Feminist 'author' argues some people ARE entitled to sex (sort of); endless double-speak used to dance around the obvious implications.

This description sounds like another useless liberal arts essay. Do these people realize how farcical it is ? Is there anyone who actually reads this book ? Or is it just virtue signaling for a club of people patting themselves on the back ? An intellectual club of other deep divers, I presume.
Most of the Editorial Reviews are boilerplate word-salad affirmations; but, hey, the work of self-serving fiction itself currently has 3 bucks off the regular price, so I guess I'm sold.

This one stands out:
Srinivasan discusses consent, intersectionality, misogyny, and gendered violence, among other topics. In “The Conspiracy Against Men,” she points out that false rape accusations are more often made by law enforcement officials (in an attempt to convict the wrong suspect for an actual crime) than by women, and describes the slogan “Believe women” as both a “corrective norm” to a legal system that skews in favor of wealthy white men and a “blunt tool” that obscures how race, class, religion, and other factors affect the handling of sexual assault allegations.

^ Translation: Only hetero-sexual white males commit rape.

To any white-women feminists cheering this, you should actually be terrified. What this^ book suggests, is that if you're raped by a black, or a homeless/low-income person, or a muslim, you should NOT be believed by default - and any evidence in your favour should be dismissed on 'discriminatory' grounds, with the culprit being automatically released due to police bias/corruption. Of course, the author apparently says 'but' a lot - I'm sure that should alleviate some of your potential fears. (Unless the rapist is a transexual refugee? - then I'm sure due process can do nothing for you in that scenario.)
 
This is an interesting impasse. Eventually, we were going to have to confront this issue and it's long overdue, and given the left's obsession with pathetic people and, especially sex, you'd think this would have come up earlier. Are people entitled to sex? If they are then this idea will result in an unmitigated catastrophe, because, effectively all people will lose the sovereignty of their bodies.

Entitled means you get it, in this case, sex, immediately and on-demand, from anyone. Worse still, how do you expect such a decision to unfold? Mathematically there are more unattractive people than attractive, as per a normal distribution, therefore, those on the right side (attractive) would be consistent targets of rape. And it will be rape. Even if the population is subdued to such a degree they somehow submit to this as some kind of "social development" or even, gasp, "progress", its still a violation and still rape.

But, think about this. This is simply an absurd outcome. I don't care how interconnected we are or if we have iPads. Therefore, I don't really see this unfolding. So then what? Well, the obvious will be too obvious even for leftists who hate that which is obvious. In other words, it will reveal the falsity of our times, which is equality. This idea of sex and entitlement comes from equality. Equality maintains that no one is different from another. Naturally, and instantaneously, there's a multitude of contrary elements refuting this idea whole cloth. But, the leftists find "ways" around it with subterfuge and lying and deceit and so on. And lies beget lies, which beget more lies.

As follows, if we're all exactly the same then the laws of attraction, i.e. genetic fitness, personal fitness, intelligence (the conventional markers that make a person attractive), must be in error. For such a law force ranks people and reveals through a selection process that people are not at all equal. This must go. And so we hear all about abolishing "traditional beauty standards", again, labeling and pathologizing - the typical MO of the left. Again, I doubt this will happen. This cannot be abolished. Simply put, no one is going to enjoy living in such a society.

Huxley's Brave New World helps to assuage the awful reality this would be and, alas, as prescient as he's been, this is still fiction. He says people will "oblige" a sexual advance. This is very naive. Sex is far more than a simple orgasm to opening a door for someone else (a la "oblige"), which the left thinks it is. Such thinking denies the emotional attachments and extreme intimacy that occurs. Already, the "hook up culture" has resulted in a lot of misery. Compulsive sexual encounters will make this far worse.

I see this as a good thing because I don't see us going Huxley's route, rather, it will force a major upheaval and result in a renewed understanding of human sexuality. We'll re-learn to take sex seriously and to handle it not with reckless abandon, but restraint and, above all, responsibility. It will be the antidote to the sexual revolution.
Outstanding.

As an aside, I did find this part of your post interesting:

"Sex is far more than a simple orgasm to opening a door for someone else (a la "oblige"), which the left thinks it is. Such thinking denies the emotional attachments and extreme intimacy that occurs. Already, the "hook up culture" has resulted in a lot of misery. Compulsive sexual encounters will make this far worse."*

The manosphere 'game' community identifies on the (alt-)right of the political spectrum. Not sure if this was your intent, but I see The Left and The Right as the same, just under different names - and not just limited to their political views, but in regards to everything secular.

*Emphasis added by me
 
Last edited:
Went to my thread first tonight, then logged in immediately afterwards. I noticed that only the link was showing; my multi-line commentary below the link was invisible - I just saw a bunch of blank-lines. After I logged-in, the invisible text appeared. Not sure what I did last night to cause that. Anyway, for any off-line lurkers, here's the OP commentary repost:

[LINK]

^ TL;DrivelR

Article summarized:
• Anyone who identifies as a 'hetero-sexual white male' has no entitlement to sex - and rejecting them is fully justified.
• Anyone who identifies from an 'oppressed group' also has no entitlement to sex (sort of) - but you don't get a "free pass" when rejecting them; instead you need to be "corrected" with "political interrogating" for the "injustice/discrimination" caused by your lacking a more open mind.

Ecclesiastes 12:12; Ephesians 5:5-7; Colossians 2:8
 

Lawrence87

Robin
Orthodox
This morbidly obese fat feminist claims it’s bigotry and discrimination to not want to sleep with fat people (this is not a joke/spoof video):

It is discrimination, I hold my hands up to it...

I do not want to raise children with a mother who clearly has no impulse control. I mean how fairly is she going to distribute food among the family? Not to mention that I want the mother of my children to live to see our grandchildren. Not some fat, lazy, lump who will die of complications relating to diabetes when they are at high school...

There's no excuse. Cut out the cakes and go for a run fatty, don't pretend to be a victim. If no one will have sex with you, you are the common denominator. So do something about it...
 

Bamboozler

Pigeon
This sounds like the equivalent of guys with nothing much to offer who try to explain logically to a woman who is flat out not attracted to him why she should be with him.
Bingo.
'Fatphobia is not a sexual preference', in other words - let me explain to you why I know better. You're all confused, silly boy. You've always wanted to sleep with fatties. And... it's done! Just like that. Since we've already cleared that up, let's proceed to other phobias you have, like flatchestphobia, yellowteethphobia, dirtynailsphobia, stinkybreathphobia. See ? There's still much to work on. In the name of progress, comrade!
 

Edek

Robin
Orthodox Catechumen
Bingo.
'Fatphobia is not a sexual preference', in other words - let me explain to you why I know better. You're all confused, silly boy. You've always wanted to sleep with fatties. And... it's done! Just like that. Since we've already cleared that up, let's proceed to other phobias you have, like flatchestphobia, yellowteethphobia, dirtynailsphobia, stinkybreathphobia. See ? There's still much to work on. In the name of progress, comrade!
The "tragic" part is that these people are obsessed with their delusional "identity". When they meet the reality of the world, in this case the sexual marketplace, all they can do is try to spread their delusion onto others, rather than improve their real body and their real personality.

It doesn't matter if one believes in demons or not: that sounds like being under the influence of an evil spirit to me. And we are all capable of doing something similar when we make excuses for our bad behaviour, rather than own up to it and repent. This is a classic flaw of single mothers: they sympathise with their child's excuses, where a dad would typically call BS or say "even if that is true, what are you going to do about it to prevent it in future?"
 
Last edited:
Top