Post: #26

It is false that a woman self lubricates during rape. Women have a defence mechanism hard wired to NOT get wet during forced entry so that it causes pain to the male and that he does not get a chance to dump his unwanted sperm into her. This is why "internal bleeding", tears, "non life threatening" injuries are common with rape as a woman suffers very bad vaginal tears and trauma from rape.

The meme on self lubrication comes from the dark truth that most rapes are done by men who know the women well. It can be a family friend or a fucked up family member who has plotted for months. In those instances the women self lubricates herself and for those instances I have no answers to give.

Women enjoy brutal domination for the most part. If rape was so taboo why do some harbour rape fantasies. Show me the children who make pictures or write stories of older people attaching them, of men writing novels of other men bashing their heads in a street brawl. No sane person dreams of their nightmare in such ways. There is s dark truth to the strange relationship between women and rape. I don't know if we will ever discover it in our times but hysteria like this does not help the women's case at all.

Post: #27

People are not questioning these powers the justice system is putting forth because the secret state of intelligence services are behind it, with full backing of the police and government.

One word: Extremism

People think terrorists when they think of that and by extension, islamic extremism. What they're not seeing is these new powers are going to be and have been used against free citizens expressing opinions in private or on social media.

Pro Western, European youth movements in Europe terrify the secret services and are inevitably going to be compromised by spying networks to monitor them. these powers are ahead of the curve and designed to deal with these movements.

Once the plebs realise whats happened it requires people who understand it to explain to them why its bad but by then it will be too late.

Post: #28

I find it hard to believe that this is a law that they passed. in the sense that some people actually sat down and thought "oh, this is a great, brilliant wonderful idea!". I feel like even if a child sits down and looks at this law they can show you a few things that are wrong with it. It bothers me to great end that men are almost always placed in the wrong when it comes to issues like these. There have been a few occasions where men have been falsely accused and it was due to a cross examination that they avoided prison sentences. With this new law here, that's nearly impossible for some people, especially if they are being falsely accused. Like nomadbrah said up above : Sex with varying degress of regret and mixed/negative emotions or loss of face is not rape though. Yet, because some women regret it in the morning, they get to claim that it is rape. Just my two cents

Post: #29

In Britain I followed the story of Adam Johnson because I'm a soccer fan and believe me my rational friends it has progressed to the point of being the Witch Hunt of the modern day. This man is not the only soccer player to have spent years in jail based on the accusations of a drunk slut. Even if they are later exonerated upon appeal, soccer careers are very short lived and they have a "wall" at around 30 years of age, so they may be very well paid up to that age, but when their career ends, it can be difficult. Taking away a soccer player's liberty is effectively fining them millions or hundreds of thousands depending on the division he plays in. In Johnson's case a couple million. On top of that you have legal fees spanning years. So even if he appeals and wins in the end, he has lost his career, his entire livelihood, and is simply thrown back out into the world with little not even a "sorry" from the UK CPS. The compensation opportunities for such falsely accused men are slim to non-existent; the accuser would have next to nothing, many of them probably on the generous UK welfare, and I'm not aware that the CPS can be sued for compensation of lost earnings. For all the perceived "injustices" in the UK, I would say straight white men are right at the back of the queue for any type of reparations.

Normal men, not professional athletes, rot anonymously in jails for similar injustices as well, and although they have fewer resources with which to appeal their convictions, they also have less to lose than professional athletes, financially anyway.

I hear the outrage on here and rightly so, but as for fighting... I'm not sure what anyone can do about it. As Roosh was accused of being a rapist based on a blog article and hunted worldwide, he came back with some nice punches that shut the media up. But when faced with an actual criminal case and determined accuser(s) and prosecutor, shit gets real, real fast. The media is obsessed with it, and they stop little short of carrying on until the man's life is completely ruined. If you've ever had the IRS pounding on your door, or the feds ransacking your home, you will know the feeling of utter powerlessness against the authorities and the legal tastes of the time they operate under. Right now one of them is a clear Witch Hunt against straight white males seeking to have what is by all intents and purposes normal sex with women, NOT rape. If you have had sex, the question is now automatically: "Prove you didn't rape her you evil straight white man," rather than, "The prosecutor must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the sex that occured was rape." When the full force of the Law and societal trends is behind all this, what the hell can any of us do about it but become poosy refugees. Either that or never take the risk of touching a woman in the Anglosphere ever again and subsequently going insane.

Post: #30

I think I know why this law allowing rape accusers to testify outside of court passed.

1. There is a massive rape wave all across Europe from Muslim men.
2. In the infrequent instances police actually pursue and catch the rapist (without fear of being called a racist) then women would testify in court, right?
3. The muslim men find out who the women are, tell their family members, and the woman is threatened/beaten/murdered by the Muslim man's family members.

Raped women being "silenced" through such means must have happened a few thousand times at least in the past decade, so new laws are passed to protect women who testify against Muslims in court.

However, the flip side of this of course is that innocent men can be falsely accused and have zero chances of defending themselves.

This is just the nonstop pattern of the Western man's rights being eroded by Muslims. Whenever Muslims do something wrong, it is our rights that suffer. We cannot ban Muslims, the courts have ruled that borders don't exist and their unfettered immigration to Western lands is a human right. And we cannot pass laws against Muslims, because that is "discrimination."

When Muslims did 9/11, now we cannot even fly airplanes without being invasively searched or exposed to a large dose of radiation.

When Muslims shoot up schools and nightclubs, calls for guns to be banned occur.

When Muslims rape tens of thousands of girls, we lose the right to face our accuser in court.

On one side we have rampaging hordes of Muslims, and on the other we have our AIDS court system that is indoctrinated with multikulti diversity leftist nonsense.

This pattern continues until someday the people snap, and groups of Whites start declaring independence. They ethnically cleanse areas of problem peoples, and resist the globalist governments with all means necessary. But until this point comes, how many millions must perish?

Post: #31

Where's the datasheet on in room cameras?

Post: #32

(03-20-2017 04:38 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  Where's the datasheet on in room cameras?

+1 Would Read, why don't you write one?

Post: #33

(03-20-2017 01:13 AM)dongiovanni Wrote:  UK law has disgraced itself recently. The whims of the moment ie the SJWs, women and their cuck accomplices are running the narratives.

Adam Johnson got 6 years for shagging a 15 year old groupie slut. He should've got 6 months for his crime and another 6 months for being so stupid as to incriminate himself on his mobile phone.

He wasn't found guilty of shagging her even, but kissing and touching her. (Still shouldn't be playing with under 16s of course.)
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...t-11087603

Post: #34

(03-20-2017 10:30 AM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  Great comment above by Jean Valjean. I agree.

Laws like this demonstrate the fact that every generation has to fight, and re-fight, the battles of the past for itself. Rights, once won, do not stay won forever. Every generation has to re-fight them, and push back the tide of injustice and ignorance for itself. If it rests on its laurels--if it relies too much on the labor of previous generations--then it stagnates and risks losing what has been won in the past.

Maybe Generals who are constantly fighting the last war have a point.

G

Post: #35

(03-19-2017 06:56 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

Quote:Prediction: White Men won't do shit.

In terms of fighting back against the state, you're correct.

But they will be more careful about which women they interact with, exclude lefty chicks from their prospect pipeline, record their sexual interactions, etc. In the end, this will just divide the sexes further, as planned.

And what will the "unintended" consequences of this be ("unintended" in scare quotes because I don't for one second believe that this isn't their real intention)?

Decent, moral, and intelligent men - the sort of men who make up this forum - will become trigger shy around women. We're fast waking up to the fact that casual sex is turning into a minefield. Meanwhile, men who aren't paying attention - the chavs, the louts, the morons - will continue to play the field. It's Gresham's law of the sexual market: the bad men are chasing the good men out. This ensures that the men who respond to women's provocations will increasingly be of lower character, and that more sexual encounters will wind up being emotionally painful.

Post: #36

Quote:We're fast waking up to the fact that casual sex is turning into a minefield. Meanwhile, men who aren't paying attention - the chavs, the louts, the morons - will continue to play the field.

My main fear in any interaction when I know I have to escalate these days is how much the SJW/anti-male/all men are rapists narrative has so successfully penetrated the legal system, to the point where on many occasions I'm not ashamed to admit I back off completely and lose the set. If I try to escalate and I get a no, assuming genuine no? Sure it's not pleasant but if the girl is hot and pleasant the sting of rejection is definitely justified. Heck, if a few people walking by or in the immediate social environment laugh or make a few nasty comments on my failure? I can deal with that. It doesn't affect my life in the grand scheme of things. Small but distinct and ever increasing chance of loss of freedom, jail for a number of years, possible restriction within my state preventing foreign travel etc., forever being known as a "rapist", regardless of truth or not? Now THAT shit is scary. Mentally ill women currently have pretty much no consequences to making false accusations, so why the hell not? Can't handle being called a slut? Can't handle telling your boyfriend what you did last night? Want a nice chunk of compensation from a professional soccer player? You can now apply without ever having to face the man in court.

Post: #37

(03-19-2017 06:38 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  The rights of the accuser in England now are placed before the accused's right to a fair trial. This is an outrage and I hope the British bar does something about it. I don't know how the British system works but there must be some way to challenge this law.

Britain's "constitution" is not contained in a single document (and would include something like the Magna Carta) and it's subject to parliamentary supremacy. This means a simple Act of Parliament can nominally change the constitution, unlike in the US and Australia where you need a combination of state majorities, Congressional/parliamentary majorities, and/or voter majorities.

To lean against this, the courts use common law presuppositions in favor of certain principles like a fair trial, but it's hard to see how a carefully, explicitly worded piece of legislation could be read into something else by a judge/judges concerned about due process.

In a nutshell, I doubt anything can really be done about this, short of whipping up considered academic, bar and other forms of disapproval.

Post: #38

I just had a heated discussion with a female family member who is in favour of the measures described in the article. She also thinks that the solution to male violence is educating men not to be violent rather than educating women not to do stupid shit. I don't even know where to start on how stupid this is. If you're getting wet because you're standing in a lake, do you educate the water not to be wet or do you just walk out of the water?

She insists that men in the UK are more violent than most places and there are huge numbers of unreported rapes because women are too afraid to come forward and be forced to "relive the traumatic event" in court.

She also made reference to a book she had read, written by a girl who was "raped" at 16 (basically a guy had sex with her while she was drunk). I pointed out that we have to be very careful with the word rape - if she was just drunk and no physical violence occurred, I didn't think it should be classified as rape at all. This did not go down well. Any discussion of rape at all seems to evoke an emotional/hysterical reaction, complete shutdown of logic and a "you just don't understand" response from women.

I understand where she is coming from, but her desire to protect all women from the world has the inevitable consequence of sending many innocent men wrongfully to jail. She doesn't seem capable of looking past the immediate action all the way to the end consequences, especially when it doesn't affect her directly. I'm 100% sure she wouldn't be in favour of ME going to jail had I been the man in question.

Post: #39

Guys... I wouldn't put my dick in a western woman if you paid me and she was a 10! It's been 7 years and counting... *heads back to the East where real women and laws are sane*