Wall Street Journal columnist James Taranto is probably the closest thing to an authentic Men’s Rights Activist there is operating in the mainstream media today, by which I mean he regularly puts forth “arguments” on gender issues that are breathtaking in their backwardness.
His latest, er, contribution to the gender debate? A column in which he suggested that drunk women who are raped on college campuses by drunk men are as guilty as their rapists. No, really. Here’s his argument, such as it is:
If two drunk drivers are in a collision, one doesn’t determine fault on the basis of demographic details such as each driver’s sex. But when two drunken college students “collide,” the male one is almost always presumed to be at fault. His diminished capacity owing to alcohol is not a mitigating factor, but her diminished capacity is an aggravating factor for him.
Huh. I’m pretty sure we determine the victim of a rape not on demographics but based on WHICH PERSON RAPED THE OTHER PERSON. Much in the way we would charge a drunken person who shot another drunken person with shooting that person, rather than simply throwing up our hands and saying, well, they were both drunk, so no harm no foul, right?
For a longer take on the issue, check out this piece over on Media Matters.
Media Matters has also assembled a nice, and mercifully rather brief, media montage of some of Taranto’s other pronouncements on gender issues. See if you can make it to the end without pulling out all of your hair.
All hale the blockquote monster!
I have eaten plenty of aubergines, but I have never stopped to measure their intelligence.
I’m a monster! *is wracked with shame*
Damn, so sorry to hear about dallasapple. 🙁 Best wishes for recovery.
*reads the thread more closely*
Oh man, I must be blind to miss this.
Best wishes for dallasapple!
“Dude, I’m going to keep jabbing you until you fucking respond to my comments. I’m a man, I’m a rape survivor, I’m the one who actually has personal experience with the shit you’re talking about. Stop pretending I’m not here.”
Citation please.
Citation for a personal experience? Really are you that stupid?
Or citation to prove you actually respond and answer questions? ‘Cauze we’ve yet to see an example of that, so no, we don’t have a citation for that. All evidence points to your unwillingness to engage on good-faith debate. Which makes you a disingenuous little shit.
Nice gotcha. Really. I’m left speechless over here … at the dumb.
@Sparky:
Being disingenuous requires some intelligence. Not seen any from Sam-I-Spam.
you all are evil, now i’m just hungry for aubergines
@ falconer
For shame! Don’t you know it’s cruel to eat something that has a face? 😉
http://i.imgur.com/GXXyO.jpg
@Kiwi girl: I think S(p)am & Sam-I-am are two different commenters.
Re: S(p)am’s ‘citation’ request. Remember, reading the comments is misandry; how on earth do you expect him to remember what he’s posted and to whom??!??
Re: dallasapple. Sending out the vibes & fingers crossed!
Oh wooky. Da twoll is twying to be kyoot!
@sam
I …did sam just ask for a citation on LBT being a rape survivor? Because that is all kinds of fucked up. Or was it on sam not responding to LBT. Because, sam I think you’re actually going to have to show us where you responded to LBT (aka not ignoring him) if you want us to buy that. Hard to cite something that didn’t happen, after all. (hard to cite a response you did not give.)
@fromafar
aaaaah, it’s evil!
Fade will tell you how high my voice squeaked. when I saw that. I confess it was not my most dignified moment 😉
ZOMG, that eggplant has a trunk!
I’ve had sex while blackout drunk.
Had I seen her sober I wouldn’t have done it, but I don’t consider that instance rape.
Now, if she got pregnant from that, that would be another can of worms.
So, Sam’s basically admitted in his attempted snipe at LBT that he doesn’t think rape exists.
Banhammer?
LOL look who’s back.
Oh god, who let Diogenes in? Anyone got a can of Raid?
@diogenes
I… if some one gets pregnant it changes if it’s rape or not? I’m so confused…
I think Diogenes meant he didn’t consider he’d been raped despite being blackout drunk.
@kittehs
I guess. I just was confused by the “if she’d gotten pregnant it’d be another can of worms” thing, which seemed to imply there was a difference there? Idk if I”m making any sense….
Yeah, you’re making sense, Marie. (You make sense 99.999999999995 of the time anyway, no need to worry there). I just got the impression the “if she got pregnant” bit (and sued for child support?) then he’d have reacted differently.
Of course I could be overestimating Diogenes the Dreary. 😛
‘ere, my % got eaten by a 5! D:
I understood it to be trolly didn’t consider it rape unless the woman, excuse me- female got pregnant because if she got pregnant then she might financially “rape” him with child support payments.