This isn't surprising, frankly. Still terrifyingly Orwellian. Anybody locked and loaded for a long post?
Quote:Quote:
Posters with messages like “Be a Man, Show Me Respect,” “Don’t Be a Passive Bystander” and “Do Something” are all over campus, in libraries, locker rooms, even on the sides of buses.
This is where society is now. We have fallen from simple aspirational messages in commercials in magazines and on TV. Now, we need propaganda at every corner, on the sides of every bus.
Women feel greatly insecure these days. The more normal ones cake on makeup, status whore and cruise social media all day. This has many roots, but the most salient one here is that women have an incredibly deep-seated sense of disappointment in men. Like Betty Freidan once famously observed, "it is a feeling that has no name." The feeling that men are failing women. Or, in words that would inflame a feminist's mind and loins, "Men aren't men anymore."
When women are deeply resentful of men as a class,
they tend to treat men as beasts, stupid and incapable of morality that women possess. Women have always experienced shades of this in American society, but it didn't reach it's crescendo until after the Sexual Revolution.
As we see here, it manifests itself -- combined with other social forces -- as a ridiculous belief that sexual assault and rape is a critically important issue to address on campus. "Don't hang yourself ladies, it has declined very much so!" Yay, prevention! "Well, know 1 in 5 women is still violated on campuses." What was the original number? Statistics are flying about in this article, but I guarantee none of them match up and this is on purpose: this is a propaganda piece. "But, but it is a NYTimes piece!" Have you watched Fox News? "They are too ideological for my taste." You don't say!
The more political women -- who think that ideology can displace personal awareness (feminists) -- make the leap from their own psychology to politics. These sorts of women live in a world where whatever they think is necessary to combat the "problem" is necessarily justified. This is perfectly captured by the glowingly progressive woman in the article,
MS. Stapleton:
Quote:Quote:
Women on campus, including Ms. Stapleton, the researcher, led protest marches, occupied a dean’s office and at one point surrounded him, linked arms and refused to let him go until he responded to their demands. It took months, but eventually the administration started making the changes that are in place today.
Ah, so some student activists -- armed with only their own incensed rage and a sense of grandiosity fueled by latent narcissism -- used physical coercion to force a man against his will to act. Of course, this was justified, because he would be forced to stop men from physically coercing women against their will, as they know the true way to prevent sexual assault. I mean, they are the ones they have been waiting for on sexual assault, right? Feminism says so.
As always, note the transference. She knows that she has strong impulses to get what she wants through force - she ignores this in herself and instead projects that out onto the "true perpetrators:" men.
Quote:Quote:
It appears to have had an impact. Shortly after the 1987 rape, 37 percent of female students reported experiencing unwanted intercourse or other sexual contact; by 2006, it was 21 percent, and by 2012, 16 percent.
By the same methodology to determine what constitutes sexual assault? These people *can't* admit failure -- unless it is done a tawdry, maudlin "Look at me!" way -- so they game the system behind the scenes and alter standards. I really wish I could link to the article, but it is buried in a couple older law review articles and a dense book of legal articles that called out these "anti-sexual assault" activists for their shifty data collection and altering of definitions to game outcomes.
Once again, we have "1 in 5" & "37% of women claiming to be assaulted to 16% assaulted 25 years later?" Why do you use assume it is a necessary result of your efforts? Leaving obvious dubious statistics aside, what about independent, intervening events? Less men on campus, men retreating into video games/
bronies/4chan?
"But, but rape is always about power!" Where did you hear that, MSNBC? I thought rape and rape culture was a complex diversity issue? Yet, it only has one and only one cause: men seeking power over women. Ah, reflexive framing of women's lives as not a man's choice.
Yes, Charlotte, rape is always wrong. But to reflexively frame it through those beasts of men seeking to make decisions for you is odd and antiquated. Shouldn't women frame it as unwanted and forced & that's all that needs to be said? People force others to do things every day but it often isn't about power. To assume that posture on rape as based out of power reinforces that women are doing things simply because "it isn't a decision a man makes." Which is why
men suggesting women grow their hair out, wear makeup or men raping women pisses most all women off. One of those things is not like the other, but I have a small penis so what do I know.
In sum, liberation = not involving/pleasing/forced or suggested by a man. One tip: invest in Purina stock, tomorrow if you can.
Quote:Quote:
More than 60 percent of claims involving sexual violence handled by United Educators from 2005 to 2010 involved young women who were so drunk they had no clear memory of the assault.
What sorcery is this? How do you know women were raped but they didn't know it? I think Rachel Maddow did a special on this once. I didn't watch, but I hear she went undercover as a mattress and found out that women got paid 75 cents on the dollar against men. Wait, wrong thread?
Still, these sorts of beliefs that women are raped so frequently on campuses is an antiquated reaction to movies like "Porkies" and "Animal House." Parents of young adults sent to campuses were appalled by these movies and, further, disgusted by the drinking, revelry and sex shared freely. This dovetails
America's deep distrust of Hollywood and their anti-social freewheeling. Parents took a personal interest in these sorts of behaviors once their young were shipped off to schools hours away.
Suddenly, campuses were seen as hotbeds of anti-social behavior and apparently the only two criticisms of this perception that exist to this day is a weak one of alcohol and strong one about sexual assault.
The Christofeminist Porn Wars took off because of this, with feminists in one hand and conservative Christians in the other.
Quote:Quote:
IT IS MOSTLY WOMEN who have spearheaded the fight against sexual assault, founded the rape prevention centers, staffed the hotlines, dominated the research in the field, led the Take Back the Night marches and organized the sexual consent campaigns. And it is men who commit most of the world’s violence.
In other words, men don't really care about sexual assault (rape culture) and more narcissism framed as selfless devotion at the vicious machinations of men. Of course, they later say that only a few men commit the majority of assaults. "Whew!" the reader thinks, "And here I was being sold a reality of dark, rapey masculinity!" Dumbass men get to think, "Hey, they are selling us as not all violent beasts!" Yeah, dumbass, after they painted a grim picture of male domination and rape of women.
Classic female posturing about how women have superior ethical and moral compasses. Congratulate yourself, ladies. You have figured out rape is wrong and are doing your utmost to erode criminal laws and Constitutional protections, replacing them with inferior administrative approaches at the collegiate level.
These are the
same people who think that women are better friends and spouses -- even though media at large *knows* that isn't true. Desperate Housewives? The mindless drama of "The L Word?" Reality TV? "Teen Mom?" Men aren't watching these shows and the media knows but women won't admit it -- least of all feminists.
Quote:Quote:
The coaches repeatedly pound into their heads that a woman not saying no is not the same as a woman saying yes. “If there is 1 percent doubt in my mind,” Mr. Rowe said, “it’s not worth doing it. Unless she gives consent, she can say, ‘I was raped,’ and it’s your word against hers.”
“If a girl wants to have sex,” he continued, “you’ll know it. She has that look in her eyes. She’s been talking to you, she bothers you, she walks by you all night, the whole thing, you talk, you let it evolve.”
Mr. Chaput looked like he had something to say but wasn’t sure he should. Finally, in a quiet voice, he said, “I waited until a girl asked me.”
These are the same people who detest creationism, citing the science of evolution -- while completely ignoring actual science on evolution. If humans evolved from primates, then you are conceding language -- as understood now -- isn't the basis for consent, but that body language must be. You know, commonly accepted science that most information between humans is conveyed via body language. Apparently, there is a feminist exception for consent for sex.
Once again, another attempt at reviving
Antioch College's patently absurd approach to consent and sex.
One more critical point needs to be articulated. I would recommend you read this article by The Last Psychiatrist: "
No Self-Respecting Woman Would Go Outside Without Makeup."
His outstandingly brilliant closing section:
Quote:Quote:
Speaking of no one being upset about rape, here's a story, starts out bad and gets even worse in ways you won't expect: a 16 year old girl is passed out drunk at a party, she is then allegedly raped by a/two high school football players, and carried unconscious to other parties and displayed and/or raped, and apparently because the town has a "football culture" no arrests are made, it's hushed up, the boys are protected, and I think to myself, oh, that's weird, is that town still in 1986? True story: in 1986, at a mixer at the Delta Gamma sorority house, Lacoste Football Guy gets hard for 16 year old sister of Benetton Girl, and in order to get her jeans off he hits her in the head with a lamp, so in order to keep her jeans on she kicks him in the mouth, and through the blood and fury he's screaming he'll sue her, do you know who my father is? NB: he went on to become a lawyer and no I am not making that up.
"Ugh, even now, 25 years later, it's still a hypermasculine rape culture." Ha! No. Hypermasculine? Where are you, the Dominican? No, what's amazing/obvious is how after 25 years of Diane Sawyer and makeup debates, not one other girl at this party came to the victim's aid; not one girl saw what was happening at the party and simultaneously called 911 and Facetimed the crime; not one girl called all the women she knew and brought the wrath of Athena down on that town. Nope. Nothing. A lot of laughing and giggling though, turns out rape is funny, someone owes Daniel Tosh a huge apology. "Women's styles tend to be more collaborative." I can tell, they collaborated to keep their mouth shut. In 1986 the sorority girls also collaborated to blame the victim for for being so rough with Lacoste Guy: "How could you do that to him? His face is like, totally corroded." Hey, come on, look how he was dressed, he was asking for it.
"We need more women in power." Wrong preposition, dummy, but anyway you have them. You have judges and prosecutors and twenty female senators, what has it gotten you? Your own ground floor women don't protect each other, you know who had to come to this teen's aid? Anonymous. Men.
Of course I don't know if the boys really did these things or not, ok? But if the reason the boys were protected was the "football culture," that means people in the town were taught to protect them. And if the girls did nothing, it means they were taught to do nothing, and the people most responsible for that lesson was other women.
"No, the town was corrupt, they swept these kinds of things under the rug for years." If you've known for years the town isn't going to help women, if you've known for years it's a "hypermasculine rape culture," wouldn't that make women want to stick together more?
It's not like these teen girls were denied an education or had to endure sexual harrassment at work or had to go to Sweden to get abortions, if there was ever a generation that should feel most empowered it would be them, yet they-- not just one of them; all of them-- "knew", somehow, that they could/should do nothing. Which means that they were taught that from somewhere, and the only place that it could have come was older women. "The other lesson is: makeup is a choice." Today I learned nothing.
There's your female empowerment, there's you feminist progress, catastrophically subverted from the top down, like it's in an abusive relationship, satisfied with the house and the car and the 4/7 good days and simply doesn't want to rock the boat so it expends frantic energy on what is ultimately nonsense. Every stupid parent teaches their girls not to get raped, duh, but have any mothers spent any time indoctrinating their daughters what to do if another woman is being raped? Have they made it a reflex to defend, to attack? "Isn't that obvious?" Ask the town. "We need to support each other!" sure, as long as it's from the safety of a computer monitor or a 5K, yay women. Have you explicitly told your daughters that if a woman is passed out drunk and you see a Notre Dame Hat climbing over her couch, it is your responsibility to grab an aerosol can and a lighter and threaten Armageddon, or at the very least yell stop? "Well, that's kind of dangerous." Yeah, that's kind of the point, but I grant you that it's safer to giggle and let boys be boys. Do you want power, or the trappings of power? Somebody's going to have it, you can't make it vanish. I wasn't at this particular rape, the town's defense amazingly appears to be she was a slut and she was asking for it, and my point is: so what? Why didn't the other women stop it anyway? Why didn't they just rise up?