The "thing" is Ms. USA... she's apparently pro-rape. She answered a question about rape in a pro-rapey sort of way. So, is this a "thing" or just a couple of accidental tweets, like when you've eaten beans and aren't paying attention and they just sort of sneak out there and make a stink way way out of proportion?
In any case... this is the horrible horrible pro-rapey answer given by the woman who eventually wins Ms. USA.
She just makes the one statement, I think that the video repeats it a few time... so once she says it you can stop... there really isn't something more pro-rapey coming at the end.
Ace of Spades HQ had this *promptly* and included one of the offended tweets. Larry Correia has a very nice run down of all (all?) of them. A sample:
’I'm sorry, but women shouldn’t need to take self defense classes to protect themselves from rape #MissUSA—
Peter Simon (@PeterSimon12) June 09, 2014
Now, Larry Correia is the guy to go to if you want a direct answer to how dumb this is. Plus, he's got the chops, as they say, to have an opinion about it since he's dedicated a considerable part of his life to teaching self-defense... even if he thinks that a gun is probably a better choice than 12 years of study in Tae Kwon Do. He's also entertaining, so go read that.
What I am more interested in is just how these accidental stinky little tweets were released out into the world? What cause, or what philosophy, is so important that it's necessary to portray black as white and up as down? Why is it so important that women BE victims?
The "teach men not to rape" thing is silly, but it's rather ubiquitous. Sure that would be nice to teach rapists not to rape, but it's impossible short of a conversion by the blood of Jesus... while locked up in prison... and it hardly takes a rocket scientist to figure that out. So what's going on?
I think that it's in defense of a definition of rape that has no meaning but has a great deal of political power. I think that the political power is more important to the cause of the "teach men not to rape" crowd than empowering individual women to defend themselves or to be safe.
The power involved rests on the doctrine that all men are rapists and that any unwelcome or regretted sex is rape. Because if you define it that way, yes, men can be taught that sex with a drunk chick who strips naked and shouts "come and get me big boy" is actually rape. Why can he be taught this? Because he is not a rapist, and never was a rapist. But never mind that, the assault on "rape culture" and the power acquired by the cause would crumble to dust if anyone admitted that the only men who are rapists are the ones who are rapists... just as only the murderers are murderers and only the thieves are thieves.
But if everything, absolutely everything, rests on the ability to insist that bad decisions on the woman's part is equal to rape on the man's part, and that saying no and then letting yourself be persuaded is him raping you, and well... dang... you sure don't want someone saying, "Well, why didn't you punch him in the nose?" Because that's victim shaming and suggesting that the victim deserved what she got. Therefore it's vitally necessary that no woman ever defend herself, nor so much as suggest that a woman should defend herself.
And so we end up here, wondering if this is a "thing" or if it was just a handful of silly persons having a brain fart.
28 comments:
Who doesn't want to be safer? How is anything she said wrong?
I feel for young men who have to put up with this crap.
I absented myself from this con game by associating with traditional Filipino women, who simply don't care about this con.
Shouting Thomas... I'm pretty sure that Ms. USA also doesn't care about that con.
Good for her.
Of course, it is on college campuses that this redefinition of rape as "any kind of disagreeable sexual experience" takes its toll of young men. Kangaroo academic courts expel young men for "sexual" assault based on this redefinition.
And, at the same time, colleges are exalting homosexuality.
I see a connection.
So what's going on?
I ask that almost daily.
What's going on is called "evil."
The Dark Lord is an expert at disguising his work as a matter of virtue.
God is the father.
The Dark Lord is cleverly organizing a rebellion against the most basic concept.
And, once again, Eve is taking a bite out of the apple.
A young Robert Louis Stevenson, assigned to cover the building of the Intercontinental Railroad in the Colonies, noted that the hookers that followed the construction gangs conspicuously strapped derringers to their waists as they solicited business.
They were generally treated with respect.
The feminuts should drop the victim act and take note.
The other McCain has a related story this morning about a good guy on campus who got accused and instead of shutting up and hiring a lawyer made things worst for himself by trying to explain what happened.
What cause is worth demanding women be victims?
The cause of defending Bill Clinton springs to mind.
By denying reality and the need to be prepared, feminists preach magical thinking.
Not unlike 4-year-olds, they believe thinking something can make it so.
Non-feminist adults recognize that the world is fallen, that there is evil around us, and it is your duty to be prepared.
But now we are faced with the perpetually adolescent narcissists demanding that the world bend to their desires, no matter how fleeting and incoherent.
As such, statements by real adults are anathema.
The truth, it burns!
Everyone...EVERYONE needs to be prepared to defend themselves. How is this a controversial thought?
The world isn't always dangerous and people should be aware that even though their little idyllic neighborhood may be like Mr. Rogers....occasionally and actually quite often you will wander into a less than desirable situation. No one is going to come and save your swooning ass. Be Prepared. Be aware. Be ready.
Or...die.
Exactly.
And adolescents read the difference between expectations and reality as oppression.
But reality always asserts itself.
Everyone...EVERYONE needs to be prepared to defend themselves. How is this a controversial thought?
It ultimately collides with their big thing, global warming, the secret weapon, if you will, that promises them complete power over every living thing that crawls and breathes. It's that simple.
You can't convince people of a coming danger, impending doom, if they believe in things like self defense, property rights, privacy, free speech, freedom of assembly.
It gets in their way.
It is a "thing" I don't understand the logic . Yes, in an ideal world there would be no rapists, but until then people should be able to defend themselves and people should be taught what constitutes consent. But, I have heard that we should teach men not to rape before.
You can't convince people of a coming danger, impending doom, if they believe in things like self defense, property rights, privacy, free speech, freedom of assembly.
Would like to also believe that those things are tangible, immutable constants. However, I've come to know that we are always standing on shifting sands.
People want to believe, like they believe in Tinkerbell in the story.. Clap your hands and it will all be well.
Well....it isn't a fairy tale and we need to be prepared to defend ourselves. Not just as the future Ms USA says against just all that rapey stuff...but against more dire and permanent danger.
Women AND MEN need to be able to protect themselves against anything that could possibly happen. To do otherwise is to just bare your throat to the wolves.
I'd say... prepare to defend ourselves, yes, be *able* to defend ourselves... well, I do know exactly what you meant but someone will always come up with the complaint that self-defense isn't 100% effective.
Because of that I've started trying to express the idea of having a chance.
Yes, I know that the complaint that people are not perfectly safe, thus they should not ever attempt to defend themselves is totally irrational. In fact, it approaches the sort of irrational argument that the post is about.
Because you can't achieve a 100% of something you shouldn't even try.
It was the argument against a defense from nuclear missiles.
We are not going to get them all, so why even try.
In the end, convincing them that we could and would try to defend against the missile brought them to negotiate and eventually see things our way, if only commercially speaking.
Just showing a willingness to defend brought about concrete, measurable results.
I'm sorry but these women are all beautiful and dumb as rocks.
I'm sorry but these women are all beautiful and dumb as rocks.
Says a guy with an avatr of a beautiful woman. NTTAWWT
You're the only person who knows my real name, Lem. (well perhaps not the only) Am I a guy? wow - cool! I've always wanted a real penis.
I don't think Uma Thurman ever sashayed across a stage in a bikini in search of a tiara and a title. I could be wrong. :)
I thought ChickL said or insinuated somewhere other than this thread that you were a guy. Sorry i got that wrong.
I like what Larry Correia said: "Back in college I went out with Miss Utah State and attended several of these things. One thing that I learned was that despite the stereotypes about the dumb beauty queen, most of these women were very smart."
Sure, only *most* of them were smart and even a smart person can sound like a ditz at any given moment. I never quite got the concept of a beauty pageant but I doubt there's a better way to "network" than managing to win a title. Which, if you think you can manage it, would be worth playing the game.
It was a very bad couple of days for Miss USA.
On the Real Housewives of New York that aired last night a former Miss USA appeared. One of the ho-wives passed around a rumor that this woman had a three way the night before with her father and his 58years younger finance who is also an attractive young black woman. Aviva (the ho-wife in question) sent a text about this during a luncheon to fight women's cancer while the main speaker was giving a heartfelt speech. The phone was passed around as these bitches proceeded to cackle, emote and general act like third graders and ignore the speechs.
Later google-eyed psycho Ramona went up to Miss USA to question her about this situation and she denied everything as I would assume you would. The Amazing thing is that this woman signed a release to allow this to go out on the airwaves. Which proves one thing.
The worst kind of whore is fame-whore.
Post a Comment