[Days of Broken Arrows]

This subject has already been discussed at the blog Community of the Wrongly Accused and Robert Stacy McCain's blog.

But I felt it should go on the record here because it might mark the turning point where the SJW/feminist crew pushed their ideas too far and began to create a backlash.

In the Claremont McKenna College student newspaper, The Forum, female college student Jordan Bosiljevac wrote an editorial titled "Why Yes Can Mean No." In it, she talks about having sex with a guy and feeling pressured. The "culture" made her do it! She apparently had no agency or control. Larger forces were at work here, people. She writes:

"So at 20, in someone’s room after a party, ‘no’ was scary and unfamiliar to me. These incidents, unfortunately, are not unique to me. In discussing this experience with friends, we coined the term “raped by rape culture” to describe what it was like to say yes, coerced by the culture that had raised us and the systems of power that worked on us, and to still want ‘no.’ Sometimes, for me, there was obligation from already having gone back to someone’s room, not wanting to ruin a good friendship, loneliness, worry that no one else would ever be interested, a fear that if I did say no, they might not stop, the influence of alcohol, and an understanding that hookups are “supposed” to be fun."

There's so much wrong here, it's hard to even untangle it all. I'd urge people to go to McCain's blog and read that, then come back and comment if the despair didn't cause you to jump out a window first. McCain makes the observation that this girl's brain has been so marinated in feminism that it's scrambled (my synopsis -- he doesn't actually say that).

All of this weirdness is an outgrowth of what girls are being taught in college today. Which, to be honest, makes the 1990s brand of feminism look good by comparison. Thank God I'm not a Millennial guy.

***

One final thing. I mentioned in the comments over at McCain's that saying no should be pretty easy. All a woman has to do is say "OMG. I had an attack of diarrhea today and it's coming again! Here it comes!!"

That should bring things to a halt instantly. Nothing makes dicks shrivel quicker than the thought of...that all over the sheets. Ewwww. I should know. One of my exes had massive stomach problems and I actually had to deal with this.

So there you have it: I just solved the problem of so-called "rape culture" with one sentence. In much the way Shawn Fanning brought down the entire music industry with one little program, Napster, I have now discovered the way to end rape culture with a single word.

Hell, women don't even need the word. They can just place the bottle pictured below where a man can see it, then watch the man scurry away like a scared poodle in a thunderstorm.

Rape culture stopper in a bottle:

[Captainstabbin]

Girls even consider romance to be rape. What is romance other than words and action to convince a woman into sex? Here we see what these bitches really want. A man to date them, support them, entertain them and "be there" for them without wanting or asking for anything in return. After all he should "love me for me" not the things I do or refuse to do for him.

And the second he suggests that things aren't working out and he either wants sex or he's gone - that too is rape. In fact, if he even asks for sex and she feels pressured by society (not even him personally) THAT'S rape!

So, a supportive but non-sexual relationship - why don't they just come out and admit that they want a father?

[MrLemon]

(05-07-2015 01:29 PM)Captainstabbin Wrote:  

why don't they just come out and admit that they want a father?

Not father...."slave".

Be clear about that.

[Kabal]

Women are strong and independent!

...oh, except for when it comes to allocating agency and accountability--then all of a sudden women group themselves with pet and children in absolving themselves of culpability for anything.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

In my wildest dreams I could not have imagined this sort of phrasing to ever be uttered. "Yes means yes" is an idiotic concept, but at least somewhat understandable. This, though, is on a level of its own!

[Grange]

Bank: "Jordan Bosiljevac will you pay back this loan?"
JB: "Yes."

5 years later...

Bank: "Your Honor, she signed the form. She owes us the money."
JB: "That really meant no."
Judge: "You gotta be shitting me."

[Ocelot]

It's both frightening and a little satisfying to be proven right on this one. From about a year ago:

(10-04-2014 05:13 AM)Ocelot Wrote:  

I wonder if, after another five or so years of rape hysteria, they will have pushed the boundaries far enough to claim that even videos of 'enthusiastic consent' aren't evidence against rape. Using this kind of logic, "Yeah, fuck me harder baby! I'm your little slut!" might actually just be her attempting to "convince herself that she'd given consent". I watch the future unfold with a continuing morbid curiosity.

I guess in the internet age, the envelope gets pushed faster than you expect... Maybe in five years time there will be an actual junior anti-sex league?

(05-07-2015 01:19 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

This subject has already been discussed at the blog Community of the Wrongly Accused and Robert Stacy McCain's blog.

But I felt it should go on the record here because it might mark the turning point where the SJW/feminist crew pushed their ideas too far and began to create a backlash.

Somehow I doubt it. Backlash tends to come when the actions of the mob have visibly run ahead of the ideas being pushed in the mainstream. If the creep of ideas is normalised before such actions (in this case, men's lives being ruined by false rape allegations) become a daily public spectacle, you can condition the general public to accept pretty much anything. Sure, they may think ideas like this are ludicrous, but merely their being given a voice makes ideas like "Yes Means Yes" seem sane by comparison.

For all the talk about a sudden "turning point" in the Manosphere, when the hoardes of "beta males" will finally snap and fight back, I just don't see it happening. The window of acceptable discourse will simply shift, as it did for age-gaps and age of consent (ever asked what the average American thinks about a 23 year old having sex with a 17 year old?) - already you cannot publicly acknowledge that girls offer token resistance before sex, or lie about rape for any number of reasons.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(05-07-2015 05:08 PM)Ocelot Wrote:  

It's both frightening and a little satisfying to be proven right on this one. From about a year ago:

(10-04-2014 05:13 AM)Ocelot Wrote:  

I wonder if, after another five or so years of rape hysteria, they will have pushed the boundaries far enough to claim that even videos of 'enthusiastic consent' aren't evidence against rape. Using this kind of logic, "Yeah, fuck me harder baby! I'm your little slut!" might actually just be her attempting to "convince herself that she'd given consent". I watch the future unfold with a continuing morbid curiosity.

I guess in the internet age, the envelope gets pushed faster than you expect... Maybe in five years time there will be an actual junior anti-sex league?

(05-07-2015 01:19 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

This subject has already been discussed at the blog Community of the Wrongly Accused and Robert Stacy McCain's blog.

But I felt it should go on the record here because it might mark the turning point where the SJW/feminist crew pushed their ideas too far and began to create a backlash.

Somehow I doubt it. Backlash tends to come when the actions of the mob have visibly run ahead of the ideas being pushed in the mainstream. If the creep of ideas is normalised before such actions (in this case, men's lives being ruined by false rape allegations) become a daily public spectacle, you can condition the general public to accept pretty much anything. Sure, they may think ideas like this are ludicrous, but merely their being given a voice makes ideas like "Yes Means Yes" seem sane by comparison.

For all the talk about a sudden "turning point" in the Manosphere, when the hoardes of "beta males" will finally snap and fight back, I just don't see it happening. The window of acceptable discourse will simply shift, as it did for age-gaps and age of consent (ever asked what the average American thinks about a 23 year old having sex with a 17 year old?) - already you cannot publicly acknowledge that girls offer token resistance before sex, or lie about rape for any number of reasons.

Yes, the discourse will shift. But I think it's going to shift away from the SJW mindset because of unintended consequences. Here's why.

As more and more of these stories get out, they have a cumulative effect. And that effect is creating an impression of the latest batch of Millennial women as hysterical, spoiled, child-like, and irrational.

This will bleed into all aspects of their lives soon and I think they're going to feel it both in the job market and personally. People will start to avoid them or keep them at arm's length. They might get their "yes means yes" laws, but that's going to come at a price -- the price of women being seen as a adults with agency.

Throughout most of history, women have not been seen this way. It's only been in the last 70 years Western society has viewed them as more than "taller children." This, I think, is going to change back. It's very easy to create a stereotype; no so easy to shake one off.

How do I know? We've seen this with various factions of society already. A few postal workers go berserk and all of a sudden you get the phrase "gone postal." Riots break out in a few cities, and the many minorities who have nothing to do with this start to feel alienated from whites and vice-versa.

I see this editorial as so over-the-top it's going to open people's eyes. I also noticed the writer removed all traces of her picture from the Web once it appeared (which I'd gone into a cache file and gotten one), so I think on some level she knows this too.

[Carlos100]

Here is her Facebook page. She appears to be aware that her recent column is receiving some criticism and ridicule.

[RawGod]

I think there will both be a ratcheting up AND a reaction to this stuff, because of a new generation coming through. The upcoming generation of women (18 and below now) will likely be more sane. But the millennials are not going to get better as they get older. They are going to screech more and more loudly as they hit the wall and realise what a clusterfuck their lives are. The shrill millennial women are still 30 or under right now. Watch as their average age rises, wrinkles appear, and the cat lady phenomenon kicks in for real. Simultaneously, more of them will reach positions of greater power in the media and professionally, giving them a greater platform.

I credit AnonymousBosch for this insight, incidentally - the "Girls" generation, ugly as they are, are now at the peak of their "sexual exploration". It won't be pretty as they age and dry up out of that.

[Mage]

After some 15 years all sex will be rape.

After some another 15 years these words will become official synonymous, but sex will be the outdated word. Everybody will just use the word rape. Men will no longer offer women sex, they will ask: "Wanna get raped?" This will still give females the power to turn men to authorities later, but not always used because women will want sex.

After some another 15 years The punishment for rape will be dramatically LESSENED because society will not be able to incinerate very man who has had sex. The society needs it's slaves to do work so rape will become a casual offense. Instead of incineration rape will be punished by monetary fines.

After some another 15 years men with a regular partner will be paying rape tax to the state for the right to bang a female. Men will no longer use game or romance to try to lure women in bed. Instead men will just physically attack women and rape them because there is no difference between how the woman has sex it all will be called rape anyway. Society returns to caveman game.

After some another 15 years women and their relatives start paying rape tax for their regular men to protect them from being raped by less desirable men. Society returns to traditional household where a strong man holds from one to several women in his house, women don't leave house and do all homework and cannot refuse sex to their protector and pay dowry to their man to not get cast out and get raped on the street.

The endgame of feminism.

But after some 15 years more women want to get out of the house demand rights and the cycle starts anew.

[dads]

I've been listening to Patrice O'Neal a lot lately, and the biggest thing I've picked up in this almost "red pill refresher course" is that women are emotional creatures. So I read this, and since I feel like I've fully enveloped the idea of being able to see things from other peoples perspectives, I understand what she is saying completely. However, law cannot be based on peoples emotions, and the ultimate issue is that men have given women such power in everything, and ultimately, it's led to policy being made based on emotion as opposed to logic.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(05-08-2015 02:16 AM)Mage Wrote:  

After some 15 years all sex will be rape.

After some another 15 years these words will become official synonymous, but sex will be the outdated word. Everybody will just use the word rape. Men will no longer offer women sex, they will ask: "Wanna get raped?" This will still give females the power to turn men to authorities later, but not always used because women will want sex.

After some another 15 years The punishment for rape will be dramatically LESSENED because society will not be able to incinerate very man who has had sex. The society needs it's slaves to do work so rape will become a casual offense. Instead of incineration rape will be punished by monetary fines.

After some another 15 years men with a regular partner will be paying rape tax to the state for the right to bang a female. Men will no longer use game or romance to try to lure women in bed. Instead men will just physically attack women and rape them because there is no difference between how the woman has sex it all will be called rape anyway. Society returns to caveman game.

After some another 15 years women and their relatives start paying rape tax for their regular men to protect them from being raped by less desirable men. Society returns to traditional household where a strong man holds from one to several women in his house, women don't leave house and do all homework and cannot refuse sex to their protector and pay dowry to their man to not get cast out and get raped on the street.

The endgame of feminism.

But after some 15 years more women want to get out of the house demand rights and the cycle starts anew.

Amusing.

My dystopian idea about the future is that boys will be given a Ritalin-like drug to keep them from being sexual.

In the same way some kids aren't allowed in school without taking Ritalin, boys won't be allowed in without this drug, because of the threat of "sexual violence." This will include college, and eventually it will make its way into the workplace.

It will only be when men get married they're allowed off the drug -- at the discretion of their wives.

I think we're already seeing a prelude to this with the rise in drugs given to "trans kids" to keep them from developing sexually. While the SJW crowd is supposedly championing the trans kids, what they're really liking is that most of this has to do with suppressing male sexuality in the end, since most trans cases are male-to-female.

As I've written before, feminism is like religion except that only men can commit sins. This girl's essay is a perfect example of that. The only difference is we now have new, trendy words to replace outdated ones like "sin."

[Roosh]

The end goal of this is to classify all sex as possible rape. Every step forward will be to move into that direction.

[CH-Toronto]

(05-08-2015 01:01 AM)Carlos100 Wrote:  

Here is her Facebook page. She appears to be aware that her recent column is receiving some criticism and ridicule.

"Going to Feminist RAGE Fest" - Makes sense.

Quote:

The end goal of this is to classify all sex as possible rape. Every step forward will be to move into that direction.

While this is incredibly extreme thinking - it's more about classifying "regretted sex" as rape. Which is pretty much the same thing.

[Socrates]

(05-08-2015 03:03 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

My dystopian idea about the future is that boys will be given a Ritalin-like drug to keep them from being sexual.

In the same way some kids aren't allowed in school without taking Ritalin, boys won't be allowed in without this drug, because of the threat of "sexual violence." This will include college, and eventually it will make its way into the workplace.

It will only be when men get married they're allowed off the drug -- at the discretion of their wives.

Welcome to the Monkey House.

[Novatore]

Quote:

Consent is a privilege, and it was built for wealthy, heterosexual, cis, white, western, able-bodied masculinity. When society has taught some of us to take up as little space as possible, to take all attention as flattery, and to be truly grateful that anyone at all could want our bodies or love, it isn’t always our choice to say yes.

Quote:

First, we have to realize that all oppression is connected, and all rape is racist, classist, ableist, patriarchal, hetero and cissexist.

[CH-Toronto]

(05-08-2015 03:03 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

My dystopian idea about the future is that boys will be given a Ritalin-like drug to keep them from being sexual.

In the same way some kids aren't allowed in school without taking Ritalin, boys won't be allowed in without this drug, because of the threat of "sexual violence." This will include college, and eventually it will make its way into the workplace.

It will only be when men get married they're allowed off the drug -- at the discretion of their wives.

They've already started to regulate the kind of woman a man should find attractive. The next step is regulating WHEN they can find them attractive.

[kbell]

She isn't fat or unattractive. Not sure why she is going full Andrew Dworkin. College is getting better at indoctrination?

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(05-08-2015 09:24 AM)kbell Wrote:  

She isn't fat or unattractive. Not sure why she is going full Andrew Dworkin. College is getting better at indoctrination?

Yes, it's definitely that.

But according to the McCain blog, she was also raised by Lesbian parents. There may also be some anti-white male bias here. I like to stay away from racial issues on this forum, but more and more it's look like the anti-frat and anti-college guy bias we see is has a lot to do with "white males." Speaking of stuff they teach in college.

Anyway, McCain's blog says:

"Thanks to the commenter who pointed out that, in another article at the Claremont McKenna Forum, Jordan Bosiljevac labels herself “a brown woman of gay parents,” and describes “third grade me, starting elementary school with more wealthy white children than I’d ever seen in my whole life”:

On the first day I entered this alien planet via my mothers’ red van — yes, that’s two moms that both came to drop me off. As if gay moms in an old, unfashionable van weren’t enough, I was one of a few children of color at my school. I had no friends, a lot of whispers about my strange family situation, and sudden regret for all the time I’d spent outside that past summer. Basically, I felt like a mess."

http://theothermccain.com/2015/05/02/rap...osiljevac/

[kbell]

Ah so its more likely the product of gay parents at the root. That way more indoctrination for even longer, plus the better college and high school level indoctrination they are exposed to. Granted if she had two parents that thought like the guy Nero from gamergate it would be a different outcome.

The white stuff is just envy of wealth. If they were brown she would make it more about class.

[Tim in real life]

Gave me another reason why I'm not attending this school.

[BagelConsultant]

On one hand she's writing this article. Her other hand is busy giving Chad Thundercock a handy. I sure hope she doesn't reproduce...

[Ziltoid]

(05-08-2015 04:29 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

The end goal of this is to classify all sex as possible rape. Every step forward will be to move into that direction.

Also I think the emasculation of men and defeminization of women is giving women stronger and stronger tastes for over the top, rough, caveman style game, both before and during sex.

Some element of guys will be able to pull it off with ease and thrive, and some guys will just hamfistedly mimic what they see working for other dudes even if it's a check their frame can't cash.
Recipe for disaster.

Women vote with their pussies, and in reality they're the ones pushing "rape culture".
If they wanted consent verbally affirmed beyond any reasonable doubt and to be tenderly carried into a bed covered with rose pedals and eaten out for 30 minutes, there's no shortage of (very thirsty) guys out there ready to provide just that. But in actuality they're reading Fifty Shades of Grey and going out of their way to get jackhammered by dudes that grab their ass in the bar and treat them like garbage in bed.

Funny Adam Carolla quote that I can't remember verbatim went like "In order to seal the deal with most women these days, you have to do something that is tantamount to sexual assault, should she end up not liking it."
If you lined up all your ducks just right and she liked your game, then in her eyes you're Don Juan himself and everything was perfect and right and "just happened" à la romcom movies.
If not... Hope you can afford a good lawyer.

[KofiKingston]

(05-08-2015 03:03 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

My dystopian idea about the future is that boys will be given a Ritalin-like drug to keep them from being sexual.

In the same way some kids aren't allowed in school without taking Ritalin, boys won't be allowed in without this drug, because of the threat of "sexual violence." This will include college, and eventually it will make its way into the workplace.

In a nutshell, Prozium.