Pro-Rape ‘Men’s Rights’ Group Plans Saturday Rally in Chicago

[Henrin]

Such as what? The right to vote? The right to birth control? The right to equal educational access? The right to equal employment opportunities? You would agree that all of those things are good, right?

And I'm fascinated by the underlined phrase. Are you suggesting that women's rights gained ground in the 20th century swiftly and with little resistance of any kind?

Give me an example of something they gave back to men in all of their time in existence? The only thing they did for men was attempt to control them and change them.

Oh and just so you know, equal employment opportunities is a bull**** right declaration since it must undermine other peoples right commerce.

 

[Peter King]

I really am speechless. This is taking place in my neighborhood. https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20160202/rogers-park/pro-rape-mens-rights-group-plans-saturday-rally-rogers-park I'd seriously love to kick this guy in the nuts.

This guy is an evil dirt bag and if anyone gets raped due to this idiot's comments, I hope that person sues him into bankruptcy.

 

[matchlight]

Such as what? The right to vote? The right to birth control? The right to equal educational access? The right to equal employment opportunities? You would agree that all of those things are good, right?

And I'm fascinated by the underlined phrase. Are you suggesting that women's rights gained ground in the 20th century swiftly and with little resistance of any kind?

Most of the women I've known have been well aware just how good they have it. Unlike feminists, they really like men and want to make our lives easier.

 

[Phys251]

Give me an example of something they gave back to men in all of their time in existence? The only thing they did for men was attempt to control them and change them.

Oh and just so you know, equal employment opportunities is a bull**** right declaration since it must undermine other peoples right commerce.

And here comes the male defensiveness.

 

[Phys251]

Most of the women I've known have been well aware just how good they have it. Unlike feminists, they really like men and want to make our lives easier.

Really, is that so?

 

[Henrin]

And here comes the male defensiveness.

Again, you started this talk by demanding male rights groups listen to feminists, and like I told you, men have been listening to feminists for the last 100 plus years. Again, since this is your line of reasoning, why should men listen to feminists? What have feminists done for men in the last 100 plus years besides undermine their culture and blame them for everything? Until you can show me that feminists have done what you demand male rights groups do, there is no reason that male rights groups should listen to your demand.

 

[Phys251]

Again, you started this talk by demanding male rights groups listen to feminists, and like I told you, men have been listening to feminists for the last 100 plus years.

They have? Well that's news to me.

 

[Peter King]

Again, you started this talk by demanding male rights groups listen to feminists, and like I told you, men have been listening to feminists for the last 100 plus years. Again, since this is your line of reasoning, why should men listen to feminists? What have feminists done for men in the last 100 plus years besides undermine their culture and blame them for everything? Until you can show me that feminists have done what you demand male rights groups do, there is no reason that male rights groups should listen to your demand.

Male culture? Which male culture would that be? The caveman male culture? The middle ages male culture? The enlightened male culture of the French revolutionary times? The male culture from the wild west? How about the male culture during the early 20th century?

Because most of these male cultures where really based on men making all the decisions and women where relegated to second rate citizens and the personal slaves to men at home. Ownership of women was not really prevalent, voting rights zero, personal freedom was close to zero, right to be the main provider was about non existent, etc. etc. etc.

Men have slowly been forced to take women seriously but I am not so sure it has to do with feminism but with the fact that women now are free to make their own money, get to vote, get to own property and most importantly are a very important voting block that votes independent on what their "menfolk" think they should vote.

And if you think male culture is male domination than it is not really a culture but the feeling that male chauvinist arrogance towards women and their rights no longer reigns supreme.

Women are fighting for equal rights, that men feel threatened by this says much more about men than that it says about women who stand up for themselves (the so called "feminists").

And male rights groups? :lamo You mean the right to still make more money compared to women for doing absolutely the same job? The right to still be seen as "the man of the house"? The right to ignore when a woman says "NO" when her husband demands sex? What male rights do you want restored because I seriously think they are anything but rights but more likely it is a bunch of privileges that some men want just because the are "men".

Because that is what is the problem for a lot of angry white men, first they had to give up the privilege of being white (at least to some degree) and now their privileges have been curtailed again because their privileges towards/over women have slowly been disappearing. Men have been privileged so long that some think it is a male right to have that or even worse, a male culture. Sorry, but just because you gave yourselves these privileges (through laws/culture) does not mean you had any right to these privileges. And thankfully this undeserved male privilege has been tumbling down brick by brick and there is no need or justification for men to be allowed to build up that male privilege ever again.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Because most of these male cultures where really based on men making all the decisions and women where relegated to second rate citizens and the personal slaves to men at home. Ownership of women was not really prevalent, voting rights zero, personal freedom was close to zero, right to be the main provider was about non existent, etc. etc. etc.

Men have slowly been forced to take women seriously but I am not so sure it has to do with feminism but with the fact that women now are free to make their own money, get to vote, get to own property and most importantly are a very important voting block that votes independent on what their "menfolk" think they should vote.

Women were not owned, unless they were actual slaves.
It wasn't until the 19th century that (generally) anyone, male or female had voting privileges.
There are many historical examples of women being primary or co providers.
Historically women could own property.

This part of your post is historical revisionism.

 

[Henrin]

Male culture? Which male culture would that be? The caveman male culture? The middle ages male culture? The enlightened male culture of the French revolutionary times? The male culture from the wild west? How about the male culture during the early 20th century?

Because most of these male cultures where really based on men making all the decisions and women where relegated to second rate citizens and the personal slaves to men at home. Ownership of women was not really prevalent, voting rights zero, personal freedom was close to zero, right to be the main provider was about non existent, etc. etc. etc.

Men have slowly been forced to take women seriously but I am not so sure it has to do with feminism but with the fact that women now are free to make their own money, get to vote, get to own property and most importantly are a very important voting block that votes independent on what their "menfolk" think they should vote.

And if you think male culture is male domination than it is not really a culture but the feeling that male chauvinist arrogance towards women and their rights no longer reigns supreme.

Women are fighting for equal rights, that men feel threatened by this says much more about men than that it says about women who stand up for themselves (the so called "feminists").

And male rights groups? :lamo You mean the right to still make more money compared to women for doing absolutely the same job? The right to still be seen as "the man of the house"? The right to ignore when a woman says "NO" when her husband demands sex? What male rights do you want restored because I seriously think they are anything but rights but more likely it is a bunch of privileges that some men want just because the are "men".

Because that is what is the problem for a lot of angry white men, first they had to give up the privilege of being white (at least to some degree) and now their privileges have been curtailed again because their privileges towards/over women have slowly been disappearing. Men have been privileged so long that some think it is a male right to have that or even worse, a male culture. Sorry, but just because you gave yourselves these privileges (through laws/culture) does not mean you had any right to these privileges. And thankfully this undeserved male privilege has been tumbling down brick by brick and there is no need or justification for men to be allowed to build up that male privilege ever again.

Geez, that's one hell of a rant. Got to love male feminists. :lol: Regardless, feminism has always been more of a cultural movement than it has been a rights movement.

 

[Peter King]

Women were not owned, unless they were actual slaves.
It wasn't until the 19th century that (generally) anyone, male or female had voting privileges.
There are many historical examples of women being primary or co providers.
Historically women could own property.

This part of your post is historical revisionism.

I just translated my Dutch thoughts incorrectly (as far as incorrectly translating the Dutch word "van"), because I was trying to convey that the ownership of property by women was limited. Ownership and even inheritance at one point of time where often an almost purely male affair.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

I just translated my Dutch thoughts incorrectly (as far as incorrectly translating the Dutch word "van"), because I was trying to convey that the ownership of property by women was limited. Ownership and even inheritance at one point of time where often an almost purely male affair.

Not technically it wasn't.
I'm not going to say women were treated equally, but any claim that they couldn't work outside the home, couldn't own property, etc. is largely crap.
Technically males were responsible for their wives property, but it was still her property.
Then there are the coverture laws that state single women have all power over their property.

But all that ignores the fact that the majority of people, male and female, had very little in the way of property.
So the point is largely moot.

 

[Henrin]

Really, is that so?

Yes, really. At every stage of the feminist movement there were men that supported their cause. The feminist movement would have completely fallen flat if men didn't go along with them.

 

[Peter King]

Not technically it wasn't.
I'm not going to say women were treated equally, but any claim that they couldn't work outside the home, couldn't own property, etc. is largely crap.
Technically males were responsible for their wives property, but it was still her property.
Then there are the coverture laws that state single women have all power over their property.

But all that ignores the fact that the majority of people, male and female, had very little in the way of property.
So the point is largely moot.

But in the world women have been banned from ownership of property. Male culture is much older and widespread than just the US. In other countries in the past and maybe even in the present ownership for women has been an issue and is an issue.

 

[sangha]

I've read his blog and he was VERY CLEARLY using an absurdist approach to the issue. Taking a woman's personal responsibility to an absurd extreme to try to make a point. If you read the article he wrote, he starts out by clearly and repeatedly stating that rape is wrong. He then throws an obviously absurd proposal about making rape legal to point out the fact that most rapes occur not in a alley or by someone breaking into a home, but by the couple being intoxicated and the woman not being capable of making the choice. He points out that since the woman gets to abrogate her responsibility of being sober enough to say "NO", the man gets convicted because he was too drunk to hear "NO". Neither Roosh nor I are saying that the man should be given a pass just because he's drunk, but what is being said is that there is a measure of responsibility expected from all parties. His point was that since a woman gets to abrogate her responsibilities, then why not the man as well?? I have a good friend who was nearly convicted of rape because he had sex with girl who too drunk to say "NO", but was well past drunk enough to say "LET'S GET IT ON!!" (a direct quote, since I was there when she grabbed his crotch and made the statement). The next day, she filed a police report because she claims that he took advantage of her when she was drunk. It was only because of the multiple witnesses that testified that she was a willing party that he wasn't thrown in jail and became an RSO for life. This kind of thing happens a lot more than people are aware of and it's what Koosh was trying to point out. No man has ANY right to rape a woman, but people have a responsibility to not put themselves into high risk situations as well. It is this gross imbalance in approach that he was trying to point out.
I'll freely admit that Koosh is pretty much a nut job and his approach in his article was poorly constructed and easily misinterpreted - especially if you really WANT to do so and choose to ignore the whole first couple of paragraphs. I really dislike his approach and a lot of his ideas, but this article was nto about making rape legal, it was really bad attempt to point out the imbalance between the responsibilities expected of a intoxicated woman and those of a intoxicated man.

Now I fully expect to be accused of supporting the legalization of rape (I DO NOT), of being a misogynist, sexist, pro-violence against women animal, but nothing could be further from the truth. All I'm doing is pointing out that Koosh wasn't stating that rape should be legal, he was just using a clumsy attempt at being clever to make a point.

That's some of the stupidest **** I've ever read but then, one has to be pretty effing stupid to whine about rape being a crime

No man has ever been arrested for being too drunk to hear the word "No". They're arrested for raping someone. And the female isn't arrested for "abrogating her responsibility of being sober" for the same reason the man isn't arrested for that ---- BECAUSE GETTING DRUNK IS NOT A CRIME.

 

[sangha]

The thing I hate about these so-called "Men's Rights Groups" is they cloud what could actually be a useful movement with their misogyny. Men do suffer injustices in a few areas, like child custody (though that is improving), employment in elementary education, suicide rates, and violence in male prisons. These are legitimate areas of concern that should be addressed. But instead all we hear about are a bunch losers who are pissed at women because they can't get dates. Even in the areas where men are disadvantaged, it isn't the fault of women.

A reasonable post in a MRA thread?

Shame on you BB!! Are you trying to destroy the internets?

 

[sangha]

It might have more to do with the media has portrayed him, rather than what he's actually saying.

No, it has to do with what he's actually saying

He's whining because when a man and a woman get drunk and the man rapes the women, the woman isn't punished for getting drunk.

 

[sangha]

Was this satire?


While walking to my place, I realized how drunk she was. In America, having sex with her would have been rape, since she couldn’t legally give her consent. It didn’t help matters that I was relatively sober, but I can’t say I cared or even hesitated.

I won’t rationalize my actions, but having sex is what I do. -d00sh v. 30 bangs


If a girl is willing to walk home with me, she’s going to get the dick no matter how much she has drunk. …

I figure my dick was inside her about forty minutes after meeting her, likely my fastest bang ever. The sex was as good as drunken sex can get, but I did notice her ***** was drier than the Sahara desert. -D00sh v



In the middle of the night I got another boner, put on a condom, and jammed it back in while she was half-asleep. I came and passed out again with the condom still on my dick…. -doosh v.


"We moved to my bed. I got her down to her bra and panties, but she kept saying, “No, no.” I was so turned on by her beauty and petite figure that I told myself she’s not walking out my door without getting ****ed. At that moment I accepted the idea of getting locked up in a Polish prison to make it happen.


After dinner we went upstairs and I eased her onto my king-size bed. It took four hours of foreplay and at least thirty repetitions of “No, Roosh, no” until she allowed my penis to enter her vagina. No means no—until it means yes.

The sex was painful for her. I was only the second guy she’d ever had sex with. … She whimpered like a wounded puppy dog the entire time, but I really wanted to have an orgasm, so I was “almost there” for about ten minutes. After sex she sobbed for a good while, talking about how she had sinned in the eyes of God, but in an hour she got horny again and we went at it once more.

I was ****ing her from behind, getting to the end in the way I normally did, when all of a sudden she said, “Wait stop, I want to go back on top.” I refused and we argued. … She tried to squirm away while I was laying down my strokes so I had to use some muscle to prevent her from escaping. I was able to finish, but my orgasm was weak.

Afterwards I told her she was selfish and that she couldn’t call an audible so late in the game.



Seems rather predatory. I actually think he's a raging liar, and you can see the anger this scumbag has because he actually can't get laid....


you take this, with the video I posted, questioning his "satire" is easy.

Wow, until I read that I thought he was a moronic douche. Turns out he really is a rapist

 

[vash1012]

Even in the areas where men are disadvantaged, it isn't the fault of women.

You are a breath of fresh air. I've been reading this thread in utter disbelief. So glad someone actually gets why Men's rights activism in its current form is a ridiculous, reactionary position.

 

[RetiredNSmilin]

Legal rape? Pro-rape?

Freedom of thought and freedom of speech allow people to openly and publicly display their lack of moral character so the rest of us know who to avoid, and the police to know who to keep an eye on.

Ahmen to that.

Just like NMBLA The National Man-Boy Love Assn. who believe boys 10 years old are OK to have sex with. They like to behave like a discriminated minority, when they too should be kicked in the nuts.

 

[Napoleon]

Sounds like they could benefit from this informational pamphlet:

 

[SDET]

Ask them and see. (I'm not trying to be dense here--I mean that sincerely.)

I take that as meaning no men's concern should be addressed until not a single woman FEELS treated unfairly. It's a total misandrist point of view.

 

[Phys251]

Yes, really. At every stage of the feminist movement there were men that supported their cause. The feminist movement would have completely fallen flat if men didn't go along with them.

You've studied feminism? Cool! Who are your favorite authors and advocates of women's rights? Any era will do, past or present.

I take that as meaning no men's concern should be addressed until not a single woman FEELS treated unfairly. It's a total misandrist point of view.

Male defensiveness detected.

 

[Phys251]

What's hilarious about these MRAs is that they try to perpetuate the stereotype that women are childish, emotional, and irrational--while themselves being childish, emotional, and irrational.

 

[distraff]

I really am speechless. This is taking place in my neighborhood. https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20160202/rogers-park/pro-rape-mens-rights-group-plans-saturday-rally-rogers-park I'd seriously love to kick this guy in the nuts.

"Aside from his pro-rape stance, Roosh also is looked upon by his followers as a "pickup artist" who claims to have an expertise in women that can help his fans get dates.

The meetup is the solution to what Roosh said is a problem among his followers: building meaningful friendships.

Though he says his fans have "normal friendships," he believes his followers may struggle to have real-life, dependable relationships."

I see what is going on. Women are not attracted to these awkward angry men so they want to be able to rape because that is the only way they are going to get any action.