Let’s take another brief excursion to the Incels.is forums, where one prolific poster is setting forth a slightly new version of an old incel folk belief — namely, that being raped is really much less traumatic than being an incel.
So many bad arguments here. Just because a women says yes to sex with particular men doesn’t mean she’s saying yet to every man who wants to, er, penetrate her hole. Nor does it mean that raping a “foid” is basically the equivalent to shoplifting or denting a person’s car.
Naturally, though, most of the commenters agree close to a hundred percent with Mr. Deleted Member.
“PIV rape should be a mild annoyance to women at worst,” offers BiryaniCel. “Vaginas were meant to be penetrated. Anal rape is traumatizing though.”
“[C]omplaints of sexual abuse or molestation should only be taken seriously in case of the victim being children or male,” adds another since-deleted commenter.
In a followup comment, the same commenter offers up the thought that
If rape was so traumatizing, and if they’re really avert to it, then women wouldn’t dresses sluttish, nor they demeanor wouldn’t be so provocative and uncaring. the only aversion they’ve is to low-value males.
Sign. This belief about “dressing sluttish” — which is held by many backwards people outside the incelosphere — is why we needed the slut walks in the first place.
“My theory,” explains Divergent_Integral,
is that a large part of the psychological trauma caused by rape stems from societal imprinting that it’s literally the worst thing that can happen to a foid (short of murder). If a foid were to be brought up in a social vacuum, she herself would never come up with the notion that rape is the most awful and traumatizing thing possible. If anything, such a foid would view rape as a minor inconvenience at the most.
This is strikingly similar to Men’s Rights guru Warren Farrell’s take on incest (that is, sexual abuse) — that girls are traumatized by it largely because “girls are much more influenced by the dictates of society and are more willing to take on sexual guilt.”
In another comment, Divergent_Integral adds,
Rape can accurately be defined as ugly men having sex. Period. No need to invoke concepts like consent or force. For even if a foid initially concedes to having sex with an unattractive male, she will soon regret it (or her girlfriends will do so for her) and “realize” that her consent was given either under duress or under false pretext. That is to say, she will redefine her sexual encounter with the ugly male as rape; regardless of what actually happened.
A commenter called Mainländer has this to say:
I suffered so much at the hands of women that my capacity to empathize with them is limited to extremely bad stuff. If a foid is tortured to death, yeah, I’ll feel bad for her. But expecting me to feel bad for some slut who drank too much in some party and some normie with a face below her standards fucked her, when most foids have a “rape kink”? I just can’t take it seriously.
In another comment, Mainlander twists the argument into a justification for statutory rape.
If you think about it, one of feminism’s main goals is making sure normie and below men can’t have any ways of ascending outside of betabuxxing some old roastie.
Can’t ascend with drunken foids, can’t try to just be first with super young foids, etc.
All I can really say at this point is “ugh.”
Follow me on Twitter.
Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.
We Hunted the Mammoth relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!