Post: #1

Prominent feminist Jessica Valenti makes a bald faced lie and claims that no serious feminists call drunk sex rape. Are they getting scared of blowback for their silly policies?

In short, when creating the laws they're all "sex with a drunk person is rape." But in public debate, they bait and switch, "of course drunk sex isn't automatically rape! Really? Wow, just wow." Personally, I'd rather have the law on my side than a bunch of vacuous pundits, so their public position is irrelevant.

Here, for example, is Stanford University forbidding precisely what the feminist is pantomiming is legal: http://www.thefire.org/cases/stanford-un...y-finding/

I'm on my phone and it's slow, but you can find plenty of institutions saying consent is impossible with someone who is intoxicated, making sex with them nonconsentual and thus assault or rape.

I'm not aware of any legal definition of intoxicated, but as far as driving is concerned, a girl only needs one to two drinks to be over the limit. I found a University site (Notre Dame) stating that intoxication is indeed > 0.08 BAC.

"But here's what Delgado is most concerned about: that "prominent scholars and activists" define rape as any sex had after drinking alcohol. Who is making this extreme argument? We don't know. Despite their "prominence", Delgado fails to point out one scholar or activist actually saying such a thing. (Now, I'm sure you could find some radical individual who would argue that anything but sober sex is rape - but don't point me to a Tumblr and tell me it's policy.)

"Admittedly, I am no scientist," Delgado says - don't worry, we could tell - "but I am fairly certain that a statistically significant amount of sex – including very enjoyable sex – happens under the influence of alcohol. But by the liberal definition of my generation, I have been raped. Multiple times."

This lie – that anti-sexual assault advocates and feminists somehow believe any sex that involves drinking is rape – is an oft-repeated one, so let me set the record straight: yes, you can be drunk and have sex. What feminists tend to advocate for is enthusiastic consent - the belief that consent is the presence of a "yes", not just the absence of a "no". Throwing a few back doesn't mean you can't enthusiastically say yes to sex."

Link: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree...k-have-sex

Here's another article by Amanda Marcotte doing something similar - baldly claiming that a sexual assault policy does not forbid drunk sex when it clearly does -
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/201...dards.html

Are these broads evil liars or just morons? Who knows? I feel like I massively misread these shrews, but I think I have not.

Notre Dame Site: http://oade.nd.edu/educate-yourself-alco...oxication/

Post: #2

Is it rape if you're both drunk? Or does that negate the whole argument?

Post: #3

They're smart. I've seen much verbiage used to distract as a key strategy and slick moves like this. I bet it would be hard to find past instances of valenti quoted in her former remarks that's likable to something she wrote

Parlay-

Applying the associative property we see that; man(beer)+woman(liquor)=man is wrong
man(yeager)+woman(beer)=man is wrong

Post: #4

Much of what women say is subjective. It makes it easy to twist things around to suit your needs.
They should all be lawyers.

Post: #5

A fat chick is trying to go on a diet, she makes a commitment to not eating pizzas, but in the heat of the moment, she eats the pizzas..

Is the pizza a rapist because she didn't plan to consent to eating it and felt guilty about it the next day?

Fat feminist: "I'll have a slice of your rapiest pizza with rape toppings please. Rape you very much. Have a rapey day."

Post: #6

Since when are women accountable for whatever they say or do?

Post: #7

From the linked article:

Quote:...violating Stanford’s sexual assault policy which states that one cannot consent to sex if “intoxicated” to any degree

That's quite a policy. Intoxicated to any degree means after a sip of alcohol. It means that enjoying a glass of wine with a girl and then having sex afterwards is rape, according to this highest of academic entities.

This will be enjoyable to watch from the sidelines. If you're going to start a witch-hunt, at the very least have some follow-through or a game plan. You can't set something like that in motion and then just pussy out.

Post: #8

(05-22-2014 05:26 PM)Daddy Wrote:  Since when are women accountable for whatever they say or do?

Since they got the right to vote.

Post: #9

^What's notable is not even that they say drunk sex is rape - it's that they *deny that anyone DOES!*

And I bet if you looked hard enough, you'd find these same feminists, i.e. Marcotte and Valenti, saying drunk sex is rape.

Post: #10

I'm up for the task

Post: #11

This can actually work to ones advantage. There are many prominent feminists who very likely said and agreed to the idea that drunk sex is rape and stated it publicly in their writings. So if she says no real feminists would say such things then one simply has to ask her "So would feminist such and such be considered a "real" feminists to you after having said this? She would be forced into a corner between denouncing quite a few mainstream feminists, and as a result you might develop some nice infighting between them over who the "real" feminists are. I've learned that women are going to fight and complain regardless, let them waste the energy on themselves, especially the fat angry ones. After, they'll have a cheeseburger with a double order of bacon and forget whatever it was they were fighting for, until the next shiny badge of victim-hood emerges.

Post: #12

I looked at the comments and was surprised to find that no one noticed this obvious lie of "feminists never say drunk sex is always rape!" The detractors mostly focus on the statistics - which may well be faulty, but are superfluous in demolishing the central argument.

Post: #13

20% of Valenti's body of work concerns rape. For someone who hasn't ever been raped, that suggests some kind of wish-fulfillment.

Post: #14

(05-22-2014 04:11 PM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  Prominent feminist Jessica Valenti...

Link: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree...k-have-sex

One of the reasons I stopped following The Guardian

Post: #15

(05-23-2014 02:39 AM)Roosh Wrote:  20% of Valenti's body of work concerns rape. For someone who hasn't ever been raped, that suggests some kind of wish-fulfillment.

It's her fantasy most likely.

Someone who has really been raped probably does everything to not think about it.

This is the most attractive picture I could find of her on Goolge. It's the one in which her upper arms seem least fat. But she's got this grumpy look that, to me, suggests she's very unhappy about something deep.

I wonder if she would go up a few points in this picture if she wasn't a grumpy "feminist".

I think she would seem more attractive.

Post: #16

http://skepchick.org/2012/12/twitter-use...e-rapists/

Post: #17

Have a friend in the "counseling industry" that specializes in post-jail "offender" counseling and he says the FBI legal definition all the way down to certain jurisdictions definitions of "rape" or sexual assault now have been changed. Its now considered those 2 if a woman has had any alcohol whatsoever and proceeds to hook up with a man even if consensual. So technically she is absolved of any culpability for what plays out with her and another man/woman. If she changes her mind about what she "consented to" the legal ball is still in her court and the fallout rests on the man's shoulders no questions asked. Sounds stupid and sketchy at the same time. Seems they have too much time on their hands to be able to nitpick apart any and all definitions of what they want them to be to suit their hamster-ish needs.

Post: #18

I read the title as "Feminist Baldy Lies..."

Imagine my disappointment at the lack of pics of said baldy!

Post: #19

From the other thread, "Real Men Don't Rape":

Samseau Wrote:

(05-23-2014 12:15 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  

(05-23-2014 12:10 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Drunken sex is not rape. If you buy food from McDonalds while drunk and regret feeling like a fattie the next day, does that mean McDonalds stole from you?

Likewise, if a woman has sex with some man while drunk and regrets feeling like a slut the next day, does that mean the man raped her?

Technically it's theft of service

So clearly, if a man drives while drunk he's not responsible for anyone he kills since he was too drunk to consent to drive.

Post: #20

(05-22-2014 04:11 PM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  I'm not aware of any legal definition of intoxicated

In California Alcohol Beverage Control training for alcohol vendors and servers, intoxication is when the customer fails 2 of these 5 visual tests:

1) Difficulty in speech: Slurred speech, uncontrolled pitch, or muttering
2) Loss of peripheral vision ie "tunnel vision" or "head pivoting"
3) Impaired motor ability --difficulty picking things up, sitting in a chair or on a stool
4) Impaired balance: Difficulty walking, bobbing and weaving, bumping into furniture.
5) Flush face

Bartenders do not serve alcohol to intoxicated people. You fail 2 of these 5 tests, we cut you off. (Page 11 of this National Highway Traf­fic Safety Administration paper covers differences between US state definitions of intoxication.)

This is why, to the great annoyance of British tourists, you don't just have one person walk up to the bar and buy a round for everyone at their table: In California at least, bartenders and servers are required to do a visual inspection for intoxication of each person, every pour they sell. If you're not seen by the bartender, you don't get a drink, and only one drink per person per order, so if you're going to buy a round for your table, they all better walk up to the bartender to be seen when you're buying. There's also no carrying back a batch of serves for your table ...where one person then drinks everyone else's serving. Big no-no.

This also means anyone you take home from a bar was not intoxicated at the time of their last serve, and at most they can be one serve over. The standard serve is 2 oz alcohol, which varies by body weight/medical condition but they will generally metabolize this within 45 minutes of their most recent serve.

The whole Mothers Against Drunk Driving blood alcohol standards are going to go the way of the do-do bird as self-driving car technology spreads. In 20 years they're going to look back at us and wonder what all the fuss was about. You had a couple glasses of wine, you let the car drive you home same as always while you text friends and chat or just nap. For them it will be like us trying to understand driving horse bound sleighs or some other archaic transportation technology.

Post: #21

Estraudi, Exactly. I reread my quote of Valenti, and I'm still in disbelief at what an outrageous lie she is spouting. "Only Tumblr crazies are saying drunk sex is rape - me and my feminist crew would never say something so daft!" As they goad lawmakers to redefine more and more sexual acts as rape.

I see no way to reconcile the two - but I don't see Valenti and Marcotte denouncing every authority saying all drunk sex is nonconsentual and thus 'rapey.'

To put it in allegorical terms:

You fuck a girl consentually, and then she tells her husband you raped her - and she goads him into taking out a hit on you and gets you killed. Then this bitch comes to your funeral and cries her heart out about what a senseless tragedy your death was. That is the level of integrity you're dealing with here.

Post: #22

Basil,

I see no way to reconcile the two - but I don't see Valenti and Marcotte denouncing every authority saying all drunk sex is nonconsentual and thus 'rapey.'

What these people don't quite understand is that the ruckus already has been raised and these are the laws handed down to shut them the hell up, not realizing they now have handicapped everybody of any responsibility while drunk EXCEPT for the man in question.

YEah "that guy" will literally have every law(felony;misdemeanor) thrown at him just to see which ones can stick, barring plausible deniability.

Post: #23

(05-23-2014 02:50 AM)soup Wrote:  I wonder if she would go up a few points in this picture if she wasn't a grumpy "feminist".

I think she would seem more attractive.

That pic makes her look like Robin in HIMYM

Post: #24

Here is Stanford's policy:

" A person is legally incapable of giving consent if under 18 years of age; if intoxicated by drugs and/or alcohol; if developmentally disabled; or if temporarily or permanently mentally or physically unable to do so. "

They seem to be attempting to track California law which is somewhat unclear but is meant to indicate that you can be so drunk that you can't consent, but a couple of beers is not going to do it:

http://articles.latimes.com/1995-02-09/n...ung-people

Post: #25

So all those condom dispensers in bar bathrooms are actually rape enabler kits.