- Purported "experts" lecturing military leaders on rape: "Even the victims are caught up in patriarchal myths that allow men to exploit women, the experts said. Was she raped, or was that something else? Wasn’t that guy her friend? Didn’t she make out with him? And why did she drink so much? These widely shared attitudes obscure rapists’ culpability." Amazing how women who cry 'rape' must always be believed (which means that the men they accuse are deemed to be rapists), but beyond that, if women don't cry rape, we must also assume vast numbers are in denial about being raped. This begs the question: if the women don't know they've been raped, why must we assume their "rapists" knew they were raping them? (Or is rape some sort of "secret" crime they never taught us about in law school that the victim and perpetrator don't even know is happening -- where the only ones who know about it are the radical feminists?) It is all such nonsense, but this proves, once again, that the gospel of rampant male predatory misconduct is alive and well among paid purveyors of this vile hysteria. This quotation accomplishes the seemingly impossible task of insulting two genders at once: it says that vast numbers of men are rapists-in-waiting, and that vast numbers of women are too stupid to know that they've been raped. Thankfully we have the radical feminists to elucidate male depravity for everyone.
- H/T to CJ for the links on the "studies": I am aware of the "studies" from Britain putting the rate of "false" rape claims in single digits and will be writing something in detail on this. Note that these are, of course, nothing but politicized screeds promulgated by persons financially interested in spreading the gospel of rampant male predatory misconduct. They are intended to furnish a "scientific" basis to effect changes in the law and police practices for the sole purpose of jacking up rape conviction rates. For now I'd say this: there are, in the UK, a small percentage of rape claims -- perhaps 8% -- that are very quickly dismissed, due usually to recantations. These are easily classified as "false" by any objective measure. On the other extreme, there are a small percentage of rape claims that are prosecuted and that lead to convictions. In between, the vast majority of rape claims are dismissed somewhere along the way because of insufficient evidence (which means there was not enough evidence to make out one or more elements of the crime, even if a trier of fact believed the evidence) or the accuser decides not to pursue the claim or the jury just doesn't buy it. To suggest that all of these rape claims that fall between the obviously false (due primarily to recantation) and those that end in conviction are, by necessity, "rapes," is dishonest in the extreme. For example, is it fair, or honest, to assume that every man exonerated of a rape charge by a jury is, by necessity, a rapist just because the charge wasn't classified as "false" early on? The question scarcely survives its statement. And what of the claims that never even actually got to a jury -- the vast majority that are dismissed earlier, often due to fatal infirmities in the case -- how on earth can we say that these should be considered "rapes"? The fact is, these studies assume rampant police incompetence, sexism and misogyny, which is absurd on its face and insulting to hard working law enforcement officers. Why is it not just as logical -- in fact more logical -- to assume that most of the dismissed rape claims in this vast middle ground were not actual rapes? And when you consider the interested and biased promulgators of these studies who have zero concern for the presumed innocent -- many of whom were, in fact, wrongly accused -- it is not very difficult to dismiss these vile studies out of hand.
- Good opinion: Alcohol should not be considered a date rape drug, but it plays a definite role in date rape. "But the problem isn’t with the alcohol itself, [professor of psychology Amanda] Price said. When it comes to the combination of sex and alcohol, the problem lies in communication between the partners involved. Understanding the nuances of nonverbal communication between the sexes is difficult enough sober, but when inhibitions are lowered with alcohol those lines become increasingly more blurred." This is the point for which our young people are in need of much better education. We have written here previously about the fact that women have greater regret following one-night stands. It would be helpful for both sexes to know that at the outset, and to understand that alcohol might numb or obscure these feelings of regret when the couple engage in sex, it will return after-the-fact. And such feelings account for a certain percentage of false rape claims. In addition, note this: "According to the Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine, a UK study showed that in a pool of 1,014 date rape situations involving alcohol, less than 2 percent of them involved any sedative meant to incapacitate a victim. That means that 98 percent of those cases could have been avoided had the people involved been more aware of both their levels of alcohol intake and of appropriate social interaction."
- Has anyone ever dared to contemplate how many young men would be in prison if the radical gender feminists were right about the prevalence of rape? It would be positively staggering, even assuming a fair number of serial rapists. Every family would be affected; every high school and every college would see male enrollments do a free fall. We should do a study on this, if only to illustrate the absurdity of the radical gender feminist position. Incredible numbers of young men and boys in prison, and the vast majority of the women they supposedly "raped" not even sure they were raped. Let's put it this way: the fact that incredible numbers of young men would be behind bars if the radical feminists were correct illustrates that there is something wrong with the radical feminists' thinking. As Heather MacDonald put it with regard to the alleged prevalence of college rape: "If the one-in-four statistic is correct—it is sometimes modified to “one-in-five to one-in-four”—campus rape represents a crime wave of unprecedented proportions. No crime, much less one as serious as rape, has a victimization rate remotely approaching 20 or 25 percent, even over many years. The 2006 violent crime rate in Detroit, one of the most violent cities in America, was 2,400 murders, rapes, robberies, and aggravated assaults per 100,000 inhabitants—a rate of 2.4 percent. The one-in-four statistic would mean that every year, millions of young women graduate who have suffered the most terrifying assault, short of murder, that a woman can experience. Such a crime wave would require nothing less than a state of emergency—Take Back the Night rallies and 24-hour hotlines would hardly be adequate to counter this tsunami of sexual violence. Admissions policies letting in tens of thousands of vicious criminals would require a complete revision, perhaps banning boys entirely."
- Another naive college student (a male) blames men, in general, for rape: "Rape prevention has been a 'women's issue' for too long. It is not a woman's responsibility to prevent rape. Men are generally the attackers, men are responsible . . . ." Surely, young man, you are not suggesting that all men are rapists? If you are suggesting that the innocent bear a responsibility to stop rape, fair enough, and we agree; but why do you limit the innocent who must be part of the solution to males? This sort of asymmetrical gender blaming is a manifestation of a young man learning too well the radical left doctrine that he is supposed to feel guilty for his supposed white male "privilege." Now this might strike some as politically incorrect (this entire blog strikes some as politically incorrect) but to suggest that innocent men, the vast majority of whom are not rapists, thank you very much, have any greater responsibility to prevent rape than innocent women is absurdly sexist and seeks to hold males as a gender responsible for a crime that only a tiny percentage of men commit (and, yes, even some women rape, too). It is condemning an entire gender based on the malefactions of a few. The fact of the matter is that women can prevent rape a hell of a lot easier than innocent men by taking steps to avoid putting themselves in danger with the bad guys; especially, stop the damn underage drinking and sex play with men you don't know. (And, yeah, we agree -- the bad guys are the ones at fault -- but that's not anything innocent men can stop.) But you see, it's much easier to scream "victim blaming" and to shame young college men into thinking they must be "part of the solution" than to actually work to reduce rape. (And by the way, it's no more "victim blaming" than when my grandmother used to warn me not to walk through certain "bad" neighborhoods at night. If I got beat up because I disobeyed her, she'd be the first to crow, "See? I told you!")
- It's happening: UK prosecutors are being urged via revised policy guidance from the Crown Prosecution Service to "robustly" challenge myths concerning rape victims in court. While some of the myths are appropriate to challenge, others are not; specifically, these: ". . . victims cry rape if they regret having sex or want revenge . . . ." While it is inappropriate to prosecute a particular case based on a generalized statement, it is quite another thing to label fact as a "myth." Women do lie about rape for both of these reasons, as explored in more detail elsewhere on this site.
- Another strident UK woman wants the war on rape beefed up: Among many other things, she writes: "Any complaint of rape should be aggressively pursued, and each victim given a case officer . . . ." Thus, she transmogrifies every accuser into a "victim." Which, of course, means that every male accused of rape is a presumed rapist, due process be damned. Ladies and gentlemen, we have returned to Salem, Massachusetts at the time of the witch hunts. Respectable newspapers print these grossly unfair statements, and the lies have acquired the aura of political correctness. What on earth have we come to?
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Posted by Archivist at Tuesday, March 24, 2009