In the world of fantasy writer and all-around hateful shithead Vox Day, women who are raped when they’re too drunk to consent should just suck it up, because reporting their rapes would be akin to someone calling police when they can’t remember where they’ve parked their car.
In a blog post today, Vox approvingly quotes a retiring British judge under fire for telling a newspaper that “the rape conviction statistics will not improve until women stop getting so drunk.” (This is the same judge who recently gave a teacher convicted of possessing a massive library of child porn a suspended sentence, saying that she couldn’t “criticise you for being a teacher who’s attracted to children.”)
Vox offers his take:
Perhaps women would be slower to put themselves in positions where they can be raped with impunity if they understood that they will not be taken at their word simply because they cry rape. It’s ridiculous. Can you imagine any other purported crime being investigated, much less prosecuted, on similarly vague grounds?
He follows this with an imaginary conversation between a young woman and the police in which she reports that her car is stolen because she can’t remember where she parked it.
It’s not really quite as hilarious as Vox imagines it to be.
PRO TIP: One way you can tell that forgetting where you parked your car is not actually much like rape is that no one actually calls police when they forget where they parked their car, while people do indeed report rapes, despite knowing that they will be grilled and second-guessed and called a “slut” and possibly mocked on the internet by assholes like Vox Day.
In the comments, one fellow suggests that feminists should have their right to vote taken away from them:
Feminists love to conflate the difference between saying that a drunk woman’s testimony is insufficient to establish a conviction of rape in a he/she said situation and the mythical attitude “she’s drunk so she’s asking for it even if she’s passed out on the floor.” They don’t understand that this is primary evidence for the fact that feminists should never be allowed to vote, because they’re (deliberately) too stupid to grasp the fundamental principles of civil society, or that alcohol affects men’s inhibitions as well as women’s.
Vox and his readers do indeed live in a fantasy land.
UPDATE: It’s a Vox Day twofer today! On his other blog today, Vox quotes a Daily Mail story claiming that the horrifying sexual abuse of 1400 children in Rotherham, England went unchecked in part because (as a report on the disaster notes) some social workers felt “nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist.”
Ignoring the fact that this is the self-serving claim of people who knowingly allowed this abuse to persist, and ignoring all of the other factors that contributed to this horrendous failure, Vox concludes that
the material costs of anti-racism are CONSIDERABLY worse than the material costs of racism …
Anti-racists not only actively celebrate predatory relationships, they regularly demonstrate that they have no problem whatsoever with child abuse, whether it occurs within the same race or is interracial. Moreover, what they falsely decry as “racism” is quite often nothing more than the exercise of the Constitutional right of free association. …
If you think that you possess the higher moral ground because you are anti-racist, think again. You are observably enabling widespread crime, particularly rape and child abuse, and are quite literally doing material harm to your own nation.
Astounding. Appalling. And just plain ridiculous.
Steampunked
Please share it when you’re done! 😀
Brain bleach if anyone wants it
http://youtu.be/7WbA3N4_gHM
I was going to try to write something witty, but my head hurts from all the literal face-palming I did while reading that. Ow.
Bina, I think he means that the rapists are able to rape with impunity, but his writing skills are severely lacking so who knows.
@cassandrakitty: Pretty sure that I always know where to find my vagina, dude.
More female privilege. It’s misandry all over again.
Ugh, no comments.
Just this cat:
This post does remind me of the (true?) story of a parking attendant at a local horse racecourse. Parking was in a big field. He got all the drivers of white coloured cars to park in one area, ditto for each of the other car colours. That was Dr Evil levels of genius.
Steampunked: I think I have enough material to write the sci-fi story I had in mind about the MRAs, now, but the problem is that the behaviour is so over the top they don’t work as villains. It’s too much like a parody.
And you should probably read Elizabeth Moon’s Serrano Legacy series before doing so, specifically _Rules of Engagement_ and it’s use of a group styled the “”New Texas Godfearing Militia”. Guess what their beliefs as regards gender relations are like…
Ugh, that child abuse story. TW: If you can stomach it, here’s a better source than the Daily Mail.
UK police have a long history of ignoring rapes reported by adult women, so I shouldn’t be surprised that they would do the same for children. Infuriating.
Those were my thoughts, too.
And how this guy gets off calling himself a writer when he can’t do it for shit, I don’t know. Is the bar so low for right-wing buffoons?
If I forget where my car is parked, it’s not going to result in potential pregnancy, STDs, lasting physical/psychological trauma, and the ordeal of being interrogated and dragged through the mud and slut-shamed by rape apologists. At most, it’s going to make me slightly panicky, irritated and late. What a colossal Category 5 asshole to think those two events have even a superficial resemblance to one another.
On a more cheerful note, Vox Day’s godawful novella finished 377 votes below “No Award” in the Hugo balloting. So there’s that.
Yes. Yes it is.
In the twisted world of Vox Day, he probably feels women cannot and should not consent to anything. You know, much like any other object.
It’s a reflection of the privilege that I’m sure he would deny having that this is the best analogy he can construct. I’ve also seen rape analogized to robbery or mugging, and lately (possibly here) to having one’s bike stolen.
I sure wish I lived in a world in which rape was so foreign a concept to women that they couldn’t wrap their heads around it without likening it to property crime.
Why is it always “cry rape”? What is it with these people and outmoded or weird language? The only other use of that that I can think of is “cry havoc”, which is used in Shakespeare, thus not modern, and pretty much a cliche because it’s been overused in books and movies.
Plus when I see a person passed out on the floor, my first action is to make sure they are breathing, and if not evidently a fall, put them into recovery position, not to assault anyone. Good grief, they are monsters.
Perhaps women would be slower to put themselves in positions where they can be raped with impunity if they understood that they will not be taken at their word simply because they cry rape.
It’s true. The threat of rape is often used to discourage women from going out in public, pursuing jobs and educations, making friends, having fun, and generally enjoying normal human lives. The thing is, most people see this as an argument against rape, whereas this sad bastard sees it as an argument for it.
On a more cheerful note, Vox Day’s godawful novella finished 377 votes below “No Award” in the Hugo balloting. So there’s that.
Ha! That’s the same thing that happened years ago when the Scientologists managed to get one of L. Ron Hubbard’s crappy novels on the ballot. Sometimes “No Award” just wanted it more.
AND he got his butt beat by a woman.
@Fred_the_Dog
I think they are using it as in “cry wolf.” Because women always and only claim they were raped if they are lying to get attention. *vomits*
And now they are suggesting that at least you don’t that sort of thing on any ‘feminist monitored campus’
https://twitter.com/hashtag/dateoffcampus?src=hash
https://twitter.com/dateoffcampus
yikes
Date off campus? Let’s pretend that false rape accusations are actually a problem. How the hell is dating off campus supposed to do anything about that?
Maybe its not about false accusations. These guys are saying the goal is to date women who are more rational and they can do so without the unwarranted risk of ruining their lives. But purposely avoiding feminist scrutiny is offensive and misogynistic. College women don’t want to get drunk and rejected if they feel like having sex.
…Huh?
I’ve pretty much come to the conclusion that most of the MRM’s are not actually about men at all, but, man-children and their “rights.” These are boys that still believe that every Woman should give them everything just like their Mother did (or did not). The “dating off campus” statement is a great example.
“University men avoid feminism, campus princess culture and college tribunals by dating gracious non-college women who live and work near campus.”
Which is just fancy words for this – “Fuck this house! Mom and her stupid rules. She should be grateful that I even did this much, fucking bitch. Fuck this I’m running away – she’ll know how bad she hurt me then!”
I bet you the campus ladies won’t be able to sleep for days, oh the sadness they will feel!
Ah, that is funny. But really, its giving them too much credit to say they are thinking about how the campus ladies feel about it. They see an option and go for it with tunnel vision. It certainly could be a learning experience as many ‘working class’ girls are tough as heck.
http://www.nashvillescene.com/binary/83ef/1372776716-running-away-from-home-laura-corebello.jpg
Maybe upon graduation that kid will get one of these little blue dating books. Its scary
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Us-passport.jpg
If feminist really is pervasive and controlling all aspects of society… wouldn’t dating off campus just mean dating a feminist who wasn’t going to that college?
I’m doing this wrong again, aren’t I. I keep trying to identify the logic in the MRA conclusions.