"Make Rape Legal" Men's Group Plans Events in 43 Countries for Saturday

[9Westy9]

You do realize we are talking about rape here? And these are not simply fratboys with a troll army. They do have the means to inspire the most vile anti-woman nonsense. Any movement or rabble of hate has the potential to grow.

The person in the OP is advocating for rape on private property to be made legal. aka a view. A very bad view, granted.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think this is unfair to stupid immature dufous fratboys, prolly most of whom are benign.

And it's still frieghtening and alarming when a herd of them chant "No means yes: Yes means anal." Disciplinary action is most appropriate.

 

[Revoltingest]

And it's still frieghtening and alarming when a herd of them chant "No means yes: Yes means anal." Disciplinary action is most appropriate.

It's unfair & unrealistic to attribute something like that to all.
This is just as not all feminists believe young women support Bernie because that's.....

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's unfair & unrealistic to attribute something like that to all.

I'm attributing it to those who have done it. It shouldn't have to be pointed out that of course there are plenty of frat boys who realize no means no, and that yes is not a "blanket consent," but I would not fault the universities at all for requiring those drunk on testosterone to take remedial ethics courses, and probably also make them seek counseling to learn the implications and consequences of such a mentality.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm attributing it to those who have done it. It shouldn't have to be pointed out that of course there are plenty of frat boys who realize no means no, and that yes is not a "blanket consent," but I would not fault the universities at all for requiring those drunk on testosterone to take remedial ethics courses, and probably also make them seek counseling to learn the implications and consequences of such a mentality.

This is going a bit far, considering I was making a joke about the fratboy comparison from another poster.
It was an opportunity to insult lawyers.
Please excuse my clumsiness & lack of clarity.

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

He does appear to hold some extreme views.



Personally I'm from the UK. Before I respond Id need you to define what you mean by "hate speech".

The UK does not have absolute free speech as I'm from the UK too and hate speech is banned. Part of the anti-hate speech law in the UK indicates that any speech that may harm, or distress a particular group, can be prosecuted and of course, if this guy is to be believed and he genuinely wants to "legalise rape", that I assume would distress over 50% of the British population and could lead to serious physical harm in the future.

Our government has banned people for far less than that. As have several governments across europe and if this idiot ever manages to pull off such an event, I hope he would be banned too.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

That Roosh guy is a psychopath. I follow that Return of Kings site on my feed reader and it's extremely horrible. Sadly, I think his views are more widespread than one would like to think, MRA or in just in general.

I don't see much man-hating from feminists these days. That was really a 2nd Wave radfem thing and associated with "political lesbianism" and lesbian separatism. Those types tend to be up in age and literally dying out. They have some younger converts, but they tend to be pretty marginalized. 3rd Wave feminism is currently the mainstream of feminism and tends to be more inclusive of everyone, or at least strives to be.

Political "lesbianism" in theory wasn't about promoting hate for men but in actuality it was the promotion of women loving women, strengthening self love and healing.

Take for instance Audre Lorde's definition of being a lesbian: "Strongly woman-identified women where love between women is open and possible, beyond physical in every way... the true feminist deals out of a lesbian consciousness whether or not she ever sleeps with women."

I have a huge gripe with calling it political lesbianism because it implies something that straight women do when they are bored and annoyed with men.

I prefer to call it female separatism and not erase the attraction that women can feel towards men or harm lesbians by implying you can be attracted to men and still be a lesbian.

I've recently discovered I'm most likely bisexual through connecting with other WOC WLW radical feminists and sharing our experiences of compulsory heterosexuality. Having a strong female support system and being celibate from men is very effective for some women in discovering their sexuality. Focusing my energy on connecting with and supporting other women has lead me to be far more aware of my romantic feelings towards them.

I'm glad to hear you have mixed feelings about Andrea. I do too, in regards to race.

 

[9Westy9]

The UK does not have absolute free speech as I'm from the UK too and hate speech is banned. Part of the anti-hate speech law in the UK indicates that any speech that may harm, or distress a particular group, can be prosecuted and of course, if this guy is to be believed and he genuinely wants to "legalise rape", that I assume would distress over 50% of the British population and could lead to serious physical harm in the future.

Our government has banned people for far less than that. As have several governments across europe and if this idiot ever manages to pull off such an event, I hope he would be banned too.

The part in bold needs backing up. We have anti hate speech laws where someone is being threatening or abusive, but I've never heard of our law being so broad that any speech that causes distress can be prosecuted.

The more important question though, is whether people should be banned merely for expressing their opinions. Should other people's feelings trump the rights of people to hold and express unpopular opinions?

 

[Kori]

I think a poll called: Should Women take Mixed Martial Arts? be a better idea for a thread.

 

[Thanda]

Political "lesbianism" in theory wasn't about promoting hate for men but in actuality it was the promotion of women loving women, strengthening self love and healing.

Take for instance Audre Lorde's definition of being a lesbian: "Strongly woman-identified women where love between women is open and possible, beyond physical in every way... the true feminist deals out of a lesbian consciousness whether or not she ever sleeps with women."

I have a huge gripe with calling it political lesbianism because it implies something that straight women do when they are bored and annoyed with men.

I prefer to call it female separatism and not erase the attraction that women can feel towards men or harm lesbians by implying you can be attracted to men and still be a lesbian.

I've recently discovered I'm most likely bisexual through connecting with other WOC WLW radical feminists and sharing our experiences of compulsory heterosexuality. Having a strong female support system and being celibate from men is very effective for some women in discovering their sexuality. Focusing my energy on connecting with and supporting other women has lead me to be far more aware of my romantic feelings towards them.

I'm glad to hear you have mixed feelings about Andrea. I do too, in regards to race.

Is it like MGTOW in the men's rights movement?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Is it like MGTOW in the men's rights movement?

I just explained what it is in my original message

 

[Thanda]

I just explained what it is in my original message

I'm just asking whether you think a comparison is apt.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

I'm just asking whether you think a comparison is apt.

Obviously not.
1)MGTW believe they are oppressed by women
2) apparenty they don't promote MLM and I suspect it's due to homophobia
3) I just read on wiki that some promote marrying Asian women as they are more submissive, is this true?

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

The part in bold needs backing up. We have anti hate speech laws where someone is being threatening or abusive, but I've never heard of our law being so broad that any speech that causes distress can be prosecuted.

The more important question though, is whether people should be banned merely for expressing their opinions. Should other people's feelings trump the rights of people to hold and express unpopular opinions?

You fail to understand, it's not simply holding an opinion but rather holding an opinion that may damage society and affect one group negatively, either psychologically or physically.

Do you think it would be ok for a religious leader to hold an opinion where people not of that particular religion are to be subjected to violence or ridicule?

I actually can not believe I am having a discussion on whether or not it's ok to hold pro-rape views...the "civilised" world eh?

 

[Thanda]

Obviously not.
1)MGTW believe they are oppressed by women
2) apparenty they don't promote MLM and I suspect it's due to homophobia
3) I just read on wiki that some promote marrying Asian women as they are more submissive, is this true?

1) Some. Others just feel their oppressed by a system that tries to screw them over (divorce courts for example).
2) No Idea what MLM means
3) Perhaps. I've actually mostly heard them saying they want to stay away from relationships with women especially marriage - not sure that they make exceptions

 

[Thanda]

You fail to understand, it's not simply holding an opinion but rather holding an opinion that may damage society and affect one group negatively, either psychologically or physically.

Do you think it would be ok for a religious leader to hold an opinion where people not of that particular religion are to be subjected to violence or ridicule?

I actually can not believe I am having a discussion on whether or not it's ok to hold pro-rape views...the "civilised" world eh?

I think the issue here is that while it may, for the moment, appear a clear cut and good thing to suppress this particular groups freedom of speech because it may distress some group, it may not be so clear cut in the future. And if we give our governments power to stop people from saying things that distress a group we may land up with unintended consequences. E.g. if a group said the law should be changed so that all convicted child rapists are executed - this would obviously distress a certain group of people and their families. But I suspect you would against that group being banned from speaking right?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

1) Some. Others just feel their oppressed by a system that tries to screw them over (divorce courts for example).
2) No Idea what MLM means
3) Perhaps. I've actually mostly heard them saying they want to stay away from relationships with women especially marriage - not sure that they make exceptions

MLM = men who love men
WLW = women who love women

When they say avoid relationships with women, do they just mean commitment or sex and commitment?

I'm all for men not having sex with women, however the comparision is still not apt.

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

I think the issue here is that while it may, for the moment, appear a clear cut and good thing to suppress this particular groups freedom of speech because it may distress some group, it may not be so clear cut in the future. And if we give our governments power to stop people from saying things that distress a group we may land up with unintended consequences. E.g. if a group said the law should be changed so that all convicted child rapists are executed - this would obviously distress a certain group of people and their families. But I suspect you would against that group being banned from speaking right?

Advocating a change in law against violent offenders is not hate crime. What this particular group is doing is advocating that it is ok to rape a woman, to take her against her will, to hurt her, to damage her both physically and mentally and in case you did not notice, rape is illegal and a morally repulsive act that can destroy entire societies (take a look at the Congo or Sierra Leone).

Speaking about changes in the law is a very different matter in itself. But I will not be arguing the merits of rape with you any more, it's just ridiculous.

Edit: You also failed to answer my question on whether or not religious extremists should be allowed to promote violence.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

1) Some. Others just feel their oppressed by a system that tries to screw them over (divorce courts for example).
2) No Idea what MLM means
3) Perhaps. I've actually mostly heard them saying they want to stay away from relationships with women especially marriage - not sure that they make exceptions

So I went on the MGTW website and they do in fact promote sex with women without commitment, so obviously there is no comparision.

 

[Thanda]

Advocating a change in law against violent offenders is not hate crime. What this particular group is doing is advocating that it is ok to rape a woman, to take her against her will, to hurt her, to damage her both physically and mentally and in case you did not notice, rape is illegal and a morally repulsive act that can destroy entire societies (take a look at the Congo or Sierra Leone).

Speaking about changes in the law is a very different matter in itself. But I will not be arguing the merits of rape with you any more, it's just ridiculous.

Edit: You also failed to answer my question on whether or not religious extremists should be allowed to promote violence.

They are advocating for a change in law. They are not advocating for people to do it while it is still illegal. That what they are asking for is morally repulsive is not in question. What is in question is whether or not they should have a right to ask for it.

If a religion asks that they be given a legal right to do violence to other groups, that is up to them. What they are asking for is morally repulsive but their right to ask for it is not.