>
Well, this is interesting. Last night, idly perusing the latest posts by blogs on my Enemies List I noticed a new post by Paul Elam. It was a doozy, and I don’t mean that in a good way. Under the seemingly innocuous title “Challenging the Etiology of Rape,” the post mocked and blamed rape victims for the crime of getting raped. I copied the most obnoxious bits onto my computer, planning to write a post about it.
Now it appears Elam has deleted the post, and the comments associated with it. [NOTE: Apparently the vanishing post was actually the result of an issue with the web host. It’s now up again. On to the content of his post.]
Here, minus a little of his rhetorical huffing and puffing, is the basic thesis of his post:
I have ideas about women who spend evenings in bars hustling men for drinks, playing on their sexual desires so they can get shit faced on the beta dole; paying their bar tab with the pussy pass. And the women who drink and make out, doing everything short of sex with men all evening, and then go to his apartment at 2:00 a.m.. Sometimes … these women end up being the “victims” of rape.
But are these women asking to get raped?…
They are freaking begging for it.
Damn near demanding it. …
[T]here are a lot of women who get pummeled and pumped because they are stupid (and often arrogant) enough to walk though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE RAPE ME neon sign glowing above their empty little narcissistic heads.
What’s there to say to that? It’s odious, simply odious. Anyone who makes such an argument thereby destroys whatever tiny bit of credibility, whatever moral authority, they once might have had to speak about rape, domestic violence, or, really any violence at all against women or men. Anyone who makes such an argument forfeits the right to be taken seriously on the issue of rape, or, really, on any issue at all.
By Elam’s logic, any man who gets drunk and hooks up with a woman he’s only recently met is “damn near demanding” to be falsely accused of rape, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE [ACCUSE] ME neon sign glowing above [his] empty little narcissistic head.”
Hey, he should have known better, right?
By Elam’s logic, any man who gets himself sent to prison through an act of his own is “damn near demanding” to be raped, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE RAPE ME neon sign glowing above [his] empty little narcissistic head.”
Hey, he should have known better, right?
By Elam’s logic, any man who works in a profession where occupational injuries are relatively more common is “damn near demanding” to be injured or killed, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH … neon sign glowing above [his] empty little narcissistic head.”
Hey, he should have known better, right?
By Elam’s logic, any man who joins the Armed Forces is “damn near demanding” to be killed, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE [KILL ME] neon sign glowing above [his] empty little narcissistic head.”
Hey, he should have known better, right?
By Elam’s logic, any man who crosses a busy street without waiting for the “walk” sign is “damn near demanding” to be hit by a car, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE [RUN ME OVER] neon sign glowing above [his] empty little narcissistic head.”
Hey, he should have known better, right?
By Elam’s logic, any man who does anything at all that might possibly increase the odds of anything bad happening to him is “damn near demanding” to face horrific consequences, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE [HARM] ME neon sign glowing above [his] empty little narcissistic head.”
By Elam’s logic, neither men nor women should ever leave the house.
Oh, but wait, most accidents happen at home (just as most rapes involve people already known to the victim, not random strangers at bars). So anyone staying at home is “damn near demanding” to trip and fall down the stairs, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE [INJURE] ME neon sign glowing above [his or her] empty little narcissistic head.”
I guess we’re all empty-headed conniving bitches. Each and every one of us on planet earth. But the only people Elam thinks to apply his logic to are female rape victims. That says a lot, and none of it good.
NOTE: Elam has (among other things) banned me from commenting on his site, and relagates all critical comments on his website to a special board for “feminists and manginas,” so any comments he makes here will be deleted.
NOTE #2: Just to forestall what could become an endless and pointless debate in the comments: Elam is not saying, as he puts it, that women “are literally asking men to rape them” — that is, walking up and saying “rape me please.” That would be absurd. He is speaking more colloquially, as am I.
>My depiction of his "Bash a violent bitch" post was accurate. I quoted it accurately. I mentioned that he said he wasn't "serious" — and that immediately after saying that he went on in a way that indicated that he actually was "serious." In any case, even if he was joking, it was still a vile piece of writing. As is this latest one.
>His piece is up again. The link is in my post, 2nd paragraph. I've also added a brief second note at the end to forestall a possible derailing discussion here.
>No, it wasn't accurate David, "bash a violent bitch month" was a satirical anti domestic violence piece that was used to highlight Jezebells pro domestic violence piece, the common attitude that domestic violence against men doesn't really count and the fact that many women exploit the fact that most men will not hit a woman back.And perhaps the correct response to being threatened with a knife by a jazebele writer is to knock her out, thats better than the politically correct choice, standing there while allowing someone to threaten to stab you just because societal and politically correct norms dictate that as being the right course of non action.
>of course, a man that knocks out a jezebelle journalist thats is threatening to stab him, is likely going to jail for having the audacity to defend himself.
>Mr. Futrelle, I have to ask, has Mr. Elam changed the post significantly, or is it the same one you originally saw?
>David, your addition.."NOTE #2: Just to forestall what could become an endless and pointless debate in the comments: Elam is not saying, as he puts it, that women "are literally asking men to rape them" — that is, walking up and saying "rape me please." That would be absurd. He is speaking more colloquially, as am I."I'm confused now, if you are acknowledging that Paul Elam is not actually saying what you said he said, what is the actual point that you are trying to make here?
>@EoghanI'm absolutely disgusted by these MRA comments that the women has no right to say no and deserves to be raped, especially yours. I mean, Paul Elam is clearly a sociopath, but the fact you support and agree Eoghan speaks volumes. He's saying women deserve to be raped! Why are you trying to excuse or dismiss it?! You claim to be a somewhat reasonable MRA who cares about men's rights and discrimination against them yet, surprise(!), you're a rape apologist. I will probably not even bother with you from now on but this particular statement needed commenting:"The politically correct position on rape infantalises women IMO. "That's hilarious. Or it would be, if I thought rape was funny. And you don't think that making women completely responsible i.e. through modifying their behaviour such as wearing "modest" clothes, infantilizes men? The converse of victim-blaming, is men cannot be responsible for their desire, impulses, etc. You know who can't control their behaviour and impulses? Babies. If men can't control themselves, then victim-blaming sets them all up as potentially rapists. Obvy I don't believe that men are unable to control themselves nor that victims are to blame, but apparently you do! So Eoghan, I guess you can explain to your MRA buddies why you think all men are rapists.Also, how does that fit in with male rape victims? Would you say to them that they're responsible for being victimized? Seems like you guys have a real double standard:- rape is genderized and male victims are marginalized and deserve the same rights and services as women victims- rape isn't real and all (female!) victims are to blame even if they are raped and deserve itPlus, you're rape stories are decidely bias – since we don't have the women's POV, you're just speculating on what really happened and (amazingly) it fits with your world view. E.g. the woman in the first could have said no when he didn't have a condom, and he forced her to anyways. Oh, right – she's not allowed to say no anymore. WRONG! Plus, the fact he's 17 at a bar – com'n how made up is that?Do you want me to link some rape stories from the women's POV? Actually I'm not going to do that, because having some total asshole who has no idea what it's like to be raped(!) explaining why the victims are in fact to blame and/or wasn't really rape is sickening and definitely wrong.
>Just reading through the comment section on a voice for men. Someone brought up another very important point that politically correct thought and speech codes deem offensive. The correlation between men that commit violent sex crimes against women and their being abused sexually or otherwise by women as children. It seems that in a number of ways, feminist magical thinking and politically correct thought and speech codes hinder us in understanding and treating the problem of rape properly.
>David (about Yohan) I think the fact that he sort of "forgot" to mention consent speaks volumes. You are always turning all and everything (deliberately? purposely? or out of stupidity?) around what I say. I said: If she says YES, say NO!And my comment again, exactly the same text!My advice as MRA to all men is to prevent such a situation from the beginning on. Stay away from such questionable places like bars full with drunk women inside and do not join strange parties full with drugs.Do not socialize with drunk and crazy psycho-girls and never invite them to your own private rooms. You got it now?It is my right to say NO!If I (the man) say NO – and I have the right to do this even to a woman in a feminist country, call me a misogynist for that – I need not to ask her for her consent. Consent for what? Consent from her because I say NO to her?You got it now?There is also another thread in your blog with a similar topic, and I said clearly the best is not to socialize with all these drunk psycho-girls. If they accuse you for rape and you can prove you have not been there, that's for sure a very good position to defend yourself against false rape allegations.
>Eoghan: "if you are acknowledging that Paul Elam is not actually saying what you said he said, what is the actual point that you are trying to make here?"Paul Elam is saying what I said he said. Only someone who is completely misreading or deliberately misrepresenting what I said would say otherwise. I'm tired of "debating" with people who do this, so I'm pretty much done with "debating" you.
>thevagrantsvoice: As far as I can tell it's the exact same piece.
>David and TecAs usual its straw man arguments, changing the meaning, being deliberately obtuse and attacking something other than what was actually said or meant you are same people that are so quick to accuse people of "rape apology" that protect female abusers and oppress their victims to suit their agenda, same old feminist story.
>Ah, I see. thank you.
>ape and rape hysteria as a political platform and a means to persecute a group is nothing new, it has been used against jews, blacks and white heterosexual males and all done by variations of the same movement, progressivism. Feminists couldn't give a flying fuck about rape victims if they cant be used as political ammunition. When its a child thats been raped by a woman, they would bury him at the bottom of a lake rather than let him exist, because he's not a useful rape victim.Rape of women is at least common as rape of men, women, according to egalitarian studies that use feminist methods rape as often as men. Rape is just a political tool to feminism.
>The real rape apologists, in my opinion, are feminist ideologues, people who attack the legitimacy of the notion that one should take sensible precautions in order to reduce one's chances of being victimized. Such ideologues often dogmatically equate well-intended safety advisories with victim blaming.[*]These ideologues are the unwitting enablers of rapists, because they lure potential rape victims into a state of heightened vulnerability by trying to justify unsafe behaviors that put potential victims at greater risk.Source:"VSU Police Department Removes Absurd Sexual Assault Prevention Tips"By Amanda HessWashington City PaperFebruary 5, 2010http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/02/05/vsu-police-department-removes-absurd-sexual-assault-prevention-tips/
>You're seriously telling us that you think VSU should be telling women that unless they gouge out the eyes of would-be rapists while they're driving, "the alternative is your fault if you do not act."
>@David Futrelle:"You're seriously telling us that you think VSU should be telling women that unless they gouge out the eyes of would-be rapists while they're driving, 'the alternative is your fault if you do not act.'"I'm saying what my comment said.
>Well, John, the "source" you use to prove this: "Such ideologues often dogmatically equate well-intended safety advisories with victim blaming" doesn't actually prove that. What is shows is an example of a school getting rid of a ridiculous and counterproductive "safety advisory" that contains that questionable and, yes, victim-blaming bit I quoted about eye-gouging.
>Eoghan said… David and TecAs usual its straw man arguments, changing the meaning, being deliberately obtuse and attacking something other than what was actually said There is hardly anything I can add to this comment.I always tell Western men to stay away from this strange US-dating-scenario – which includes one-night stands with unknown women in private rooms, plenty of alcohol, drugs etc. etc.I always tell Western men, in case should such women approach you, to be firm and to say NO. Not even willing to try. Too risky.Now David is telling me, I am not mentioning anything about 'consent' from these poor girls…Do I need to ask a woman to give me her consent, if I say NO to her? And if I say NO to her without her consent I am a misogynist or what?That's crazy, that's feminism at its finest.It's like if a man has even no right anymore to say NO to a woman.
>Yohan, I was referring to this, in which you seemed to suggest that agreeing to go to a room with a guy = consenting to sex:"A woman who says YES and agrees to go with her new boyfriend to his private rooms at 2:00 AM the same night cannot be considered to be a victim of 'rape', if she regrets it a few weeks later suddenly out of whatever reason."I said nothing about men saying "no." Obviously men have the exact same right to say no, and have that "no" respected, as women do.
>@David Futrelle:"Well, John, the 'source' you use to prove this: "Such ideologues often dogmatically equate well-intended safety advisories with victim blaming" doesn't actually prove that."Prove? It's my opinion. If you look in the comments section, you'll see some people who agree that the feminists were over-reacting, such as this one:http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/02/05/vsu-police-department-removes-absurd-sexual-assault-prevention-tips/#comment-40423
>@David Futrelle: "Yohan, I was referring to this, in which you seemed to suggest that agreeing to go to a room with a guy = consenting to sex:"[Quoting Yohan:] "A woman who says YES and agrees to go with her new boyfriend to his private rooms at 2:00 AM the same night cannot be considered to be a victim of 'rape', if she regrets it a few weeks later suddenly out of whatever reason."Seemed to suggest, eh? Yohan "seemed." On a feminist's blog. Break out the handcuffs!A more reasonable interpretation of Yohan's comment is that if a woman says yes — referring to SEX — and then acts on her consent, going home with him and having consensual sex, then there's still nothing to prevent her from regretting her consensual act after the fact and calling it rape. If a false allegation of rape like this CAN happen, then it probably does, and it's an injustice that the woman enjoys a feminist-enabled spectrum between impunity at one extreme and a slap on the wrist at the other.
>Feminists are very skillful in distorting all what you write or say, this blog is a good example.For what reason will a drunk woman in a bar say YES to a drunk man who is asking her to come with him (asking her to go with him for what?) and she agrees and goes with him at 0200AM to his private rooms in USA?When I wrote my comment I was never ever thinking for one moment about anything else but a one-night-stand with the full consent of both of them.However the law is tricky and to do exactly what I mention above – a one night stand with an unknown girl from a bar or party – is highly risky for the man.The drunk man is responsible and the drunk woman is not responsible for all what will happen between both of them. That's not fair, but this is the US-law.Consent? What consent is that if you can recall your consent days or even weeks later?The only solution I know and I tell this as MRA to every Western man is PREVENTION.Men cannot trust such a given consent by a woman. YES from her might mean NO, and this is even a headache for judges and bar associations. She says, he says…PREVENTION means for me as man to reject ALL sex-contact-offers in bars and during parties.To say YES and to mean NO – The law indeed treats women like small children, responsible for nothing what they say and do.Therefore, under no circumstances go with women to 'somewhere' and do not invite them to your private rooms.Say NO, even if she says YES.This is the best solution and the safest way to go for a man, just my opinion.Should any psycho-girl show up and is accusing you falsely for rape, it is VERY difficult to say I did not do that if you were indeed together with her.If you can prove however, you have not been with her but somewhere else, this is a argument, which cannot be dismissed easily even by biased investigators.The Duke case comes in my mind. Nifong, DA. There was one certain guy (Seligman?) accused for rape, but he made a phonecall with his girlfriend at that time and after he was in a taxi, using an ATM which took his picture and time-stamp and even he was captured on a video showing him leaving or entering the campus. – Clearly innocent. Legal expenses (for all of them totally) = USD 5 million!Nifong, the DA is gone, but…What happened with the poor girl, the 'victim of rape'? A crime out of her fantasy which never took place?She was writing a book about her 'experiences'.
>Manhood Academy answers Paul Elam's intellectual cowardice: http://goo.gl/ryAYn
>@Yohan "The drunk man is responsible and the drunk woman is not responsible for all what will happen between both of them. That's not fair, but this is the US-law." Not true, US rape law language is gender neutral. A woman who has sex with someone too drunk to consent has broken the law just as much as a man who does the same thing. I would advise you to stop talking about US law, as you clearly know absolutely nothing about it. On the Duke case, the defendent's are suing the city for the prosecutor's misconduct and are likely to collect the damages. "even by biased investigators" It was, in fact, the police who played a central role in getting the charges dismissed here. Do you assume that the existence of people falsely accused of murder or robbery means that no murders or robberies occur and most people that claim to have witnessed them are liars? Congratulaions, you managed to find a single solid false rape accusation. Now, what about cases like Roman Polanski, where a rapist does not face punishment and gets massive social pity? What about Charlie Sheen who has had multiple arrests for assaulting his girlfriend and still has a prime time show? What about OJ Simpson and Jack Abbott, who also published books?