Posted on 03/26/2014 12:41:09 PM PDT by rickmichaels
The CBCs Jian Ghomeshi is the most amiable, open-minded guy in the world, with a good sense of humour to boot. The perfect radio host. His weekly show, Q, frequently provides proof of his willingness to explore both sides of a gamut of issues in the classic liberal tradition.
Unfortunately, amongst doctrinaire feminists, amiability, intellectual curiosity and even (especially?) a sense of humour dont cut it when their pet theories fall into Qs crosshairs. Ghomeshi had the temerity on Monday to host a debate about the veracity of rape culture, between Lise Gotell, chair of Womens and Gender Studies at the University of Alberta, and conservative researcher Heather Macdonald of the Manhattan Institute.
A storm of indignation erupted, describing Macdonald as a rape apologist for expressing the perfectly sensible view that if girls did not drink [themselves] blotto at parties, the entire phenomenon called rape culture would virtually disappear. She is not wrong, but it is politically incorrect to blame the victim. No, the only correct view is that Drinking doesnt cause rape, its the decision of rapists that cause rape, in Ms Gotells words.
(Excerpt) Read more at fullcomment.nationalpost.com ...
What? My understanding of the classic liberal tradition was:
Caller: "Well, I think that George W. Bush might - maybe - potentially have had an idea or two that are worth looking at agai....."
Liberal Host: "You right-wing, bigoted, racist, hateful, wife-beating, dog-kicking racist bigot!! Why don't you DROP DEAD!!! .....next caller, please...."
Classical liberalism has nothing to do with modern “liberals”. Adam Smith was a classical liberal.
Lesbians coerce drunken women into sexual relations too. Not all rape is male on female. As they are discovering the military, there is male on male rape, and yes there is even female on female rape.
Good grief, Charlie Browne, haven’t the feminazis done enough for the country already???
WOMAN’S LIB AND ISLAM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0cS4p9cFlo&feature=c4-overview&list=UUFDlhK80EdO28R-iGTXiGaw
Two college kids get blotto and have sex. If the girl wakes up and decides she didn't want to do that, the boy has "raped" her, right?
And these same women who feminists say are incapable of defending themselves against those predatory "rape culture" college boys are supposed to be capable of being combat soldiers? How can they defend the nation and their comrades in arms if they can't defend themselves from unarmed college boys?
According to radical feminists in America, the first grope is free. AFTER that, the woman can say no. This all came out in the wash as feminists dropped to their knees to service the Clinton administration.
This becomes a never ending discussion.
Nobody deserves to be raped or sexually assaulted. It doesn’t matter if she is falling down drunk. But, if we use our common sense, that common sense would tell us that girls should not be falling down drunk in the first place. Not specifically to avoid assault, but for other good reasons too.
This really comes back to responsible personal behavior. Girls, and guys also, if you don’t go out and drink irresponsibly, you will avoid all sorts of trouble you might get into.
William Flax
William Flax
In 1975,Susan Brownmiller's book Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape argued that rape was not aberrant behavior, but a strategy devised by men to maintain their control over women; that, in essence, all men were guilty of rape, all women victims of rape. Every rape, Brownmiller argued, was an act not of sexual desire, but of violent aggression against women; and conversely, every act of violence against women by men was rape.
All acts of of violence/rape, that is,were political acts encouraged by the male (or patriarchal) system as a means of oppressing women. The oppression of women, then, is an act of continuing rape, an ongoing crime of violence against women.
The idea of violence against women became a rallying point that united mainstream feminists and radical feminists.
It's the same with most crimes. Nobody deserves to get mugged, but wearing a Rolex in a bad neighborhood at night is stupid. Nobody deserves to get defrauded, but answering emails from Nigerian Princes with money to move to the US is stupid. And so on.
But should not not equate with will be able to.
That pesky real world keeps gettin in the way of these beautiful theories that out betters keep inflicting on us.
Thanks rickmichaels.
Yes, I think we’re talking about the real world, vs. the fantasy or ideal utopian world which liberals believe in. Ideally, none of us would ever be victims of any crime.
But realistically, certain situations put us in greater danger than other situations. And among those situations, unfortunately for girls, is their being drunk or high on drugs, makes them more likely as a target for something such as sex assault.
If we are going to be realistic, we should be able to say that out loud, without being harassed by liberals or feminists, saying we’re blaming the victim.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.