“SlutWalk” comes to South Africa, where rape is on the rise
posted at 7:00 pm on August 20, 2011 by Tina Korbe
In a country in which more than 55,000 rapes and sexual assaults were reported from 2009 to 2010 alone, some 2,000 protesters marched the streets of Cape Town to contest the notion that what women wear might play into their victimization. The Washington Post reports:
Women draped sexy lingerie over their street clothes as they marched through Cape Town on Saturday, bringing an international campaign against the notion that a woman’s appearance can excuse attacks to a country where rape is seen as a national crisis.
Some 2,000 protesters walked a route where fans partied during last year’s football World Cup. Men joined in, some of them wearing miniskirts in solidarity. Some protesters pushed their children in strollers and carried signs declaring, “Rapists rape people, not outfits,” and “Weak men rape.” …
“SlutWalks” originated in Toronto, Canada, where they were sparked by a police officer’s remark that women could avoid being raped by not dressing like “sluts.”
One of the walkers said it was important for women to know their dignity “should not be taken away from them.” Yes, but it’s also important that women carry themselves with dignity in the first place — and that, I’m sorry to say, means adopting a modicum of modesty. I pity the poor police officer who tried to speak truth and instead sparked an international campaign to excuse women from taking any responsibility at all for the situations in which they place themselves. The police officer was not excusing rape — and neither am I. It is never, never OK. Nor is it ever, ever deserved: The rapist is always the perpetrator, the victim always the victim. But he was pointing out the obvious — that by taking care to dress in a self-respecting manner and by not putting themselves in potentially compromising situations, women reduce the likelihood that they will be that victim in the first place.
As a college coed, I sat through my fair share of women’s safety lectures. No presenter ever wanted to say it, but it had to be acknowledged as true: No way a girl who stays in her secured dorm room or heads to the local movie theater with friends on a Friday night runs the same risk of date rape as a girl who dances on the tables or falls down drunk at a college kegger. That’s just common sense.
On a separate but related note, the “SlutWalk” phenomenon troubles me for another reason. The bald-faced use of terms once universally accepted as offensive has become too common. Anti-rape activists aren’t the only women who have taken to referring to themselves with labels that suggest they have little to contribute to the community other than brazen sex appeal. Young girls, too, have hijacked formerly disparaging terms and held them hostage in desperate pleas for attention. Facebook walls are plastered with girl-to-girl messages that use these terms affectionately. Women do themselves a disservice when, instead of outright rejecting the use of insulting language, they try to redeem it by using it themselves. Regardless of who uses it, disgusting language is just that – disgusting. Why not a “Walk Like a Lady” anti-rape demonstration?
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air
Menendez – Looks like we don’t have the votes for that immigration bill after all
America in decline – Bars selling rubbing alcohol as “scotch”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 … 7 Next »
While I wouldn’t presume to argue when you’re right, which is all of the time–I see the matter of lawyers vs society as chicken-or-egg situation. One goes to the other. There are many instances where changes in the law have led to cultural rot, and cultural rot has in turn affected how laws are written and/or interpreted.
Defenses like being used in Ohio are why, were I to have your kind of credentials, I could only be a prosecutor. There is no way I could be creative enough to try saving a client’s tail when he’s a despicable piece of human debris that needs to be removed from society.
I know what the defense attorneys’ jobs are, and I don’t disagree with it given the profession. I just hope the jurors see right through it and send those guys where they belong.
Liam on March 12, 2013 at 11:14 AM
It is to protect of from tyranny of any kind…including that which male pigs would inflict upon us women.
No one is saying that “She’s asking for it if she isn’t armed.” Rather, she’s merely asking to be allowed to be armed in case one of your relatives decide to force themselves on her.
Oh, and guess what? All people have a duty to take steps to protect themselves and to mitigate any harm. That would include you, too.
Resist We Much on March 12, 2013 at 11:15 AM
I’ll give you this much: you’ve taken sophistry to a whole new level.
Suggestion: Since you don’t seem to have a concrete notion of what constitutes rape (something any female can define is less than a minute) perhaps you should educate yourself. Oh, enough with the misandry. Men are not prone to rape in general any more than they are prone to steal. Violent, forcible rape isn’t about sex,it’s about dominance by cowards. Date rape is a combination of the two in most cases. Dominance and the insistence that the perp be gratified. There are a lot of reasons boys grow up to be victimizers and education won’t help in all cases. I want to protect myself so I don’t have to be caught short in the presence of someone who has failed your anti-rape program. End of story.
All potential victims should have the ability to protect themselves. Following your logic, I shouldn’t have locks on my doors, or doors at all, actually, so long as we make sure to educate those home invaders out there that home invasion is wrong. To say that I can fortify my home against home invaders, and perhaps to suggest I do so, would be blaming me? Like I said, you’ve got that sophistry thing down. LOL.
totherightofthem on March 12, 2013 at 11:16 AM
But that’s how the liberal hive mind works. It’s all or nothing. If you think someone should (as a product of good judgement) you really mean they must. If you don’t want to pay for someone’s access to something, you really want them to go without it.
Everything is carried to the extreme.
CurtZHP on March 12, 2013 at 11:17 AM
verbaluce on March 12, 2013 at 11:05 AM
Are you a woman? I am. I think you need to remove your head from your posterior.
annoyinglittletwerp on March 12, 2013 at 11:17 AM
It is the right of self-defense from Criminals and Tyrants.
What difference does it make?
Galt2009 on March 12, 2013 at 11:18 AM
Well, education is certainly not going to help stop the people that women would otherwise have to pull guns on.
steebo77 on March 12, 2013 at 11:18 AM
Maybe the next troll in this tag team will address my question.
Does this woman have a right to choose to carry a gun?
Yes or no.
CurtZHP on March 12, 2013 at 11:19 AM
It is the fundamental difference between progressives and conservatives IMO. The idea that enough education/laws/money/programs will change human nature enough to usher in heaven on earth. Hence Hope and Change – blind, grasping Hope.
GWB on March 12, 2013 at 11:19 AM
You can sometimes educate your way to less date rape, if you start with early teens, particularly the booze-laden variety. You can’t educate your way to less rape by strangers in alleys, no.
alwaysfiredup on March 12, 2013 at 11:19 AM
With the exact same verbiage, too. Oh, and I replied to your comment. ;)
totherightofthem on March 12, 2013 at 11:21 AM
As defined by who…you, the NRA, and Sig Sauer’s marketing department? And I’m guessing you don’t view the effort to put some restrictions on firearms to be an effort to mitigate harm…
verbaluce on March 12, 2013 at 11:21 AM
You have an utterly insane view of what it is to be a heterosexual man in America. There is no “rape culture” in America. A rape culture is one that views women that way women are viewed in Muslim countries and sadly in India.
I suggest you try talking to some heterosexual men in America. Once you get over your fear of them, you may find them ok. As a gay man, I have been forced by social situations to talk to them and have found them generally pleasant.
thuja on March 12, 2013 at 11:22 AM
Of course not. The data from the old AWB proves they don’t have that effect.
alwaysfiredup on March 12, 2013 at 11:23 AM
Exactly!
It is the right of self-defense.
The right to defend yourself from Public and Private Criminals.
The right to defend yourself from Public and Private Tyrants.
There is no difference – it’s the same justification of a basic human right no matter the threat.
Galt2009 on March 12, 2013 at 11:23 AM
Again, I state that the only education that would help is a moral education, starting when you are young. And liberals would, of course, rather there were ten thousand rapes an hour and open warfare on the streets rather than admit that perhaps Christianity (or Judaism) might in fact be something good, rather than an evil.
Right, verbaluce? Wouldn’t you rather there were more rapes than more Mormons or Baptists or actual committed, practicing Catholics? Or Orthodox Jews?
Vanceone on March 12, 2013 at 11:23 AM
Who are you saying is pulling the ‘rape card’? Cause that’s what I am criticizing Ed for here.
verbaluce on March 12, 2013 at 11:24 AM
Instead of pearls before swine, here it’s pearls before liberals.
22044 on March 12, 2013 at 11:24 AM
Er… You’ve hung out around varsity football and basketball players at big-name schools before, right? Certainly it is not to say all such people see women as accessories, but such people do exist and they aren’t exactly rare.
It would be more accurate to say most people do not subscribe to “rape culture”, not that it does not exist.
alwaysfiredup on March 12, 2013 at 11:25 AM
We already have all manner of limitations on a RIGHT that is not supposed to be infringed upon.
Are you seriously arguing that people should be disarmed and public and private criminals empowered above them?
Galt2009 on March 12, 2013 at 11:26 AM
WHO said that, you lying sack o’ crap?
Why do you hate women, poofter?
Do you hate women more than you hate America?
You’re an idiot.
Solaratov on March 12, 2013 at 11:27 AM
I noticed you didn’t bother referencing the latter part of my post, thereby ignoring it entirely. You refuse to accept reality, which coincides with your dreams of utopia, “If all men were educated not to rape women, women would not be raped.” I don’t know if you are being willfully obtuse or are that naïve. Either way, I may be a “piece of work”, but you are a POS. From reading some of your later genius posts, do you honestly think that parents don’t teach their boys that it is wrong to rape a woman?! If so, you really have no clue what most American families practice.
Set up your strawmen at your leisure, but as I can see, you got a healthy dose of arguments from people who understand, as I do, that evil exists in this world. It is a woman’s right to protect herself from that evil with a weapon, gun, knife, etc. Period.
ICBMMan on March 12, 2013 at 11:30 AM
I said I was pulling the rape card. It means I was using my former victim status. It is what liberals have been known to do.. See also woman card, race card, gay card et. al.
melle1228 on March 12, 2013 at 11:31 AM
There is a lesson in that, one best learned very quickly.
Pablo on March 12, 2013 at 11:32 AM
LMAO!
melle1228 on March 12, 2013 at 11:33 AM
And you do?
Did affirmative action give you some sort of amazing insight or “knowledge” about women and rape?
Or just your overriding desire to be a woman?
You’re an idiot.
Solaratov on March 12, 2013 at 11:33 AM
Read what he wrote. I’m sure he’d argue with you, well that’s not what he meant.
But if you’re going to spin out hypothetical narratives to suggest in one case she dies, in another she doesn’t…than you are indeed advocating for something.
It’d be just as easy to pull anecdotal stories where an innocent person would not have been harmed/killed if they had not chosen to arm themselves.
So this is just a b.s. angle.
Ed’s is not making an argument for women’s safety.
He’s making one for unrestricted gun ownership.
It’s effective only in that the right takes pleasure thinking they’re ‘turning the tables’ on ‘liburls and feminazis’.
verbaluce on March 12, 2013 at 11:34 AM
No.
But of course you can’t make your argument unless you suggest that what gun control efforts are really about.
verbaluce on March 12, 2013 at 11:36 AM
I am all for “educating” them by pulling their spark plugs.
John the Libertarian on March 12, 2013 at 11:36 AM
We already have all manner of limitations on a RIGHT that is not supposed to be infringed upon.
Are you seriously arguing that people should be disarmed and public and private criminals empowered above them?
Galt2009 on March 12, 2013 at 11:36 AM
verbaluce on March 12, 2013 at 11:34 AM
I do a lot of walking. By April I should have my TX CHL in hand. that-and my .38-are going to make me MUCH safer.
annoyinglittletwerp on March 12, 2013 at 11:37 AM
What?
Galt2009 on March 12, 2013 at 11:38 AM
Since when have you neo-comms ever given a sh1t about mitigating harm? You know as well as I do your objective here is to confiscate guns and you don’t really give a sh1t about “mitigating harm”. Just like feminist who love Bill Clinton really care about rape.
ClassicCon on March 12, 2013 at 11:38 AM
Gosh, I thought “liberals” about personal empowerment and choice? Why do you want to disempower women? I thought “liberals” respected women? Do you think women are too stupid or inept to handle a gun? Even if a handgun stopped a small percentage of the hundreds of thousands of preventable rapes, why wouldn’t you want to give women the fighting chance?
It’s as if you want women to be victims.
rrpjr on March 12, 2013 at 11:38 AM
This is an example of your elected leaders that hide and secure themselves in Washington. They have not a clue what is happening in America. They refuse to answer simple questions. And because voters keep electing these nutcases we have what we have… a country that will never be the same in strength.
karlinsync on March 12, 2013 at 11:39 AM
And we’ve exposed a fundamental difference here. Conservatives believe that people are responsible for themselves liberals do not.
According to libfree individuals weren’t responsible for rape, they just hadn’t been educated properly. Here verbulance states that people aren’t responsible for their own safety.
The State is responsible for everything, your for nothing. Statism is monarchism in a different hat.
29Victor on March 12, 2013 at 11:39 AM
I tutored varsity football players some when I was in grad school. They seemed like normal guys to me, but better looking. Why would they rape, when they should be able to get willing partners without possible legal hassles? Maybe there is a rape culture or maybe you just don’t like large jocks? I have no way of knowing. Maybe someone else who has been on a varsity sports team can tell us.
thuja on March 12, 2013 at 11:39 AM
And of course you understand that even if all of what’s being proposed right now becomes law, then by April you’ll still have your CHL and .38. You know that, right?
(Unless you’re concerned about passing a background check, I guess.)
verbaluce on March 12, 2013 at 11:39 AM
Dems are thinking that women don’t need to be able to defend themselves… After all they now have free morning after pills.
WestTexasBirdDog on March 12, 2013 at 11:40 AM
Guess you didn’t hear my story then. I was raped when I was 14 by someone I knew very well. Almost a year later, two more guys tried to rape me. I swore I would never be a victim again and had taken to carrying a knife. Needless to say I was NOT raped again. When this occured I was 5 feet, 105 pounds. The knife could have very well been used against me and you can insert gun (because it could have been a gun) because all I had to do was threaten with a weapon and the crazy look in my eyes took care of it. These are not hypotheticals. We are real women. And the 2nd amendment is included in women’s rights that leftist talk about.
melle1228 on March 12, 2013 at 11:40 AM
Willingness to report sexual assault isn’t necessarily a good thing if the assaults reported are not really assaults. But, I’ll grant that you have “achieved success”.
Wow, for a professor, you’re not real big on the “data” thing, huh? “No-doubt”? So, you don’t have anything to show that’s true?
Actually, it was a lot of unsupported accusations – not a “conversation” – in most of the cases.
Dude, that is … really the wrong thread for that imagery! *shakes head, chuckling*
Exactly.
GWB on March 12, 2013 at 11:40 AM
That is an indisputable outcome of gun control. We can argue about what motivates the desire, but you can’t argue that disarming law-abiding people doesn’t make them more vulnerable to criminals.
Pablo on March 12, 2013 at 11:41 AM
Libfree….
You claim that gender studies programs on college campi have done so well to educate men as to the definition of rape….so according to your worldview rape no longer happens at any college in this country?
Or perhaps you’d like to limit your assertion to only colleges with gender studies programs?
Or perhaps you’d like to further restrict your assertion to only men who have taken any such classes?
Then you’re asserting I cannot find a single example of a man who has ever had such a class that ended up raping a woman. Nope, that’s not what you’re claiming either. You know it to be incorrect.
So what is it you’re saying exactly? Please be specific, because so far it appears you made those claims knowing it was BS.
runawayyyy on March 12, 2013 at 11:43 AM
verbaluce, you are cherry picking who to respond to.
You and your ilk who claim that no women should have guns, because if we only educated the men there would be no rape–that is insane.
That’s your position: that women should put all their trust in the power of teachers to prevent rape, and should do NOTHING to protect yourself.
Women should not have the power to choose to protect themselves. That’s your argument. That’s Ed’s point that you seem to be agreeing with–liberals think that women should not be able to protect themselves.
There’s abundant evidence of that. So that’s the simple question: should women have the choice to defend themselves at all? If yes, they why are you so intent on depriving them of their ability to do so? If not…. then who is really waging a “war on women?”
Especially since liberals love the criminals.
Vanceone on March 12, 2013 at 11:43 AM
But teaching them personal responsibility in this manner is seen as “blaming the victim” so they aren’t taught it. Because of this more rapes take place.
Just one more example of liberals hurting the people they claim to want to help.
29Victor on March 12, 2013 at 11:44 AM
Women’s self-defense is a b.s. angle?
blink on March 12, 2013 at 11:44 AM
Still waiting.
Does she or doesn’t she have a choice?
CurtZHP on March 12, 2013 at 11:44 AM
The operative words being “right now”.
Pablo on March 12, 2013 at 11:45 AM
You’re not even managing clever here.
verbaluce on March 12, 2013 at 11:45 AM
Because they can. Rape is about power. People who have a lot of power tend to abuse that power. If you have never been in a position where a date was pressuring you for sex that you didn’t want to offer, then you are a fortunate person.
alwaysfiredup on March 12, 2013 at 11:47 AM
Then why are you advocating the taking away of a person’s right of self-defense?
Galt2009 on March 12, 2013 at 11:47 AM
Yeah, because liberals don’t know the meaning of practicality. It is why they rail against patriarchy and love sexual freedom and yet the consequence of this is scores of women being worked to the bone because they are single parents with illegitimate children and no baby daddy in sight.
melle1228 on March 12, 2013 at 11:48 AM
I understand. Believe me, I do. I only represented a handful of criminal defendants when I was first admitted to the bar. It was my policy to demand the truth. I had to know. Many defence attorneys make it a practise NOT to know “what really happened.”
I can give you examples of cases where I think that defence counsel crossed the line from a vigourous defence into a fraud on the court and, as such, should have been, in the very least, sanctioned, if not disbarred. The David Westerfield trial in San Diego was one such case. Defence counsel knew that he had murdered Danielle Van Dam; yet, they attempted to blame and vilely slandered the parents and, IIRC, held negotiations with the prosecution in which they said that the defendant would lead them to the location of the body in exchange for life in prison. I don’t remember what, if any, punishment the two attorneys faced from the court and/or bar, but remember this case because it happened around the time that I was studying for or just after I had passed the bar and the MPRE (professional responsibility/ethics) is one section.
Yes, sometimes, changes in the law lead to cultural rot, but, most often, the changes are the reflection of society and what is already happening on the ground. Many point to Roe v Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), as an example of where lawyers changed the law and contributed to cultural rot. I would argue two points: 1) I think even thoughtful legal scholars on the left such as Justice Ginsburg acknowledge that it would have been better had the Supreme Court not forced the abortion issue, especially on the dubious legal analysis contained in Roe, which even its author, Justice Blackmun, later confessed bore an eerie similarity to Dred Scott, because it caused intransigence and a divide that has split the nation for 4 decades; and 2) many states were moving in the direction of either fully legalising abortion or, at least, easing restrictions on the practise.
For years, I have predicted that the Supreme Court – with Justice Kennedy writing for the majority (based upon his opinions for the majority in Romer v Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996) and Lawrence v Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)) – would overturn both DOMA and SSM bans (not just Prop 8) 5/4 or even 6/3. Now, I’m not so sure…at least with regard to Kennedy or, I should say, I’m not so sure that he is going to strike down SSM bans. The reason is NOT because he is not pro-SSM. I completely believe that he is given his previous writings and the fact that he has a mean libertarian streak, which I share. Instead, I think that he, like others on the Court, can see what is happening on the ground and the rapidity of it. Why, they will ask themselves, create Roe-Redux when Americans are, organically, moving in the direction of SSM on their own?
With regard to DOMA, there is a narrow way in which the Court to both keep the law in place while allowing same-sex married couples qualify for Federal benefits. So, again, why, they may ask, recreate Roe, when the people are moving in that direction and Congress may repeal the law on its own?
Of course, it is quite possible for Roberts to join the 4 liberals creating a majority even if Kennedy doesn’t go along because of his Roe fears.
(Before a Prog calls Kennedy a ‘fraidy cat or sumthin, just know that he was a cat’s whisker away from being the 5th vote to overturn Roe in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), before he decided not to do so.)
Resist We Much on March 12, 2013 at 11:48 AM
You’ll note that when she get’s to a point of losing the argument, she will ignore you.
It’s a tacit admission that you’ve won.
Galt2009 on March 12, 2013 at 11:49 AM
I noticed both of them ignored me. Not that there’s any difference between them.
Probably the same person.
CurtZHP on March 12, 2013 at 11:51 AM
Because that enforces the adult concept of personal responsibility. Exposes progressives for the children that they are and so they must manufacture a faux moral reasoning why it is “stupid”.
ClassicCon on March 12, 2013 at 11:51 AM
I “lettered” 3 years playing football and wrestling in high school and never ever even thought about raping a girl. The folks with the “testosterone fixation” on jocks probably never knew any and just read about them in comic books kicking sand in the face of some smaller guy.
VegasRick on March 12, 2013 at 11:52 AM
How’s that convo working out for ya?
-Signed one of the 20%
Resist We Much on March 12, 2013 at 11:52 AM
Of course for the paranoid right, where are those not the operative words? There are no Obama ordered internment camps ‘right now’.
You don’t need those survival seeds tools ‘right now’.
Right now and quite a while after right now is pretty clear on what is and isn’t possible with respect to gun control.
But rather than have that discussion, by all means let’s debate what to do when the jack booted thugs kick down doors and take away all the guns.
verbaluce on March 12, 2013 at 11:54 AM
verbaluce on March 12, 2013 at 11:39 AM
I had to pass a background check to buy my .38.
That’s not an issue.
As usual, you’re completely missing the point.
annoyinglittletwerp on March 12, 2013 at 11:55 AM
…okay. No one said everyone does it, or even that most do it. It still does happen.
alwaysfiredup on March 12, 2013 at 11:55 AM
Its a media stereotype and there have been some high profile cases that have kept those up. Have a lot of friends with college age girls and there isn’t a “rape culture.” Of course, most of my friends think like I do, and have prepared their girls. No drunkedness at frat parties, don’t leave drink unattended, meet the boy at your dates in a public place etc.
melle1228 on March 12, 2013 at 11:57 AM
Not at all what I’m saying.
Silly.
Read my comments again.
verbaluce on March 12, 2013 at 11:57 AM
A lot of things “happen”. I would guess that the anti-social creeps with no friends would be more likely to do something like that.
VegasRick on March 12, 2013 at 11:59 AM
^
This
verbaluce – maybe your name should be verbobtuse!
22044 on March 12, 2013 at 11:59 AM
It was the typical liberal response to dealing with bad actors. All talk, no action. That made it worthy of ridicule. Liberals don’t want to prevent the problem. They just want the poor victims to be able to talk about it afterwards, so they can always have a steady stream of victims to parade in front of the media to get what they want.
So they ran a program that encouraged victims to come forward. So what? Come forward AFTER THE FACT. After you’ve been violated. After some smelly neanderthal got his rocks off beating the hell out of you. But the liberals don’t want you making a victim of him. Oh, no. Can’t have little Missy packing heat. How are we supposed to present her as a victim if she takes care of herself??
CurtZHP on March 12, 2013 at 11:59 AM
/29Victor goes and looks up the word “practicality.”
Amen! The Left’s crusade to “liberate women” has led to more female poverty, more girls aborted and more objectification and victimization of women then even the most ardent 1950s misogynist could have dreamed of.
Meanwhile men are being taught to treat women like garbage, use the for sex and that it’s okay to not take responsibility for the outcome (responsibility is the State’s job, not yours).
29Victor on March 12, 2013 at 11:59 AM
I’m starting to think that they are heartless ghouls & profiteers, who try to benefit from others’ misery.
22044 on March 12, 2013 at 12:00 PM
There have been plenty of Pro-tyranny pols calling for the precursor to CONFISCATION – registration.
Are you really going to try and deny that didn’t happen?
BTW, you have yet to address this question:
Galt2009 on March 12, 2013 at 12:00 PM
You just said that your friends’ kids don’t hang out with the crowd or participate in the activities common for those that would subscribe to such a culture. They are kind of definitionally not a part of the culture. It still doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
alwaysfiredup on March 12, 2013 at 12:00 PM
Smart. And classy.
VegasRick on March 12, 2013 at 12:01 PM
You’d be wrong. Again: rape is about power. Antisocial creeps don’t have any. Uber-popular kids looking to get into the NFL draft next year have a lot.
alwaysfiredup on March 12, 2013 at 12:01 PM
While I don’t believe that internment camps are on their way it’s just foolish to mock the idea that a Democrat president would establish them. After all the only internment camps that have ever existed in America were created by Democrat heroes.
Your attitude insults millions of Japanese and Native Americans.
29Victor on March 12, 2013 at 12:02 PM
Why did you use the words “right now” if not to delineate from “later?”
Are you familiar with Handgun Control, Inc. and its current incarnation? I am. I’m also familiar with incrementalism. It isn’t conspiracy theorizing to note peoples’ outright declaration of their desires and intents. This is not a new game. It’s been played over and over, around the world. I’ll not be shamed for noticing.
Pablo on March 12, 2013 at 12:02 PM
Stop by the next time there’s a thread about abortion. “Heartless ghouls” is right.
CurtZHP on March 12, 2013 at 12:02 PM
So let’s examine Verbaluce and fellow’s cognative dissonance here. She ( I think) says she is in favor of women being able to defend themselves…. just not with a gun. Presumably a knife is okay? Really, I want to know. Now that guns are not kosher, what can a woman defend herself with? Knife? Vomit? That’s what your fellow Democrats think is okay: Piss and vomit only. Do you agree?
Come on, let’s flesh this out. What is an allowable way for a woman to defend herself? How should Mielle have defended herself, in your world of fantasy liberal land?
Vanceone on March 12, 2013 at 12:02 PM
I’m really not sure why this is even being debated. Do I really need to list the number of pro-football players with DV charges? Where do you think those guys came from?
alwaysfiredup on March 12, 2013 at 12:03 PM
I think LiveFreeOffOthers is projecting. Perhaps he should seek clinical help before he ends up attacking someone.
jawkneemusic on March 12, 2013 at 12:04 PM
Where did I say that they don’t hang out with the crowd?
I said this:
That doesn’t mean that they don’t go to frat parties etc. In fact, my best friends daughter is in a sorority an Univ. of Tenn.
melle1228 on March 12, 2013 at 12:04 PM
We won’t have leftist gubment mandated healthcare “right now”…oh wait…
ClassicCon on March 12, 2013 at 12:05 PM
I know it does happen but you make it sound like “the rule” as opposed to “the exception to the rule” and I disagree.
VegasRick on March 12, 2013 at 12:06 PM
Ah. My former Rep. Wish I could say that he was the worst one that I’ve had. But he’s not. Not by a long shot.
besser tot als rot on March 12, 2013 at 12:07 PM
And I never used fraternities as an example. The sample is much more mixed, because just belonging a frat doesn’t give you any power. I used varsity football and basketball because those kids often do have a lot of power.
alwaysfiredup on March 12, 2013 at 12:08 PM
Why wait? Look in the HA archives and read the threads about the Sandy Hook murders. The trolls were here, all but jumping for joy, hours before any of those tiny bodies were removed from the scene. Not a one of them said the shootings were horrible. Instead, they were loving the idea that now they had a fresh opportunity to ban guns from the law-abiding.
Ghouls, indeed.
Liam on March 12, 2013 at 12:08 PM
One could also argue that is is the domestic violence in the “black culture” that is the problem, since most of what you see in the NFL is black violence. I would say that your opinion(that there is rape culture in the athlete community) and the one I just stated is oversimplification and harsh.
melle1228 on March 12, 2013 at 12:09 PM
Considering the FACT that there are more people carrying those Sig Sauers today and the homicide and violent crime rates are the lowest they’ve been in DECADES, I think the mitigation is in the pudding, puddintang.
The Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence: Violence Is Lower In Right-To-Carry States
Chart of the Day: United States Homicide Rate 1885-2012
Warren v District of Columbia holding: The police have no duty to protect or provide police services to the public, even if a dispatcher tells member(s) of the public that “help is on the way.” Such a duty only exists if a specific duty and special responsibility has been established between law enforcement and a particular person.
Castle Rock v Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005), holding: The police do not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even if such person has a court-issued protective order. In Castle Rock, a woman had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation. The police failed to arrest her husband and he murdered their three daughters. The Court held that she had no right to sue the city or any of the officers involved.
DeShaney v Winnebago County, 489 U.S. 189 (1989), holding: A state agency’s failure to protect a child from abuse by a custodial parent, even where such parent was known to abuse said child in the past, does not violate the child’s Fourteenth Amendment’s right to liberty nor did the child have a reasonable expectation that the state would prevent and protect her/him from abuse by her/his custodial parent.
Verb, if you want to protect yourself, it is YOUR responsibility. QUIT asking the government to do everything for you.
Resist We Much on March 12, 2013 at 12:09 PM
Nice for leftists like LiveFreeOffOthers and verbulace among others to admit that they’d rather woman just ‘take one for the team’ instead of defending themselves. So glad you leftist trash are finally exposing yourselves for the sick flukes you really are.
jawkneemusic on March 12, 2013 at 12:10 PM
Ben rothlisberger (sp?) is not black. It’s about power, not race.
alwaysfiredup on March 12, 2013 at 12:11 PM
Sorry to hear that. I have no issue with the choices you made moving fwd from that. And I support you having the right to both defend yourself as well as arm yourself for protctions and/or to provide a sense of safety and security.
I do not support an unlimited right to posses any and all weapons.
I am not an irrational gun ban advocate nor an irrational 2nd amendment interpreter.
OT in this thread, I am taking issue with the Gayle Trotter-esque exploitation of women’s safety issues to advance an argument for unlimited and unrestricted gun possession. I think it’s cynical…and I think it preys on the emotions of victims.
By presenting perfect narrative hypotheticals in which a women dies or is harmed because she was not in possession of a firearm, it suggests women make a ‘bad choice’ by not choosing to arm themselves.
verbaluce on March 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM
But they’re just trying to “mitigate harm.” Harm on the part of criminals, that is.
CurtZHP on March 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM
You need to stop being right all the time. You’re apt to give liberals an inferiority complex, hurt their feelings, and otherwise ruin their day. :-)
Liam on March 12, 2013 at 12:13 PM
My understanding from a criminal defense attorney was that insistence on knowing the truth would have too severely limited his defense – since, as you say, an officer of the court cannot perpetrate a fraud upon it by claiming a client’s innocence when he knows the client’s guilt. How did you work around that in your defenses?
mrsknightley on March 12, 2013 at 12:13 PM
I don’t believe in the “rape culture” that the left tries to push, but I do believe that when you mix alcohol and young men on their own for the first time who have never had to be responsible for themselves – bad things are bound to happen.
However I would think that there are several things that a young woman could do (or avoid doing) to mitigate their risk almost entirely.
29Victor on March 12, 2013 at 12:13 PM
Of course for the paranoid right, where are those not the operative words? There are no Hitler ordered internment camps ‘right now’.
verbaluce circa March 12, 1933 at 11:54 AM
HumpBot Salvation on March 12, 2013 at 12:13 PM
I was making a point. That you see a couple of athletes raping and you made an assumption about a whole community. I was using the same kind of example. As I have stated earlier, I was raped in high school and almost raped again by a total of three high school boys. NONE of them were athletes. Rape isn’t just about power. Someone just doesn’t get power and decide to rape or else husband’s all over would be raping their wives who are vulnerable to them just be virtue of living in their homes and being weaker.
melle1228 on March 12, 2013 at 12:14 PM
Now that I agree, Alcohol and pressure from other young males is always a bad combo, but that doesn’t just happen in the athletic community.
melle1228 on March 12, 2013 at 12:16 PM
A few years ago I took my kids on a tour of an all-American interment camp which had housed Japanese Americans during WWII. IT was a surreal experience.
To believe that we have somehow “evolved past that” or something is just one more lefty foolishness, especially since it was a “Progressive” hero/president who implemented them.
29Victor on March 12, 2013 at 12:16 PM
Legally, in many states, a husband cannot rape his wife. It’s considered a perk of the relationship.
alwaysfiredup on March 12, 2013 at 12:16 PM
To hell with asking that they be self-reflective. Let goons like Moran be as tone-deaf as humanly possible. It allows their actual intentions to finally show through.
Bravo, Mr. Moran. Take a bow.
Myron Falwell on March 12, 2013 at 12:17 PM
Again, no one has said that, liveasaslaveanddie. You’re making things up as you go along, now. A sure sign of your desperation in the face of the knowledge that you have – once again – lost the argument and been shown as the misogynist that you are.
Personally, I will never understand an ideology (leftism) that would deny women the right to avail themselves of any and every means of self-defense available to them. Only someone – or some group – that hates women and considers them to be too mentally incapable of making life and death decisions in order to protect themselves.
BTW: Aren’t you leftists the ones pushing to have women in combat? Aren’t you trying to say that they are perfectly capable of making those life and death decisions in combat…but they’re too weak and stupid to make the same decisions in their daily lives?
You’re an idiot, liveasaslaveanddie.
Solaratov on March 12, 2013 at 12:17 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 … 7 Next »