Common sense on leftpol, what the right needs

Never thought I’d see the day.

2,500 words.

This is a salt post. If you’re new, you might try to argue. This is cute.

You know the only reason the left has power over the young? The right refuses to discuss class issues.

They hand-wave the concerns of the poor, the realpolitik.

Because most of them are middle-class, like the chattering left, but rescind the ground out of supposed principle. The principle being cowardice. They’ll talk about race, sex, sexuality and so on like the left want them to. Never classism.

Huh.

As if everyone capitalist, whatever their job, is the fucking Monopoly man.

Check this privileged asshole. Poster boy of all men. And you let it happen.

Why do you think they still got a hate-on for Thatcher?

She knew, daughter of a grocer and didn’t ridicule the poor/proles for capitalist ambition.
She treated them like intelligent adults who wanted to work hard and do better.

This is surprisingly realistic on the obligations of gender and biological realities.

How is a woman supposed to simultaneously raise children (alone, so still bad for them) while earning a high-earning full-time wage sufficient for financial support of self plus dependents as well? Especially given how men have higher-paying roles in the first place, prior to conception? [motive or cause aside]

And were she to apply after being left with baby (punished and derided for trusting a weak man, my stars), what of the so-called motherhood penalty? The one that makes her a less attractive hire, first to fire (less time for corporate faux family drama, HR hates them) and less likely to get a promotion whatever the skill level? You’d have to be a total fool to think companies don’t factor all of this in. After childbearing, a woman’s work options ARE severely limited and her earning potential for herself is impaired, discussions of cause or blame aside. If capitalism had disabilities, that would be the biggest one. Whereas fathers can get more pay, more time off (covered by the single, unfairly) because it’s expected they aren’t the primary caregiver to their own child. I’d love to see studies on single fathers and earning potential but the SJWs won’t do them! Because then it isn’t about the women (and not even white women) but companies punishing responsible parents.

Child support or welfare, I wonder who should be held responsible for your loin meat.

Parental protections in occupational law are vital. States exist to make sure businesses don’t ruin the People and that includes dysgenic culling of the future population by active punishment of childbearing, the cultural risks to having kids are already high enough.

https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/9118a9ef-0771-4777-9c1f-8232fe70a45c/compendium—sans-appendix.pdf

And if men want to be primary caregiver, if they think it’s easy, I haven’t seen anything to suggest this damages the children if both parents are still a unit and supporting the child. That’s the business of the people in the marriage, not the State.

MRA types assume all women are upper-middle class with Daddy’s savings. Like the SJWs, that’s why both get so, so much wrong.
They’re out of touch.

The following inspired by

https://8ch.net/leftpol/res/120643.html#q126164

It’s hilarious that misogynists assume they’re on the right side of the bell curve a- when they can’t read it properly and b- they make basic bitch errors clear to anyone who can think three hypotheticals ahead. For example, assuming white women were the property (as has never actually happened, historically) of white men (their fathers or possibly brothers) then why would those relatives want the women mistreated? Why would they sell them like desert cowboys when all men even get emotionally attached to the wellbeing of their dogs? It just seems like rapists trying to justify their ‘consent’ hamstering with the notion it’s validated by the owner in a sales position… when white women would be the most valuable, globally, pricing them out of the market, were it to happen. Finally, the recent universal suffrage of men would be torn down and slavery or servitude to pay off debts brought back. Well, plenty of men have Fight Club style debts on car leases, carousing parties and Ikea branded cardboard. If your sole argument for enslavement is IQ, look at the bell curve, most of the low IQ are male and already work in those lower tier manual roles, causing little movement in the labour market. It could be argued they’re already enslaved now, by practical virtue of their low IQ. It isn’t like you’re freeing up jobs for men (who don’t want to do them) and infertile women (by age or nature) would also be forced to work like men so the office couldn’t possibly be a 100% Mad Men montage sausage fest. All the glamorous jobs would go to the highest IQ i.e. not you and the majority of works (busywork) would disappear, the thing about a minority of workers producing the most? Assuming you actually wanted meritocracy and the best man or woman for the role. Men wanted worker’s rights for a reason – they wanted it for themselves.
What do they expect to rest on, for those job roles, their winning personality? I mean, these idiots think it’s the worst of times for men. Fuck grand-daddy gored on barbed wire, his grand-daddy dying down the mines crushed by debris with black lung hindering any escape, his being pressganged and dying a slow painful death of syphilis – women not humouring your bullshit HURTS. These guys think the modern times oppress them when it actually keeps them alive (with the threat of nuclear war) to consider blogging a job and blame women for their weakness on an information hub they waste on porn addiction. Porn is the opiate of the idiot masses.
The Peter Pan immaturity that conflates taxes for labour and fun for “rights” to an imaginary Pleasure Island discussed on the internet to troll them.
Some HR harpy may pay taxes but do they work? Who’s paying for the abortion clinics these wannabe manwhores wanna fill up with their ‘stealthing’ bullshit? Where in the human rights law does it say other-caused orgasms?
They also imply homemakers aren’t workers, which is abject crap. Deadbeats tend to be male because they don’t want to put in the work raising a family, being a Patriarch so they dump the contractual obligation of their gender role after making the most expensive ‘mistake’ (actually investment) characteristic of mature adults i.e. making a child. They knew sex made babies and didn’t get a vasectomy beforehand. What hypoagency? Are women really responsible for your case of the wandering penis now?
If women couldn’t inherit despite longer life and their own earnings, property rights wouldn’t exist for over half the
population, not including low IQ men who’d likely be stripped too. So it’s a fundamentally classist thought experiment and screws over their fellow man the most. If suffrage were based on paying taxes, a sensible position, then all the libertarians and corporate men couldn’t vote for betraying the nation, even if they were billionaires. Again, a sensible position. Suffrage is inherently nationalist, look at how white women voted in droves for Trump to protect their families.

The enemy using a good system doesn’t make that system the enemy. Your ancestors died for that position, you think they didn’t have good experience of what happened without them?

Deadbeats are a ghetto concept, it’s rare for a white man to have such r-select inclinations but they try to normalise this. Show me deadbeat populations by race. It should be larping like a rapper or something.

What’s normal for other races in whatever continent shouldn’t be normalised or (god forbid) celebrated for white people.

All they have is ad hominem for the average woman, if you ask for citations of their Muh Studies and ‘logic’. If they had such an issue with whores they’d make actual prostitution (inc. hardcore porn) illegal. Yet they ignore all the realities they don’t like e.g. porn addiction/mental issues, bachelorhood/lifespan, divorce/male re-marriage, paternal age/literal autism, and call women the emotional snowflakes who hate science.

Why aren’t there more women on their team? Big mystery. Guess they’re jealous too.

And gatekeeping the right wing, philosophy of sexual cooperation, segregated by sex, is totally feasible.

But Emotional Intelligence isn’t real, guys. Apparently big-brained men can’t figure out, as a sex, how to do it, so it cannot be real. This is science. This isn’t just a bunch of autists complaining about empathy.

Let’s be clear, snowflaking isn’t sex-specific, it’s an IQ range. For one Trigglypuff there are a thousand guys ragequitting their keyboard because you like a different phone or think a certain car manufacturer is over-rated. At least Triggly had some higher bloody attempts at priorities.

Men stereotypically bicker about the most pointless of things and act like it’s so deep.

Are we supposed to pretend we don’t notice?

Bring back duelling and the gobby lefty will mysteriously go extinct. As will black crime gangs.

They’re allowed to box with gloves, that might kill them, but not fight for their principles under agreed rules?

They don’t even specify landmass, racial composition or national IQ average for their thought experiments.

If utopia were a graph, a couple are important legends. What are you controlling, what do you measure?

Libertarian cuck tier “errors”, like ignoring what’s happening with the billions of swarming parasites populating the rest of the world – and feeling entitled. Like pop! we magically get to a land of no history and genetic competition.

That’s only a thought experiment if you’re a moron.

Would only the sons and daughters of the rich be recognised as having natural rights they’re born with?

You know, like the right of kings?

But they won’t dare bring up eugenics, because that would lead to a discussion of declining male quality too. The old coots were right, we do need a good war… or smarter abortion/contraceptive efforts.

Caring for the fate of your group (i.e. its fitness because evolutionary competition exists) does not imply caring for the individual entitlement feelz of everyone IN said group, presently. The current generation is nuclear ashes as far as low time preference planning is concerned.

Hey, I promised salt. All women are brutal thinkers, we just can’t acceptably say it (unless you want people singing songs about witches when you die).

We’re all trying to come up with some grandiose plan (one by one, how smart) that replaces a monarch’s wisdom and even has a cultural tier replete with aristocrats (in a democracy, in all but name) – all without discussions of class, IQ, culture/quality…

and wonder why it doesn’t work?

Muh Social Darwinism from actively anti-natal genetic suicides is tragic and ironic and I love it. You don’t want your genes in the future but sure, you “care”… like the socialists who tax evade!

They’re actually taking advice on how to form a healthy family unit and Patriarchal masculinity – from gay guys!

No wonder women laugh at you, who’d respect someone who thinks THAT is a good idea?

Do you want a world where Oscar Wilde wannabes can fuck your brother and call it trad?

Assuming it’s genetic and you believe in evolution (big ask, I know), nature has culled those people from the gene pool for solid reasons. Let them paddle in the brown-tinged hot tub in peace.

The hidden bisexuals, however, are a threat.

How does a person go through this loop of circular irrationality a thousand times for various forums and never figure it out?

>women are selective, it’s just evolution, they can’t help it
>why don’t girls like me? must be their fault, women r dumb

You can’t rationalise your way out of evolution but they try.

Tier: Sexual selection.
Outcome: rejection.

>women shouldn’t be able to accuse men of rape, lol don’t believe women
>how did Rotherham happen? why did nobody believe them?

Literally protecting rapists (unless Muslim) and would probably claim rights to access a rape baby, over rights to a lead payment. Are they rapists? Are they enablers?

Why don’t women want them?

Rape is the only way they can reproduce. Your forefathers knew this and carried out the death penalty. No bros before hoes. It was missus before sissies.

Think of it in terms of property rights. If I grew drugs in your garden without your permission and tried to sell that land, keeping all the profits. Bastards are an illegitimate exchange. The baby was made with an egg that didn’t belong to you, in a growing machine that also did not legally belong to you. It’s theft of fertility.

Otherwise, I can drill for oil on their land. If consent doesn’t exist, drafting returns.

The reason they hate the Brahmin class, the typical Hipster Joe Goldbergs of the world running everything from a modern art gallery, is that they’re a decadent aristo class who usurped the role of the rightful inheritors by blood.

That’s your real problem, isn’t it?

Was leaving your racial kinfolk of the British Empire truly worth your precious melting pot?

Take a good, hard look.

Would this have happened if you’d stayed with your race over multiculturalism mark 1, the pre-European pilot test or at least installed a King? You slag off monarchy but there’s one benefit. Kings don’t care about getting people to vote for them.

Instead you have rule by aristo-acting Jews. You must be so proud.

The Muh Ashkenazi Verbal IQ thing is just cultural Stockholm Syndrome at this point.
Who owns academia, who does the tests, who excludes the majority of white people?

Jung’s critique of Freud for ‘Jewish Psychology’, Jews of any stripe are not the human prototype.

It’s gone from frogs in palaces to banker toadies. Huge difference, huh?

Especially from our perspective, watching from their sewer as we filter their Third World shit.

Look at national debt under the British Empire versus now and repeat after me: Land of the free!

It is possible to vote wrong. Your working class great-grandpa might’ve been a socialist for the ‘right reasons’ but that doesn’t make the consequences of the voted party’s actions any less severe. Now America is fast becoming Little China, look at new immigrant flows.

A lot of the people new to right-wing ideas are experiencing bastardizations, pollutions with leftist assumptions and this includes “history was just the same as now, but the present is totally different, new and only getting worse”.

I question.

Psyops?

We know they have research profiles. Why not?

Alongside “people are all the same and ignore HBD, all class differences are a social construct but the oppression of class is totally real when we, your betters, deign to officially notice it”.

Like, isn’t it ultimately class-privileged to work in journalism?

I wonder.

Some universalism in whites dates back to our ancient tribal history. Why treat close genetic kin like shit, that would fly against inclusive fitness? We wouldn’t have survived the Ice Age. Not to be confused with pathological altruism’s out-group universalism. The bad faith try to draw a false equivalence, trying to make it a thought-terminating cliche so you cannot discuss the first, drowned out by accusations of the second.

There are misogynists in power in America, that’s correct, they’re Jewish culturally who consider women the spawn of Lilith. Orthodox Jews are the most woman-hating group in the world, moreso than Muslims. Why else try to turn white women into actual whores? Then get white men to cheer it, like the presence of camera equipment (thanks Edison!) makes it less shameful? There is a class of misogynists running the ‘rape culture’ but hardly a white Patriarchy and they also prey on little white boys. Look at all the crimes swept under the rug dating back to Old Hollywood. Whites wanted Prohibition to reduce crime, and this actually worked, so what did the Jews do? Under-mine it. What vice precedes most degeneracy, please?

I digress.

You can’t discuss society without class, America, it’s the fundamental way power is used, abused and accumulated.

TLDR: America’s stubborn refusal to discuss class is why it’s a moral cesspool. 

The ultimate problem is very simple, in an increasingly high IQ-demanding civilization:

What does America do with its low IQ?

Most of those happen to be male, fuck your feelings.

Stop the fake debates please

I can already feel the heat of hate I’m going to get for this.

There’s a broken record.

You’re being played.

What strawman?

Not all (crime) are (demographic) is an excuse to dismiss data.
Probability data. It happens to the HBD crowd all the time.
A derailing tactic intended to keep you ignorant and fixated on casting aspersions (ad hom). Bullshit rhetoric. There’s no debate. It’s the statistical equivalent of anecdote and rejects the heinousness of the crime in question. In a civilized, First World society, the acceptable number is zero.

They want you to forget this.

(I also think that traumatizing a person with crime should be an aggravating offence, we already implicitly have this but it’s been forgotten in sentencing for political expedience e.g. aggravating factor for taking a child’s innocence away or raping a celibate/faithful Christian or a virgin, same principle. It could even apply to male rape of a straight man, since there is another layer to the trauma based on the individual’s beliefs and identity. “Hate” crime should be put toward those ends if anything, protecting the in-group against the out-group of the really spiteful (anti-Western) predatory targeting and life ruining. The system we have is broken because it defends the out-group like infantile damsels when they are literally criminals explicitly targeting the in-group of the society they chose to live in. That is “sexual terrorism”.)

I’ll take the one with more data as example.

Muh “not all men are rapists”

– but most rapists are male, it’s just un-PC to collect demographic data (including race) and publish it.

Seriously, try to find rape data by sex and/or sexuality, I did. Couldn’t find anything reliable. Isn’t this suspicious?

We need a data collection charter where such information in the public interest must be collected and published freely, with no distortions. Including the rate of demonstrably false accusations. It viscerally sickens me that a raped man by another man must expressly state he isn’t homosexual to be taken more seriously. Where are the libertarians on that privacy? Consent is never an assumption, property rights begin with the body.

You’re being hoodwinked. So I looked up American data since a lot of you are filthy Americans.

You won’t pay attention unless I’m talking about you.

Best I could find in a moderately long search attempt.

https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=317

OT but “Attempted rape includes verbal threats of rape.”
How many men plead ignorance on that one?

All this insufficient data (even at collection stage) is intended to keep men and women at one another’s throats. To lower the fertility rate. It is dyscivic.

Sex-based triangulation. You cannot fight the system that oppresses you if you’re busy engaging in an impossible game of one-upmanship.

They also want to deny unPC but true stereotypes by hoping you won’t ask for full datasets.

Your taxes are paying for them already, you should get all the information.

They also are intellectually dishonest to report victim but not criminal.
https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=6427
Revised Oct 2018 data from 2016 (latest).
e.g.
“The rate of violent victimization against males increased from 2015 to 2016, rising from 15.9 to 19.6 per 1,000 males age 12 or older.
From 2015 to 2016, the rate of aggravated assault against males age 12 or older rose from 2.7 to 4.2 per 1,000.
The rate of violent victimization against persons ages 25 to 34 rose from 21.8 per 1,000 persons to 28.4 per 1,000 from 2015 to 2016, and the rate for females in this age group rose from 24.6 to 33.4 per 1,000.”

>implies women are not persons but O.K.

Who attacked them? A ghost? It is a common incomplete sentence and poor grammar. It’s also scientism.

You need a Punnett square and I see none.

Male, female and male, female. Basic stats again? Otherwise an individual reading cannot know their risk.

“Not all men” really is the fake right equivalent of the fake left’s “not all immigrants”.

-but most terrorists are foreign, culturally and racially, it’s just un-PC to collect demographic data….. again.

See the pattern?

You’re chasing your tails.

Red-pill statistics can make men look really, really bad. Men have a right to know the likes of rape data, in particular, because they need to know they’re at great risk from other men as well.

Naturally it doesn’t list the latter but they take one step forward in two steps back by collecting male victim data…. only to neglect entirely listing the female. Mathematics in need of context. Society is not just one group, you collect all the data or it’s close to useless. They know this, it’s deliberate. This is intended to bait silly MRAs who won’t even notice it doesn’t mention perp details.

They do make another error in saying Male for Male Victim rape and subsuming the female in an age range.
Piss-poor data entry. I notice everything.

Collect ALL the data or no, we cannot debate it. 

It would entirely become a futile argument of ignorance. 

They know this. Mathematically, you have no data.

Conveniently, they don’t have to change and lower the crime rate (toward zero) if you don’t know how badly they’re doing their job.


5% of the latest reported US crime was rape.
That’s absurdly high for such a specific and brutal crime.
(This is what happens when you don’t keep serial offenders off the streets).
1 in 20 criminal acts was rape. You need all the data, America.

If I hadn’t screencapped this, you probably wouldn’t have believed me.

Irony! The dramatic irony!

Statistically you’re more likely to suffer domestic violence than stranger violence. That is horrifying. You were over twice as likely to get raped as burgled (1.99% in 2016). Do the libertarians care about bodily rights? Statistically they should care twice as much as about burglaries. The average citizen is twice as likely to be raped as generally assaulted, do you consider non-sexual assault a real problem?

You call yourself the First World? Greatest nation on Earth? Please, lead by example.

We’re right there with you. Bring back the standards of civil behavior, the etiquette. Update it, sure, but you do need it back again, what little data you have is starkly apparent in this. Perhaps enshrined in law, to make sure everyone is clear.

Not all- is NOT how statistics work.
Using big words doesn’t make it a debate.
You are not sounding intelligent to anyone who uses their brain.

Demand more data and think for yourselves.

Fellow Westerners are not the enemy. It is those who keep you shrouded in ignorance and wasting your time attending a digital circus of vicious fallacies. Oh but the delivery of their lies is so sweet, right?

Not all (blank) – they cant.

They don’t have to be.

It’s a false equivalence.

Rape doesn’t belong in the First World and neither do hostile foreigners.

Hopefully you can see why they won’t let me near a television camera.

You’re only watching the puppets who never raise real points. You can’t settle real issues in a soundbite or cheeky Youtube clip.

“Boys will be boys” is pathological altruism enabling the psychopathic of the male population against everyone else and sexist infantilisation.

What a “player”

Rapist jailed after beating woman and keeping her as a ‘sex slave’

During cross-examination, vile Patton even asked his defence barrister: ‘How can it have been rape if there was no violence?’

Where the hell would someone get such a totally wrong idea?

This is why coercion and threats don’t count as consent. Legally.
It is much the same as a written contract.

Leeds Crown Court heard that Patton was ‘obsessed’ with his victim and he threatened to hurt her family and damage their property if she did not agree to meet him.

He should be swinging from a rope like the Rotherham lot. How can white supremacists claim to be superior while they’re soft on people like this? You want to let this one run around near your sisters, mothers, grandmothers, daughters – because an owner of a penis can do no wrong? You think you’d get low crime that way? Like majority white Europe never hanged people?

No Patriarchy in history went nicely on abusive little men, let alone easy.
They knew they only get worse, a rotten apple mustn’t be allowed to spoil the barrel.
His victim is ruined for life. As an r-type, you’d expect him to be proud of this.

Sexual entitlement, this is where it leads.

Today, at the same court, Patton was sentenced to 13 years in prison.

For seven charges? I hate this country. Why bother? Why not 13 days? 13 minutes?

Patton, who in the past had told the woman she was ‘nothing but a dog’,

Clean the gene pool, please. Men, this is your gender role.

slapped her repeatedly and even brandished a knife before telling her he was going use her as a sex slave.

Where did he get that idea?

Did anyone ask? ….

“No violence” guys, and if you think he’s nicer to other men, you’d be naive.
Psychopaths are worse with men than they are with women.

But women need to “give men a chance”, right? Fuck our right to safety, let’s coddle some snowflakes.
When men give creepy guys on the bus a chance, we might listen.

Patton has previous convictions for criminal damage, theft and battery.

And just 13 years?

And doing anything to an unconsenting person is violence. Because of the consent part. So I’m guessing low IQ with omnipotent fantasies of Genghis Khan?

(He probably thinks Khan wasn’t a rapist either).

The battery occurred in 2014 when he pinned his own mother to the floor by the neck and then punched her once in the face.

Alpha.

A generation with no father to slap them for getting out of line? Guessing.
What’s the bet he blames his mother for his deadbeat father? Would this be delta or omega, in the silly hierarchy?

But we can’t bring back drafting why? If they’re violent thugs anyway?

After being locked in the house the first night, his victim banged on the windows and screamed to attract attention, but Patton ran over and grabbed her by the mouth and nose, put his arm around her neck and told her to shut up.

“No violence” guys.

He choked her but no violence, obviously.

Having put his arm around her neck, Patton threw her on the floor then picked her up and threw her on the sofa, smothering her and causing her to struggle to breathe. When she told him that she did not want him, Patton replied: ‘Wrong answer.’

“No violence”.

Sometimes the feminists have a point. The right to refuse anything is a basic human right of liberty. I bet he didn’t want to marry her, either, so a traditional excuse of “but it’s creepy love!” wouldn’t wash.

I doubt her father would give permission to let a man abuse his daughter, in marriage or out.

This isn’t a thing where it’s okay when white people do it. I see too many soft men talking tough about tan-toned women but when it’s a white person and especially a male there’s an almost privileged number of excuses made.

But there’s no such thing as male privilege (read end, I now believe). Any woman who doesn’t want to be raped is a feminist (well, shit, I guess we all are, how terrible of us not to be whores from porn).

No, there are no excuses for any aspect of this. It is evil.

EVIL.

Evil when any sex, race, sexuality does it.

Pure, Satanic evil.

Patton grabbed her hands and made her hit herself in the face. She was petrified, crying her eyes out, and he picked up a knife from the mantelpiece.

 

“No violence”

She was screaming for him to calm down. He was telling her she should slit her throat, but she managed to calm him down and he forced her to kiss him and tell him she loved him.

“No violence”

The next morning, he told her that if she performed oral sex on him that it would calm him down before ejaculating inside her wearing no protection.

Rape, would count even in a relationship. Clear elements of force (ordering, changes).

It’s like the callous men assume this can never happen to them either.
Plenty of male rape victims in the world. Rapists use the same tactics on them.

Let me guess, after the (attempted) coercion, she put up last minute resistance?

That force has a legal name, rape.

Check the legal codes. I did.

When the victim went for a shower, Patton came in and raped her again.

I wonder if Roosh V’s forum will welcome him with open arms for having a “concubine”. Check the web history, I’m certain you’ll find it, but the police haven’t reached the level of common sense where they look for incitement to rape and “rape isn’t real” (because women aren’t human) propaganda. I said this would happen years ago, you plant the entitlement and lie about the laws then eventually some psycho will act on it.

But the propagandists are also legally culpable. This isn’t a “game”…

‘Given his young age, I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt and not say that he is dangerous.’

He should be swinging. I’m sure he’ll convert to Islam while he’s in there. He’ll fit right in.

Update: I can only find the false dichotomy of rape and violence (rape is inherently violent as the ultimate sexual, violent crime) in PUA materials.

This was literally the top of the search results. Don’t get mad at me.

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

“What I’ve gathered from the words of these future Pulitzer Prize winners is that women are not getting raped by violent offenders while taking a jog in the park or walking through a dark street—they are getting raped by men they already know,”

I can’t find this false distinction anywhere else? Can anyone else show an earlier origin?

Seriously. Genuine request. Where did this toxic narrative come from?

“I also read that men must be taught not to rape,”

but what of the places that teach them to rape?

“which means that they are all born with the capability to rape and have zero instinct to know that taking a woman with violence is improper.”

Define violence. You don’t have to pin someone down if you coerced them but both are violent acts in consent law, whether it’s sexual or cheating granny out of her title deeds. Any force of consent is not consent.
In that very wording there is already violence “taking”, rape means to “take”.

The basic premise of that mess was: It isn’t my male duty to control my body, it is the world’s responsibility to tread on eggshells around it for me.

SJW logic.

That’s why everybody thought wow, what a pajama boy. Handle your own feelings, including lust. That’s in the sodding Bible. The men who claim to know how sexual relations should play out better than Jesus

pic unrelated

and that strangely put all the social power on one side (a dying society, because the sexes can’t cooperate) is a sign of how our times are done for.
And if rape were legal, it would mostly be men raping other men. It would involve murder. You can’t have a rape culture without a high risk of homicide. The world would be a gay bar toilet at 2am. Somehow I don’t think this is what they envisioned, being very echo chamber. The highest sex drive men… are gay. The streets would be like prison for the average man, kidnappings and false imprisonments would be the norm.

There was no logic to call it a “thought experiment”, it was a stupid metaphor (private space*, sexual safe space, yes!) about how a woman’s No is never real because neither is rape. If you don’t believe in certain things, what’s the point calling yourself a society?

This guy (top) lived out Roosh’s rape “experiment”, on “private” (read: false imprisonment) property. Nobody else seems to have made this connection.

*Which is ironically calling on ideas of a marital bed and conjugal rights to endorse fornication and rape.