Society/Culture Feminism part 1 - continued in part 2

[Total Power]

Glad I started your day well.

Bedtime here mate lol

 

[Reality Check!]

ITT: Angry virgins

 

[kfc1]

ITT: Angry virgins

Since you checked in the population has doubled

 

[Reality Check!]

Since you checked in the population has doubled

That was a good burn, I'll pay that.

 

[kfc1]

had a good lol @ this
https://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/

PIV is always rape, ok?

Just to recall a basic fact: Intercourse/PIV is always rape, plain and simple.

This is a developed recap from what I’ve been saying in various comments here and there in the last two years or so. as a radfem I’ve always said PIV is rape and I remember being disappointed to discover that so few radical feminists stated it clearly. How can you possibly see it otherwise? Intercourse is the very means through which men oppress us, from which we are not allowed to escape, yet some instances of or PIV and intercourse may be chosen and free? That makes no sense at all.

First, well intercourse is NEVER sex for women. Only men experience rape as sexual and define it as such. Sex for men is the unilateral penetration of their penis into a woman (or anything else replacing and symbolising the female orifice) whether she thinks she wants it or not – which is the definition of rape: that he will to do it anyway and that he uses her and treats her as a receptacle, in all circumstances – it makes no difference to him experiencing it as sexual. That is, at the very least, men use women as useful objects and instruments for penetration, and women are dehumanised by this act. It is an act of violence.

As FCM pointed out some time ago, intercourse is inherently harmful to women and intentionally so, because it causes pregnancy in women. The purpose of men enforcing intercourse regularly (as in, more than once a month) onto women is because it’s the surest way to cause pregnancy and force childbearing against our will, and thereby gain control over our reproductive powers. There is no way to eliminate the pregnancy risk entirely off PIV and the mitigating and harm-reduction practices such as contraception and abortion are inherently harmful, too. Reproductive harms of PIV range from pregnancy to abortion, having to take invasive, or toxic contraception, giving birth, forced child bearing and rearing and all the complications that go with them which may lead up to severe physical and emotional damage, disability, destitution, illness, or death (See factcheckme.wordpress.com for her work on the reproductive harms of PIV, click on the “intercourse series” page or “PIV” in the search bar). If we compare this to even the crappiest online definition of violence: “behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something”. Bingo. It fits: Pregnancy = may hurt, damage or kill. Intercourse = a man using his physical force to penetrate a woman. Intention / purpose of the act of intercourse = to cause pregnancy. PIV is therefore intentional harm / violence. Intentional sexual harm of a man against a woman through penile penetration = RAPE.

If we look at the act in more detail (skip this parag if you can’t take it), PIV is a man mounting on a woman to thrust a large member of himself into her most intimate parts, often forcing her to be entirely naked, banging himself against her with the whole weight of his body and hips, shaking her like he would stuff a corpse, then using her insides as a receptacle for his penile dejection. How is this a normal civilised, respectful way to treat anyone? Sorry for the explicit picture, but this is what it is and it’s absolutely revolting and violating.

The term “**** you” is not an insult for nothing, men know why – it’s the worst thing you can do to a human being. It is in itself an extremely physically invasive act, very often painful, generally at the beginning before the pain may be cut off by the genital arousal; causes all sorts of tears, bruises, swelling, discomfort, STDs, vaginal infections, urinary infections, genital warts, HIV and death. Not to forget the additional sado-gynecological interventions/ costs of PIV-maintenance, and all the secondary physical mutiliation and financial costs that go with our duty to make ourselves look decorative for male sexual consumption – such as hair removal, make-up, starvation or forced feeding, torturous limb deforming or cutting up, etc.

The fact intercourse causes so many infections and tears and warts attests to the unnaturalness of intercourse, that it’s not meant to be. The vagina’s primary function isn’t to be penetrated by a penis but to eject a baby for birth. They are two muscle tissues / sphincters pressed against each other to help the baby be pushed out. Penetration of the penis into the vagina is completely unnecessary for conception.

There’s a reason men need to groom us into it, and why this grooming takes so long- because it’s so grossly violating and traumatising that we would otherwise never submit to intercourse. The only reason we may now not feel r*ped or have the impression we desired or initiated PIV, is because men broke down our barriers very skillfully and progressively from birth, breaking down our natural defences to pain and invasion, our confidence in our own perceptions and sensations of fear and disgust that tell us male sexual invasion is painful, harmful and traumatic.

Through an all-pervasive and powerful male propaganda, they stuff our minds from infancy with the idea that PIV is normal, desirable and erotic, before we can even conceive of it as something horrifying, and make sure we never see any alternative to their lie – or that if we do, we can no longer take in the information, are punished for thinking and saying otherwise. The fact we may not immediately feel r*ped doesn’t mean it’s not rape, objectively speaking. To give a classic example, many women in prostitution may not identify the act of prostitution as rape, except if the act wasn’t paid for. It doesn’t stop us from saying that all prostitution is rape. We know that our subjective feelings or thoughts may be colonised by men’s perspectives and as radical feminists we don’t let that override and erase the objective reality of violence. (PS -The reason why ONLY the lack of payment is defined as rape is because the offence here isn’t against the prostituted woman but the pimp who was deprived of his income. Rape comes from rapt, which is an old word for theft of woman-as-property.)

Lastly, from a structural point of view, as a class oppressed by men, we are not in any position of freedom to negotiate what men do to us collectively and individually within the heterocage. Men, by whom we are possessed, colonised and held captive, are the sole agents and organisers of PIV. Men dominate us precisely so we can’t opt out of sexual abuse by them; intercourse is the very means through which men subordinate us, the very purpose of their domination, to control human reproduction.

 

[Lester Burnham]

had a good lol @ this
https://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/

That article r*ped my eyes.

 

[tesseract]

had a good lol @ this
https://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/

Here's just a few feminist quotes which evidence the feminist view that consensual heterosexual sex is to be considered rape and/or anti-feminist. Btw, these feminists aren't your average misguided and ignorant coffee shop variety feminists spouting feminism equals equality, these women are part of feminism's brains trust and are novelists, activists and academics.

"The institution of sexual intercourse is anti-feminist." Ti-Grace Atkinson

"When a woman reaches orgasm with a man she is only collaborating with the patriarchal system, eroticizing her own oppression." Sheila Jeffrys

"Politically, I call it rape whenever a woman has sex and feels violated." Catherine MacKinnon

"And if the professional rapist is to be separated from the average dominant heterosexual (male), it may be mainly a quantitative difference." Susan Griffin

 

[kfc1]

Sick! Feel sorry for you.

Why do you feel sorry for me?

 

[Maggie5]

Why do you feel sorry for me?

If you can't work it for yourself in posting that photo, really don't have the energy to explain. Used all my energy up in feeling sorry for you.

 

[kfc1]

If you can't work it for yourself in posting that photo, really don't have the energy to explain. Used all my energy up in feeling sorry for you.

Typical. Did you read the article I posted?

 

[Keys]

had a good lol @ this
https://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/

So we've found the feminist equivalent of Tess it would seem

 

[skilts]

I wonder if it's muffled.

 

[Chief]

had a good lol @ this
https://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/

So glad you posted the entire thing.

Sounds like drivel to me. For one it omits the "permission" aspect entirely.

Legally, any touching is assault. This is mitigated entirely by consent or agreement. Legally you cannot give someone permission to kill you.

 

[evo]

What happens when women call out feminism?

Her intros always make me chuckle.

yeah, she's great.

 

[Chief]

I wonder if it's muffled.

Only because the patriarchy is trying to silence it!

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

I always thought Tessie was an unemployable social misfit living in his mum's sewing room.

Turns out he is the Mayor of Albury. Who would have thought?

 

[cartwright]

I always thought Tessie was an unemployable social misfit living in his mum's sewing room.

Turns out he is the Mayor of Albury. Who would have thought?

*sigh*.

"I always have encouraged women not to walk alone, to have someone with them at all times, because that in itself is an invitation for someone to take advantage of you,"

http://www.theage.com.au/nsw/women-...lbury-after-alleged-rape-20150430-1mxcph.html

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

I always thought Tessie was an unemployable social misfit living in his mum's sewing room.

Turns out he is the Mayor of Albury. Who would have thought?

For reference:

I always have encouraged women not to walk alone, to have someone with them at all times, because that in itself is an invitation for someone to take advantage of you.

I guess, depending on your point of view, this could either be seen as victim blaming or encouraging women to take necessary precautions.

I think the use of the word 'invitation' will cause a bit of a stir.

Edit: Beat me to it, cartwright

 

[Slippery Pete]

Earlier this week, SJWs went after "Australia's angriest coach" Alastair Clarkson, suggesting that his actions perpetuated a "one-punch culture", and, anyway, where does a man in his position get off walking alone at night?!

This week, SJWs are outraged over the Albury mayor's comments that women shouldn't walk alone at night, these comments perpetuate a "rape culture," they say, and where does this mayor get off, telling women they shouldn't walk alone at night?!

The sick, diseased cognitive dissonance of the SJW in all its ugly, black-framed glasses-wearing glory. If only they could see themselves as others see them.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

Earlier this week, SJWs went after "Australia's angriest coach" Alastair Clarkson, suggesting that his actions perpetuated a "one-punch culture", and, anyway, where does a man in his position get off walking alone at night?!

This week, SJWs are outraged over the Albury mayor's comments that women shouldn't walk alone at night, these comments perpetuate a "rape culture," they say, and where does this mayor get off, telling women they shouldn't walk alone at night?!

The sick, diseased cognitive dissonance of the SJW in all its ugly, black-framed glasses-wearing glory. If only they could see themselves as others see them.

I think people are justifiably pissed off with an elected official who says that a 17 year old girl who was allegedly gang-r*ped at knife point invited the attack. Maybe you think she asked for it, I certainly don't.

 

[Slippery Pete]

I think people are justifiably pissed off with an elected official who says that a 17 year old girl who was allegedly gang-r*ped at knife point invited the attack. Maybe you think she asked for it, I certainly don't.

Not at all, and neither did Clarkson.

 

[Probitas_]

Using the term SJW is a convenient way to let others know you have ridiculous opinions on a wide range of subjects.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Using the term SJW is a convenient way to let others know what to picture in their minds.

EFA.

This:

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

I think people are justifiably pissed off with an elected official who says that a 17 year old girl who was allegedly gang-r*ped at knife point invited the attack. Maybe you think she asked for it, I certainly don't.

That's the thing though. You, me, and the vast majority of people don't see a woman walking alone at night (or any behaviour, for that matter) as an invitation to sexually assault them. But most people would be repulsed by the thought of sexually assaulting someone in the first place, so it doesn't really matter if we see it as an invitation or not.

A sex offender (or potential sex offender) absolutely does see certain behaviours as an invitation for assault - they use all sorts of justifications for their actions to convince themselves that they aren't at fault. The victim deserved it; or brought it on themselves; or actually wants to be r*ped/enjoys being r*ped etc. Anything to shield themselves from their own evil. These are the people that women (or people in general, really) need to protect themselves from, and their minds work differently to most.

This one seems to have been an opportunistic attack, so it is really about denying them the opportunity in the first place in cases like this.

I should stress that it's not the fault of the victim - at all - and I hope they are caught and charged (though, based on the low number of convictions in sexual assault cases, I won't hold my breath on that one) ASAP. The blame lies 100% with the perpetrators - in all cases - but people also have a responsibility for their own personal safety.


P.S Sorry for the rant - bored at work!

 

[cartwright]

That's the thing though. You, me, and the vast majority of people don't see a woman walking alone at night (or any behaviour, for that matter) as an invitation to sexually assault them. But most people would be repulsed by the thought of sexually assaulting someone in the first place, so it doesn't really matter if we see it as an invitation or not.

A sex offender (or potential sex offender) absolutely does see certain behaviours as an invitation for assault - they use all sorts of justifications for their actions to convince themselves that they aren't at fault. The victim deserved it; or brought it on themselves; or actually wants to be r*ped/enjoys being r*ped etc. Anything to shield themselves from their own evil. These are the people that women (or people in general, really) need to protect themselves from, and their minds work differently to most.

This one seems to have been an opportunistic attack, so it is really about denying them the opportunity in the first place in cases like this.

I should stress that it's not the fault of the victim - at all - and I hope they are caught and charged (though, based on the low number of convictions in sexual assault cases, I won't hold my breath on that one) ASAP. The blame lies 100% with the perpetrators - in all cases - but people also have a responsibility for their own personal safety.


P.S Sorry for the rant - bored at work!

I do find it interesting we hardly hear this when someone is randomly bashed.