I thought colleges were filled with Progressives?


Amanda Marcotte:

Most campus rapes don’t resemble the kind of rape that involves call boxes or could theoretically be prevented by concealed carry—e.g., a stranger leaping out of the bushes so that a ready and armed woman could pull and shoot. In the real world, at least 80 percent of victims of campus rapes know their assailant. The standard strategy of rapists is not to jump a stranger who could, after all, fight back. Research shows rapists prefer to attack women they’re on dates with or at parties with, situations where the victims have their guard down. Rapists almost always prefer to attack women who have been drinking, in part because it makes it easier to overpower them without too much force and makes it hard for the victim to press charges without being accused of making it all up to cover for a drunken mistake. The only way that guns could prevent the vast majority of campus rapes is if women carried them at parties and on dates—a questionable proposition.

See? You don’t need guns to stop rape. You just have to outlaw alcohol, parties and dating. Then there would be no more rape.

BTW – I thought colleges were filled with progressives? So who is doing all the raping?


About Myiq2xu™

"If you hit an artery, somebody can bleed out in two minutes."
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

74 Responses to I thought colleges were filled with Progressives?

  1. myiq2xu says:

    It’s nice to know that no college woman who is sober and walking home from the library at night has to worry about rape.

    • myiq2xu says:

      Amanda Marcotte does seem to blame the victim, doesn’t she?

      • wmcb says:

        Yep. According to her, a college posting shit like “realize some of your actions (like fighting back) might make it worse” is sound advice. Saying women being armed is an option is victim-blaming.

        That’s how far down the rabbit hole modern feminism is.

  2. wmcb says:

    Marcotte wrote that after I and others bombarded her multiple times with the FACT that on every campus where CC was allowed, ALL rape dropped drastically. Even date rape.

    As a matter of fact, at Colorado State, forcible rape dropped from over 30 to less than 5 per year, and non-forcible all but disappeared. Amazing what the fucking fear of God in the form of a potential handgun will do to readjust creepy dudes brains to the idea of living in a polite society.

    But, Empowerment! Womynz! We need to DANCE and march some more to educate the menz!! Great. Go for it. I’m sure it helps at least some. Also, give them guns if they want one.

    • Now you know how this works. You’re only truly empowered when you can abort your rapist’s fetus. Themz the rulez.

      • DeniseVB says:

        Indeed. This is how surreal the conversation’s gotten. Choose: The Pregnatator or The Terminator. Sigh, the war on women continues and it’s not Bush’s, Palin’s or Romney’s fault.

  3. votermom says:

    Tangentially, one of the things that bugs me about the OWS supporting-left

    • angienc (D) says:

      In their defense, that was always the plan.

      • votermom says:

        Yup. The thought that someone might be packing heat casts a pall over their reckless & immature impulses. Down Twiinkles.

        • angienc (D) says:

          If women carry guns those Occupy rape tents won’t be any fun. Bummer, man.

        • wmcb says:

          Angie, Marcotte also categorically denies that any rapes were happening among OWSers. It was all homeless people, nothing to do with them. She also screamed and yelled at people and called them “racist rape apologists” over the Duke Lacrosse thing for months after they had been aquitted and it was OBVIOUS it was a false rape accusation.

  4. SHV says:

    ” Amazing what the fucking fear of God in the form of a potential handgun will do to readjust creepy dudes brains to the idea of living in a polite society.”
    Fear of the “potential” may be the biggest benefit. I have a CWP but rarely carry; it’s a PITA. Following the crime reports in my area, a CW would rarely be of any use. It’s usually victim/victims are in gas station, mini-mart, etc. and are part of crowd being held up at gun point or individual is getting out of car, walking, etc. and a gun is put to their head. Most of the armed robberies now seem to involve 2-3 people acting together. Dealing with home invasion, becoming more frequent in my area, seems to be the best use for a firearm.

  5. Geezus, she’s a certifiable Democratic lap dog. More than blaming the victim, she’s using the current discussion to cover for mainstream misogyny on the left and elevate extreme misogyny on the right. The article itself is riddled with bias and fallacies galore.

  6. One of the glaring things about articles like this is that it gives lie to the old leftist proverb that rape is about power, not sex. On college campus, such predatory behavior on the part of male students is absolutely about sex. It may also be about power, but it’s mainly about sex and bragging rights. That’s why I think there should be a distinction for this concept between date rape/party rapes and stranger/forcible/serial rapists rapes.

  7. SHV says:

    I have a right to defend myself if I want to. Period.
    That is the bottom line….

    Reading some of the Amanda person’s nonsense, it seems like “gun” is symbolic of all the crazy shit that is going on in her mind and unrelated to the actual issue. That whole psychological dynamic seems to be standard thought for the vile progs; (myiq’s fav. Toure comes to mind) “assault rifles”, Voter ID, etc., etc. just craziness masquerading as politics/social policy.

  8. SHV says:

    ” that it gives lie to the old leftist proverb that rape is about power, not sex. On college campus, such predatory behavior on the part of male students is absolutely about sex.”
    I never really understood the power vs sex rational. It’s one of those statements that is repeated so often that it seems to be true. Years ago, I was listening to NPR and there was a psychiatrist who worked at a max security prison that had the serial killers, serial rapists, etc. He said the power/sex canard is bullshit….with these animals it all about the sex….it’s the dynamics of rape (fear, violence, etc.) that is the sexual stimulus.

    • wmcb says:

      I think there are rapists for whom it’s mere power, not sex. But I don’t think it’s all of them. I think the little date rapists dropping roofies in drinks are all about getting their rocks off. Though it’s still rape, they are slimy opportunists, which is different kink from a an animal who *needs* to violently beat and subdue and terrify a woman.

      • myiq2xu says:

        I wonder how often that really happens. It seems to me that there is already a lot of drunken college sex going on without the aid of roofies. I wonder how often “He must have slipped me a roofie” is used to avoid admitting “I got drunk and slept with him.”

        • wmcb says:

          Yes, but you can’t say that, myiq, or you are “victim blaming”. Just as with accusations of “racist”, some people figure out pretty quickly how to use something that *does* happen (victim blaming) as a handy get-them-to-shut-up card to bludgeon others with.

          It’s just like those who claim that women never, ever lie about domestic abuse. BULLSHIT. Bull fucking shit. I have personally known 2 women who did, and dozens who used the spectre of false accusation as a threat. It’s actually fairly common for some women to trot out “I’ll call the police and tell them you hit me, and they’ll believe me, asshole!” as a weapon in an argument.

          People are a mixed bag. Good and evil, truthful and liars, etc. Black, white, male, female. People are individuals. Some of them do really shitty things – and being of an historically oppressed class does not make you an angel.

        • Somebody says:

          Well years ago in the early 80’s I had that happen to me Myiq and I swear I wasn’t drinking. I agreed to join a co-worker for dinner at his house, others were supposedly joining us to. I was busy in the kitchen and the host made a pitcher of drinks. He poured me a drink and I helped him carry the steaks out to the grill. I took maybe two sips of that drink and the next thing I know I woke up in the wee hours of the morning in his bed with him on top of me.

          I most certainly didn’t just get drunk and sleep with him. I had no interest in him and only agreed to the dinner because another co-worker and his girlfriend were supposed to join us. I somehow thought if I agreed to the dinner the creep would stop begging me to go out with him…….but a date wasn’t really what he was after so I found out.

          A side note, only a few months later the creep got his just desserts. He met and fell in love with the woman of his dreams, who as it happened had been born a man, LOL!!!! Karma baby!

        • wmcb says:

          Somebody, what a horrible experience! That’s why I said date rape happens, just like racism happens. It’s real as can be. And it’s disgusting that some will take a legitimate and painful reality and use it as a weapon applied to any situation they don’t like.

        • Somebody says:

          Well I’m over it wmcb, that was a long time ago and I’ve had much worse happen to me. But again I don’t know that it qualifies as date rape because it honestly wasn’t supposed to be a date, although I did know the creep.

        • gxm17 says:

          I suppose it depends on one’s definition of drunk. Tipsy but still able to give consent or passed out drunk? IANAL but I’m pretty sure that it’s considered rape to have sex with someone who can not give consent.

        • gxm17 says:

          wmcb, yep, too true.

        • gxm17 says:

          Somebody, that’s terrible! Sounds like premeditated rape to me. I hate the term date rape because people like Whoopie Goldberg mistake it for not being “rape rape.” It’s disgusting to think that just because one knows one’s attacker, it’s a lesser crime.

  9. yttik says:

    “The only way that guns could prevent the vast majority of campus rapes is if women carried them at parties and on dates—a questionable proposition…”

    Oh, I don’t know, it sounds good to me! Men would have to walk on eggshells, in fear of their life. Do not slip a drug in that woman’s drink, we have no idea how she’ll handle a handgun if she’s hallucinating! Consent would be pretty easy to figure out….I think she’s interested in you, she put the gun down.

    Seriously though, have you ever heard anybody tell a man that bringing a weapon on a date or to a party is a “questionable proposition?” More likely there would be an automatic assumption that he needs his gun to not only protect himself, but to protect his girlfriend, too. Apparently it is only women who can’t be trusted not to straight shot vodka and start pop-popping their dates on a whim.

    • wmcb says:

      Apparently it is only women who can’t be trusted not to straight shot vodka and start pop-popping their dates on a whim.


      Here’s an idea: women can stop bringing a gun (which they may or may not misuse, but you worry they might) to college parties when men stop bringing penises and greater body strength (which they may or may not misuse, but you worry they might) to parties. Yeah, that’s ridiculous. So is Marcotte.

  10. myiq2xu says:

  11. votermom says:

    I didn’t realize Dr Ben Carson joined twitter

  12. votermom says:

  13. wmcb says:

    A graphic is worth a thousand words. THIS is what all the hyperventilating and handwringing is over. They lie. Every fucking one of them. And they do so partly because if they don’t, the other side gets a demagoguing advantage, and they get painted as the mean mean meanypants. So it’s all a big kabuki designed to preempt and fend off the “you’re an uncaring meanypants” accusation. Meanwhile they are destroying my fucking country.

    • yttik says:

      That’s a different kind of rape. We’re being violated with endless hysteria and fear mongering.

      • lyn5 says:

        The DOD plans to punish its civilian employees. My hubby will lose a month’s pay if nothing is done. He was told to plan for 22 furlough days to be taken between April and October.

        • wmcb says:

          Yep. That’s how they always try to strongarm more spending. They NEVER go after waste, unneccessary stuff, etc first. The moment a cut is proposed, they DELIBERATELY start doing layoffs, wailing about police and fire, etc.

          It is purposeful coercion and fear tactics. It’s no accident. It’s as if I were forced to budget, and the first thing I did was stop giving my kids lunch money, rather than cutting out the Starbucks lattes, out of spite. It’s an intimidation tactic.

        • wmcb says:

          Oh, and every dept of govt does this, not just DOD. All of them. It’s a fucking protection racket. It’s extortion, plain and simple.

        • yttik says:

          We’re supposedly winding down two wars. You would think that would mean that we could afford to slow the increase in defense spending. That’s all sequestration really is, a reduction in scheduled increases.

        • Somebody says:

          Sorry Lyn5, my husband is an air traffic controller same thing. WMCB is correct they do these furloughs deliberately, it’s all political theater. There is plenty of waste that could be cut, but those things are never cut. I’ve said it before furloughs are government management 101. Speaking of managers, I bet not too many of them end up on furlough, but funny thing if they did would anybody notice?

      • HELENK says:

        give your husband a great big hug. he has one of the most stressful jobs in the world.

        • Somebody says:

          Ah thanks Helen, he’s pretty good at it too and that’s not just me saying that he’s very well respected by his fellow controllers.

          He won’t be stressed or furloughed for much longer though as he only has 100 days left until he’s forced to retire by federal law due to his turning the ripe old age of 56. He had hoped he might be one of the lucky ones to get a waiver since he’s in excellent health and as I said very well respected. Man the timing couldn’t be worse, what with sequestration. Oh well such is life!

        • lyn5 says:

          Somebody, I totally agree with you and wmcb. I hope your husband gets a waiver. My husband retires in 11 months, and we are OK. If you want to discuss timing, I’m leaving my job on the 28th. I gave my notice in mid-January. 🙂

  14. votermom says:

  15. wmcb says:

    ROTFLMAO!!!!! You guys have to read this letter from the “uppity” Ted Cruz, re: Rahm Emanuel’s attempts to strongarm gun manufacturers out of business. Love it.

    Cruz is smart as a whip and was a shark of an attorney. I’m not sure they are quite ready for him:

    • angienc (D) says:

      He uses too many commas, but otherwise I enjoyed that — especially the part to Rahm.

    • HELENK says:

      between him and Rick Perry, telling businesses to come on down and be welcome they are making governors like moonbeam brown and the Colorado governor and now the godfather crazy.
      telling companies the door is open and they are welcome in Texas is one the smartest moves a state government can do

  16. HELENK says:

    I have just returned from the ostrich races and the camel races and kids chasing chickens. I have not laughed that hard in years.
    It was at the Riverside County Fair. really great time

    as soon as I learn how to upload pictures from my camera I will post the pictures

  17. LMAO!

  18. 49erDweet (D) says:

    I’m not late with this, I’m not, I’m not. It’s been granddaughter time all afternoon.
    Expanding here, but for AM to believe “teach men not to rape” is even remotely possible shows she hasn’t clue one to the makeup of male psyches. Non-date rape is not solely about male gratification. It is a sex plus urge seeking an enhancement thought multiplied by power, control and dominance. It is bullying at it’s worst. The ugly secret is almost all men can be “bully’s”. Yes, even the Justin Bieber types. It’s in our DNA.
    Most women I know sincerely and I believe mistakenly believe they control the bullying streaks in their “others”. Maybe a tiny few do, but most are simply fortunate they’ve so far been able to avoid triggering situations. Convincing burgeoning coeds to recognize and appropriately respond to bullying factors is usually a lost cause, mostly because they assume they “know everything” and are somehow “in control”. Without exterior limitations, such as secure locations, alert companions, CCW, mace, etc., IMO they are about as much in control as the Slim Pickens character was during his iconic bomb ride in Dr. Stranglove.

    • wmcb says:

      There is a reason why almost all violent crime and physical aggression, not just rape, is perpetrated by men. Several thousand years of evolution made it so.

      Frankly, I think we have done boys a disservice by becoming so obsessed with completely suppressing any and all hint of “aggressiveness” in male children. I think a day will come when we will look at that with as much horror as we look at the brutal suppressing of sex drive by the Victorians. When you overly repress something that is natural to the human animal, it has a tendency to later manifest itself in VERY unhealthy ways. A much better approach is to allow it outlet in ways that are not too harmful.

      Little boys used to be able to have minor fights, get busted up, be “aggressive” be competitive, etc. We are now taking small boys and trying to completely cram a lid down on any hint of that. No fighting, no posturing, no nothing.

      By the time young boys are turning to young men, we have fucked them up royally, IMO. And all that stuff you forced them to completely repress starts leaking out in some horrible ways.

      *shrug* Y’all can agree or disagree. I certainly think that you can *nudge* natural human tendencies into less harmful directions. But when you try to authoritatively clamp down on thousands of years of evolution, you are making a damn mess.

      • Underwhelmed says:

        You are 1000% right. But education has largely been taken over by left wing women, the hardliner feminists who really don’t like men, or maleness, or masculinity, and want to stamp it out everywhere. So they won’t let boys be boys in safe, structured spaces. And since instincts will out, we get drugging boys into feminine softness.

        Boys/men are loaded with testosterone. They need that to be expressed in healthy, outward looking ways. They need not to be told they are inherently evil and dangerous. They need to be taught ways to channel their natural energies into positive activities that celebrate their strengths and teach them how to be strong and comfortable in their skins and not angry all the time. They need women to tell them they are okay being boisterous. They need to learn their boundaries within a framework of acceptance, not revulsion. They need wonderful, strong men as role models. They need to learn that hating women, directing their anger at women, isn’t the answer.

        • wmcb says:

          Yep. And I think that one of the reasons why prog men have become (in my experience) such purveyors of deepseated misogyny is that they have been taught that being truly masculine is rednecky and gauche and lowclass and wrong. And they subconsciously resent the fuck out of that. All their outlets become poisonous and unnatural and wrong, because they resent women so very badly.

      • angienc (D) says:

        And all that stuff you forced them to completely repress starts leaking out in some horrible ways.

        Worse than seeing all these beta male progs getting hard ons for the SCoaMF and acting like that jugeared geek is Steve fucking McQueen?

  19. SHV says:

    “By the time young boys are turning to young men, we have fucked them up royally, IMO. And all that stuff you forced them to completely repress starts leaking out in some horrible ways.”
    I think you may be right. A couple of boys fighting at elementary school is treated like a felony.

    • wmcb says:

      Yeah, I think trying to make little boys all passive sunshine and roses is not working. I’m not saying we have to let them be violent bullies. But we might want to take a step back a bit: let them fight it out, jockey for position, compete, be risky, figure out where to loose that testosterone. Cramming boatloads of guilt down their throats for any whiff of “aggression” strikes me more and more as a dumb thing to do.

      • SHV says:

        ” Cramming boatloads of guilt down their throats for any whiff of “aggression”…
        A wiff of aggression and they are “diagnosed” as “suffering” from ADHD and have amphetamines crammed down their throats.

  20. wmcb says:

    Random thought for tonight: I was reading an article over at American Interest, and it struck me again how the southern states completely screwed us all re: Federalism (and I say that as a southerner).

    By choosing the issue of slavery, of all things, to go balls to the wall over states rights, they poisoned the well for decades to come.

    We would not have nearly the problems we have now with trying to return to some semblance of sovereign statehood, some pushback to an overarching federal authoritarianism, if the shadow of the slavery fight had not lurked every time some governor wanted to tell Washington “Fuck you, we won’t.” The states have spent over a hundred years being cowed, too afraid to flex any muscle, and they were put in that spot by the damn confederacy. We are where we are today in large part because of those dumbasses making “states rights” a shunned concept.

    Here’s the article that sparked the thoughts:


  21. Constance says:

    Since almost all gun crimes and mass shootings are done by men why are we even discussing gun controls for women? Sure we need to be careful not to let men get our guns but we don’t need laws that restrict women’s access to guns because WE don’t misuse them and cause terror in the society. How did we even get put in the same class with men with regard to guns anyway?

  22. myiq2xu says:

  23. wmcb says:

Comments are closed.