Well, this is interesting. Last night, idly perusing the latest posts by blogs on my Enemies List I noticed a new post by Paul Elam. It was a doozy, and I don’t mean that in a good way. Under the seemingly innocuous title “Challenging the Etiology of Rape,” the post mocked and blamed rape victims for the crime of getting raped. I copied the most obnoxious bits onto my computer, planning to write a post about it.
Now it appears Elam has deleted the post, and the comments associated with it. [NOTE: Apparently the vanishing post was actually the result of an issue with the web host. It’s now up again. On to the content of his post.]
Here, minus a little of his rhetorical huffing and puffing, is the basic thesis of his post:
I have ideas about women who spend evenings in bars hustling men for drinks, playing on their sexual desires so they can get shit faced on the beta dole; paying their bar tab with the pussy pass. And the women who drink and make out, doing everything short of sex with men all evening, and then go to his apartment at 2:00 a.m.. Sometimes … these women end up being the “victims” of rape.
But are these women asking to get raped?…
They are freaking begging for it.
Damn near demanding it. …
[T]here are a lot of women who get pummeled and pumped because they are stupid (and often arrogant) enough to walk though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE RAPE ME neon sign glowing above their empty little narcissistic heads.
What’s there to say to that? It’s odious, simply odious. Anyone who makes such an argument thereby destroys whatever tiny bit of credibility, whatever moral authority, they once might have had to speak about rape, domestic violence, or, really any violence at all against women or men. Anyone who makes such an argument forfeits the right to be taken seriously on the issue of rape, or, really, on any issue at all.
By Elam’s logic, any man who gets drunk and hooks up with a woman he’s only recently met is “damn near demanding” to be falsely accused of rape, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE [ACCUSE] ME neon sign glowing above [his] empty little narcissistic head.”
Hey, he should have known better, right?
By Elam’s logic, any man who gets himself sent to prison through an act of his own is “damn near demanding” to be raped, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE RAPE ME neon sign glowing above [his] empty little narcissistic head.”
Hey, he should have known better, right?
By Elam’s logic, any man who works in a profession where occupational injuries are relatively more common is “damn near demanding” to be injured or killed, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH … neon sign glowing above [his] empty little narcissistic head.”
Hey, he should have known better, right?
By Elam’s logic, any man who joins the Armed Forces is “damn near demanding” to be killed, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE [KILL ME] neon sign glowing above [his] empty little narcissistic head.”
Hey, he should have known better, right?
By Elam’s logic, any man who crosses a busy street without waiting for the “walk” sign is “damn near demanding” to be hit by a car, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE [RUN ME OVER] neon sign glowing above [his] empty little narcissistic head.”
Hey, he should have known better, right?
By Elam’s logic, any man who does anything at all that might possibly increase the odds of anything bad happening to him is “damn near demanding” to face horrific consequences, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE [HARM] ME neon sign glowing above [his] empty little narcissistic head.”
By Elam’s logic, neither men nor women should ever leave the house.
Oh, but wait, most accidents happen at home (just as most rapes involve people already known to the victim, not random strangers at bars). So anyone staying at home is “damn near demanding” to trip and fall down the stairs, is “walk[ing] though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE [INJURE] ME neon sign glowing above [his or her] empty little narcissistic head.”
I guess we’re all empty-headed conniving bitches. Each and every one of us on planet earth. But the only people Elam thinks to apply his logic to are female rape victims. That says a lot, and none of it good.
NOTE: Elam has (among other things) banned me from commenting on his site, and relagates all critical comments on his website to a special board for “feminists and manginas,” so any comments he makes here will be deleted.
NOTE #2: Just to forestall what could become an endless and pointless debate in the comments: Elam is not saying, as he puts it, that women “are literally asking men to rape them” — that is, walking up and saying “rape me please.” That would be absurd. He is speaking more colloquially, as am I.
>Even the name of the law is not gender-neutral. VAWA means violence against women act. MRAs know how gender-neutral laws are executed.You again fail to mention the legal fees in USA, and if you are unable to pay for defense and experts you are guilty even if you are innocent.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Polanski_sexual_abuse_caseRoman Polanski is a good example of a rich celebrity, who is able to pay for defense for a crime committed in USA, his case is complicated as he is not an US-citizen and he had left US territory. Such extradictions are not easy to handle and I wonder how frequently USA is extradicting its own (very rich) citizens to other countries.His case however is exposing a ridiculous US-justice system, as the plea bargain makes it possible to get away with lenient sentences, but the plea bargain is also misused against people, who cannot pay for their legal defense.The victim files lawsuits 10 years later to extort money from him and is claiming this is for remaining silent. 20 years later the victim claims that the event had been blown all out of proportion.He left 1978, but extradiction was started 2005, and Switzerland decided this year not to follow the extradiction request of the USA because of missing documents.http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article3720836.eceA mother of three accused Roman Polanski of rape when she was 13 and caused him to become a fugitive from America. Now she says he was the victim of a miscarriage of justice….Even Samantha Geimer – the 13-year-old with whom Polanski had unlawful sex – her lawyer and the prosecuting attorney agree that the director was justified in fleeing rather than face an indeterminate jail term, possibly as long as 50 years. The sentence was about to be meted out by a judge who – all the lawyers involved acknowledge – had corrupted the legal process and was more concerned with his own image than with the law or justice. So much about US-justice…
>@Yohan, I did respond to one of your comments about legal fees in detail in a different post, perhaps you missed that I pointed out that poor defendents have a CONSTITUTIONAL right to an attorney and legal fees paid for by the state if they cannot afford one. This is well established US law and is required to be disclosed at all arrests (the right to an attorney is part of the Miranda Warning). There is not such thing as a criminal defendent being denied any council or fee payment in the US, unless the defendent specifically waives these right and has a competancy trial before a judge on the matter.The victim in the Polanski case did not recant her story, that he drugged her and raped her both vaginally and anally while she told him to stop. What she said was that she wished that the case would no longer be pursued so that she would not have to deal with it anymore. That is a much different statement. The judge did not 'corrupt the legal process'. In accepting a plea bargain, the judge is NEVER required to accept the prosecutor's recommendation of sentencing. That is what the judge did in this case, insist that a low plea bargain for a brutal rape was not going to get him the minimum sentence for what he plead guilty for. It is, in fact, one of the central duties of a US judge to deal with sentencing, exactly what the judge did in this case. Polanski pled guilty to the crime he was to be extradited for and for which he was sentenced. Not only that, but he plead to a charge far less serious than the actual crime. Stop engaging in rape apologism in an attempt to minimize his crimes and blame the victim. Tell me, how much time do you think he should get for drugging and raping a child?
>As we all know legal assistance by the state for indigent men is not very effective. Worldwide. For sure legal procedures with aggressive lawyers and experts are nowhere else so expensive than in the USA. Anyway, I am not living there, why shall I care.The Polanski case got much attention outside the USA, as he is not an US-citizen and very rich. Yes, he did this crime in USA, but the way how USA justice was handling his case over its borders was questioned by many. Polanski left USA, nobody stopped him to do that and the case become international.The entire legal procedure in USA was far away to be called transparent, and a lot of money often creates 'silence', regardless if the accusation is right or wrong.The plea bargain procedure is not allowed within the justice systems of most European countries. It is considered often to be like a lottery. As you said yourself, you never know what the judge will decide.If you are innocent but indigent and accused, with a plea bargain you might be out of jail quicker than being innocent and fighting it out in courts.The documents which Switzerland requested from US justice to send Polanski back to USA were not complete – and without any explication why they were not complete – which shows something had to be hidden to outsiders.Stop engaging in rape apologism in an attempt to minimize his crimes and blame the victim. I gave you merely a link to an well-known article also mentioned in wikipedia, so you see not everybody shares your opinion and the other side of a story. This alone should not make me a 'rape apologist' (whatever this word could mean)MRAs generally want to see laws where both crimes, rape and false rape allegation are subject to the same punishment. Tell me, how much time do you think he should get for drugging and raping a child? In European courts it will be something from 5 to 10 years. In Sweden the limit is up to 10 years, in Germany I think it is 12 or 15 years.In Japan, a US citizen, who committed a similar crime spent 5 years in jail, after his release he filed a lawsuit against the Japanese Ministry of Justice complaining about harsh treatment with the help of US lawyers. Interesting that US-human rights do-gooders said nothing about the Japanese victim.
>@Yohan. An entertainment site linked to by wikipedia? Now I know for sure that it is far more credible than the court documents, police reports, and actual statements given. Thanks for that (<-all sarcasm).
>It's not an entertainment link, it ishttp://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article3720836.eceA section of THE TIMES, UK, http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/
>"Anyway, I am not living there, why shall I care." This was exactly the point of one of my earlier comments. It is fine if you know nothing about the US legal system. No one knows about every legal system in the world. The problem though, is that you insist on talking about US law when you do not understand even the very basics of the US legal system."The entire legal procedure in USA was far away to be called transparent, and a lot of money often creates 'silence', regardless if the accusation is right or wrong." All court documents in the US are a matter of public record. Any person walking in to the courthouse or library off of the street has access to them. Some of the depositions in the Polanski case can even be found on the internet. "As we all know legal assistance by the state for indigent men is not very effective. Worldwide." This actually varies widely amoung US districts. States which encourage or mandate certain amounts of pro bono time from lawyers have more effective council. In addition, some districts have moved away from a set public defender (particularly for felonies) to having volunteer council. In this model, local attorneys volunteer to work these cases with fees paid to themselves and the state picks up other court costs. This model greatly equalizes the quality of council and is very effective. In addition, poor defendents who have an attorney hired by friends and family do not generally have better outcomes than those defended by public defenders."Polanski left USA, nobody stopped him to do that and the case become international." He was out on bail, which means he was forbidden from leaving the state, but he did it anyways, like most criminals fleeing justice."The plea bargain procedure… is considered often to be like a lottery. As you said yourself, you never know what the judge will decide." You obviously do not understand how plea bargaining works. First, the prosecutor must offer the deal. Secondly, the defendent must accept it and confess guilt (a guilty plea is a legal admission of guilt). When the plea bargain is entered, the defendent is appraised of possible sentences before it is accepted by the court. Then, the judge decides a sentence based on the crime that the defendent plead guilty to. There are, in most jurisdictions, sentencing guidelines, which give a range of sentences from which the judge may choose. When you plead guilty, you do so knowing the possible charges. Polanski thought that, since he was rich, he would get away with the lightest possible sentence, but he was informed of the sentencing range. "If you are innocent but indigent and accused, with a plea bargain you might be out of jail quicker than being innocent and fighting it out in courts." This is not true. The long delays in the US court system are in civil cases, not in criminal ones. The prosecutor's investigation is usually complete when charges are pressed. The defendent has the right to a speedy trial, so, in most cases, the defendent could be in court within a month or so at the latest if they wished to proceed immediately. The problem is that the defendent's investigation begins when charges are pressed and they often need more time to prepare for trial. It is at the defense's request that trials are delayed, it is not a burden upon them. The only cases that you might see it be quicker to plea than to go to court are misdemeanors where the maximum jail term is no more than a few weeks."MRAs generally want to see laws where both crimes, rape and false rape allegation are subject to the same punishment" This is utter bullshit and is rather disgusting. Anyone who says this is minimizing the horror of being raped. Does it suck to be falsely accused? Sure, but it is not comparable to rape. I would rather be accused of murder than be murdered and I would rather be accused of rape than be raped.
>DarkSideCatBeing falsely accused of murder and being falsely accused of rape are different things, rape of a woman is considered much worse than murder and in prison rapists can face rape, torture. As well as that bing falsely accused can lead to suicide and loss of everything and false accusations of murder dont go to trial unless there is evidence."A woman drove a man to suicide by crying rape and forced a second innocent man to consider taking his life after falsely accusing him of a similar sex attack.Despite being exposed in court as a serial liar, legal restrictions mean the 21-year-old woman can never be identified.A jury took only 45 minutes to clear medical student Olumide Fadayomi, 27, of rape.But several jurors at Sheffield Crown Court broke down in tears when the judge revealed the 'victim' had a history of crying rape."Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1280926/Student-cleared-rape-emerges-second-man-committed-suicide-falsely-accused-woman.html#ixzz15iiE3j7gIf I could chose between raped in private and having an being falsely accused of rape, I'd chose being raped in private. Whats more most rapes are verbal coercion and don't involve violence or strangers.Feminists tend to minimize abuse victims, CSA victims, domestic abuse victims, false accusation victims, if they are victims of women… you want them all kept under the carpet and out of sight then you project that on to advocates of the victims of the crimes that your movement minimizes and oppresses by accusing them of minimizing abuse when in fact they are doing the opposite.
>DarkSideCat: MRAs generally want to see laws where both crimes, rape and false rape allegation are subject to the same punishment. This is utter bullshit and is rather disgusting. Anyone who says this is minimizing the horror of being raped.Why? I did not say, I want the punishment for rape reduced. I said, I want the punishment for false rape allegations considerably increased.What's wrong with that?MRAs consider false rape allegations as a very severe crime equal to those of rape.Why do you protect false rape accusers against punishment? Because they are females?
>Eoghan: If I could chose between raped in private and having being falsely accused of rape, I'd chose being raped in private.Yes, me too. Better raped for a few minutes than to be in jail maybe even over years for being falsely accused for a rape-crime which never took place and which exists solely in the sick fantasy of a psycho-grrl.False rape allegations are terrible crimes which deserve long jail-sentences. This is the only way to finish with this nonsense.Only a radical feminist could argue otherwise.
>YohanId rather be raped in private than be falsely accused and going through the years of court and having my identity printed in the paper as that of a rapist even if the case was eventually thrown out of court, having to go to jail for it and face the punishment for being a rapist in there would be beyond horror.
>@Eoghan, YohanYou know what would be really beyond horror? Being raped. Fucking wow. (I know you don't think so, but yeah.) IOW:"The thing is, I'm not sure he really understands how heinous rape actually is. I don't believe any man who will cast himself as a rapist, even (and perhaps especially) for a laugh, has any clue what they're saying. If they really understood what a (conscious) person being raped felt, looking up at the person forcing himself on hir, the abject terror, feeling his hot breath on hir neck, the stomach-churning revulsion, listening to him grunting and groaning, the red hot anger, struggling and clawing and resisting and succumbing and already feeling the creeping blame, the shame cutting through me like a knife, the horror of it, the unimaginable horror, oh god I can't believe this is happening, no goddamned person would ever cast himself as a rapist for a fucking joke. Not someone who understood. Not someone who'd ever even tried to understand."http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/08/rape-is-hilarious-part-35.htmlIs THAT what you'd prefer to being falsely accused? Anyone who really knows what it's like to be raped would never say such BS, and it's a rather privileged position since you know that your likelihood of getting raped is so fucking low, to make such an assertion. (Actually, depending on what studies you look at, you are more likely to be raped as a man than falsely accused, but that's a digression.) I gotta pull Eoghan's typical Godwin's Law argument on you: that's like saying, "oh I'd rather have been in a concentration camp than be falsely accused of being a Nazi war criminal". And you reason given? Because your identity would be published? Because it might only last a few minutes? Wow. Fucking privileged entitled ramblings that go way too far…
> Eoghan said… YohanId rather be raped in private than be falsely accused and going through the years ….You are right and only a woman who has no consideration for men at all would argue otherwise.Spending a decade in a jail for males falsely accused by a woman for a non-existing sex-crime is better than being raped for a few minutes??? To say something like that is really ridiculous.As I said many times, both, rape and false rape allegations are severe crimes and BOTH crimes deserve long jail sentences. Only feminists argue otherwise, they want the males in jail for crimes against women, but justify the wrongdoings of malicious women who are fabricating sex-crimes accusing innocent men as 'victims of the patriarchy' or such nonsense.I think, its totally wrong for feminists to argue in that way, as a movement which is busy to excuse female criminals on the grounds that their crimes were committed only against men is entirely untrustworthy.
>@Yohan – nice minimization of rape. Just a few minutes eh? Wow. Just fucking wow. "You are right and only a [man] who has no consideration for [wo]men at all would argue otherwise.Spending  decade[s] [in therapy, reliving the horror, being subjected to victim-blaming and feeling shameful for speaking out, accused of lying, being afraid to even leave the house, etc.] for [fe]males [raped] by a man for a [oft minimized] crime is better than being [falsely accused] for a few minutes [given that false accusations rarely ever make it to court and are often conflated with wrongful convictions, where a rape did take place]??? To say something like that is really ridiculous.As I said many times, both, rape and false rape allegations are [NOT equally] severe crimes and [ONLY rape] deserve[s] long jail sentences. Only [misogynistic rape apologists] argue otherwise, they want the [fe]males in jail [for the same time as rapists] for [petty] crimes against men, but justify the wrongdoings of malicious men who [really rape but] are fabricating [false rape allegations] accusing innocent [wo]men [whom they've raped] as '[members] of the [feminazi conspiracy]' or such nonsense.I think, its totally wrong for [misogynistic rape apologists] to argue in that way, as a movement which is busy to excuse male criminals on the grounds that their crimes were committed only against [wo]men is entirely untrustworthy. "
>@Tec:"You know what would be really beyond horror? Being raped. Fucking wow."The issue is a bogus rape conviction, followed by rape victimization of the non-rapist in prison. Not only is it unjust to confine a non-perpetrator, but also to expose him to those who would become predators against him. Prison life is incredibly violent and especially dangerous for non-rapists who were nevertheless convicted of a bogus rape allegation. Prisoners like to "punish" other prisoners who were convicted of rape. And if by some miracle a non-rapist who had been falsely convicted of rape were ever to survive that ordeal, and be paroled, his chances of eking out a humane and productive existence after his false incarceration are nil.False allegations of rape result in both unjust incarceration and repeated rape victimization by the falsely accused, in addition to the shattered life, the public marking, the shame, and the (for men) LACK of adequate psychological therapy after this ordeal. A man who is falsely accused of rape, unjustly convicted, and subsequently raped throughout the term of his incarceration — all because of a woman's lie — has it substantially worse than a woman who has been raped. There is absolutely no comparison.The issue is unjust INCARCERATION, and its after effects including the non-perpetrator's subsequent rape victimization. Rape of anyone is unjust. So why then do you try to elevate the seriousness of a woman's rape victimization above and beyond the seriousness of a man's rape victimization, made all the worse by society's condemnation against the non-rapist victim?And let me address the point of the appropriate punishment for false accusers of rape. The phrase "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" in scripture emerges directly from false allegations of rape. The nation of Israel was commanded to "expel the evil from within your midst," namely the false accuser.
>Tecwhen I was talking about the punishments for rapists in prison being "beyond horror". I was talking about prison rape, torture and death, rape and abuse at extreme levels that female victims of rape and abuse tend not to ever experience.I stand by what I said, I would rather be raped once in private and deal with that than be falsely accused, go through the months and years of court, lose everything and face vitilante attacks because Ive been publicly labelled a rapist.To be falsely accused and put in prison to face torture and violent rape for a number of years, would be beyond horror. I think that sometimes feminists have a difficult time conceptualising pain that is not their own or that of men, this is perhaps because as you said, feminists tend to be rape or abuse victims themselves and because feminism doesnt encourage healing from abuse but rather encourages cultivating the pain and pojecting it onto all men and the culture for its own political gain. I think that people like you tec are the abuse apologists and abuse minimizers of this debate, you want to oppress every victim other than those that look like you and have have been abused by someone that looks your abuser.
>Anyone who say's that two drunk people fooling around is rape IS damn near demanding to be called out on their bullshit.
The good news is that “drunken rapes” are but a fraction of rape cases. For the grasping at straws reasoning that since alcohol is involved — the permission for sex is automatically given you can rest easy knowing there are still more rapes without alcohol involvement that you can wrap your teeny, misogynistic minds around.
False rape allegations are extremely rare.
Most rapes are neither reported nor prosecuted.
Most reported rapes are legitimate.
Most women I have met and dated have either been raped or nearly raped — most often by a trusted acquaintance, relative or romantic interest.
There’s one surefire way to lower the rape stats :
STOP RAPING WOMEN AND STOP EXCUSING PERPETRATORS.
LOL – Thank you Adam for that. I was getting a headache reading all the comments that came before you. People are unbelieveable.
If someone says they don’t want to have sex, that can only mean one thing : they don’t have to have sex – no matter the circumstances. No means no – no exceptions.
She may have been in the mood before, and then it wore off & never came back. That happens! Is it ever OK to force someone to have sex with you just because you’re in the mood, disregarding their mood entirely? When did people become so selfish? Sex is about pleasing you, as well as your partner.
If that rapist wanted his weiner tugged THAT bad, he could’ve fucked his hand, a sock, the couch, a fleshlight, a pillow ANYTHING ELSE. Why force someone else to take them to the promise land? It’s not only incredibly selfish, but immoral & degrading. He’s punishing a person just for saying “no” to something they’re always allowed to say no to? How is any of this rational?
Forcing someone into sex is violence, ALWAYS. The second you make any exceptions you are a rape apologist.