The Left's Big Collective Rape Fantasy
#1


In the Catholic News, Discussion, History, & Culture sub-forum is a thread called "Salon Sacrilege for Christmas," about how one writer at Salon refers to the events of the Annunciation as rape. Yes, believe it or not, that's what the article says.

Poster DivineSilence80 wrote:

DivineSilence80 Wrote:Honestly, I think liberals fantasize incessantly about rape because they get to have sex and have a reason to trick their conscience into not feeling bad about it because they know the truth. Rape fantasies for the sexual liberals are well-documented. Why do you think 50 Shades of Gray is so popular with today's young women who are liberal to the max? They are all sick in the head, but that's what you get when you fight mother nature.

I responded with:

Vox Wrote:I think it's trickier than that -- more specific than that. I was thinking about starting a thread about the big leftist rape fantasy that's going on, actually (and I do think it's a collective rape fantasy in the classic sense of the phrase "rape fantasy"). Maybe I'll do that soon.

But rape fantasies aren't just had by "sexual liberals." They're very common in women. And for understandable reasons -- reasons that make sense and reflect the natural differences between the sexes. In fact, one of the points I wanted to make in the thread I'm thinking about is that it's precisely because radical feminists deny these differences and their desire to experience male power that this big collective public fantasy has come about.

So here we are.

For years now, radical feminists have gone on -- and on and on -- about rape and the alleged existence of "a rape culture."

We get stats that say 1 in 4 women who go to college will be raped during her 4 years on campus. That makes me wonder why, in God's Name, would anyone who actually believes such a thing attend college or, especially, send her daughters there! But, praise God, this is what the U.S. Department of Justice gives as the actual rates: "In 2013, college age females had a similar rate of rape and sexual assault regardless of enrollment status (about 4.3 victimizations per 1,000), while the victimization rate for not college-age (ages 12 to 17 and 25 or older) females was 1.4 victimizations per 1,000." Now, those stats are for one year, so multiplying that number by 4 to get the number of rape/sexual assault victims that there should be over the course of a college career, we get 17.2 victims per 1,000 women. That's a big difference from the 250 victims out of 1000 women the commonly touted statistics indicate there should be -- as in almost 15 times fewer than the leftists tell us.

We've had hoax after hoax, from the Duke LaCrosse non-incident, to the recent, strange goings-on at the University of Virginia, first brought up in the  Rolling Stone article, "A Rape on Campus," and thoroughly discredited best by Steve Sailer. (For the run-down of Sailer's articles on this topic, start with his November 29, 2014 post, "Richard Bradley: "Is the 'Rolling Stone' Story True?" and keep going forward in time until it becomes the main topic at his blog. I find it all fascinating!)

We've got people like Lena Dunham writing about having been raped "by a Republican named Barry" while she was at school -- yet another rape fantasy that exploded upon further investigation.

We've got Emma Sulkowicz, a.k.a., "Mattress Girl":


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9hHZbuYVnU#t=58


Her "art project" -- her senior thesis -- of carrying around campus the mattress on which she was allegedly raped is getting lots of media attention, of course.  She wrote an article about it all -- for Time Magazine, and it looks like she's now a star of sorts because they invited her back to write an article entitled "What I'm Thankful For," apparently in the spirit of Thanksgiving Day (she's thankful for her dogs Tybalt and Ophelia, in case you're interested. Maybe if we all get our houses burgled, people will want to know what we're thankful for, too. One can dream!).  Anyway, something I find fascinating about this case (though this is something I've heard elsewhere, too) is that Mattress Girl refers to the man she alleges attacked her as "my rapist." That first Time article is titled, "My Rapist is Still on Campus." It's 475 words long, and it uses the phrase "my rapist" five times. Does that wording strike you as bizarre as well --- "my rapist"? She uses that phrase in the videos I've seen of her, too. But me, I can't imagine being raped and referring to the person who did that to me as "my" anything. It sounds like such a personal way to speak of a person who'd brutalize and dehumanize you in that sort of way. It makes the rapist sound like a sort of hired hand, as in "my poolboy," or maybe like a "pet" -- "my puppy" -- or a toy, as in "My Little Rapist." No one would refer to "my burglar" when talking about the guy who broke into her house and stole her stereo, or to "my attempted murderer." One'd think that distancing language would be more natural, that referring to "that animal" or "that $^(&^$ piece of &^%^ asshole" would more readily come to the lips.

Anyway, her "rape" and her reaction to it all have led to things like this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldl-a6GY7Tw


-- and to CarryingTheWeightTogether.com, a website that asks people to sign their names to this pledge --

""I SUPPORT SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND AM HELPING TO #CARRYTHATWEIGHT"
(I think the thinking is that  if you don't make that pledge, you don't "support" survivors,
and if you do sign it, you're in the club, you're kewl!)

-- and to -- get this -- upload pictures of themselves carrying a mattress, pillow, or a written "pledge of solidarity." It also asks them to donate, of course. I have no idea what they'd spend the money on (sheets and pillow cases to match whatever they're wearing, maybe?)

Rape isn't a crime any longer; it's a female bonding experience. It's practically festive! "How's about all us girls getting together, maybe drink some wine, catch an episode of 'Girls', and talk about our rapes?! Sound good?" Check out the faces of the women carrying that mattress in that video or in the pictures.


[Image: carrythatweight.JPG]
Girls having a ball!


And consider how they'd likely react upon being told the Department of Justice's rape statistics. You think they'd be happy, as in "Whew! Great! I'd thought we were living in a rape culture, and I'm so glad it's not so!"  Me, I don't think so; I think they'd be upset, maybe really angry, and would accuse you of lying, or being a woman-hater, or maybe even "a Republican"! To wit: these women want for there to be a rape culture. Not consciously, but I think definitely. Now, why?

My guess is that it's because they are women and, so, want what most women want:  to love and be loved by a strong man, and to feel his masculine power. But these women are radical feminists, likely with "Daddy issues." They can't admit, even to themselves, that that is what they want, so it comes out looking like bitter hatred toward men -- the classic "reaction formation" defense mechanism. Maybe there's a bit of displacement in there as well in that their secret desires are so painful to them that it's psychically easier for them to think of themselves as helpless potential or actual victims flailing about in a veritable sea of rapists, living in a land in which every 4th woman they see is a victim of sexual violence, than it is to confront head on the fact that they are women, that they want strong men, etc. And that sort of displacement is likely due to a sense they have that being a woman is a dangerous thing to be, that being vulnerable to a man risking psychic annihilation in some way. I bet there's a lot of fatherlesness, emotionally absent fathers, or something else along those lines in these women's lives. Whatever is going on exactly, I'd about guarantee that underneath their rage is grief that they're too wussy to face and deal with.

The stories they tell themselves and each other, the media's lapping it all up, the Big Myth they've got going, etc., are really messing up even more how men and women get along, and things were bad enough to start with. They've got a major witch hunt going on, and the injustices suffered by our young men are heartbreaking. I'm so glad that the Rolling Stone rape story fiasco has come to light (before the internet, it likely wouldn't have!), and I so hope people don't let it drop, don't allow The Powers That Be to toss it down the memory hole.  The beauty of the internet is that we have the power to make sure that doesn't happen!

Reply
#2
I figured I would post my response to your post here so as not to derail the other thread....

Basically I think it boils down to the age old battle of the egos. Women want men on their terms which is to say on command. They don't want to have to bother "compromising" or accepting any form of responsibility that comes with being human. Why do you think men are expected to do all the dangerous and crappy jobs? The only dangerous job women do that they can't pass off is child birth. I think it angers many that mother nature enforces that responsibility so they obsess about getting around it (i.e. abortion and contraception).

The problem for woman however is the male ego is not so easily conquered by shear force so they have to destroy a man from the inside out. As a result, they invent crises to slander, discredit, gossip, and destroy the reputation of men with false statistics to legitimize themselves. That's what teen girls do to other girls when they stand in their way so feminists use the same tactics on men. These tactics are the legacy of the human female. Men may duke it out physically to break the body, but women assault the spirit directly.

Look at liberal males for instance. I bet if you gave them an easy painless procedure for cutting off their penis, and changing it into a vagina most would leap at the opportunity to impress the women they chase. They are easily swayed by emotion as many women are, stand for nothing except their own sense of "feeling good", and their entire existence is based solely on the table scraps of women's praise. The liberal male is little more than a useful idiot who hates himself to placate the liberal woman who is in denial over her own self-hatred.

Anyway, the liberal rape fantasy is just another feminist attempt to destroy men and turn society into a matriarchy to remake the world in THEIR image. The female ego hasn't had much room to breathe in the past because the soil of society was not rich enough to sustain it. That's why feminism doesn't flourish anywhere except in the developed world. I'm sure many feminists would look at King David's collection of concubines with envy, except they want the gender ratio inverted. That would explain the liberal female's sexual choices these days.
Reply
#3
The majority of women have rape fantasies?  Huh?

Well I guess I'll be single for longer than I thought. Yikes.

Since we're psychoanalyzing the feminists, I think it should be noted that most feminists seem to be plain janes or more homely. I imagine this has a big effect on women in this looks obsessed society, and causes them to hate men and attempt to marginalize them.

I've seen the MRA or anti-feminist types on the internet troll with this stereotype. I can't really blame them, feminists these days don't engage in reason in the first place, just feel-good rhetoric.
Reply
#4
I'm a bit skeptical that women have a rape fantasy. I'm not a woman, but isn't rape the worst thing for a woman? Wouldn't the virgins in Rome commit suicide so that the barbarians would not rape them?

I think the matter is not so much that women like rape or have rape fantasies but that rape has changed drastically in meaning. Today the absolute only thing that is not controlled by some sort of ethics is sex, and so the only thing governing sex is “consent”, and of course this varies a lot: when one has an extra glass of wine (or harder drugs, as is the fashion today), when one is under some passion for the person, or even—as I speculate is the reason for labeling most things “rape” these days—the undeniable fact that, as they say post coitum omne animal triste est: after intercourse comes the sadness that shows that the passion that one had was not for the object but for some construct of one's minds and was something irredeemably ephemeral and unsatisfying.
But never mind the causes of variation, consent is not a well defined moral concept, and so everything turns into rape, which is now defined as the only bad sex because its not covered by consent.
So, I suspect the problem is one of morals and not of psychology (though, of course, things are very connected).

As for women bonding over rape, isn't this just a species of the indignation mob that we see everywhere? In protests against corruption, bad behavior of the banks, the enviroment. There's a very interesting interview (mp3) with Joseph Bottum who traces this to mainline Protestantism, going through Rauschenbusch, etc.
Reply
#5
(12-24-2014, 02:16 AM)Estevao Wrote: The majority of women have rape fantasies?  Huh?

Well I guess I'll be single for longer than I thought. Yikes.

Since we're psychoanalyzing the feminists, I think it should be noted that most feminists seem to be plain janes or more homely. I imagine this has a big effect on women in this looks obsessed society, and causes them to hate men and attempt to marginalize them.

I've seen the MRA or anti-feminist types on the internet troll with this stereotype. I can't really blame them, feminists these days don't engage in reason in the first place, just feel-good rhetoric.

Not sure if its a majority, but its definitely not an insignificant minority. Most feminists are simply angry from self-inflicted wounds and expect other people to take responsibility for their self-induced misery. I'd be hard pressed to say they are plain Janes or homely unless you think living with a seriously POed crocodile qualifies as "homely."

(12-24-2014, 02:52 AM)Renatus Frater Wrote: I'm a bit skeptical that women have a rape fantasy. I'm not a woman, but isn't rape the worst thing for a woman? Wouldn't the virgins in Rome commit suicide so that the barbarians would not rape them?

I think the matter is not so much that women like rape or have rape fantasies but that rape has changed drastically in meaning. Today the absolute only thing that is not controlled by some sort of ethics is sex, and so the only thing governing sex is “consent”, and of course this varies a lot: when one has an extra glass of wine (or harder drugs, as is the fashion today), when one is under some passion for the person, or even—as I speculate is the reason for labeling most things “rape” these days—the undeniable fact that, as they say post coitum omne animal triste est: after intercourse comes the sadness that shows that the passion that one had was not for the object but for some construct of one's minds and was something irredeemably ephemeral and unsatisfying.
But never mind the causes of variation, consent is not a well defined moral concept, and so everything turns into rape, which is now defined as the only bad sex because its not covered by consent.
So, I suspect the problem is one of morals and not of psychology (though, of course, things are very connected).

As for women bonding over rape, isn't this just a species of the indignation mob that we see everywhere? In protests against corruption, bad behavior of the banks, the enviroment. There's a very interesting interview (mp3) with Joseph Bottum who traces this to mainline Protestantism, going through Rauschenbusch, etc.

There is some truth to this. Feminists seem to keep moving the ever widening goal post for what qualifies as rape on a daily basis. I think their ultimate goal is having men on remote controls and having the ability to convict a man based on how they feel about one. Facts and evidence don't matter to them. Feminists would like a woman's feeling of guilt or dissatisfaction to be proof of rape. They want a rule of law based on emotion and not facts / logic.
Reply
#6
[tt]
(12-24-2014, 02:52 AM)Renatus Frater Wrote: I'm a bit skeptical that women have a rape fantasy. I'm not a woman, but isn't rape the worst thing for a woman? Wouldn't the virgins in Rome commit suicide so that the barbarians would not rape them?

The key word in there is "fantasy." Rape fantasies and real rapes are worlds apart. Universes apart. No woman wants to actually be raped by some stranger, to have her house broken into and to be at the mercy of some guy. But it's a very common female fantasy to be ravished, taken, overwhelmed by, and to experience the power of a man she is already attracted to and would consent to have sex with, said man being so taken by her beauty and so consumed with desire for her that he can't stop himself, etc., blah blah. A lot of men have lesbian fantasies, but most wouldn't actually want to see real lesbians having sex -- e.g., most don't have fantasies about stereotypical, flannel-wearing, short-haired, butch lesbians -- that is, real lesbians as they are in real life. Same deal.

Anyway, if you don't believe me about women and rape fantasies, read a few romance novels, or read about "Fifty Shades of Gray."

(12-24-2014, 02:52 AM)Renatus Frater Wrote: I think the matter is not so much that women like rape or have rape fantasies but that rape has changed drastically in meaning. Today the absolute only thing that is not controlled by some sort of ethics is sex, and so the only thing governing sex is “consent”, and of course this varies a lot: when one has an extra glass of wine (or harder drugs, as is the fashion today), when one is under some passion for the person, or even—as I speculate is the reason for labeling most things “rape” these days—the undeniable fact that, as they say post coitum omne animal triste est: after intercourse comes the sadness that shows that the passion that one had was not for the object but for some construct of one's minds and was something irredeemably ephemeral and unsatisfying.
But never mind the causes of variation, consent is not a well defined moral concept, and so everything turns into rape, which is now defined as the only bad sex because its not covered by consent.
So, I suspect the problem is one of morals and not of psychology (though, of course, things are very connected).

I think consent is pretty easily defined, myself. And I think this is definitely psychological. It wouldn't have the thrust behind it if it weren't (no pun intended). This phenomenon is too huge to be mere confusion in terms of morals.  I doubt, too, that there is much "passion" involved in hook-up culture to begin with. I don't think there's much regret in terms of "I so wanted him, but it all just didn't measure up and wasn't as fulfilling as I'd expected." I don't think that initial "I wanted him"  is typically deep. I think there is a lot of post-coital regret, but that it goes more to shame/concerns about reputation and to thinking more along the lines of  "dang, why'd I cave in to that loser? What if this gets around?" than to "I was so in love -- but, alas, I was actually longing for something else I can't define" or "I was so in love -- but, alas, he is not who I thought he was." There's not much passion going on out there. It's drunken rutting for the most part.

(12-24-2014, 02:52 AM)Renatus Frater Wrote: As for women bonding over rape, isn't this just a species of the indignation mob that we see everywhere? In protests against corruption, bad behavior of the banks, the enviroment. There's a very interesting interview (mp3) with Joseph Bottum who traces this to mainline Protestantism, going through Rauschenbusch, etc.

I imagine there's that in all this, too, but I think this is a lot more than that. These women are telling themselves and each other personal stories revolving around themselves as sexual victims, and they do so at great expense of the men involved. The emotions playing into all this are totally different than the emotional investment involved with concerns about the environment, corruption, or banking.
Reply
#7
i probablu shpouldnt have clicked this

butvox..  you should think
..mqybe for two minutes even..  about how someone who had been raped assaulted would take a lot of what you say

Reply
#8
(12-22-2014, 09:25 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: Mattress Girl refers to the man she alleges attacked her as "my rapist." That first Time article is titled, "My Rapist is Still on Campus." It's 475 words long, and it uses the phrase "my rapist" five times. Does that wording strike you as bizarre as well --- "my rapist"? She uses that phrase in the videos I've seen of her, too. But me, I can't imagine being raped and referring to the person who did that to me as "my" anything. It sounds like such a personal way to speak of a person who'd brutalize and dehumanize you in that sort of way. It makes the rapist sound like a sort of hired hand, as in "my poolboy," or maybe like a "pet" -- "my puppy" -- or a toy, as in "My Little Rapist." No one would refer to "my burglar" when talking about the guy who broke into her house and stole her stereo, or to "my attempted murderer." One'd think that distancing language would be more natural, that referring to "that animal" or "that $^(&^$ piece of &^%^ asshole" would more readily come to the lips.

why do you care?

i am a make survivor and while i do not see this as a legitimate art installayion..wouldlaugh at it as a senior thesis but i can relate to carrying around the weight of the traumatic event i often feel that way too.

good for her for talking openly about what happened to her heaven knows i wouldn't go so public

i have used the words "my rapist"before.  wish i never had a reason to.  i think until you have carried that burden you do not know.  it is her business how she is going to refer to the perp.  it is not your call..  you don't live with the reality

(12-22-2014, 09:25 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: Anyway, her "rape" and her reaction to it all have led to things like this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldl-a6GY7Tw


-- and to CarryingTheWeightTogether.com, a website that asks people to sign their names to this pledge --

""I SUPPORT SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND AM HELPING TO #CARRYTHATWEIGHT"
(I think the thinking is that  if you don't make that pledge, you don't "support" survivors,
and if you do sign it, you're in the club, you're kewl!)

-- and to -- get this -- upload pictures of themselves carrying a mattress, pillow, or a written "pledge of solidarity." It also asks them to donate, of course. I have no idea what they'd spend the money on (sheets and pillow cases to match whatever they're wearing, maybe?)

Rape isn't a crime any longer; it's a female bonding experience. It's practically festive! "How's about all us girls getting together, maybe drink some wine, catch an episode of 'Girls', and talk about our rapes?! Sound good?" Check out the faces of the women carrying that mattress in that video or in the pictures.

so i guess laughing about rape and making fun of sexual abuse victims is fine as long as theyre irritating liberals...

yeah, i don't like a lot of the sentiment I see and I have my own issues with the greater sexual assault recovery vommunity but at least there is a community

good for the women and menwho seek out healing.

what most survivors really are looking for is someone to hear their experience, and process the trauma.  someone who has has been there and can help them know they're not alone

women who have been rapedin general have an easier time finding someone to talk to..  as a man it is not so easy i have never met any men in real life that went through rape.

the question is..  why are they not going to the church to heal?  why don't they see the church ad a safe space to heal from their trauma... 
Reply
#9
Well, to analyze this situation with any seriousness is really above my capacities. I grant that there might be something to this fantasy of domination (though I still think a bit disgusting, as all the fifty shades phenomena was).

But I still think that, at least, a major component to all this is the change in morals: the complete abandonment of morals in sex and the only principle governing sex being “consent”.
Consent would be well defined if a person were completely free from all external influences and internal things that is not the person, so basically its a concept that assumes already the neutral self (and in this regard this sort of evolution to consent governing sexual relations is a mere consequence of the nihilism of late modernity, of the will defining itself by itself, an absolute free will hovering over a sea of potency). But given that this neutral self does not exist, consent becomes hard to define: when one drinks, when one is driven by some passion, when one is driven by peer pressure, etc., all these things can be seen a posteriori to be outside one, and so one, when all is over, decides—again, after the fact—that there was no consent.
The thing I mentioned about passion still sounds reasonable to me. Why would a girl have intercourse if she didn't desire it? I'm not talking about falling in love and being deceived (though I must note that in some cases of “rape” this is indeed the case! I've read of a woman claiming to be in a “rape relationship” because she was in love with the fella and he wasn't very nice to her, so clearly we are dealing here with a very strange phenomena). But maybe I'm thinking more as a male. But still, that's just one of the infinitude of reasons why “consent” is not well defined.

Also, let's not forget that ethics is not something outside of us, as a set of rules that does not affect our persons, our groups and the society (this also is a liberal—in the classical sense—myth). In fact morals do shape how people think and act and the society in general, I mean, just consider what happened in the fall of the old Thomistic-Aristotelian (or, to put in more annoyingly general terms, the classical) ethics and the rise of the modern ethics that is basically voluntarism: persons changed drastically. Ethics is much more than a system, and is something that deforms (or forms) minds.

Anyway, I don't think I can defend my case any further (I mean, its the most reasonable explanation to me, but I grant it might not be the whole story), and talking about this is kinda icky to me, so I'll just let this be.

Reply
#10
(12-25-2014, 11:04 PM)Chestertonian Wrote: i probablu shpouldnt have clicked this

butvox..  you should think
..mqybe for two minutes even..  about how someone who had been raped assaulted would take a lot of what you say

Well, C., you don't know my life, and that's all I'm going to say about that. But my post isn't about victims of rape, or about rape at all; it's  about the pseudo-rape hysteria, the nonsense about our having "a rape culture," the ridiculous definitions of "rape," the abuse of men, false accusations, denying men due process, the destruction of normal relationships between men and women, and so forth.

Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)