Return of Kings: Supporters of website touting 'legalising rape' to meet across Australia

[RavenSky]

Yes, I know. I use the same response when trying to find a way to defend a position which I don't actually have a decent reason for holding. It's easier to try and distract the conversation away from that fact an it is to try and figure out how I came to the conclusions which I have and perhaps even begin to question them. It's a good debating technique for you to use.

Male bovine excrement, it's the usual bait switch that goes on here. Tedious beyond belief.

Then stop posting in the thread.

Betcha can't

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Yes, I know. I use the same response when trying to find a way to defend a position which I don't actually have a decent reason for holding. It's easier to try and distract the conversation away from that fact an it is to try and figure out how I came to the conclusions which I have and perhaps even begin to question them. It's a good debating technique for you to use.

Male bovine excrement, it's the usual bait switch that goes on here. Tedious beyond belief.

Yes, I agree. Trying to derail the thread with insults is yet another decent way to draw attention away from the fact that not even you can figure out a way to support the position you're attempting to argue. Really, it's the fault of everyone except you that you can't back up what you're saying.

 

[TSwizzle]

Male bovine excrement, it's the usual bait switch that goes on here. Tedious beyond belief.

Yes, I agree. Trying to derail the thread with insults is yet another decent way to draw attention away from the fact that not even you can figure out a way to support the position you're attempting to argue. Really, it's the fault of everyone except you that you can't back up what you're saying.

Wait, you think I should respond/explain things I never said ? LOL, jog on, not going to happen.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Yes, I agree. Trying to derail the thread with insults is yet another decent way to draw attention away from the fact that not even you can figure out a way to support the position you're attempting to argue. Really, it's the fault of everyone except you that you can't back up what you're saying.

Wait, you think I should respond/explain things I never said ? LOL, jog on, not going to happen.

No, of course not. I think you should back up the things you did say, however. Every post you make bitching about the meta-conversation instead of doing so drives that further back in the thread, though, and allows you to pretend that you didn't say those things. Good work.

 

[RavenSky]

Here it is again, so TSwizzle can defend/support his position this time

Why should women not have to face the consequences of bad choices.

Why should victims of drunk drivers not have to face the consequences of bad choices of being in the wrong place at the wrong time?
Why should the victims of armed robbers not have to face the consequences of bad choices of carrying cash and clean cut clothes?
Why should arson victims not have to face the consequences of bad choices of being around flammable materials?
Why should victims of airline disasters not have to face the consequences of bad choices of living in a flight path or choosing an airline based upon cost?

 

[TSwizzle]

Wait, you think I should respond/explain things I never said ? LOL, jog on, not going to happen.

No, of course not. I think you should back up the things you did say, however. Every post you make bitching about the meta-conversation instead of doing so drives that further back in the thread, though, and allows you to pretend that you didn't say those things. Good work.

As I said, I'm not going to respond to stuff I never said. Jog on.

- - - Updated - - -

Here it is again, so TSwizzle can defend/support his position this time

Why should victims of drunk drivers not have to face the consequences of bad choices of being in the wrong place at the wrong time?
Why should the victims of armed robbers not have to face the consequences of bad choices of carrying cash and clean cut clothes?
Why should arson victims not have to face the consequences of bad choices of being around flammable materials?
Why should victims of airline disasters not have to face the consequences of bad choices of living in a flight path or choosing an airline based upon cost?

*yawn* Already brushed aside.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Here it is again, so TSwizzle can defend/support his position this time

Why should victims of drunk drivers not have to face the consequences of bad choices of being in the wrong place at the wrong time?
Why should the victims of armed robbers not have to face the consequences of bad choices of carrying cash and clean cut clothes?
Why should arson victims not have to face the consequences of bad choices of being around flammable materials?
Why should victims of airline disasters not have to face the consequences of bad choices of living in a flight path or choosing an airline based upon cost?

In TSwizzles defense he is stating that irresponsibility and bad choices have consequences. This is not controversial. The problem here is it is coupled with another's behavior to take advantage of these bad choices to harm another individual. Let's say a woman is drunk and walking alone late at night. Yes, she should not have been drunk and alone, that is irresponsible. But her being alone and drunk does not give another individual carte blanche to take advantage of the situation.

 

[Toni]

So, no you don't really believe in personal responsibility.

Behave yourself. You believe all men are either rapists, would like to be rapists or applaud rapists. It's perverse.

You lack completely and utterly any capacity to pretend to know or to speak on my behalf about what I do or do not believe not do you possess any qualifications that might convince me to take your advice about my behavior.

 

[TSwizzle]

Here it is again, so TSwizzle can defend/support his position this time

In TSwizzles defense he is stating that irresponsibility and bad choices have consequences. This is not controversial. The problem here is it is coupled with another's behavior to take advantage of these bad choices to harm another individual. Let's say a woman is drunk and walking alone late at night. Yes, she should not have been drunk and alone, that is irresponsible. But her being alone and drunk does not give another individual carte blanche to take advantage of the situation.

This is a bit more reasonable. There is no "deserved to be raped" about it. I've never said that, nor have I applauded rape etc.

 

[Arctish]

Pro-Rape Meet-Up Canceled After Women’s Boxing Club Threatens to Show Up

After word of the Newsgirls' plans spread, Roosh decided to cancel the meet-ups, writing that he can "no longer guarantee the safety or privacy of the men who want to attend."

So, I guess the best thing for RoK fanboys to do is just stay home. Because if they get their asses kicked it'll be their fault for flaunting their punchability in public.

 

[RavenSky]

Pro-Rape Meet-Up Canceled After Women’s Boxing Club Threatens to Show Up

After word of the Newsgirls' plans spread, Roosh decided to cancel the meet-ups, writing that he can "no longer guarantee the safety or privacy of the men who want to attend."

sounds like the typical abuser misogynist... he's actually a whiny coward

So, I guess the best thing for RoK fanboys to do is just stay home. Because if they get their asses kicked it'll be their fault for flaunting their punchability in public.

Imagine feeling unsafe in a public space, or afraid to have your privacy violated. As a woman, I have no idea what that must be like.

word

 

[RavenSky]

Here it is again, so TSwizzle can defend/support his position this time

In TSwizzles defense he is stating that irresponsibility and bad choices have consequences. This is not controversial. The problem here is it is coupled with another's behavior to take advantage of these bad choices to harm another individual. Let's say a woman is drunk and walking alone late at night. Yes, she should not have been drunk and alone, that is irresponsible. But her being alone and drunk does not give another individual carte blanche to take advantage of the situation.

Just out of curiosity, how often has anyone here ever had a conversation about how men should never be drunk and walking alone at night?

Is there a list printed somewhere of behaviors women shouldn't engage in lest they be declared "irresponsible"? Is the list the same for men?

As someone asked earlier, how many "irresponsible" actions can a woman take before her rape ends up being entirely her fault. How few can she take and not be judged/blamed?

Yes, she should not have been drunk and alone, that is irresponsible.

So is it "drunk and alone" - both parts must be present for her to be deemed "irresponsible"? Or is just "drunk" enough? Or how about just "alone at night"?

Oh, and these last questions are for Loren... is it acceptable for a woman to kick a man in the balls if she is sufficiently taller than he is so she has no risk of being thrown off balance? How about if she knees him with full force. Will you give your male blessing to that defensive move?

We females really need you men to tell us how to behave...

or not.

P.S. Nice Squirrel, I know that you are trying to be even-handed here, and not a dick like a few others, but you are still placing blame where it doesn't belong.

 

[RavenSky]

To see Roosh and his acolytes pilloried on an international scale has been a strange experience for me. I don’t write about them (because I’m busy, they haven’t earned my time, and they have mistaken attention for legitimacy, a delusion I have no interest in feeding), a hard and fast rule I’m breaking for the first time here.

But they write about me. If you Google “Lindy West” and “Roosh”, the first eight results are from Roosh’s various websites: “Lindy West Brags About Getting an Abortion”, “Lindy West Leaving Jezebel, Still a Whale”, “Fat Feminist Lindy West Goes Berserk Because She No Longer Fits in Airplane Seats”, “The 9 Ugliest Feminists in America” (I’m #1!), and on and on and on. For years, Roosh and his bootlickers have been feverishly monitoring my life, mining it for vulnerabilities that they can exploit. They have stolen my wedding photos. They’ve vandalised my Wikipedia page. They’ve posted pictures of my children and my husband’s ex-wife. They’ve written long, sexually graphic poems about me. They’re obsessed with a completely innocuous YouTube video I made four years ago (because I eat food in it), and still leave comments: “Fatty fucking fat ass get raped you stupid fat landwhale.” And I’m far from their only target.

So it was disorienting, last week, to see the person who orchestrated all of that hate issue this plea for mercy on Twitter: “Anonymous doxxed my family’s address. Whatever I’ve done in life, they don’t deserve to be harassed or harmed.”

I know that feeling so well: just please let me get through this intact. Please let my family remain unharmed. Please don’t make me move. Please let me live.

I know that feeling largely because of Roosh. I’m an anti-harassment advocate largely because of Roosh. And he’s right. His family doesn’t deserve it. Unlike Roosh, I actually oppose doxxing and death threats, even against people I dislike. So it’s difficult for me to enjoy watching anyone, even someone who’s tormented me with a pathological intensity for years, go through a hell I’ve devoted so much of my professional life to fighting.


And, ethical concerns aside, Roosh facing some karmic retribution for the havoc he’s wreaked on women’s lives doesn’t bring me much satisfaction, because it really doesn’t accomplish much. He was already a buffoon caterwauling on the fringe. That the whole world knows it now doesn’t change that fact. What matters is that we recognize that Roosh and his repellant worldview don’t exist in a vacuum; they’re an extreme crystallization of attitudes with real roots in our real lives.

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-roosh-v-valizadeh-and-his-acolytes-pilloried

 

[Toni]

In TSwizzles defense he is stating that irresponsibility and bad choices have consequences. This is not controversial. The problem here is it is coupled with another's behavior to take advantage of these bad choices to harm another individual. Let's say a woman is drunk and walking alone late at night. Yes, she should not have been drunk and alone, that is irresponsible. But her being alone and drunk does not give another individual carte blanche to take advantage of the situation.

Why, exactly, should a woman not be drunk and walk alone? Why is that irresponsible? Surely you would not want her to drive home?

What about just alone? Can a woman responsibly walk alone? Is there a particular o'clock which determines whether she is being responsible or irresponsible?

Are drunk women walking home alone prone to committing crimes? Do they harass innocent men standing on the street corner, hoping to score a little somethinsomethin? Do they break windows? Graffiti buildings? Set fires? Slash tires? Make book?

You have no idea what it felt like to have to tell my daughter all the things she shouldn't do---not because they were wrong but because if she did them, she would be entirely too vulnerable to having crimes committed against her. And to have to try to defend my words when she pointed out that her brother received no such cautions. No one told him to make sure his shirt or jeans weren't too tight or to make sure not to leave too many buttons undone. No one told him he shouldn't walk 3 blocks home from his friend's house after dark. Mind you: we live in a small town where most people know each other and many are related to each other. It's safe enough my neighbor only locks her house if she goes out of town. But I still had to worry about my daughter doing something so outrageous as walking home from her friend's house after dark. Do you know how hard it was to look her in the eyes and explain that she couldn't do something that is perfectly ordinary, healthy, even, if you are male, legal, moral, safe if you have a penis and testicles but not if you have breasts?

She was right: fuck that shit.

 

[bigfield]

You have no idea what it felt like to have to tell my daughter all the things she shouldn't do---not because they were wrong but because if she did them, she would be entirely too vulnerable to having crimes committed against her. And to have to try to defend my words when she pointed out that her brother received no such cautions. No one told him to make sure his shirt or jeans weren't too tight or to make sure not to leave too many buttons undone. No one told him he shouldn't walk 3 blocks home from his friend's house after dark. Mind you: we live in a small town where most people know each other and many are related to each other. It's safe enough my neighbor only locks her house if she goes out of town. But I still had to worry about my daughter doing something so outrageous as walking home from her friend's house after dark. Do you know how hard it was to look her in the eyes and explain that she couldn't do something that is perfectly ordinary, healthy, even, if you are male, legal, moral, safe if you have a penis and testicles but not if you have breasts?

Dude, stop slut-shaming your daughter.

 

[Will Wiley]

no.

http://www.rooshv.com/how-to-stop-rape

I saw women wholly unconcerned with their own safety and the character of men they developed intimate relationships with. I saw women who voluntarily numbed themselves with alcohol and other drugs in social settings before letting the direction of the night’s wind determine who they would follow into a private room. I saw women who, once feeling awkward, sad, or guilty for a sexual encounter they didn’t fully remember, call upon an authority figure to resolve the problem by locking up her previous night’s lover in prison or ejecting him from school.

By attempting to teach men not to rape, what we have actually done is teach women not to care about being raped, not to protect themselves from easily preventable acts, and not to take responsibility for their actions. At the same time, we don’t hesitate to blame men for bad things that happen to them (if right now you walked into a dangerous ghetto and got robbed, you would be called an idiot and no one would say “teach ghetto kids not to steal”). It was obvious to me that the advice of our esteemed establishment writers and critics wasn’t stopping the problem, and since rape was already on the law books with severe penalties, additional laws or flyers posted on dormitory doors won’t stop this rape culture either.

Liking and trusting the wrong the man is not illegal, not even immoral. (And after these many years posting on these boards, I can name several men here who better be glad and appreciate that fact, otherwise they would never be with a woman.)

Getting drunk, provided you are of drinking age, is not illegal.

Forcing sex on someone without that person's consent is illegal, is immoral, and is totally the decision and responsibility of the rapist.

What kind of a man needs a woman to be drunk and or forced to have sex with him? And what kind of a person wants that kind of man to be able to blame his actions on his victim?

Just because something is not illegal doesn't mean it's not irresponsible,

Irresponsible behavior. ALSO not illegal and does not mitigate in the least the actions of the rapist.

Do you want it to?

Why do you think I would want it to?

I would like to see less rapes.

My experience, as a man, is that I have never known men to joke about raping a female or to suggest it or plan it. And I know a lot of men and I have hung out with a lot of men in a lot of situations, and they aren't all angels. I know people who have killed stolen bashed people and various other crimes, as well as people who have never committed a crime.

I have on many occasions seen women who put themselves in very dangerous situations often involving alcohol or drugs I know women who have shared with me how usually through alcohol they have put themselves in very risky dangerous situations and how later in the light of day they realised how foolish that was.

So i think Voosh has a point when he points to these things

 

[Will Wiley]

Here it is again, so TSwizzle can defend/support his position this time

In TSwizzles defense he is stating that irresponsibility and bad choices have consequences. This is not controversial. The problem here is it is coupled with another's behavior to take advantage of these bad choices to harm another individual. Let's say a woman is drunk and walking alone late at night. Yes, she should not have been drunk and alone, that is irresponsible. But her being alone and drunk does not give another individual carte blanche to take advantage of the situation.

Since we are talking about Voosh (or whatever his name is) why not talk about his examples?
He talks about women getting drunk or high and then going to a private home with one or more men she didn't know.
He saw this happen often. I've seen this happen too often to recall.

 

[Will Wiley]

P.S. Nice Squirrel, I know that you are trying to be even-handed here, and not a dick like a few others, but you are still placing blame where it doesn't belong.

Is there anything a woman could do which would be foolish and stupid?

I know there are many women I know who think that popping some pills and getting drunk and going to a private home with men she didn't know would be foolish and stupid. Do you think it would be?

 

[Juma]

P.S. Nice Squirrel, I know that you are trying to be even-handed here, and not a dick like a few others, but you are still placing blame where it doesn't belong.

Is there anything a woman could do which would be foolish and stupid?

I know there are many women I know who think that popping some pills and getting drunk and going to a private home with men she didn't know would be foolish and stupid. Do you think it would be?

It might be foolish and stupid, but if she is sexually exploitet without consent it is still not her fault.

 

[Will Wiley]

Is there anything a woman could do which would be foolish and stupid?

I know there are many women I know who think that popping some pills and getting drunk and going to a private home with men she didn't know would be foolish and stupid. Do you think it would be?

It might be foolish and stupid, but if she is sexually exploitet without consent it is still not her fault.

Ok so it is foolish and stupid, which is what Voosh says too, except he goes a step further and says if a woman doesn't act foolishly in that way she is less likely to be raped.

Is that good advice for a young woman?