The Most Stupid Thing About Third Wave Feminism!

[UpperEchellon]

Is the idea that men don’t understand consent.

Men understand consent. No rapist has ever not understood that “no means no.” With the exception of a few cultures that consist of people who are still essentially neanderthals in terms of their mental development and mentally retarded people, men fully understand that raping someone is bad. Unless you’re one of the (apparently many) women who are dumb enough that you refuse to even say “no” to indicate that you don’t want to have sex, rapists know. They know what they’re doing.

So why do rapists rape then? Uh, because they don’t care. They’re sociopaths. This world consists of many people and some of them are very cruel.

Rape happens because there are people on the planet who don’t care about your feelings and well-being. There are people who simply think of you as an object that exists to be used. Some of these people will use and take advantage of you monetarily, (See: Your bank) others emotionally (See: advertising) and yet others will do so sexually (See: Rapists.)

You will never change these facts.

When you have a house that you don’t want to be broken into, what do you do? I’d personally lock the door. Perhaps I’d buy a security system. What I wouldn't do is ignorantly insist that "I should be able to keep my doors unlocked without the fear of being robbed." What I wouldn’t do is begin a campaign to “educate” burglars on the fact that people don’t want to be robbed.

Feminists want to believe that they are changing the world with posters and hashtags and retweets and by donating to sketchy little BS charities (usually the kind that refuse to make their expenditures public) so they will believe anything a man tells them as long it fits into that narrative. And the most hysterical lie that they’ve ever believed is that men don’t understand consent.

I mean, imagine this. You get caught doing something bad and you want to avoid getting in trouble for it. What do you say? For many the first thought it is going to be “I DIDN’T KNOW I WASN’T ALLOWED TO.”

“I didn’t know it was bad to get a cookie from the cookie jar!”
“I didn’t know I actually had to follow the speed limit!”
“I didn’t know that it wasn’t okay to discriminate based on race when giving housing loans!”
“I didn’t know I wasn’t allowed to have sex with people when they didn’t say they wanted to!”

No one with a working brain would ever believe these excuses, and yet third-wave feminism is stupid enough to believe that rapists don’t know that they’re raping. Hilarious.

But hey, you don’t want to get raped? Luckily for you I have created a strategy that, while not fool-proof, will minimize the chances and you don’t even have to sign up for twitter to do it: Buy a gun, a knife, study anatomy, self-defense and spend some time coming to terms with the fact that you might have to kill someone to protect yourself. If you truly want to be vigilant about not getting raped, these are some real, legitimate questions you need to ask yourself: Am I down to kill someone if it means not getting raped? Would I rather be a killer than a rape victim? Am I willing to put in the mental and physical effort that it’d take to become capable of truly defending myself?

If you truly feel strongly about not getting raped, you should say “yes” to all of those questions and act accordingly.

Or you could just keep retweeting some cool hashtag and hope that it convinces the sociopath next door not to abuse you, whatever, it’s your pussy, your choice.

[the_rake]

good points,

but i think the consent issue is more in regards to supposed 'blurred lines', e. g. when the girl has had a lot to drink and says she wants to have sex but then she's only partially conscious and... whoops, you're already inside her.

or, when the girl says she wants sex then suddenly changes her mind and she won't let you touch her but when you are more dominant, she seems happy to let you make a more bold move and she doesn't move away from you or anything.

in situations like these, the signals can be confusing but feminists tend to assert that there are no situations like these and either you have a woman's consent or you do not (the situation is always black and white).

of course, there are just men who really don't give a damn and will take a woman by force quite happily. then in court they will say something like, "yes, but she 'lead me on'", or "there were 'blurred lines' " and they have either deluded themselves OR they genuinely believe it to be true.

[Ginnyweasley97]

this reminded me of earlier today. a few days back i liked a feminist page because i am a first wave feminist and second wave (to a certain degree) i dont in any way want handouts and plan on getting a conceal carry permit on my 21st birthday. Anywhoo fast forward to today. the page had posted a video of a woman senator saying men need to shut up because we dont want to hear their opinions. I ended up unliking the page what was even worse is some women were laughing about it. it bothered me because it was not too long ago that women were not allowed to voice their opinions and turning the tables and making men oppressed won't help anything. because hate won't end hate.

[AllThatSweetJazz]

If I'm thinking of the same video I believe that was claimed as "satire" (not very good satire, mind you). But then again as they say: Many a true word hath been spoken in jest.

[Ginnyweasley97]

@AllThatSweetJazz I know it was a joke, a very bad one but hating men will never make us achieve equality.

[AllThatSweetJazz]

Hear, hear.

[itsallover]

When there's people out there who believe that just because they're in a relationship with/married to someone means they're entitled to sex anytime, there is indeed a lack of understanding as to what consitutes as consent.

The self-defense argument isn't even applicable to all situations and is just ignorant. Most rapes are committed by someone the person knows and trusts, usually in the safety of their own home. I'm sure most would not be driven to have to kill or injure someone they have a relationship with (whether it be a kinship, friendship or romantic involvement) to stop being raped. A lot of rape victims freeze up out of fear and just endure the ordeal not knowing what to do. The rapist could even kill THEM if they try to resist.

[nalaa]

"few cultures that consist of people who are still essentially neanderthals in terms of their mental development and mentally retarded people" well true... kinda. It's just that definition of rape varies greatly among cultures. It should not be news to you that what we consider as rape isn't everywhere and wasn't always
Ever seen this ehm... "classic"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzT8TyvmiLM

In 1978 apparently it was funny to consider sleeping with a girl that is passed out. Today most men would hopefully see it as wrong but back then perfectly fine

There's a difference between locking your doors and telling people its ok to rob a house if a window is open, because obviously the owners are asking for it. How can expect anyone to help themselves?

[UpperEchellon]

I didn't get what you meant in your last paragraph. It's never okay to rape or rob. I'm comparing the approach people take in dealing with it. When it comes to rape, our priority is teaching men that no means no. When it comes to theft, our priority is to teach people to protect themselves. The latter is a much more effective way of dealing with the problem.

[nalaa]

First of all I don't think rape and theft are quite the same and hence this not a good analogy. But even to sticking to it it should be obvious what people, which is that a lot of people make excuses for rape and give lower sentences to rapist under circumstances. What rape is, have varied greatly and still not everyone is convinced that it's always 100% the rapist fault
The only thing everyone seems to accept is rape violently being attacked by a stranger, Sunday morning on your way to church. Or in the analogy, having all windows, doors locked, a security system installed and having a small house because a big would clearly draw too much attention. But most people realize that if you don;t have all that and you got robbed it's not all your fault. A court wouldn't ask, do you have a big house that might tempt burlgars? Or did you leave your windows unlocked? And then give a lower sentence for the burglar based on that.
But if you get raped it's likely you'll gets asked did you wear

[nalaa]

a miniskirt that could have tempted rapist? Were you drunk? Did you flirt with him?

With theft people focus n protecting themselves from it because there are no excuses made for it. You don't have to worry someone whole stole your family heirlooms getting away with nothing because you left one window unlocked.
But you do have to worry about rapist getting a way with a low sentence if you were drunk, dressed revealing, already on date with him...
By law, in most states the max sentence for a husband who rapes his wife is about a decade lower than if they were strangers. Even tho we all recognize it as rape and know it's wrong. How does that make sense? What else is that than a social acceptance of rape under some conditions?

[UpperEchellon]

Giving your rape examples, it is still comparable to theft. Hear me out. When we buy a security system, or when we lock our doors, it is mainly to protect against theft from strangers. Women should take the protective approach when dealing with *strangers* as well. When walking in public wearing revealing clothing, it increases a woman's chances of being raped or harassed by *strangers*.

Now consider the case with husband and wife. By law, a wife cannot steal from her husband. If she takes out money from his bank account without his consent, it is NOT considered stealing under the law, and she gets no punishment. Compare that with rape where if a man rapes his wife, he still gets punished.

Now every rape scenario varies in severity, and that is why the punishment is reduced. A stranger raping a female leaves the very large possibility of being traumatized (and thus very harmful), whereas when a husband rapes his wife, rarely if ever, will she be traumatized.

[UpperEchellon]

There are varying degrees of severity in theft (first degree, second degree etc). I believe it is the same with rape. A stranger raping a woman is much worse than her husband doing it (although both are still wrong).

[nalaa]

"When walking in public wearing revealing clothing, it increases a woman's chances of being raped or harassed by *strangers*" does it? really? Because no research I've seen indicates that. Muslim women overall dress very modestly and yet they a very high number of rapes. So show me where you get that idea from please, otherwise I don't think it's a valid point. It's a hypothesis without proofs. What did they tell you in school about building arguments that you want people to believe?

And yes in marriage there is naturally more joint property. But joint property isn't a concept that translates to woman's body (anymore :( ) Unless you want to argue that point?
Taking something from your own is not stealing. "What's mine is yours" well that's what marriage does, it joins property. But actually taking something from his account without consent IS still stealing, it's the joint account where it's ok

"whereas when a husband rapes his wife, rarely if ever, will she be traumatized" ehm what?

[nalaa]

again show me the research that shows that? Otherwise it's an invalid point. All the research I''ve seen suggests that being raped by someone you trust, someone familiar is even more traumatizing. But I won't go into that, you made that claim the burden of proof is on you.

Overall I think your misconceptions about rape is what people want to get rid off

[UpperEchellon]

This social experiment is a good example of how clothing plays a HUGE role on how women are treated: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgw6y3cH7tA

It's like a millionaire deciding to flaunt his riches by going out in public while carrying $1million dollars in an invisible purse for everyone to see. He has every right to do what he's doing, no one can tell him he can't do that. But this drastically raises his chances of being mugged or robbed, because it catches the attention of theives. Of course, if he does get robbed, people will still point fingers at him for being so foolish. "Why were you trying to flaunt your riches, you should have known better than to go out in public like that." They're NOT saying it's his fault for being robbed, nor are they saying he was "asking for it." They were merely saying he could have prevented it. Of course, this is only in stranger situations. Husband/wife scenarios have a completely different dynamic in how rape plays out and this example doesn't fit that.

[UpperEchellon]

Another point: This world will always have crime in it. There will always be thieves or rapists in this world. Trying to teach people not to commit crimes does very little to help. We teach kids not to steal but many would not pass up the opportunity to steal something if they could get away with it. Some people are just criminals by nature, and no amount of teaching will stop crime once and for all. Protecting yourself is the much more effective way of mitigating crime committed against you.

[nalaa]

I'm not sure what conclusion you want me to draw from that video? That staring and catcalling is the same as rape? Or that men who stare and catcall would also rape? I don't think either is true, so I don't see the merit that video has in regards to rape? I think it's a rater big step from looking to raping. And studies that interviewed actual rapists shows that they choose strangers to rape based on a number of things, like how confident the victims seemed and others. And how revealing they dressed was fairly low on the list. Mostly they looked for good victims, someone small, easy to grab, hair that's easy to grab and clothes that easy to remove. But that doesn't have to mean revealing. A long summer dress would be easier to remove than hot pants for example.
Furthermore it should be quite obvious that it's not all about sex, it's in large parts about agression and power, whereas staring is all about sex I assume

[nalaa]

No doubt there will always be rapist, but no doubt that how a society values women and precieves rape makes a massive difference in how many men actually rape. That's for example why the muslim minority in Sweden commits the majority of rapes

Of couse people should try to protect themselves, but as you should have learned from the snowden stuff there is a trade off between security and freedom and you have to find a reasonable balance. So telling people rape is not as bad if she was i. e. drunk shifts that balance towards less freedom

[UpperEchellon]

I honestly feel feminists are just being ignorant when they insist rape has nothing to do with sexual desire. Sexual attraction is what drives rape, and without it, the rapist wouldn't care enough to rape. There are a few scenarios, like during the medieval times, when they'd pillage a village, a group of men would rape the women, regardless of how attractive she was. This is because they have so much pent up sexual desire that at that point, anything would be better than nothing. That's the reason why porn has since lowered porn rates, because it gives men with sexual frustrations a means to relieve their desire. Take porn away, and men will find other means of getting themselves off, such as rape. And feminists want to ignore this by insisting rape has little to nothing to do with sexual desire?

The only scenario I can think of for power driven rape is when a husband wishes to punish his wife by raping her. This may be common as it's easy for the husband to get away with. By far

[UpperEchellon]

By far, the biggest reason I believe rape happens is the opportuniy. If a rapist believes he can rape a girl and get away with it, he will jump at the opportunity. This is mainly driven by desire. So when the opportunity is there, and a rapist decides to rape, he won't think about how he was taught that rape is wrong. He'll only think about the desire he has. Similarly, have someone drop a $100 bill and see how many people would actually return it. Few would, in fact most would steal despite being taught that stealing is wrong, because they have a strong desire for an extra $100.

As for your drunk scenario, I find is incredibly unfair that if a drunk woman and a drunk man consent to having sex, the woman can push for rape charges after she regrets having sex, but the man can't. Regret is not rape. If he tries to push for rape, few will take him seriously. But if the woman pushed for charges, the man would be arrested faster than you can say feminism isn't about equality

[nalaa]

I never said sex wasn't part of it, but it's clearly not all of it either

"That's the reason why porn has since lowered porn rates" another one of those statements that you don't bother supporting in any way. Seriously what did they teach you school about building arguments?
Show me some statistic that says that. I would instinctively think porn increases violence against women including rape, because of the way women are dehumanized in those movies
And looking at reported rapes would certainly no indicate that availability of porn in any way decreases rapes
cdn.zmescience.com/.../prostitution.png
so where exactly do you get that idea from?

And my drunk scenario? What drunk scenario?

[UpperEchellon]

"I never said sex wasn't part of it, but it's clearly not all of it either "

Sexual desire is what *drives* rape. It's the underlying factor. If there's no desire there, the rapist won't be bothered to try to force someone into sex. Sexual desire is essential for rape to happen. The only scenario where this isn't true is when the rapist cares more for the harm he does than the benefit he gets out of it (ex. Husband punishing wife), but we're not talking about hate crime.

Vulnerability is the biggest reason why rape happens. When a rapist has the opportunity (ie, when the victim is vulnerable) he will strike. If this is what you meant by "power" then yes, it's the biggest reason. But that doesn't negate the fact that the desire for sex is what drives rape.

Sexual desire is the fuel. Opportuniy/vulnerability is the car. They work in tandem to drive rape.

Which leads back to my point: that we should work on the "vulnerability" aspect, rather than the desire aspect. (cont.)...

[UpperEchellon]

(cont.) So trying to "teach men not to rape" is rather ineffective. We know rape is wrong, but it is the few sociopaths who don't care that will do it. It's these people who we have to worry about. Trying to teach them to not go after their desires won't change anything. They'll still commit the crime much the same way a thief will. Instead, we should work on protecting ourselves from rape.

As for the porn-rape thing, I saw it from a link posted on facebook. Surprisingly it was from a girl I knew to be a pretty adamant feminist.

www.slate.com/.../how_the_web_prevents_rape.html

[nalaa]

And yet most men desire sex and have a opportunities to rape but don't. (I assume) So clearly it's not as simple as saying sexual desire is what causes rape. there is clearly more to it

Punishment I think was also very low, if I recall right 2% of rapist mentioned that so not sure why you're making such a big deal out of it

Again, it's not about not protecting yourself, it's that people make excuses for rape. And I think I've made that point very clear throughout this conversation and if you're still not getting that that is what people complain about I don't what else to say?
I don't expect you to agree, but only that you get that point that feminists complain about people making excuses for rapists, based on culture and customs.

[nalaa]

The article makes some point but he doesn't at any point link his data so I find it a little to hard to believe. From what I know rapes did not go down since the 90s which essentially nulls thesis. What statistic does he use to conclude rape went down?

[Crazyced]

Speaking of data. About your reported rape graph, could we have an overlapping one with rape convictions?

[nalaa]

@Crazyced well I didn't do much research on it, I was just looking to see if there was any merit to what asker said about porn preventing rape and picked one picture out of many that showed the same trend.

Well here's one for the UK that includes prosecutions and convictions. Again no foundation for even implying porn decreases rape
newsimg.bbc.co.uk/.../...18750_rape_squads_226.gif

[Crazyced]

That's what I feared. Calling rape turned into a fad. Conviction are steady.

[Crazyced]

This data is actually extremely scary. Being label a rapist is life changing, yet here it is, exploding in popularity. There need to be real consequences for false accusations.

[nalaa]

@Crazyced It's not that easy. Prosecution rate stayed steady as well, so most of "fad" accusations as you called them never even got a chance to be proven right or wrong. Even so, the statement made was that the availability of porn DECREASES rape and well prosecution and conviction rate increased marginally, so it def didn't go down, as was claimed

A lot of things influence how likely a woman is to report rape and how likley a court is to convict a rapist

[Crazyced]

It is that easy. Ask yourself WHY it didn't get to prosecution. Assuming someone is guilty because because it didn't get to prosecution is incredibly asinine.

The graph speaks for itself. A 600% increase in reports didn't make a blip on the convictions, even when prosecuted.

[nalaa]

@Crazyced read what it say under "Why police drop cases:", which accounts to 80% of reported rapes
https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/7496013.stm

Actually I'll copy and paste it for you, just in case

Why police drop cases:
Insufficient evidence 21%
Victim withdrawal 17%
Victim declined to complete initial process 17%
Offender not identified 13%
False allegation 12%
No evidence of assault 5%
No prospect of conviction 2%
Not in public interest 1%
Other/ unknown 12%

False allegation account for 12% of 80% which is not quite 9% of the total, the remaining 91% are legitimate claims for all we know

[Crazyced]

And a false allegation wouldn't have enough evidence? Police have been clear that they are not willing to call out false allegations in order to encourage victims to come forward. But the data clearly shows coming forward is not the issue here.

[Crazyced]

'victim withdrawal' is also a nice play on words. Third wave feminism is full of those words manipulation.

[nalaa]

@Crazyced now you're the one making accusation without any kind of proof. Funny that you're criticising false or unfounded accusations when you do much the same

Why would a victim withdraw the case? Many reasons, for example they might not want to go through what happen all out in the happen, might not think there is a chance of conviction. We don't know the exact reasons but it doesn't mean it's false accusation. That's a ridicoulous statement
Why might there not be enough evidence? because for the most part rape is a he said she said type of thing and that alone is not enough

Now back to the point I was originally making, would you agree that rape did not decrease with the availablity of porn?

[Crazyced]

What's more ridiculous then assuming the lack of evidence means it's a false accusations is to assume the same lack actually means it's true. Do you know what innocent until proven guilty means? What about the burden of proof. Feminists are trying to circumvent these principles with rape accusations. Starting with 'victim withdrawal' terminology, which serves to assume a wrong doing and try to sell a failure of the system to deliver 'justice'. Newsflash, women lie, a LOT. Their words are not worth more then a man's and the data is staggering.

[nalaa]

@Crazyced I'm not saying it means true, I'm saying we don't know. You can't just make it part of your false allegation statistics. You're passing judgment on women who report rape without any information, which is exactly why a lot of victims don't report or withdraw in the first place
You're obviously very upset and emotionally invested in this but saying every withdrawn case means the accused is innocent is just not reality

Also, you might want to bother answering the only question I've asked you?

[Crazyced]

You just admitted that your first grph is meaningless as it is filled to the brim with 'we don't knows'. And the same 'we don't knows' attitude is the exact reason why rape accusation is so devastating to men's lifes. Because hey, even if he's not charged, 'we simply don't know'.

[Crazyced]

And I never talked about porn and it's impact on rape.

[UpperEchellon]

"So clearly it's not as simple as saying sexual desire is what causes rape. there is clearly more to it "

What else could "clearly" have more to do with rape than sexual desire? Mind elaborating why a guy would want to forcefully stick his penis into something he's repulsed by?

"it's in large parts about agression and power"

Correction: it's in large part about vulnerability.

"it's that people make excuses for rape."

So when a guy and a girl, both drunk, agree to sex, and the guy gets charged with rape because the woman regretted it, he's making excuses?

You've been insisting that nobody blames theft victims, like they do with rape victims but that is untrue. If I left my car unlocked in the parking lot with the keys in the ignition, and it gets stolen, I will no doubt get a "you should have known better" kind of reaction. People learn their lesson and move on.

[UpperEchellon]

Also, I gave you my source on the porn-rape thing, if you choose not to believe it, that's up to you, but there's no point magnifying a remark I made especially since it has nothing to do with the point of this thread.

[nalaa]

@Crazyced of course crime statistics are filled with don't knows I didn't think I'd have to point that out.

@ take owner. Well clearly there is more to rape than sexual desire, unless you're implying that all men are in fact rapists?

Ok you've worn me out, let's go with that drunk example. Drunk consensual sex is obviously not rape. The point, if you start making out and you're drunk and eventually you don't want to go further so withdraw consent and he keeps going nonetheless. If you ask people was it rape? the answer is not as black and white as it should be.
The video is another good example, havign sex with someone that is passed out, clearly rape. Or not? In 1978 it wasn't that clear apparently, not sure how it is now?
I saw another good example here, not gonna find now but the question was essentially is it rape if you've paid a prostitute and she doesn't want to go through with it? And more than a handful of guys said no it's perfectly fine

No I'm saying

[nalaa]

how stupid victims of theft are doesn't influence the punishment of the thief. AND different point but we all know stealing is bad, always. Whereas as I outline just a few sentence ago, with rape people seem to see more greyzones, which obviously breeds rapists

The article, is an opinion. By someone who based it on a statistic that said rape went down as the internet came along. A statistic he never bothered to cite. I didn't ask for an opinion, I asked for data

[UpperEchellon]

"you're implying that all men are in fact rapists?"

Men who act on their sexual desires and forcefully attain sex are rapists. You're implying there's something else other than sexual desire that drives rape. I'm wondering what that is? Vulnerability is what allows rape to happen, not what drives rape.

"with rape people seem to see more greyzones"

It's not saying rape is ok, it's lowering the punishment because it's like manslaughter vs murder. By definition, voluntary manslaughter occurs when a person is strongly provoked and kills in the heat of passion. That's like getting raped after arousing the rapist. Both are qualified for a lesser sentence, and I think that it's more than fair. Asking the woman those questions doesn't mean we're blaming her, it means we're trying to determine how provoked the rapist was.

Also, in your prostitute example, I would wager those people said yes it's ok to rape her because she scammed him. Like asking, is it ok to punch someone who punches me

[nalaa]

Manslaughter and murder are different crimes though. Different crimes are punished differently. Fair enough.

Rape and rape is the same crime that get punished differently based on how the victim behaves. And some people find that quite outrageous and that's what feminism is on about with rape

I'm not gonna be as arrogant as to suggest I know why rape happens. But I think it's quite obvious that it's more than desire. I'm sure we've all wanted I don't know some game as children that our parents didn't buy and most of us didn't steal. Most of us hate a person and we don't kill or torture them. Even racist that hate black people to death, most wouldn't kill them. Most people can't even stand to look animals be hurt. Holding someone down and hurting them and watching their pain and enjoying it, is not what normal people.

[nalaa]

" I would wager those people said yes it's ok to rape her because she scammed him. Like asking, is it ok to punch someone who punches me" they didn't always specify, but again and again I can't believe how trivial you think rape is. She doesn't want to go through with it, so what's the big deal? He paid for it. You're making an excuse for a rapist.

She didn't steal at the point where she asked to stopped. He could have asked for money back and if she didn't you can go to the police. Because that's what it is, petty theft.
What you can't do is rape her in return. You're comparing a misdemeanor with a felony. Actually you're punishing a misdemeanor with a felony and it's not your place. You don't get to do that. That's what courts are for.

You wouldn't do that with any other crime. If you go to the movie and halfway through it stops working, you wouldn't kill the manager, even if he won't give you back your money. But with rape somehow people make an exception, that's my point

[nalaa]

Racism is a good example how cultural norms breed murders though. Not too long ago killing black was no big deal. Though technically illegal people didn't care much about it. And you could have said to black at the time "there will always be bad people. Nothing we can do, just protect yourself" and that would have been just as much BS as it is now with rape.

Nazis germany, another good example of how social norms encourage or prevent crime.

[UpperEchellon]

Manslaughter is still a crime that gets varying levels of punishment depending on how provoked the murderer was. It's like that with all crimes. Including rape. You're trying to suggest all rape is the same and equally punishable, when every other crime gets to vary. Compare a rapist who one day rapes a stranger he sees walking down the street vs a man who's so turned on from a girl making out with him in a bar, that he rapes in the midst of his arousal. In the bar situation, the man likely would not have raped if he wasn't so aroused due to the girl's actions. In the stranger situation, the rapist would have raped regardless. Like in manslaughter, the person likely would not have committed the murder if he wasn't so provoked.

I was postulating that the people who said its ok to rape the prostitute saw it as a scenario like "If someone sold you something, and you paid, but they decided they didn't want to give it to you anymore, is it ok to steal it?" It's not ok, but I can see why

[nalaa]

Now we're just looking at manslaughter not murder anymore? Can you just pick one analogy and stick with it please?
And no I'm not saying all rape should punished the same, but that just like with manslaughter it should be punished based on the severity of the crime, not the circumstances leading up to it

" In the bar situation, the man likely would not have raped if he wasn't so aroused due to the girl's actions" two things
1) I hope you are aware of the fact that that is exactly what feminist oppose, blaming the victim in any way?
2) We don't know that. We don't know if he would have raped otherwise or not. And it doesn't matter because he did. What you're saying is essentially that flirting with a guy give blanket consent to any further sexual interaction, because if you change your mind and he rapes you he's not gonna be punished like a "normal" rapist

Also in case you don't already know this, most women aren't raped by strangers. The first scenario is

[nalaa]

the exception. The rule is to be raped by someone you know, father, step father, uncle, boyfriend, friend, cousin, teacher, coach or other authority figure
So how do they fit in? Are they "rapists" or can you make up excuses for them to?

[UpperEchellon]

some people would say yes. These guys aren't inherent theives, they just feel entitled to justice. If this went to court, he'd likely get a less punishment because he was scammed, which provoked the theft.

I don't see what's so obvious about rape being about something unrelated to sexual desire. Yes, murders happen even if there was no grudge/anger/provocation, but those guys are sociopaths. People who rape without the sexual desire would be sociopaths. Otherwise the arousal/provocation is what drives people to rape/murder respectively. I'm sure women have just as big a sex drive as men, but the fact that they usually can't overpower a male is why rape statistics are dominated by men. A good deal of rape is certainly committed by women though, but it's the general lack of vulnerability on the men's side that creates this discrepancy.

[UpperEchellon]

"Can you just pick one analogy and stick with it please?"

My manslaughter vs murder analgy remains. You suggested they are not the same, so I insisted that it still applies to just manslaughter.

If a guy comes home and finds his wife in bed with another man, and in the heat of rage, he kills this other man, he is committing voluntary manslaughter. It's still murder. He committed a heinous act. But the fact that he was provoked diminishes his punishment. The fact that the murdered man's actions led to him being killed is the same with how women's actions can lead to them getting raped. If you're going to deny that a woman's actions have absolutely no effect on if she get raped or not is frankly just being ignorant. Its not "her fault", but she definitely could have prevented it. Same with the guy who got murdered. It's not her fault, but it was preventable on his end as well.

[UpperEchellon]

Also, in this manslaughter example: Consider if this husband came home to his wife cheating, but chose not to kill the other man. If he waits for a week, and then kills this man who slept with his wife, he would be charged with murder, not manslaughter. See the relation with rape?

[nalaa]

Well they ARE not the same. malice is what distinguishes murder from manslaughter, making it two entirely separate crimes. But there is no such distinction for rape. Rape is rape
And within the trial for one of them (murder or manslaughter), only the actual crime is considered for the punishment, not the circumstances leading up to it. So I don't see your point?

" It's still murder" no it's not. He still killed someone, but murder is a legal term, which doesn't apply here. You named the right term, voluntary manslaughter, which is different from murder

"but she definitely could have prevented it" again we don't know that and it doesn't matter. That guy in your scenario could have prevented that as well by not sleeping with a married woman. Doesn't mean killing him is anymore ok. Could the victim have prevented the crime is not something that should ever be taken into consideration when determining the punishment of a felon

[nalaa]

And no I don't see the relation

[UpperEchellon]

"only the actual crime is considered for the punishment, not the circumstances leading up to it."

The legal definition of voluntary manslaughter: "voluntary manslaughter consists of an intentional killing that is accompanied by *additional circumstances* that mitigate, but do not excuse, the killing. "

I also just gave you an example of how the circumstances DO matter (the guy slept with his wife). The circumstance also has different levels of severity (For example, using a petty insult vs sleeping with fianace) and that's also taken into account when determining the punishment.

If you're just going to deny facts, then there's really no point discussing this.

[nalaa]

Yes that is what distinguishes manslaughter from murder. I just said that. But once you've decided that is IS manslaughter the circumstance don't matter.
And since there is no distinction between that for rape I don't see how it should ever matter

Again the circumstances you described are what makes it manslaughter, it doesn't tell us anything about the actual crime and it doesn't matter for the punishment

[UpperEchellon]

Lol. the only reason voluntary manslaughter has a distinction from murder is because of how killing in the act of self-defense is not unlawful. They are still the same act (killing). The term also stretches to include the act of killing when provoked. In such circumstances, the perpetrator would be given a lesser punishment (and justly so). It applies to many other crimes, including rape/theft, but only murder/manslaughter gets a distinction because stealing/raping in self-defense is a rather ridiculous statement.

Insisting all rape is the same because the court doesn't have a legal term to differentiate provoked rape and unprovoked rape is a pretty lackluster argument. The court still acknowledges these differences, regardless, by instilling a lesser punishment for provoked rape. And justly so.

[Anonymous]

While you are correct about second and third wave feminism, you are incorect about first. Many of feminism's doctrines such as "cooking for a woman is slavery" came from first wave feminists like Friedman. Its just everyone was swept up in the right to vote that they ignored the real motivation for the movement at society's peril.

You are correct though they are trying SO HARD to pain all men as rapists. Especially college men. They want to straight up run men out of higher education, and have society view us as less than shit.

[TadCurious]

I think you make some really good points. All of the Politically Correct crap out there these days about "consent" isn't doing anybody any good. I did a myTake about this a while back:

www.girlsaskguys.com/.../a8240-craziness-on-campus-if-she-was-drunk-she-gets-to-decide-if-she-was

You're right: Hashtags and tweets about "no means no" isn't going to have any effect on a sociopath. And that's what rapists are. The college guy who hooks up with a girl on a Saturday night after they've had a few beers isn't a rapist. It's just that some girls wake up the next day and wish they hadn't had sex the night before and decide that they would feel better about themselves if they say they were "raped." Wrong.

[Anonymous]

Actually I think there was more man hating in the second wave feminism than the current one. Yes there are a lot of man haters today but they don't care enough to do anything other than whine and complain on tumblr or create their own websites where they just whine and complain about men on there. Besides organizations like NOW making child custody even worse off for dads and the manspreading in NY there has been very little actual action just blatantly attacking men.

This era of feminism may have Big Red but she isn't as evil as Valerie Solanas was.

[Vesuvius87]

Just read about Valerie Solanas now. Sounds like she based her hatred on men due to her abuse during her early years but it sucks that because of a terrible role model in her life (her alcoholic grandfather who beat her), all of the population of the opposite get the blame. Makes me wonder how she became a psychologist with all that hatred.

I couldn't continue what her work on SCUM Manifesto... it's so bad.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCUM_Manifesto

[Opinion Owner]

@Vesuvius87 She tried to go on a murder spree. Fortunately she had shit aim and she didn't make sure the gun was maintained and cleaned properly. The messed up part is she got more followers than before after that.

[bluenose1872]

Wish we could have a poll and find out who all these crazy bitches are. Then round them up and give them a big bit of land to live in lesbian harmony with each other. That's fine by me. There's normal women out there sick to the back teeth of hearing from the ugly bitches who couldn't get a man in a maximum security prison full of rapists

[Watermelonoma]

i don't really pay that much attention to what's coming out of feminist camps anymore, as its usually something like he for she, where even though i don't have any ill will towards women, im still viewed as part of the problem. I already understand what consent is, so this message of theirs is not for me

[buttheadkakakak]

I honestly don't understand this myTake.
I mean, really. Rapists know exactly what they're doing when they're doing it. Feminists of the third wave are taking it too far. First wave feminists just wanted to protect themselves

[AllThatSweetJazz]

I think that's exactly what the Take was about.

[Anonymous]

If think lack of non consent should = consent. If you just go along with it and then later claimed they raped you you are doing a disservice to yourself and the so called "rapist." If you jad said know they wouldn't go to jail and you wouldn't be scared for life or whatever happens.

[HikerDude]

Feminism has totally jumped the shark, so much so that even the most fair-minded guys roll their eyes when its very name is mentioned.

[jacquesvol]

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/61832073.jpg
_____________________________

[Anonymous]

What I love about feminist groups is their inflated rape statistics that demonstrate precisely how many innocent men are falsely accused every year of rape.

[CasaNorba]

for some reason the third wave made me feel the same exact way towards women

[Anonymous]

these days its (your title to normal one) First wave: Equalist Second Wave: Feminist Third Wave: Extreme Feminist