The sexual threats against Emma Watson are an attack on every woman

[William Tell]

Lol why on earth would I choose a liberterian forum full of manly gun-lovers and old school values in attempt to pick up virtual chicks?

I'd just go to some feminist site or some other female heavy place and pretend to be gay.

She is not saying you are here for chicks, she is saying you have an attitude of sucking up to women in ways that even they think are weird.

 

[pessimist]

She is not saying you are here for chicks, she is saying you have an attitude of sucking up to women in ways that even they think are weird.

What makes it even weirder is that I'm not sucking up to women. I just have own opinions.

I'm not a feminist, nor do I belong to any group, and you'd have to pay me to vote for Hilary Clinton or march in the streets for any cause.

You will never see we me arguing any of the democratic talking points or feign outrage by whatever got the chicks at jezebel all fired up.

I just see the world differently. No act here.

 

[osan]

lol, that is usually the point where some of the MRAs loose me. If a man doesn't want to be "raped", he will not be raped.

Assuming "raped by a woman", that is not necessarily true. If the girl has a .45 at your head and means what she says, you will oblige her... unless you really do not care whether you are shot through the head. When life is at stake, little Juleswin will stand to perfect attention on command. I would also note that one does not have to be "turned on" to achieve a boner. My understanding is that nurses get comatose men up in order to facilitate the changing of catheters. This is what I've been told, but my lack of direct experience there disqualifies the assertion as quote-worthy.

The same goes with physical abuse. But just like every rule there are few exception

You appear to use cite statistical rarity to... what, exactly... minimize validity? I would also take issue with your implication that female-on-male physical abuse is rare. It is certainly rarely reported, probably for reasons very similar to the ones underlying the under reportage of rape. Stigma, real or imagined, is a powerful motivator.

What's good for the goose must also be good for the gander. If it is worthy of ruckus when woman is the victim, equally so is it when a man is on the short end. Few things in this life are as despicably invalid as hypocrisy.

 

[Wooden Indian]

...and the passed-out drunk men. A percentage of the latter don't really care and only wish they would have been awake.

When I was 18 a 40'ish woman forced herself on me while I was blind drunk and on some pills she gave me. The next day, I could remember only in an almost dream like recollection what happened.

She was LARGE and old... and it wasn't funny. Biker type chick up in Knoxville, TN. So, in case anyone was wondering, yes.. it does still work under those circumstances. Your little fella will just respond even when you don't want it. At least as a teenager it will.

 

[thoughtomator]

I've had women drug my drinks with Viagra and later tie me up. Have any of you gone to ER with Priapism? It is not pleasant.
.

We're not worthy!
We're not worthy!

 

[pessimist]

This thread is hilarious. Does anyone see the irony here?

I am being accused of being some effeminate fairy or some slimy douchebag trying to gain favor with women- yet I am not the one sounding like the woman here.

Do you guys realize that how girly and unmanly you sound? Are you aware of how you’re victimizing yourselves? You’re crying because an extremely small and insignificant percentage of women ‘rape' men. You’re whining about ‘equal rights’. You’re completely sounding like the feminists you apparently loathe and feel like you’re victims of.

I am actually taking the more traditional masculine stance here. I am recognizing that men, not only are physically bigger, faster, stronger- they are just simply more biologically equipped to rape.

No real man fears being raped by a woman. Period.

 

[pessimist]

Assuming "raped by a woman", that is not necessarily true. If the girl has a .45 at your head and means what she says, you will oblige her... unless you really do not care whether you are shot through the head..

I don't know about you, but there is no way I could become aroused with a gun pointed at my head.

 

[juleswin]

Assuming "raped by a woman", that is not necessarily true. If the girl has a .45 at your head and means what she says, you will oblige her... unless you really do not care whether you are shot through the head. When life is at stake, little Juleswin will stand to perfect attention on command. I would also note that one does not have to be "turned on" to achieve a boner. My understanding is that nurses get comatose men up in order to facilitate the changing of catheters. This is what I've been told, but my lack of direct experience there disqualifies the assertion as quote-worthy.

True, one doesn't have to be turned on to achieve a boner but when you have your fight or flight response activated, blood is actually taken away from the urinary system to other vital parts of the body which kinda makes it harder to achieve a boner. But I am talking about the real world and since we are talking about achieving a boner, I would assume that we are also talking about penetration rape. So try and imagine position that you could do with the rapist while she still has effective control of the gun against you? cos I cant think of one

Also I am in nursing school now and we are told to give the patient time for a boner to die town if they happen to have one when you are trying to put a foley catheter on. You can put a catheter fine just without a boner. Lol,if nurses knew of the secrete of raising a really dead wood, they haven't taught us that yet and if I don't know it, then I doubt some random chick trying to foolishly rape you with a .45 doesn't knows it either.

You appear to use cite statistical rarity to... what, exactly... minimize validity? I would also take issue with your implication that female-on-male physical abuse is rare. It is certainly rarely reported, probably for reasons very similar to the ones underlying the under reportage of rape. Stigma, real or imagined, is a powerful motivator.

What's good for the goose must also be good for the gander. If it is worthy of ruckus when woman is the victim, equally so is it when a man is on the short end. Few things in this life are as despicably invalid as hypocrisy.

I agree with some of the things you said but my point is that men being abused by female is only possible except in very rare cases if the man allows it. I hate to break it to you but some men get off from that kind of stuff. They love the idea of women abusing and dominating them and they just keep coming back for more. The other type see it as some harmless attack they can live with. I try not to judge people with alternative lifestyles cos if that is what they want, then I would not be the one to get in their way of attaining enjoyment.

Not to sound sexists here, some women just like the men enjoy this type of relationships and will continue to stay even when they have the ability to leave and live a comfortable life without the abuser. Domination and abuse is also a form of fetish

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Hillary 2016!

[video=youtube;j70ha1PUlqk]http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=j70ha1PUlqk[/video]

 

[juleswin]

"No more she could have been more careful". Because your behavior plays no part whatsoever with you becoming a victim of a crime. Be careful? not in my dictionary, I say we throw caution to the wind and live life like there's nothing to loose

 

[pessimist]

The media really needs to shine more light on the rampant rape of men by sex crazed power-hungry women. These savage vixens are roaming the streets gang-raping men at gun point daily and the media turns a blind eye.

Where is the justice? Fear matriarchy!

 

[MelissaWV]

The media really needs to shine more light on the rampant rape of men by sex crazed power-hungry women. These savage vixens are roaming the streets gang-raping men at gun point daily and the media turns a blind eye.

Where is the justice? Fear matriarchy!

Or people could stop trying to hyphenate and categorize everything by condition, looking instead at the action and its effect, rather than the demographics of the victim. No "hate crimes" or "women's rights" or "gay rights" needed.

Then again all of this ignores the elephant in the room.

"Sexual threats" made online or even by commentators are not likely to be actual, actionable threats. They're societal. Society is going to have assholes. It's really much better if people just wear those sorts of opinions right out in the open, so that others can choose to not associate with them. "Fixing" society is not something that should involve laws or government.

As for the very real and often institutionalized violence against women AND men, it's already a crime regardless of the demographics of the people involved. That's where you start to sound like you're trying to curry favor. Painting it as a women's issue is ridiculous. It's a human issue, and belittling the plight of men who are victimized does very little to bolster your credibility. The argument about statistical likelihood is preposterous. The majority of murder victims in the US are male. Does this somehow mean that it's a "men's issue"?

 

[pessimist]

Or people could stop trying to hyphenate and categorize everything by condition, looking instead at the action and its effect, rather than the demographics of the victim. No "hate crimes" or "women's rights" or "gay rights" needed.

I disagree. When a specific demographic faces disproportionate abuse or discrimination you need to call attention to it.

One should never downplay the seriousness of rape whether the victim is a child, a woman, a man, or even an animal. But let be real here: how many women are raping men? How many women are raped daily by men? Okay, maybe we can’t get an actual stat for that…but do honestly believe men need to take serious measures to defend themselves against rapist women, the way women need to protect themselves from men?

I am talking actual RAPE here, not predatory gold digging women who make false allegations; I am talking women physically raping and sexually assaulting men.

As for the very real and often institutionalized violence against women AND men, it's already a crime regardless of the demographics of the people involved. That's where you start to sound like you're trying to curry favor.

I’ll freely admit I hold women in higher regard, but it’s not to ‘curry favor’. I just find them to generally be more ‘civilized’. When I leave my house I have ZERO fear of being mugged by a woman. When I used to go to college parties, I had ZERO fear of being raped by a woman, when I hear of a mass killing or a serial killer on the loose or read about a drive-by shooting I immediately think of men as being the perps.

That doesn’t mean that it is not possible to be mugged, raped, and murdered by a woman, but if I am walking the streets at night I am on the look at for a man. I bet you are too, as well the men in this thread.

Is it wrong? At what point is profiling and generalizing acceptable? Is it wrong to point out that violent crime and rape sprees happening across Sweden, for example, are mostly committed by young men of the Muslim faith even though we all know NOT ALL Muslims are violent rapists?

Like I said earlier, parents don’t fear their sons getting raped by girls for a reason- that doesn’t mean it can’t or won’t happen- it’s just means that statistically speaking, it’s highly unlikely to happen. Following this line of thinking, I think it’s fair to say that blacks have a REASON to fear the police more than white guys as they are disproportionately targeted and imprisoned.

Sometimes demographics need to have those 'hyphenated' rights. At one point in our dark history blacks were slaves and considered subhuman and women couldn’t even vote. There are still folks in this country who think you should be in apron in the kitchen, and blacks should be out in the cotton fields.

 

[MelissaWV]

Sometimes demographics need to have those 'hyphenated' rights. At one point in our dark history blacks were slaves and considered subhuman and women couldn’t even vote. There are still folks in this country who think you should be in apron in the kitchen, and blacks should be out in the cotton fields.

When people tell you you're on the wrong forum, this is why.

I don't care if people think that. I certainly don't need the Government to give me special protection (disguised as "rights") to protect me from others being extra mean. That is way more demeaning than someone thinking I should be barefoot, pregnant, and getting them a sandwich.

 

[XNavyNuke]

Sometimes demographics need to have those 'hyphenated' rights. At one point in our dark history blacks were slaves and considered subhuman and women couldn’t even vote. There are still folks in this country who think you should be in apron in the kitchen, and blacks should be out in the cotton fields.

While you are disagreeing, I do hope that you recognize the elites who offer those hyphenated rights are the same ilk that look down their nose with disdain at women who choose to be homemakers and black farmers who choose to cultivate cotton and the evil tobacco.

XNN

 

[pessimist]

When people tell you you're on the wrong forum, this is why.

I already stated in my first thread here that I am of a liberal persuasion. I am just shocked I haven't even been warned yet on here- that is a personal record for a political forum.

I don't care if people think that.

I am willing to bet that you probably would if they had the power, and you had little to none.

I certainly don't need the Government to give me special protection (disguised as "rights") to protect me from others being extra mean. That is way more demeaning than someone thinking I should be barefoot, pregnant, and getting them a sandwich.

That's not what I meant though. I wasn't talking about protection from 'meanness'- I was saying that sometimes these special rights are necessary. Obviously we are at the point now where most are nothing but money-grabbing institutions of exploitation, but at one point they served a legitimate purpose.

Here let me ask you this: if there was never a womans rights movement, do you think you would have been granted the rights that you have today in the West?

 

[pessimist]

While you are disagreeing, I do hope that you recognize the elites who offer those hyphenated rights are the same ilk that look down their nose with disdain at women who choose to be homemakers and black farmers who choose to cultivate cotton and the evil tobacco.

XNN

The elites view the plebs as nothing but disposable labor and demographics to sell products to. Most of us are worthless to them.

 

[MelissaWV]

I already stated in my first thread here that I am of a liberal persuasion. I am just shocked I haven't even been warned yet on here- that is a personal record for a political forum.



I am willing to bet that you probably would if they had the power, and you had little to none.



That's not what I meant though. I wasn't talking about protection from 'meanness'- I was saying that sometimes these special rights are necessary. Obviously we are at the point now where most are nothing but money-grabbing institutions of exploitation, but at one point they served a legitimate purpose.

Here let me ask you this: if there was never a womans rights movement, do you think you would have been granted the rights that you have today in the West?

Yeah, Lord knows that being a female minority tossed into South Carolina in the 1980s, I have no idea what it is like for people to discriminate, nor when I would go out places with a blind boyfriend and people would tell me to "keep him away from breakables," or when people take a giant step back or make horrid assumptions and spread rumors when the issue of sexual orientation comes up. Oh and certainly trying to find shelter when you're homeless but not a single mom... that definitely did not expose me to people with power who discriminated.

You certainly have my number!

Let me ask you this: did phrasing it as "women's rights" help or hinder when it was associated entirely with the push towards Prohibition, which cost lives and maimed many? I would rather we were pushing for human rights, not tilting the scales here and there because of some misguided reparation attempt. The view of women as a social component has changed greatly in the West over time. The mandates and "social media" outcries are not quite as influential. I'd hope we would, as a species, get to the point where we value action and attribute over what's between someone's legs or where we feel their skin color lies on a spectrum. We're not there yet, though, so it's very helpful to know who feels I'm so inferior that I need special protection above and beyond my betters.

 

[William Tell]

The notion of 'special rights' is the opposite of equality.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

... there is nothing feminine about me,...

Lol why on earth would I choose a liberterian forum full of manly gun-lovers

I just have different brain wiring or something...

I just see the world differently.

Sometimes demographics need to have those 'hyphenated' rights.

...do you think you would have been granted the rights that you have today in the West?

You might be male biologically, but you don't seem to act like one. The idea that you think rights are somehow granted by government, elites, etc. is indirectly opposed to any notion of male responsibility and duty. Contemporary males have ceded so many of these tasks to extra-familial institutions that it's no wonder you start a thread about a topic that seems to confuse you. You foolishly associate beer swilling and pornography with--in your words--gun slinging. It's a sad commentary when the modern American male can't distinguish between the ability to protect one's own family with incessantly masturbating to contemporary fantasy.

No, there is nothing wrong with your brain's biology, but you certainly see the world differently. Your brain has simply been filled with others' confusion. The confusion leads nowhere except to continue to empower someone else to confer these "special rights" and other items that were your responsibility all along. Every time you invoke a third party, then you concede another responsibility. Someone already mentioned that women don't want ingratiating men. They want men willing to accept a responsible role.




..