Monday: Midnight Snack
Batshit Crazy News
Average Bubba
Animal Magnetism
Regular Right Guy
Proof Positive
A View from the Beach
Ninety Miles from Tyranny

The Hunt for Hayat Boumeddiene
Batshit Crazy News

Meet ‘Tony’; Senator Reid’s Occasional 6’2″, 225lb, Taciturn ‘Exercise Instructor’
Batshit Crazy News

France and Terror
Batshit Crazy News

FMJRA 2.0: Pretty Pink Rose
Batshit Crazy News

The Higher Education Bubble: Feminist Postmodern Literary Criticism, Ph.D.
Batshit Crazy News

Asked and Answered
Batshit Crazy News
Regular Right Guy

The New Exodus
Batshit Crazy News

A Call For A Statute Of Limitations On Cheap Equivalences
Bits Blog
Batshit Crazy News

Harry Reid’s Constituents
Batshit Crazy News

Feminism and Sex: ‘Bad, Dumb, and Desperately Unfun and Unsexy’
Batshit Crazy News

LIVE AT FIVE: 01.13.15
Batshit Crazy News
Regular Right Guy
Proof Positive
A View from the Beach

UVA Fraternity Cleared by Police, But Fraternities Are Punished Anyway
Regular Right Guy
Batshit Crazy News
A View from the Beach

Quick Hits
Batshit Crazy News

Two Victims, No Crime
Political Rift
Da Tech Guy
Batshit Crazy News

Feminist Rhetorical Method
Regular Right Guy
Batshit Crazy News

LIVE AT FIVESEVEN: 01.14.15
Political Rift
Batshit Crazy News
Proof Positive
A View from the Beach

Feminism’s Big Lie
Batshit Crazy News
Theological Geography
Political Rift

‘Jettison Society’s Toxic Values and Embrace the Beautiful You’
Batshit Crazy News
iOTW Report
Regular Right Guy

Rapists Rape and Rape Again
Batshit Crazy News
Regular Right Guy
Bertpowers
Proof Positive

Call for Tax Questions
and Wednesday Afternoon Open Thread
Batshit Crazy News

In The Mailbox, 01.16.15
Batshit Crazy News
Proof Positive

‘You’re My Favorite Victim’
Regular Right Guy
Batshit Crazy News

Dear Time: Per The Bible, Churches Still Admit Sinners; Yet They Still Reject Sin
Batshit Crazy News
Political Rift

Top linkers this week:

  1.  Batshit Crazy News (24)
  2.  Proof Positive (5 the hard way)

…and as usual, a handful of folks that just missed the cutoff. Thanks to everyone for their linkagery, especially all the folks who made Rule 5 Monday the most-linked post this week!


All That You Can’t Leave Behind

Category: FMJRA Award

Massachusetts Man Arrested for Kidnapping Teen Girls for Prostitution

Posted on | January 17, 2015 | 10 Comments

Derek Miranda was arrested in Rhode Island:

Three missing girls from Massachusetts were being held against their will in Providence to be sold for sex by an 21-year-old Dorchester man, according to Providence police.
Their whereabouts were discovered late Thursday night when one of the 14-year-old girls managed to escape the third-floor apartment at 95 Cumerford St. and got help, said Maj. David Lapatin.
The girl was “visibly shaking and upset” when Patrolman Alex Kanelopoulos arrived and found her and the father of another girl outside the house, according to a police report. She told the officer that the man inside had “guns” and wouldn’t let them leave — and the father said his 15-year-old daughter was still in there, the report said.
Police tried several times to contact someone in the apartment, and then just went in and ordered everyone to the floor. They found the 15-year-old girl and another 14-year-old girl, along with a 21-year-old woman and Derek Miranda, who police say was trafficking the underage girls. . . .
Miranda, who has an address at Gibson Street in Dorchester, Mass., told the police the Cumerford apartment was his aunt’s residence, according to the report. Detectives are still investigating how the girls ended up with Miranda and what has transpired.

That harrowing story comes just days after federal authorities busted another prostitution operation in Providence:

A former Massachusetts man faces federal charges of trafficking two homeless women into Providence and selling them for sex from a sparse apartment in Federal Hill.
Damien Beverly, 29, who moved into 149 Ridge St., had lured the two women from South Station in Boston with promises they’d make money, according to an affidavit accompanying his arrest warrant.
Instead, the state police found that Beverly was “paying” the women in heroin –- and threatening that he’d hurt their families if they went to police, the affidavit said. The women’s photos were posted on backpage.com, and tallies of the number of customers were logged on a whiteboard in the house, the affidavit said.
Beverly, nicknamed “Black,” bragged about being a pimp and had a homeless man drive him around in a 2001 black Lincoln, the affidavit said. He was arrested Tuesday, when state and federal authorities raided the apartment house and freed the two women.
Beverly was arraigned Wednesday before U.S. Magistrate Patricia Sullivan on charges of interstate transportation for prostitution, enticing a person to travel for prostitution, sex trafficking, and distribution of heroin.

So what is it with Boston pimps and Rhode Island? Is this some kind of market-demand situation? Are there not enough pimps or prostitutes in Providence to handle the local traffic?

 

Category: Crime, Massachusetts, Rhode Island

Dear Time: Per The Bible, Churches Still Admit Sinners; Yet They Still Reject Sin

Posted on | January 16, 2015 | 132 Comments

by Smitty

I guess the relentless, nihilistic spiritual decay of Progress can’t help but project itself upon churches:

. . .the changing allegiances and divides in evangelical churches and communities over homosexuality. In public, so many churches and pastors are afraid to talk about the generational and societal shifts happening. But behind the scenes, it’s a whole different game. Support for gay marriage across all age groups of white evangelicals has increased by double digits over the past decade, according to the Public Religion Research Institute, and the fastest change can be found among younger evangelicals—their support for gay marriage jumped from 20% in 2003 to 42% in 2014.

This winter, EastLake Community Church outside Seattle is quietly coming out as one of the first evangelical megachurches in the country to support full inclusion and affirmation of LGBTQ people. It is almost impossible to overstate the significance of this move. EastLake is in many ways the quintessential evangelical megachurch–thousands-strong attendance, rock-music worship, Bible-preaching sermons. But pastor Ryan Meeks, 36, is on the front wave of a new choice. “I refuse to go to a church where my friends who are gay are excluded from Communion or a marriage covenant or the beauty of Christian community,” Meeks tells me. “It is a move of integrity for me—the message of Jesus was a message of wide inclusivity.”

Ryan Meeks is encouraged to re-read the Bible in general and the Roman and Corinthian Epistles in particular. The Bible is our compass; Christ is our course. Yes, we get off course from time to time, but the only one smiling when somebody in a leadership position declares a false course to be the new true is Satan. Sure, technology has afforded some brand new ways to get off course. Yes, all manner of folk have been in the doors of my church. Indeed, we’re not going all Jonathan Edwards on them Sunday for Sunday.

But Elizabeth Dias is welcome to swing on by any traditional Baptist church to discover (a) the unalloyed Gospel still being preached, and (b) Christians rejecting the sort of rot she’s peddling.

Who knows? A little repentance may find her, too, as it has me.

via Hot Air headlines

Category: Culture

‘You’re My Favorite Victim’

Posted on | January 16, 2015 | 23 Comments

Even the NYPD police union won’t be able to save this guy:

A married detective assigned to investigate the rape of a 24-year-old woman has been booted from the Manhattan Special Victims Division after flying to Seattle, drinking with her all night — and then allegedly trying to tear her clothes off in a hotel room.
Hours before the disturbing encounter, the college student alleges, Detective Lukasz Skorzewski — in the midst of a nine-hour drinking frenzy — looked at her and said, “You’re my favorite victim.” . . .
The sordid tale began Jan. 13, 2013, when the woman, who attends college in New York City, reported a rape to Skorzewski of the Manhattan Special Victims Division. She told him she was raped by a man at his Union Square apartment after a night of drinking. . . .
The young woman characterized Skorzewski as an officer still earning his detective badge. She was surprised at how young he was, and thought he was cute. . . .

You can read the rest. Being young and “cute” has become so dangerous for men nowadays, I’m grateful to be old and ugly.

(Via Memeorandum.)

 

Category: Crime

Rapists Rape and Rape Again

Posted on | January 16, 2015 | 42 Comments

Serial rapist DeShawn Starks

Here’s the headline:

100 serial rapists identified after
rape kits from Detroit Crime Lab
are finally processed

In 2009, more than 10,000 untested rape kits (i.e., vaginal swabs from victims, containing the DNA of rapists) were found abandoned in a Detroit Police storage facility. Some cases dated back to the 1980s:

Not long after the rape kits were discovered, [Wayne County Prosecutor Kym] Worthy pushed to start the processing with Michigan State Police.
So far, 1,600 rape kits have been processed, resulting in the identification of about 100 serial rapists and ten convicted rapists, according to Worthy.
Worthy told reporters that perpetrators have moved on from Michigan to commit similar crimes in 23 other states.

This is mind-boggling. Processing roughly 1/8th of these DNA samples (1,600 out of 10,000) has identified 100 serial rapists who have committed sexual assaults in 23 states. So by the time they’re through processing the entire backlog, the pattern of Detroit’s previously unknown rapists could look like a national crime wave. And if you think about it just a little, you realize how, prior to the development of DNA testing, such serial rapists faced a comparatively low risk of apprehension. More and more women are victimized the longer the predator remains on the streets:

Fourteen prosecutions have resulted from what is being called the “Detroit Rape Kit Project”, including the case of DeShawn Starks, 32.
On February 19, 2003, Starks pretended to be having stomach pains as he approached a woman who was returning to her home in Detroit, according to prosecutors. Starks pulled out a gun, robbed the woman, then drove her to a wooded area where he raped her. The woman’s unprocessed rape kit remained in storage for ten years until Worthy’s office launched their investigations into the abandoned rape kits. DNA linked Starks to that case.
Prosecutors says Starks went on to rape another woman in 2003. That rape kit was also placed in storage and left unprocessed for ten years.
On November 19, 2013, investigators say Starks struck again, raping two friends as they were walking home from a family gathering.
Starks was just sentenced to 45 to 90 years in prison.

That’s four rapes by one criminal over a period of 10 years. Horrifying. The good news is that law enforcement agencies have spent years developing a national DNA database of criminal offenders. States are beginning to recognize the importance of expanding this database. In Nevada, lawmakers in 2013 passed “Brianna’s Law” which “requires law enforcement officers to take a DNA swab test for all felony arrests.” A suspect arrested in Nevada for any felony — assault, burglary, car theft, drug trafficking, etc. — will automatically be tested.

Brianna Denison (left), James Biela (right)

“Brianna’s Law” is named for Brianna Denison, who was kidnapped, raped and murdered in 2008 by serial rapist James Michael Biela. Before he killed Denison, Biela had raped 19-year-old Amanda Collins in a parking lot near the campus of the University of Nevada-Reno:

Amanda Collins, 25, is a wife and new mom, and a concealed weapon permit holder for years. At her father’s law office in Reno, she showed us the 9-mm Glock she carries for her safety.
“It’s got a pretty standard magazine,” she said, “and night sights so you can see in the dark when you’re aiming.”
However, Collins couldn’t aim her gun at the serial rapist who attacked her at the University of Nevada at Reno, where she was a student. That’s because, like most public colleges outside of Utah and Colorado, UNR is a “gun free” zone. The rule required her to leave her gun at home, leaving her defenseless the one time she needed its protection most.
In October of 2007, while walking to her car after a night class, Collins was grabbed from behind in a university parking garage less than 300 yards from a campus police office. The school’s “gun-free” designation meant nothing to James Biela, a serial rapist with a gun of his own, who saw Collins as an easy target. “He put a firearm to my temple,” she recounted, “clocked off the safety, and told me not to say anything, before he raped me.”
The university has since installed more emergency call boxes and lights in the parking structure, but Collins says that won’t stop an attacker who knows the campus is a gun-free zone, a policy she believes invites crime, and may have even emboldened the man who raped her.

DNA testing is important, but the right of self-defense is more important. A woman with a gun can stop a rapist — permanently.




 

 

Category: Crime
« go back — keep looking »