I know nothing about Michael Daly, a writer for the New York Daily News, aside from the article I cite here, but make no mistake, he is one of radical feminism's useful idiots. Here is what he wrote about the falsely accused men in the Hofstra rape case:
"The five were freed after getting the good scare that they well deserved." Read the whole wretched thing here.
Does the name Catherine Comins come to mind? In this 1991 Time Magazine article, Comins, then a vice president at Vassar, discussed men who are victimized by false allegations of rape: "Comins argues that men who are unjustly accused can sometimes gain from the experience. 'They have a lot of pain, but it is not a pain that I would necessarily have spared them.'"
Why did Daly conclude the young men deserved the good scare?
"No young woman would consent to having sex with five guys in a bathroom unless she was seriously troubled.
"Any guy with even a trace of gentleman would have told everyone to leave this 18-year-old Hofstra freshman alone, then walked her to her room and left her in the care of a female friend or roommate.
. . . .
"I have two daughters. I do not for a minute think the five deserved to go away for a crime they did not commit. I also do not think that what they did do is even remotely acceptable.
. . . .
"These five may not be guilty, but that does not make them innocent.
They should stop their whimpering and apologize for acting like mutts. "
____________________________________________
Did you get that? The victims should apologize -- to their false accuser.
First, I don't know about you, but whenever I read a story about rape written by a man who proudly proclaims he has daughters, I can predict exactly where it's headed. The implication typically is that the darling girls need to be protected from the dreaded male predators, and with all the chivalry the writer can muster, he often proclaims that if one of "them" dared to hurt his princesses . . . well, you know the rest. Sometimes castration and medieval tortures figure into it.
Second, Daly's misplaced anger at the young men for failing to somehow know that a girl who openly consents to having sex with several guys must be troubled -- because, I suppose, that's what he, as a father of girls, believes about her -- is supported by no evidence whatsoever. It is based solely on Michael Daly's serene, chivalrous ipse dixit. He thinks it was a terrible choice, so that means the young men must have known she was "seriously troubled."
Third, Daly's tirade accomplishes the seemingly impossible task of insulting two genders at one time: First, it is insults women because it is sexist in the extreme, implying that they are either too stupid or too weak to act as free moral agents capable of making even fantastically dumb choices when it comes to sex, and that they need their chivalrous guardian angel, Michael Daly, to protect them from the male evildoers. Second, it insults men, because it suggests that when men and women engage in consensual, albeit fantastically stupid sex, the men are predators, the women are innocent victims, and that later, when the women try to wrongly destroy the mens' lives with rape lies, the men should apologize to her. The misandry at work here is breathtaking.
Guess what, Michael? If a woman wants to have sex with one, two or five guys, that's her right. And you might be astounded to know that they're doing it. On college campuses all across America, they're getting drunk -- but not drunk enough to preclude valid consent -- and having casual, random sex, sometimes with multiple partners.
Yes, it's stupid on multiple levels. Do I approve? I personally think it's revolting. Truth be told, I don't approve of premarital sex, much less casual hook-up sex among complete strangers. How's that for old-fashioned? And I don't even have to hide behind my daughters to say it.
But none of that changes the fact that Michael Daly has blamed the victims in a way that would have gotten him fired if he had dared blame an alleged rape victim for "asking for it."
Once again, one of radical feminism's useful idiots -- a chivalrous male -- is among those hurting the cause of the falsely accused the most.
You owe the young men -- the victims -- an apology, Daly.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
50 comments:
Amazing how this man-hating piece of shit manages to cling to feminist stereotypes about male power -- THEY are responsible for the bathroom sex, not HER, never HER -- even as he admits that she needs to be convicted for her actions!
Even this victim-blaming, slut-shaming moron understands that false rape accusations are a serious problem. They man-haters can no longer deny that this bullshit is going on.
I don't know about you, but whenever I read something written about rape by a man who proudly proclaims he has daughters, I can predict exactly where it's headed.
I had just read that piece of drivel and keyed in on exactly the same things you did. So many of these "daddys" simply refuse to even acknowledge the fact that their "little girls" are in fact "young women" who may not be as completely asexual as daddy wishfully thinks she is.
In another discussion on this event someone observed that women/feminists are so fond of claiming that women mature faster than men (or girls faster than boys), so in this case the "more mature woman" is actually more culpable than the "less mature men." Strange how nineteen year old men are somehow required to have the finely tuned perceptions of trained mental health professionals and know full well that a willingness to have sex with them was evidence of being severely mentally troubled. Of course, that is the default position of chivalrists - they all know that women are simply devoid of any and all sexual feelings or desires.
As you said, he managed to insult both sexes at once, infantilize the woman, and place on the young men expectations which can only be described as insane.
However, I am sure the victimist brigade will be here shortly to spin their convoluted excuses as to why such a "strong, independent, empowered" woman who has every right to expect to be president or Secretary of State some day, also has the right to be treated with kid gloves like an emotionally disturbed child if that is to her benefit.
Great job you are doing with this case!!! Keep on it. This could turn out to be one more turning point like the whole Duke rape hoax.
Let's recap Michael Daly's position:
1 - False accusations of rape are a terrible crime that must be punished, not because of the harm inflicted on the victims but because of the harm done to society.
2 - He doesn't think for one minute that men who haven't raped should go to prison for rape.
3 - However, false rape accusations are still a wonderful way to discourage men from having gangbangs in bathrooms, and the victims should shut the fuck up about it and accept being labelled as rapists for the rest of their lives because they are still lowlifes who had promiscuous sex, which she only had the sex because she was "obviously troubled."
It sure is hard supporting jail for false accusers while continuing to be a chivalristic asshole, isn't it?
I wonder Michael Daly would tell his little baby daughters to shut the fuck up about being raped because they were behaving like sluts and deserved the public humiliation, even if their attackers deserved prison for their crimes. That's what his argument amounts to, only turned around.
This illustrates our biggest problem: men are far more divided than women. We're divided by race, by religion, by partisan politics, by social roles (fathers/bachelors).
We're all in the same boat, and all we do when we attack each other is help the man-haters to sink it. The low social status of fathers and contempt for the falsely accused are related.
Step 1 to rebuilding a male-friendly society: stop judging other men.
we help the man-bashers to sink the boat.
The last line should have been deleted.
A tiny bit of progress -
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090917/ap_on_re_us/us_hofstra_rape_hoax
The word HOAX is actually being used to describe this event. Even by such a bastion of PC as Yahoo.
Maybe there needs to be a companion blog to this one -
The Rape Hoax, 'Rape Epidemic' Hoax, and 'Rape Culture' Hoax Society. ;)
I don't like the term. The Loch Ness Monster was a hoax. This was a fraud.
Michael Daly: "Sex is bad, m'kay?"
A hoax is a deliberate attempt to deceive or trick an audience into believing, or accepting, that something is real, when the hoaxster knows it is not; or that something is true, when it is false.
"Hoax" works for me.
"Hoax" sounds like a harmless practical joke to me.
Maybe "scam" would be a better word?
Even "fraud" is too weak. This was the attempted murder of five young men.
Anon @ 3.20
Spot on my man, I tried to make this point here a few weeks ago.
"false rape" is the decaff, diet, lite, kiddie, PC version of the crime in question.
The crime in question is essentially attempted murder.
You may still be alive, but they have tried to take away from you everything you were, have, and will be.
In my book that is murder.
Here's another thing: these idiots who are excusing her behavior by saying that she's crazy (talk about a nutty-slutty defense!) haven't explained how she could have been such a bright, successful student if she was so messed up psychologically. She was a very bright girl from a good home; no sign of being out of control.
This was a deliberate act committed by a grown woman who knew what she was doing. There is such a thing as pure evil and she is an example of it.
She wanted to rape five men and get away with it. It was a power trip. In no way is she a helpless victim.
just out of curiosity, what does ipse dixit mean?
It refers to a statement that is accepted without proof.
"Ipse dixit is a Latin phrase meaning "he himself said it." The term labels a statement asserted but not proved, to be accepted on faith."
Daly really needs to wake up to what is going on on college campuses these days. Here is an interesting article about "Slutty Feminism" -
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/dec/31/20051231-095711-3227r/
"a new wave of feminism: Slut feminism, where the new test of gender equality is how openly promiscuous a woman can be without judgment or penalty."
Maybe there are more "seriously disturbed young women" on college campuses than most people, particularly Daly and other blind chivalrists, realize.
Uh... so you believe that consensual gang rape is acceptable, and that these poor maligned boys did nothing disgusting?
The blame definitely falls on the woman. Afterall, it was "she" who wanted sex and allowed them access to her body.
But wait ... What male species are you discussing here? Are we referring to the logical human male species, capable of exercising moral judgement; or, are we referring to a pack of wild animals that are in no way responsible for their own actions, and must be hauled off and euthanized in order to protect society?
"Uh... so you believe that consensual gang rape is acceptable, and that these poor maligned boys did nothing disgusting?"
What in FUCK are you talking about? "Consensual GANG RAPE"? THERE IS NO SUCH THING.
"Are we referring to the logical human male species, capable of exercising moral judgement; or, are we referring to a pack of wild animals that are in no way responsible for their own actions, and must be hauled off and euthanized in order to protect society?"
You need to go walk around the block a few times and get some fresh air. This is a site about FALSE RAPE CLAIMS. That's what happened at Hofstra. Did you even READ my post, genius? I'm not repeating it here.
By the way, I don't need you on here saying fucking stupid things to jack up my readership. It's already through the roof.
the 3:49 said:
"The crime in question is essentially attempted murder.
You may still be alive, but they have tried to take away from you everything you were, have, and will be. In my book that is murder."
That's murder in my book too. You have just described how a brutal rape can effect the remainder of a rape victim's life.
Thank you.
I gave him a stern typeface lashing in the comments section.
"I gave him a stern typeface lashing in the comments section."
Kindly explain.
You have just described how a brutal rape can effect the remainder of a rape victim's life.
But, that is only true if the victim actually is brutally raped. This is about a case where the woman wasn't.
People like you who deny that there is any difference between someone who actually was raped and someone who was not actually raped are doing more to destroy the credibility of rape victims than anyone else.
Unless your goal is to inspire a majority of men to become monks, it is necesary to at least admit that there is some possibility of normal, non-criminal, sexual relations.
For the rest of the readers, please don't mind my explosion at Atom. He said:
"So you believe that consensual gang rape is acceptable . . . "
It's not rape if it's consensual. And:
". . . and that these poor maligned boys did nothing disgusting?" After I just got done calling revolting.
I am so sick of being stereotyped -- by the feminists, and by people of my own gender.
Isn't "consensual gang rape" something of a contradiction in terms?
The blame definitely falls on the woman. Afterall, it was "she" who wanted sex and allowed them access to her body.
"Bring 'em along. It'll be hot."
- Danmell Ndonye
Apparently six folk engaged in this particular activity. Consensually. No laws were broken. Nobody got hurt.
Until afterwards.
When one girl decided her reputation was more important than the lives, reputations and freedom of five others.
But wait ... What male species are you discussing here? Are we referring to the logical human male species, capable of exercising moral judgement; or, are we referring to a pack of wild animals that are in no way responsible for their own actions, and must be hauled off and euthanized in order to protect society?
Are you actually advocating execution for engaging in group sex? And only for male participants? How very rational of you.
Anon at 7:05 said: "People like you who deny that there is any difference between someone who actually was raped and someone who was not actually raped are doing more to destroy the credibility of rape victims than anyone else. Unless your goal is to inspire a majority of men to become monks, it is necesary to at least admit that there is some possibility of normal, non-criminal, sexual relations."
Absolutely!
The nitwits who want to use Hofstra as an occasion to raise awareness about women being raped do damage to the cause of raising awareness about rape. They trivialize rape, and they make a lot of people better understand what I've spent about 1,000 posts on this site trying to say.
Apparently six folk engaged in this particular activity.
One committed a crime.
The other five are being treated as criminals.
These useful idiots should be held accountable to the men and fathers they are spreading inflammatory rhetoric about.
"These useful idiots should be held accountable to the men and fathers they are spreading inflammatory rhetoric about."
Yes, it is slander of an entire gender.
Atom...There was no gang rape here, and the girl that wanted to gang bang five guys, is just as much the pig (or more)..than the guys that participated.
Gender raunch culture is manufacturing these "liberated" girls...And it's willfully naive eunuch males like yer self that just can't accept that gender raunch culture is manufacturing hog girls that do this stuff.
The nitwits who want to use Hofstra as an occasion to raise awareness about women being raped do damage to the cause of raising awareness about rape. They trivialize rape, and they make a lot of people better understand what I've spent about 1,000 posts on this site trying to say.
There is another significant aspect to it as well. If there is no distinction between rape and non-rape, then the only non-criminal option for a man is to follow a monastic existance. The unfortunate reality for women is that the men who will have the easiest time doing this are the ones who are most intelligent and highly socialized. Thus, by driving those men away from women, it assures that women will have only an ever-increasing percentage of brutes in their pool of potential partners.
I know that all desire or fondness I once had for women has been destroyed by a combination of this sort of exploitive divisive rhetoric and the attempted criminalization of a natural desire - of both men and women, despite what they claim. They are completely safe from being victimized by me, and they are also completely safe from every being helped or taken care of by me.
To this day, I do not see ordinary sexual relations between men and women as being such a horrible thing, but I am willing to take women's word for it that they do. That will never translate into actually believing that they are terribly victimized - just that it appears that men and women have nothing to offer each other that the other wants.
Alright already, I stand corrected! The act describes "group sex" -- not rape.
We already KNOW the girl is a pig and a liar. I tried to point out also that some men are ruled by their almighty penis, and not their brain.
Atom -- agreed. I just don't understand why we must use this CRIME as the occasion to kick the victims.
There are multiple parties at fault here.
The only one actually committing a crime - and the one to whom the entire fault can be leveled - is the false accuser.
The next group of individuals behaving reprehensibly are the police who threw these guys in prison as if guilty, with no prior investigation that would have shown easily that the accusation was probably baseless.
The District Attorney, who hasn't laid charges where they belong, is derelict of duty and should be fired. Fortunately, the next election may do that.
The press printed these guys faces under the banner of 'Rapists' and circulated it publicly, with no concern for the truth.
Then there are the guys like Michael Daly and all the other apologists for false rape accusations, who don't seem to have any sense of perspective, or even know what a crime or indecency is.
And finally, the boys themselves could be advised that having group sex is never wise, because if the girl pulls out an accusatory finger, all the morons in the world will side with her.
But of all these groups, these boys are the most guilt-free, they should be catching the least flak, and they have already been castigated enough, far beyond anything commensurate with what they have done.
To blame them for anything any more, and not go after the other much worse parties, is perverse. It surpasses perverse. It's sick to the core.
Because they used poor judgement and deserve a swift kick. Betcha they'll think twice before having another multiple romp.
Okay, i've made my point, so I'll shush up.
Atom said...
That's murder in my book too. You have just described how a brutal rape can effect the remainder of a rape victim's life.
I've seen close up the impact of rape on many, many victims. Too many!
I'll correct your comment by stating that the level of violence involved in an actual rape is not necessarily a pointer to how much impact it will have on it's victim in the long term. The less, or non, violent rape is often more likely to create a greater pattern of guilt and shame in the victim.
But this case involves no rape Atom.
Something for you to ponder...
Some, or all, of the young men you have advocated killing are likely to suffer very similar symptoms to those of actual rape victims in years to come. Personally, as a rape survivor and advocate for other such, I wouldn't wish that upon anybody.
"Because they used poor judgement and deserve a swift kick. Betcha they'll think twice before having another multiple romp.
Okay, i've made my point, so I'll shush up."
The point you've just made is that you choose not to blame the police, the DA, the media and false rape apologists. You make no special attempt to denounce her that provoked this whole business.
But you do think it worth your trouble to have yet another go at those who have already been unfairly pilloried.
People like you are part of this problem. The moral vacuum in your taunts is far greater than any group sex participant.
Anon at 8:40: well said
Anon at 8:40: well said
Wholeheartedly agree.
If there is one thing this whole dialogue has convinced me of, it is that I will never touch another woman as long as I live. They can have the absolute control over the situation they desire with their vibrators, but apparently the concept that men are human beings, too, (not animals) whose perspective must be considered in a relationship - even if it is different from theirs - is a completely alien idea to these women.
Betcha they'll think twice before having another multiple romp.
They may think twice before ever having anything to do with a woman again. And, having thought twice, they might decide it just isn't worth the risk and the agony.
But wait ... What male species are you discussing here? Are we referring to the logical human male species, capable of exercising moral judgement; or, are we referring to a pack of wild animals that are in no way responsible for their own actions, and must be hauled off and euthanized in order to protect society?
*************
Wow, did you escape to Argentina after the Reich collapsed? What a vile remark.
And just so that everybody understands this, you do not need to participate in a wild orgy with a strange woman or even have sex with a woman to be falsely accused of rape. I'm sick and tired of conservative assholes using this as an opportunity to pontificate about the evils of consensual sex, and insisting that the boys are somehow horrible sinners who got what was coming to them. Anyone with any moral sense whatsoever would understand why THIS TERRIBLE CRIME is in no way comparable to fooling around in a bathroom, no matter what your puritanical can't-get-laid intuition tells you.
Anon at 9:48: notice that she's the one who has sex done TO her. Everyone -- conservatives, feminists -- assume she's not empowered, she's passive and not really interested in sex.
Unbelievable.
"I tried to point out also that some men are ruled by their almighty penis, and not their brain."
What does that have to do with this board? The more I read your posts, the more I wonder what the heck you are hanging around here for.
Hello everyone,
I'm back. And it couldn't be at a better time. Pierce, you've knocked this one out of the park.
Atom,
Honestly, the way to speak of these young men, is considered a hate crime in today's P.C. society.
I really think you need to step back and realize that women are just as likely to be scum, as men are, and when they act like criminals, they should be treated like criminals.
Michael Daly is an idiot. FYI Pierce, I get the feeling that Real Men Define Themselves is the same as the person on the link that left a comment under the name definingmanhood.
I would recommend all reading here leave a comment for Mr. Daly on just how backward his views are (respectfully please).
"Because they used poor judgement and deserve a swift kick. Betcha they'll think twice before having another multiple romp."
Excuse me, but what exactly did these men do wrong?
They were invited to have sex with a woman,by the woman, and they accepted.
Why exactly do they deserve "a swift kick"?
For being male? For being naive enough to think that yes means "yes" or that anything means what it's supposed to mean when a woman says it? Explain this one to me.
"No young woman would consent to having sex with five guys in a bathroom unless she was seriously troubled."
This implies either that the young men themselves are "troubled" or that males who indulge in group sex are just dogs in a rut - from the rest of the article i think its safe to say it is meant to imply the latter.Bloody typical.
I hope these young men get the best lawyer they can find and sue her arse off.
THIS IS A PRODUCT OF FEMINISM.
The comment about what no young woman in her right mind would do is also demeaning to women, implying that they are less capable of making their own choices.
This "young woman" neither deserves nor requires a leash with a daddy attached to it -- she just needs a conscience, and to be held accountable for her actions in exactly the same way that a man would be held accountable in her place, if he had committed a crime of equal severity.
Post a Comment