Post: #1

http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Campuse...lk/148615/

"The discussion of alcohol and sexual violence is the third rail of discourse"

Stephen Joel Trachtenberg, president emeritus of George Washington University, suggested as a guest on a National Public Radio show that college women could protect themselves by drinking less. The remarks caused an immediate uproar on GW’s campus and beyond.

the Department of Justice has run a grant program [that] points administrators away from an emphasis on "changing victim behavior."

she grew to resent feeling as if she had to monitor her behavior because of what others might do to her, says a volunteer [at] a network of self-identified survivors and allies. "The cost of any form of self-policing—not walking alone in the dark, watching what you drink and what you wear—is that you live under a self-inflicted form of fear," she says.
No, it's that you live in the world.

To paraphrase Roosh, why are women criminals when they drink and drive but victims when they drink and hook up?

Post: #2

I don't get her argument. Watching what you drink, what you wear, and where you walk when it's dark, means you're living in fear?

So live in fear.

Post: #3

The trouble is that the whole "discussion" is nonsense.

There is no problem with "sexual assault" on campuses. With alcohol, without alcohol, inside dorms or outside, anywhere you look. There is simply no "problem" that needs to be solved.

Dudes and sluts getting drunk and fucking is not a problem in need of a solution. It's the most natural thing in the world. It goes on, as well it should.

The problem -- and it is a truly terrible one -- is with this entirely manufactured "sexual assault" hysteria that has already destroyed the lives of some college kids and is introducing tension and anxiety into the lives of many others.

The feminists and their white knight enablers who come around trying to rid colleges of virtually nonexistent "sexual assault" are the problem. They are the sickness for which we need a cure.

Post: #4

No one ever wants to take responsibility, especially women.

If I decided to drunkenly wander around Baltimore at night and got my ass kicked no one would feel bad for me, they'd just think I was a moron. Women want to have their cake and eat it too, if chicks drink less at parties the number of "rape" cases would plummet.

It's always funny how women, especially hardcore feminists, talk about how all men are potential rapists. I'm sure talking about minorities as being nothing more than potential criminals would be offensive to them though. They really want to be considered some protected/elevated class of human, and to act like dudes while they do it.

Post: #5

The rape crisis may not exist, but the white knights are real.

From the article:

Quote:Instead, many campus programs focus on "bystander intervention," or teaching students how they can help their friends stay safe at parties and in other situations. It’s an easier message for students to hear, say campus administrators, and doesn’t result in blaming those who get drunk and are assaulted.

"They are taught to notice when something might be harmful to their friends and distract someone and get them away," says Ms. Masters. "Part of the conversation is ‘We need to keep our friends safe,’ and by doing that, we also learn how to keep ourselves safe."

The real problem is that universities are encouraging white knighting as official policy. Because these schools refuse to make girls responsible for their own behavior.

Post: #6

Regarding the "bystander intervention"... Have any of you tried to pull a drunken friend away from someone at the party that they are attracted to? It doesn't work. I remember having to take some online course about drinking a decade ago before I attended university. There was a whole segment on bystander intervention. What did I do when I got to college? I through that garbage out the window. I'd willingly assist my drunk friends in getting with drunk women. Being intoxicated doesn't give you a mulligan anywhere else in life, so why should you get one after a sexual encounter? In some cases, the girls would stop by our house wondering if they slept over. We'd send them on their way saying that it must have been a similar house on another block. If you dress like a slut, drink like a slut, and act like a slut, then you must desire to be fucked like a slut. Get what you came for and leave.

Post: #7

If you feel you need to teach other people how to care for their friends, it says more about you can anything else.

This "bystander intervention" is just more pressure applied on men to go out of their way to help women. It is almost they know they can't convince women to protect other women - men have to given that task. If you recall, the most disturbing aspect of the Steubenville sexual assault incident wasn't the assault itself, but the fact that many women were just standing there, watching. Not horrified, not scared...just watching it happen.

Post: #8

Maybe some guys will/should start black knighting and saying they heard the chicks say they wanted sex.

Post: #9

For feminists it makes sense:

Post: #10

We shouldn't teach our children to look both ways before crossing in a cross walk because drivers should NEVER be speeding in a school zone.

Teaching our kids to look both ways would be victim blaming.

Post: #11

(09-04-2014 10:18 PM)CactusCat589 Wrote:  I don't get her argument. Watching what you drink, what you wear, and where you walk when it's dark, means you're living in fear?

So live in fear.

Exactly. The ancient Hindus had a nice summary of animal existence: sleep, food, and fear (nidrā-āhara-bhayam in Sanskrit). Humans are still animals, deal with it.

Post: #12

Why should I have to wear a seatbelt when I drive my car? Just tell other people not to crash into me, stop encouraging traffic accident culture.



Get blackout drunk around horny, equally drunk men, and perish the thought that you might be "taken advantage of". Idiotic children.

Post: #13

The funniest thing is that after all these years feminists have no real answer for the question that when two people are equally drunk why is the girl the victim and the man the rapist? I have asked this question at times on such articles only to get dumb answer from feminists and white knights which make no sense or they simply try to insult me with "Bro, you are the kind of guy women should stay away from" type of answers. It also shows the power of feminism that we have gotten to this point where two drunk people can have sex and the women is portrayed as this innocent, helpless bird that the man took advantage of. One day society will look back and see how dumb and unjust this it. Two drunk people fucking consensually is nothing more than drunk sex, not rape or sexual assault.

Post: #14

My friend's wife's "BFF," who is now slutting it up in NYC, is an alum of GWU and posted this same article on her facebook. I usually don't get involved with this stuff because I always have the unpopular opinion. Can't find the post and responses any more but I made a similar analogy to Hedonistic Traveler about not putting yourself in a compromising position. I said something about walking down a dark street at night in a bad neighborhood with hundred dollar bills hanging out of my pocket and getting robbed. Would I be the victim? Yes, but I would also accept the fact that I put myself in a very vulnerable position and I should take responsibility for what happened to me.

When I was in college, I overheard too many sorority chicks on Sunday morning bragging about how many dudes in XYZ fraternity or the guys on the basketball team they'd fucked in the past week to have any sympathy for them.