• SJW Tropes Against Humanity: Rape, a Necessary Evil

    Yes, I think rape is evil.  And no, I do not think it is remotely necessary—except to the purveyors of rape-culture ideology, who find it absolutely indispensable.  And no again, I do not mean they need to be raped.

    I mean that rape is a central pillar of radical feminist dogma.  According to the radfem revelation, we in the Western democracies live in a Stepford-style patriarchy where sexual violence is men’s greatest weapon for subjugating women, crushing our minds by terrorizing our bodies; where rape is normalized and winked at; where boy children are taught to be sexually entitled, where girl children are raised to be fucktoys.  In short, we are told we live in a rape culture.

    So crucial is rape to the radfems’ schtick, that they would need to invent something like it if it did not already exist.   Indeed, as rates of sexual assault fall dramatically in the West, the SJW axis has had to reset the boundaries of rape, almost as if there was not enough of it going around to sustain their model. At the same time, its scope has been narrowed to include only women as victims and men as perpetrators, which is a dishonest simplification of a complex  phenomenon.  In the process of pushing this ideology, they harm not only men (which they might not regard as a problem, as it would be “punching up”), but also the women they claim to be championing.

    We do not live in a rape culture.  We live in a culture beset by yet another divisive and fast-spreading religious ideology, complete with revealed truths and sacred mantras, martyrs and demons, moral crusades and moral panics.  Like those of any religion, its truths are self-referential and unfalsifiable, and have as much to do with the reality of Western society as Genesis has to do with evolutionary biology.  And of course, it has its own version of blasphemy, which I have already committed by being skeptical of rape culture in the first place.  But, oh, there are so many other doctrines to blaspheme!  Here are just a few:

     

    Sacred Mantra: Don’t teach girls to avoid rape; teach men not to rape.

    Blasphemy: The vast majority of men already know perfectly well not to rape, and anyway have been taught from toddlerhood that hurting girls is bad.  The vast majority of men take about as dim a view of rape as most women do, regarding the act as abhorrent, and rapists as despicable. Most of the approximately 4-6% of men who do commit sexual assault will not be reached or changed by anti-rape education because they do not give a fuck about what society thinks of them: sociopaths and sexual predators come to mind.  It’s like saying I need to train the local poodles not to eat my cats, because there are coyotes in the neighbourhood.  What makes more sense is to take precautions against the coyotes.   See below.

     

    Sacred Mantra: Teaching women to defend themselves or take precautions against assault amounts to “victim blaming.”  “A woman should be able to walk stark naked down Main Street and not be raped.”  She should have the right to wear exactly what she feels like, no matter how sexy or revealing, and not be raped.  She should have the right to drink herself blotto in a singles bar, and not be raped. She should have the right to go wherever she pleases, even alone down the darkest alley in the dead of night, and not be raped.

    Blasphemy:  There are no such rights.  Everybody, of whatever gender, needs to take some responsibility for their own safety.  Sexual predators, indeed, are only one item on a menu of lurking hazards. A burly young man would be an idiot to go down some dark alleys at night, so why should a woman claim it as a right?  (In fact, although violence against women holds centre stage, men are the ones who are far more at risk.) The behaviours cited above, to my mind, boil down to a demand for the right to make foolish choices without suffering consequences.

    This is absolutely not to say that a woman who is sexually assaulted is at fault—terrible things can happen to anyone, no matter how careful they are; and being raped is a disproportionately high price to pay for doing something stupid or naive.  Rather, the point is that exercising common sense can substantially reduce one’s chances of becoming a crime statistic. Why should recognizing that simple truth be considered “victim-blaming?” We should be teaching sensible precautions to both our daughters and our sons, not unrealistic expectations about how the world would treat them in a radfem utopia.  Ironically, this sacred mantra disempowers women, removes their agency, and reduces them to objects whose sexual safety is in the hands of others: the men who are “taught not to rape.”  See above.

     

    Sacred Mantra: Women live in fear, since every man they encounter is a potential rapist (Schrödinger’s Rapist). No man can understand the burden of fear under which women daily suffer.

    Blasphemy:  Fear of men is another indispensable tool of rape-culture ideology.  At one stroke, it seeks to demonize half of society, and turn the rest into quaking victims, flinching at every male-shaped shadow.  While paying lip service to the truth that not all men are rapists, it foments mistrust of all men anyway: our fathers, brothers, sons, lovers, husbands.  The truth is, there are times and places where a human of any gender would be wise to be afraid; women do not have a monopoly on either fear or risk.  But be honest, sisters: do we really walk around under a burden of fear so crushing and pervasive that no man could possibly imagine it? Are we really that timid and fragile?

    Some people do live in genuine fear—of abusers in their lives, of dark shadows in their neighbourhoods. We should not trivialize their experience by equating it with stupid radfem-generated collywobbles.

     

    Sacred Mantra: Believe the victim.

    Blasphemy: This is, perhaps, the rape-culture doctrine inscribed in the largest letters on the radfem stone tablets.  To question a woman’s claim that she has been sexually assaulted is held to be the deadly sin of rape apology, even a secondary rape.  To ask for evidence is rape apology.  To consider context is rape apology.  Any response except unconditional belief for the accuser and vilification for the accused is rape apology.  But it is fallacious in the very way it is framed: it assumes that the accuser is indeed a victim.  It is also a clear violation of the presumption of innocence, and a potential life-wrecker for those who are falsely accused.  In the rape-culture world, this does not matter.  In the real world, it is not only unjust, it is the thin edge of the wedge.

     

    Sacred Truth: Rape is devastation.  There is nothing worse than rape that can happen to a woman—it is literally a fate worse than death, a trauma from which one can never fully recover.  Survivors—or even “potential survivors” (women who have not been raped, but fear they might be eventually)—require special deference, support, safe spaces, and unconditional belief, and above all must never, ever be triggered.

    Blasphemy: Some victims are devastated; others are not.  There is a wide range of reactions to rape and sexual assault, from sustaining horrific emotional damage right down to being no more than disgusted or pissed off.  Some women whose experience would qualify as rape under the very elastic current radfem definitions do not even consider themselves to have been raped.  And by the way, many of us can think of a good many things we would consider to be worse, much worse, than being raped.

    However, rape-culture ideology seeks to force all women who experience sexual assault into a uniform mold of victim/survivor – to tell them how damaged they are obliged to feel, to keep the trauma going, even to implant trauma that may not have arisen in the first place.  This harms women.  What better way is there to damage someone permanently than to tell her she can never recover?

     

    Sacred Mantra: Rape is about power, not sex.

    Blasphemy: Sometimes it’s about power—sometimes it’s just about sex.  Other times it may be about revenge, mixed signals, or failures in communication, particularly as the definition has expanded to include contacts that were honestly perceived as consensual at the time.  Sexual assault is a complex behaviour with a whole range of proximate causes.

    Why is this important?  Because according to rape-culture doctrine, rape is always a political act that serves to put women in their place.  Every rapist, from the serial shit who slips rohypnol into his date’s drink, to the fumbling teenager with screaming hormones in the back seat of his car, is apparently using his penis as a weapon to enforce rape culture and deepen the oppression of women.  That is insane.  Really—to paraphrase Freud—sometimes a penis is just a penis.

     

    There are societies in the world where sexual assault is normalized, and victims are not so much blamed as beaten half to death.  That, if you like, is closer to what a true rape culture might look like.  But we in the West—coddled, cosseted, and protected by laws, social norms, and a general repugnance for rapists that is shared by all genders—should recognize “rape culture” for the divisive bullshit it is, and woman up.

    Next: Patriarchy

    Category: FeaturedSecularism

    Article by: Rebecca Bradley

    3 Pingbacks/Trackbacks

    22 comments

    1. That was a veritable clinic in sensible thinking…now all we need is an easily transmissible virus that can instill the same sort of rational mindset…

    2. Teaching women to defend themselves or take precautions against assault amounts to “victim blaming.”

      I think there’s some nuance to this one. I don’t think the radfems are necessarily saying that one shouldn’t take precautions in a risky situation (well, some might go that far). I think their main complaint is that women are too often blamed for their assaults because they didn’t take proper precautions (whatever those precautions might be). …as if the lack of taking precautions somehow absolves the perpetrator of any wrong doing towards their victim. I think this is the sort of thing they are getting at, but maybe I’m wrong.

      1. If it were as nuanced as that, I’d have less of a problem with it. But google “Nia Sanchez,” for example, the beauty queen with a black belt, who was piled on by feminists for daring to suggest that learning self-defence and self-confidence would provide a measure of protection against rape. I’ve seen it again and again on comment threads at (for example) FreethoughtBlogs, where anyone with the temerity to suggest teaching girls some commonsense precautions for their own safety was dogpiled for being a rape-apologist. It really is as bad as that. 🙁

      2. Here’s a specific example of just how nuanced some of these views are, courtesy of of Ophelia Benson.

        http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/2014/03/avoid-isolated-areas-dont-carry-bags-be-aware-of-your-surroundings/

        In this post, Benson complains about the injustice of publishing tips for avoiding dangerous situations, and closes with the apparently serious suggestion that this list “just boils down to telling women to stay inside, or if they must go out, act like a Jew in 1943 Warsaw nipping out for a package of cigarettes.”

        This list, by the way, was published by the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN). According to Wikipedia, RAINN is an “American anti-sexual assault organization, the largest in the United States. RAINN operates the National Sexual Assault Hotline and carries out programs to prevent sexual assault, help victims, and to ensure that rapists are brought to justice.”

    3. I find the strangest things while cleaning up old tabs. 😛

      I mean that rape is a central pillar of radical feminist dogma.

      Then you should have no problem citing sources for your definition. And yet:

      According to the radfem revelation, we in the Western democracies live in a Stepford-style patriarchy where sexual violence is men’s greatest weapon for subjugating women, crushing our minds by terrorizing our bodies; where rape is normalized and winked at; where boy children are taught to be sexually entitled, where girl children are raised to be fucktoys. In short, we are told we live in a rape culture.

      That’s nothing but condensed anti-feminist talking points, devoid of reference and obviously not what any feminist would believe. In fact, you make the same arguments as some fundamentalist Christians.

      BarbWire content editor and columnist Gina Miller was the guest this weekend on “Mission America,” where she and host Linda Harvey took a break from attacking the LGBT community to discuss campus sexual assaults, for which they blame feminism for launching a “war on white males.”

      Miller said feminists, and all liberals, “have this hatred for males, especially white males.”

      “There is this palpable hatred for men,” she said. “Actual rape is a terrible thing and no one is saying that these men are not accountable but I at the same time hold women responsible for when they put themselves, present themselves in slutty attire at a drunken frat party and then expect these frat boys to behave like gentlemen. It’s nonsense.” [1]

      Do something as trivial as plunking “rape culture” into a search engine, though, and your definition rapidly unravels. I prefer to go to the source, though, and quote academic papers.

      The second perspective, the “rape culture” approach, grew out of second wave feminism (Brownmiller 1975; Buchward, Fletcher, and Roth 1993; Lottes 1997; Russell 1975; Schwartz and DeKeseredy 1997). In this perspective, sexual assault is seen as a consequence of widespread belief in “rape myths,” or ideas about the nature of men, women, sexuality, and consent that create an environment conducive to rape. For example, men’s disrespectful treatment of women is normalized by the idea that men are naturally sexually aggressive. Similarly, the belief that women “ask for it” shifts responsibility from predators to victims (Herman 1989; O’Sullivan 1993).[2]

      In 1975, sociologist Diana Russell published
      “The Politics of Rape: The Victim’s Perspective, a groundbreaking work not only for its methodological sophistication, but because it included women’s voices in each of its 22 chapters. In part, these testimonials helped support anti-rape ideology, a movement to combat rape myths and rape acceptance in what was increasingly characterized as an extant “rape culture” by radical feminists. The aforementioned myth of the Black rapist was just one of many myths that surrounded rape, most of which had to do with justifying or explaining rape using both sexist and racist stereotypes and beliefs [3]

      That’s much more reasonable. But because your description has only a passing resemblance to actual feminist views, this entire article is rendered worthless. You don’t even realize that, if everything but your definition was true, you just validated the existence of rape culture!

      1. “Rape culture” is a cloud of myths within our culture that make it easier to get away with sexual assault.
      2. Feminazis promote all sorts of myths about sexual assault in support of their cult.
      3. Through strategic maneuvers, they’ve gained an inordinate amount of control over culture and made their ideas widespread.
      4. By promoting myths and drumming up false positives, feminazis are making it tougher to find “real rapists.”
      5. Ergo, “rape culture” exists.

      The entire article is so full of straw, I could spend weeks picking off half-truths and outright inventions. Here’s a sampler:

      as rates of sexual assault fall dramatically in the West

      Actually it’s flat in the UK, with the prevalence of any sexual crime (attempted or executed) in the last year for 16-59 year old women ranging from 2.8% in 2004/2005 to 3.0% in 2011/2012[4]; in Canada, police-reported rates are down[5] but self-reported rates are flat[6]; we don’t have any good multi-year self-report data in the USA, and while the FBI numbers show a steady decline over the past two decades [7], we have multiple reasons to suspect undercounting[8]. No other countries have useful data to reach any conclusion, let alone how the data is moving.

      1. [1] “Gina Miller: ‘Slutty’ Women Encourage Sexual Assault.”

        [2] Armstrong, Elizabeth A., Laura Hamilton, and Brian Sweeney. “Sexual Assault on Campus: A Multilevel, Integrative Approach to Party Rape.” Social Problems 53, no. 4 (2006): 483–99.

        [3] Rutherford, A. “Sexual Violence Against Women: Putting Rape Research in Context.” Psychology of Women Quarterly 35, no. 2 (June 1, 2011): 342–47. doi:10.1177/0361684311404307.

        [4] An Overview of Sexual Offending in England and Wales. Ministry of Justice, Home Office & the Office for National Statistics, January 10, 2013. Table 2.3.

        [5] Brennan, Shannon., Andrea. Taylor-Butts, and Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. Sexual Assault in Canada, 2004. Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 2008. Chart 1.

        [6] Samuel Perreault, and Shannon Brennan. Criminal Victimization in Canada, 2009, n.d. Table 6.

        [7] “Crime in the U.S. 2011.” FBI. Table 1.

        [8] Chemaly, Soraya. “How Did the FBI Miss Over 1 Million Rapes?” The Nation, June 27, 2014.

        1. Hornbeck, you shock me. You are clearly not up on your Susan Brownmiller, radfem prophetess and a wellspring of rape-culture ideology. You asked for a source? Try her manifesto Against Our Will, which still conditions much of the radfem rhetoric:

          “A world without rapists would be a world in which women moved freely without fear of men. That some men rape provides a sufficient threat to keep all women in a constant state of intimidation, forever conscious of the knowledge that the biological tool must be held in awe, for it may turn to weapon with sudden swiftness born of harmful intent… Rather than society’s aberrants or ‘spoilers of purity,’ men who commit rape have served in effect as front-line masculine shock troops, terrorist guerrillas in the longest sustained battle the world has ever known.”
          “Man’s discovery that his genitalia could serve as a weapon to generate fear must rank as one of the most important discoveries of prehistoric times, along with the use of fire and the first crude stone axe. From prehistoric times to the present, I believe, rape has played a critical function. It is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear.”

          You say, “condensed anti-feminist talking points, devoid of reference and obviously not what any feminist would believe.” But as you see, Hornbeck, it’s straight from the horse’s mouth. You tell me to google “rape culture” to see my definition unravel: try it yourself, and you will find every trope I discuss being disseminated as inalienable truth in most of the hits on the first three pages (which is as far as I had the, er, spoons to go.) Those are feminists speaking, Hornbeck, and I accurately reported their views. Where is the straw in that?

          You say I make the same arguments as some Fundamentalist Christians. So what? That’s the association fallacy, and does nothing to address the arguments.

          Your logical derivation of the existence of rape culture simply equivocates on the term “rape culture.” I’m not sure if you were trying to be funny, but it fell flat for me.

          As for rape stats and “I prefer to quote academic papers” [good lord, son, on a personal note, could you learn to be a little less pompous and patronizing?], I’ve been taking an interest for some time in the heated debate over rape stats, and how they are impacted by shifting definitions of what constitutes rape and sexual assault, and I’ll be discussing them in a future post in this series. Save it for then. But are you really denying that sexual assault, following the same trend as other forms of violent crime, has seen a precipitous decline in the last thirty years?

          1. My apologies for replying back so late, I was looking for an email notification that never came. 😛

            I’ve been taking an interest for some time in the heated debate over rape stats, and how they are impacted by shifting definitions of what constitutes rape and sexual assault, and I’ll be discussing them in a future post in this series. Save it for then.

            Hmm, I do need to delve into the numbers a little bit in order to make my arguments. Tell you what: I’ll limit myself to just the studies on sexual assault you’ve cited here, and leave the others I have until this new post.

            You say I make the same arguments as some Fundamentalist Christians. So what? That’s the association fallacy, and does nothing to address the arguments.

            By itself, it does not. But if we find two similar types of rhetoric, either this is because of a consensus due to an overwhelming level of evidence, or because of similar influences. As a former fundamentalist Christian, it’s quite plausible you continued to repeat the talking points drilled into you even as you challenged the God question. This is further boosted by your lack of citations, and your misunderstanding of the citations you do have. To wit:

            Most of the approximately 4-6% of men who do commit sexual assault will not be reached or changed by anti-rape education because they do not give a fuck about what society thinks of them: sociopaths and sexual predators come to mind.

            First off, it’s not 4-6%. Emphasis mine:

            studies of unreported rape, mainly on college samples, indicate that from 6% to 14.9% of men report acts that meet legal definitions for rape or attempted rape (Collings, 1994; Greendlinger & Byrne, 1987; Koss, Leonard, Beezley, & Oros, 1985; Koss, Gidycz, & Wisniewski, 1987; Krahe, 1998; Lisak & Roth, 1988; Merrill et aI., 1998; Mosher & Anderson, 1986; Ouimette & Riggs, 1998; Rubenzahl & Corcoran, 1998) […]

            The total sample consisted of four separate studies (n = 576; n = 587; n = 123; n = 596), conducted between 1991 and 1998. The three largest samples each represented 10% to 12% of the total male student population of the university at the time. The four samples were combined to provide a large enough subsample of rapists to permit the proposed analyses. Although the percentage of rapists within the samples varied from 4% to 9.8%, X 2 (3, N = 1,881) = 11.57, p < .05, there were no significant differences among the samples on any of the variables used in the analyses. […]

            Of the 1,882 men in the total sample, 120 (6.4%) met criteria for rape or attempted rape. A majority of these men, 80.8%, reported committing rapes of women who were incapacitated because of drugs or alcohol; 17.5% reported using threats or overt force in attempted rapes; 9.2% reported using threats or overt force to coerce sexual intercourse; and 10% reported using threats or overt force to coerce oral sex.[9]

            Secondly, Lisak’s number is probably low, and not just because he’s on the low range of the studies he cites:

            In addition to high rates of reoffending, several studies have shown that among incarcerated rapists the actual number of sexual crimes committed far exceeds the number of adjudicated charges against these men. For example, Abel and colleagues (1987) reported that when given assurances of confidentiality, 126 identified rapists admitted to 907 paraphilic acts against 882 victims. Weinrott and Saylor (1991) conducted a similar study of sex offenders in a state treatment program. The 37 rapists in the study had been charged with 66 offenses against a mean of 1.8 victims. Yet under conditions of confidential self-report, these same 37 men admitted to 433 rapes against a mean of 11.7 victims. […]

            There are now considerable data suggesting many commonalties between incarcerated and undetected rapists. Are the men who are committing these undetected rapes distinguishable from their incarcerated counterparts either in terms of the number of rapes they commit or the other types of violence they perpetrate? Or, are they simply getting away with their crimes? […]

            The data from this study of 120 undetected rapists underscore the similarities between incarcerated rapists and at least some of the rapists who escape the notice of the criminal justice system. These data conflict with the implicit notion that these rapists are in some way less serious offenders than their incarcerated counterparts. Almost two thirds of these rapists were repeat offenders who averaged close to six rapes each, and the majority also engaged in other forms of interpersonal violence, ranging from battery to physical and sexual abuse of children. This portrait is more consistent with the data on recidivism among sex offenders than with the still-prevalent image of a male college student who, under the influence of alcohol, mistakenly crosses the line between sexual pressure and rape.

            I have a feeling I’ll enjoy this upcoming post of yours. 😀

            You are clearly not up on your Susan Brownmiller, radfem prophetess and a wellspring of rape-culture ideology.

            I understand her better than you. For instance, I know “Against Our Will” was published in 1975, roughly one year after the term “rape culture” showed up in print and about four since the first public “speak-out” on sexual assault; nor was it even the first attempt by feminists to discuss sexual assault, as a number of suffragette groups had tried and failed over the previous century [10][3] . It also predates the foundational work of Burt (1980), one of the first to put all these theories to empirical test. As she put it, [11]

            These theoretical developments are particularly valuable because until quite recently the whole area of rape research proceeded on largely atheoretical grounds while at the same time implicitly incorporating many cultural stereotypes into its hypotheses, methodologies, and interpretations of results (Albin, 1977; Burt, in press; Marolla & Scully, 1979; Swift, 1978).

            Thus, although people active in the rape area have recently been discussing and refining the ideas tested here, the author knows of no other published research that attempts to document the complex web of attitudes and beliefs surrounding rape in this culture. The present research, therefore, constitutes a first effort to provide an empirical foundation for a combination of social psychological and feminist theoretical analysis of rape attitudes and their antecedents.

            To hold Brownmiller’s views as more representantive of modern feminist views than what I quoted from Rutherford (2011)[3] or Amrstrong (2006)[2] is like claiming modern biologists use On the Origin of Species as their core textbook. I recommend against reading her, unless you’re interested in ancient history.

            You tell me to google “rape culture” to see my definition unravel: try it yourself, and you will find every trope I discuss being disseminated as inalienable truth in most of the hits on the first three pages (which is as far as I had the, er, spoons to go.)

            There’s no problem with it being “disseminated as inalienable truth” if the evidence behind it is overwhelming. You yourself cite some of the strongest evidence I know of for cultural influences, the Partners for Prevention study of Southeast Asia.[12]

            From 10 percent (Bangladesh-urban) to 62 percent (Papua New Guinea-Bougainville) of all men interviewed reported perpetrating some form of rape against a woman or girl in their lifetime. The prevalence of different types of rape also varied greatly across sites, with non-partner rape and gang rape much more common in some sites (Papua New Guinea-Bougainville, Indonesia-Papua and Cambodia-national) than in others.

            If, as you argue, “sociopaths and sexual predators” are to blame for rape, why do we find such variance in the perpetration rates? If you reply that only a small fraction of the 62% in Bougainville are sociopaths, then doesn’t that argue sexual assaults rates are more heavily influenced by culture than biology?

            If, as you argue, these are societies “where sexual assault is normalized,” then does that mean you concede the United States is one of those societies? As pointed out earlier, self-admitted rapists constitute 6-15% of the US male population, yet this study found urban Bangladesh had a 10% rate.

            These behaviours are interpreted as not merely expressing sex seeking but more so as ideas of masculinity that emphasize heterosexual performance and dominance over women. These masculine ideals also commonly emphasize performances of strength and toughness, which are expressed in gang membership and fights between men with weapons and are significantly associated with rape perpetration.

            If, as you argue, these are societies “where sexual assault is normalized,” then does that mean you do not think the culture within the United States “emphasize[s] performances of strength and toughness?” A quick glance at the report shows many cultural similarities.

            But are you really denying that sexual assault, following the same trend as other forms of violent crime, has seen a precipitous decline in the last thirty years?

            “Denying?” The statistics departments of two Western governments argue sexual assault perpetration has remained approximately constant over at least a decade. If you think you can provide stronger evidence to the contrary, I again invite you to provide it.

          2. [9] Lisak, David, and Paul M. Miller. “Repeat Rape and Multiple Offending among Undetected Rapists.” Violence and Victims 17, no. 1 (2002): 73–84.

            [10] Feminists, New York Radical, Noreen Connell, and Cassandra Wilson. Rape: The First Sourcebook for Women. New American Library, 1974. pg. 105.

            [11] Burt, Martha R. “Cultural Myths and Supports for Rape.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38, no. 2 (1980): 217.

            [12] Emma Fulu, Xian Warner, Stephanie Miedem, Rachel Jewkes, Tim Roselli, and James Lang. WHY DO SOME MEN USE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND HOW CAN WE PREVENT IT?: Quantitative Findings from the United Nations Multi-Country Study on Men and Violence in Asia and the Pacific. Partners for Prevention, 2013.

    4. Rebecca, don’t bother too much with Hornbeck. He really does seem to regard himself as some kind of rhetorical assassin while displaying monumental levels of cluelessness. He doesn’t take many people in besides the converted despite his delusions that he is a master propagandist. A wordier Nerd of Redhead. The substance of your post is beyond question at this point as the evidence has been all over blogs and social media for years now. All you’ll get from the ideologues is denials sandwiched between posts supporting the purveyors of radfem bullshit.

    5. Outstanding piece! A succinct & devastating exposé of the dogma and Reveal Truths of the cult of SocJus.

      So nice to see HJ Hornbeck here — sniping, as usual, at minutia instead of addressing the central points. Cherry-picking or just flat-out distorting data, as usual, to support his a priori conclusions.

      Note that, to counter Rebecca’s observation that:

      “Most of the approximately 4-6% of men who do commit sexual assault will not be reached or changed by anti-rape education because they do not give a fuck about what society thinks of them”

      … HJ quibbles that it’s not 4-6%, rather 6.4% (presumably the highest figure HJ could find to cherry-pick.) HJ next proceeds to assert that this figure — that is, percent of rapists among the general population — “is probably low” by citing a study indicating that the total assaults/rapist far exceeds the charged assaults/rapist! Yet again, HJ has cleverly confounded his interlocutor by disproving his own point.

      Note also that HJ, in citing Lisak & Miller (2002), draws the polar opposite conclusion of RAINN, which, citing the very same paper, observes:

      “Again, this research supports the fact that more than 90% of college-age males do not, and are unlikely to ever, rape. In fact, we have found that they’re ready and eager to be engaged on these issues. It’s the other guys (and, sometimes, women) who are the problem.”

      RAINN rejects broad ‘teach men not to rape’ campaigns as mis-targeted and ineffective, noting that “between 3-7% of college men have committed an act of sexual violence or would consider doing so”. Instead, RAINN concludes “[i]t’s this relatively small percentage of the population, which has proven itself immune to years of prevention messages, that we must address in other ways. “

      https://rainn.org/images/03-2014/WH-Task-Force-RAINN-Recommendations.pdf

      Which is exactly Rebecca’s point to which HJ takes such umbrage.

    6. HJ Hornbeck and other social justice warriors are frequently puzzled when they see their own image in a mirror held up to them. Let’s take one well documented example of “Rape Culture” rhetorics, from our own “community”, that was however suspiciously buried in propaganda ever since. First HJ Hornbeck quotes:

      Rebecca Bradley wrote: According to the radfem revelation, we in the Western democracies live in a Stepford-style patriarchy where sexual violence is men’s greatest weapon for subjugating women, crushing our minds by terrorizing our bodies; where rape is normalized and winked at; where boy children are taught to be sexually entitled, where girl children are raised to be fucktoys. In short, we are told we live in a rape culture.

      And replies:

      HJ Hornbeck wrote:That’s nothing but condensed anti-feminist talking points, devoid of reference and obviously not what any feminist would believe. In fact, you make the same arguments as some fundamentalist Christians.

      Whether this is sheer ineptitude, the toll from hanging out in propaganda-soaked “safe spaces” also known as Echo Chambers, dishonesty or just a mental deficit; what is safe to say is that the entire US secular movement has been duped by it (that puts it mildly, you make a Nazi movement look pale in comparison, and I’m German and know a few things about it and its improper usage). The event that introduces Rape Culture is none other than Elevatorgate, by sheer co-incident! Rebecca Watson says this…

      [15mins]{1} Because there are people in this audience right now [mentioned McGraw already] , who believe this, that… [Ms. Watson reads slide] “A women’s reasonable expectation to feel safe from sexual objectification and assault at a skeptic and atheist events is outweighed by a man’s right to sexually objectify her.” That’s basically what these people have been telling me, and it’s not true [clapping] – thank you Melody [Hensely/CFI Exec Director, DC]. Since starting SkepChick, I’ve heard from a lot of women who don’t attend events like this because of those of you who have this attitude. They’re tired of being objectified and some of them actually have been raped. Quite a number have been raped or otherwise sexually assaulted. And situations like the one I was in, in an elevator, would have triggered a panic attack. They’re scared because they know that you won’t stand up for them and if they stand up for themselves, you’re going to laugh them back down. And that’s why they aren’t coming out to these events. — Rebecca Watson, The Religious Right vs. Every Woman on Earth, CFI Leadership Conference 2011

      Of course this Original Smear™ and actual Elevatorgate incident is typically downplayed or omitted entirely, as you would expect when Social Justice Warriors run a movement. The whole picture, with other tangents, looks a bit like a Hieronymus Bosch painting ranging from the gritty and grotesque to the comical. Here’s Dr. Richard Carrier’s recent take, he claims:

      Dr Richard Carrier wrote {2}The mythology [of Elevatorgate] goes like this:

      Rebecca Watson advocated for draconian anti-harassment policies at atheist conventions that would forbid all sex or any hitting on anyone ever, because some guy innocently asked her for coffee in an elevator once. And therefore feminism is ruining atheism.

      Okay. Step one.

      Go directly to the source.

      The video in which she supposedly said this is easily found. In it you’ll find she merely said “Guy’s, don’t do that,” and calmly and reasonably explained why. That’s it.

      The cocksure attitude and pretension are often very comical when you know that it is demonstrably false. In typical fashion he claims to dispel a myth, yet reinforces one boldly. Rebecca Watson did introduce Rape Culture in a discussion that was supposedly about double entendrés in a confined space.

      But of course, even that is corruped, because there are several versions about what “Elevatorgate” was about, and HJ Hornbeck and his Postmodern Fascists keep switching around what they mean. One time, it’s just a “slightly bad” thing and Ms Watson “merely” did this or that, and the evil misogynist make a mountain out of a molehill. And when somebody else points out that this incident was indeed just “slightly bad”, they are “delegitmizing the lived experiences of women” (or however it’s described in ridiculous SJW talk) and keep the movement hostile to women, because, same conclusion, they hate women. The conclusion is always fixed, the reasons and the outgroup are just plugged in later (here it’s McGraw & the CFI audience who are conflated with hatemail writers, later it’s the Slymepit ).

      1_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqzE16UsNW4&t=15m00s
      2_http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/6788

      PS: Great series, and great blog. Missed a lot of content, need to check in more.

      1. Thank you for drawing my attention to this. Fascinating. I could not have found a better demonstration of a rape-culture ideologue in action.

          1. Take it however you like, Francois. I really do not care, and I’m not going to be drawn into a slanging match.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *