'When I go on a date, I leave the man's contact info so the cops can find my body if I go missing'

I get some very, very, very angry emails from young women, chastising me for attacking feminism. The fact is, I do not attack feminism. I quote it. A long time ago I came to the happy conclusion that feminists' own words demonstrate the vacuity, the vapidness, and most of all, the misandry that their movement has come to embrace. If you need an example of how misandry has eaten away at the very core of whatever feminism might be in theory, look no further than this awful, awful blog post by a woman who pretends to write a column about how men should approach women in public: Guest Blogger Starling: Schrödinger’s Rapist: or a guy’s guide to approaching strange women without being maced -- found at http://kateharding.net/. In reality, it is nothing more than a showcase for her hatred of an entire gender. And please read the inane comments by the young and naive female devotees of this sort of hatred.

Let us not linger on it because we do not dignify young and naive feminist hate speech at this blog. We deal in facts, and this piece is the worst kind of feminist man-hating. Among other things, this feminist makes the following astounding assertion: "To begin with, we [women] would rather not be killed or otherwise violently assaulted. 'But wait! I don’t want that, either!' Well, no. But do you think about it all the time? Is preventing violent assault or murder part of your daily routine, rather than merely something you do when you venture into war zones? Because, for women, it is. When I go on a date, I always leave the man’s full name and contact information written next to my computer monitor. This is so the cops can find my body if I go missing." And: "So when you, a stranger, approach me, I have to ask myself: Will this man rape me?"

She proceeds to furnish statistics about how many women are raped. Yawn. As we've demonstrated time and time again on this blog, her statistics are utter nonsense, supported by flawed polls and feminist wet dreams. To assert that the standard feminist stats for the prevalence of rape are a moving target is an understatement. For example, their stats for the prevalence of rape are wildly -- I mean fantastically -- inconsistent with their own stats for alleged underreporting of rape. Hey, but why let facts stand in the way of a good feminist victim fetish? In any event, I'm not going to get into all that again in this post. The feminists are not interested in facts; they are interested in positing a politicized ideology, and facts only get in their way.

Let's get down to it. Here is the problem with this feminist's post: instead of talking about criminals versus innocent people, she justifies her misandry by rationalizing why it is acceptable to treat all men as rapists. It's perfectly acceptable in her world to equate "men" with criminals, and "women" with the innocents. Now, to understand how morally grotesque that is, just substitute "blacks," or "Hispanics," or "Jews" for men and watch the justifiable outcry. But, you see, in the feminist world, it is perfectly acceptable to unfairly stereotype -- prejudge -- all men and boys based on the misconduct of some males. In any other context, such bigotry is not tolerated. In matters of gender, it is embraced.

The milieu of rape hysteria in which we find ourselves stranded not only is terribly gender divisive because it encourages women to mistrust men, but it also enables false rape accusers to spread their lies with automatic credibility. This post is a manifestation of a culture where rape hysteria not only grows but flourishes. When women tell each other how rampant rape is and how evil the male gender is, garden variety sexual conduct is wrongly transmogrified into imagined rape, and innocent men and boys are victimized.

The fact that innocent men are more vulnerable to the criminals than innocent women is completely lost on this feminist -- but what can one expect, given the gynocentric lens through which women of her ilk view the world? Don't believe me that innocent men are more vulnerable? Check out J. Friedman, J. Valenti, Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power and A World Without Rape (2008) at 23: "Men are 150 percent more likely to be the victims of violent crimes than women are. . . . . Men are more likely to be victimized by a stranger (63 percent of violent victimizations) . . . ."

It is all such utter bullshit, a lengthy refutation is not worth our time. Her argument refutes itself by its stupidity, its hatred, its misandry.

And for you young women tempted to write to me: go spend several days reading this blog before you dare try. I'm going to print one in the next couple of days that I found especially entertaining for its sheer stupidity.

And I dare you to try to tell me how much good feminism has done. I dare you.