Why Liberals Need To Keep Promoting “Rape Culture”
There is no doubt that rape is a horrible crime. Is there any reason to discuss why? I thought not. But do we really need to keep talking about ‘rape culture’, rather than going after the people who rape? Hardcore, radical feminist Jessica Valentia says yes
There’s no arguing that America has a rape problem: Someone is sexually assaulted in the United States every two minutes. But the problem extends beyond the crimes themselves to the culture that allows rape to thrive.
We live in a country where a Texas defense lawyer called an 11-year-old gang-rape victim a “spider” luring men into her web. Where instead of helping a rape victim, high school students in Steubenville, Ohio, joked about the assault and took pictures. As feminist Thomas MacAulay Millar wrote, “It takes one rapist to commit a rape, but it takes a village to create an environment where it happens over and over and over.”
Let me point a few things out: as despicable as it is, defense lawyers are paid to get their client found not-guilty, or at least the shortest sentence possible. Second, it’s interesting that these “villages” with rape environments tend to be liberal strongholds, ie, cities. Third, it’s even more interesting that it is liberal criminal justice policies of leniency, tolerance, and understanding that enable short criminal sentences. It’s darn sure not conservatives who sentence child molesters to short incarcerations. Oh, and it is liberal policies which push heavy gun control which turn women into victims.
Ms. Valentia wants to blame the greater culture for creating this environment, and wants everyone to keep talking about it
Yet Tracey Vitchers of Students Active for Ending Rape says talking about rape culture has been instrumental to her work. “The concept of rape culture provides students with the language to contextualize what is happening and how they can talk to administrators and peers,” Vitchers says. “Rape culture speaks to the larger systemic problem of why bystanders don’t intervene, why victims don’t feel safe going to campus police and why you see such levels of PTSD among college survivors.”
One has to wonder if the leftist mantra of Me Me Me has something to do with this. Rape has obviously always been around, but if radical feminists are saying this is worse, and it’s the villages causing it, might the loss of morals, even small ones like “help your fellow Man” and “treat people with respect”, notions caused by Leftist culture, have something to do with it? If people are living the “if it feels good, do it” life, and not only live the Me Me Me life but the I Don’t Care What Happens To You life, might that be something liberals should look in the mirror over? If people blow off the simply rules of life/law for self gratification, might they not blow off the big ones as inconsequential?
The Other McCain notes this op-ed piece in discussing female sexual predators
The Washington Post offers feminist Jessica Valenti op-ed space to argue that we need to keep talking about “rape culture,” coincidentally providing Valenti a chance to promote her book about “Female Sexual Power.” But what if female sexual power is actually a major contributing factor to rape culture? This paradoxical possibility isn’t something anyone at the Washington Post is willing to consider, yet the celebration of aggressive promiscuity in the name of “empowerment” may be implicated in all kinds of unintended consequences:
This is part of a wider discussion of adult females praying on underage girls and boys, often as school teachers. Want to see a rape culture? Look at the education system, which is primarily inhabited by liberals, and their unions, especially the leadership, which is virtually all leftists. Search “teacher student sex” on Google, Yahoo, or Bing news, and there are lots and lots of stories. Google offers 32 pages for just the last 7 days, and many of those give the “explore in depth” with more articles links.
Women have traditionally been the gatekeepers of sexual orthodoxy, the arbiters of virtue in American society. Therefore, advocates of unrestrained perversion have devoted enormous effort to attacking the “hang-ups” of morality that prevent most women from fornicating with the ghastly shamelessness of “Belle Knox.” If sexual liberationists can persuade women to screw around with the reckless abandon of drunken sailors on shore leave, their self-appointed task of destroying American morality will be complete.
Leftist dogma promotes an “if it feels good, do it” culture. It eschews personal responsibility. It defends child predators, such as Kaitlyn Hunt, of whom Leftists stated that it was wrong to prosecute her of young lesbian love. They turned it into a drama about homosexuality, instead of statutory rape. If they want to discuss rape culture, they should look in the mirror: liberals enable this.
(The Other McCain) We were told that the Steubenville case was the pluperfect example of “rape culture” in action, but when all was said and done, the most obvious lesson of that saga was, drunk teenagers make very bad decisions, which is not exactly a startling revelation.
Liberals don’t see it that way, nor do they see themselves as the problem. Culture needs morals. Culture needs bedrock foundations of conduct. Liberals are trying, and succeeding, in destroying them. Want to reduce rape culture? Reduce rape with harsh criminal penalties. And empower women
PS: No, school kids should not be armed. While a few who were raised around guns would be responsible, they are still kids. Instead, have increased penalties for those who would sexually assault children. Shame the school unions who defend teachers. And refuse to prosecute parents who beat the ever-lovin’-sh*t out of the people who molest their children.
Britain provides yet another example of why the last people you would want advising lawmakers are pointy-headed liberal establishment “experts”:
Proving once again that the Democrat Party is the “more loving” and “more caring” Party, a Democrat Party official in
Paul Krugman is a Nobel Prize winning economist, which makes me think he’s deliberately playing stupid on Social Security: Social